Rotterdam, Netherlands
Help defend science: flunked not expelled
Author: cbit on April 18 2008
Viewed 8191 times. 29 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
--> Apologies, a completely non-music related post.

The creationist/ID friendly pseudo documentary called Expelled will be screening near you soon. In the film, Ben Stein claims that scientists critical of the theory of evolution are being silenced by the powers behind "big science". Through ham fisted montages the film also tries to establish a link between the theory of evolution and Nazism and other genocidal ideologies.

Christian fundamentalists are lobbying hard to promote this film, even offering incentives to school groups to go and see it.

A counter site has been launched by the national center for science education that lists, and refutes, the lies and important omissions of the expelled film.

Publishing hyperlinks to the expelled exposed site, using 'expelled' as the visible link text, will help make the counter site more visible in search engines, and help ensure that people really do hear 'both sides' of the story. If you can, please help out.

Here's a review of the film:
link

Digging this page will help spread the word too (there's a subtle digg link beneath this blog post)

edit: "help defend science" == shorthand for 'help protect people from being robbed of the chance to understand the scientific method, to understand the crucial importance of evidence based reason in evaluating truth claims, to understand the principles or critical thought, to appreciate the enormous weight of evidence in support of evolutionary theory.'
Read cbit's other blogs.cbit's Recent Blogs
Comments

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18
scientists need to quit being pussies and man up. instead of the "theory" of evolution they should call it what it is the "LAW" of evolution. i mean really.. what's the deal? you have the LAW of gravity don't you??? newtons laws, right.. why not quit pussy footing around and put the right language on things.

religion?? aaarggh.. there's a dozen of them out there all claiming to be the one. why bother? why can't people stick their religion someplace deep inside and keep it out of the ether.

what it comes down to is we're all just floating through space on this big rock and we're stuck here. believe what you want but lets not go overboard. i mean.. what's the use of fighting about it really.. we're all just gonna be dead some day and buried in the ground or burned up or burned up and shot into space or whatever.. so keep your mouth shut about it and quit making things more complicated than they need to be. there's work to be done damnit and we don't have time to dick around trying to answer to a dozen gods every time someone needs to put one foot in front of the other.

fucking ay. bring on the soma. i'll take brave new world over any possible religious future freak out any day. bring on our alien or cybernetic robot overlords!

cbit said: "they just have different ideas about what that is."

I think you've answered your own question. A violent fundamentalist is just that. What more are you looking for?

Actually, cbit, the idea of simplifying faith to remove the distinction between non-violent believers and violent extremists is troubling to me. Would you also refuse to distinguish between those who love their nations and those who use their patriotism as a platform for waging war? Such thinking puts me in bed with the US president, and I'd rather not share the sheets with him.

oh Iggy come on, some of us enjoy a bit of pointless intellectual wankery, leave us to our fun

tantan: my point is that, if we take them at their word, that they behave the way they do because the creator of the universe wants them to do so, then the difference between the moderate and the fundamentalist is one of degree, and not of of kind (and crucially: both groups believe that what is moral is dictated by God).

But: I think that in fact many moderates do not in fact believe with 'all their heart', in what they profess. There's some kind of compartmentalization going on. They cherry pick their holy texts for the non violent parts, they interpret things symbolically or metaphorically when passages conflict with the prevaling moral zeitgeist. At least the violent fundamentalists tend to be more consistent.

Actually, cbit, the idea of simplifying faith to remove the distinction between non-violent believers and violent extremists is troubling to me.

We can draw a distinction, but it has to be an arbitrary one. Both groups believe that doing what God wants of them constitutes what is right. One group happens to believe that what god wants is in line with what most of the rest of society wants, the other doesn't. Again, this is a difference of degree (usually the degree to which the theist is willing to overlook certain of his holy passages for an easy life) and not of kind.

tantan said: "oh Iggy come on, some of us enjoy a bit of pointless intellectual wankery, leave us to our fun"


yes yes i know. my mini rant was directed at this movie/situation not anywhere else...

I see. Well, I may have to start quoting Spark and asking for more than anecdotal evidence. ;) But I won't.
cbit said: "You think that a point of view which says that the universe and everything in it was created for the benefit of human kind, and that you know what the creator of the universe wants from us, is humble?"


could you please quote a christian book that says those things? i know the bible doesn't. the bible actually refers to the garden of eden as one of the gardens, it doesn't say it was the only one.

cbit said: "All it takes to trust science is the observation, from first hand experience, that evidence based reasoning is the most reliable way we have of assesing truth claims. This is how we rationally put trust in the scientific method."


this is how i put trust in god. i have witnessed stuff that have proved to me the existence of god and i have no doubt about it because i have rational and more than rational proof about this matter (do atheists accept "more than rational" or do they say that's equal to "irrational"?). the problem is that there's no math that can describe my experience so i can prove this to other people as well.

the part about the flaws in the human body is actually in the bible as well. it is something that constantly reminds you of your own mortality, so you can grasp each chance to be a better person. also, a few pages ago Spark told that religion is a totally personal matter and i agree 100%.

i have the impression that the organized church in your countries is nuts. church here is a little nuts as well but not to that extent. however, there are many reasons for going to the church but only one of them is actually the correct one. belonging to a church and going there for anything else than praying or seeking spiritual guidance is like going for pork chops to a vegan only restaurant.

i guess the above show that i'm christian as well (for the record i'm orthodox christian, i just mention this to show my background, not to make any point about 'true faith' or anything).

delete said: " religion is a totally personal matter and i agree 100%.
"


if only everyone thought that way.. the world be a little less messy.

em978 said: "i'm sure this lame crap won't change anyones mind...wiki had this which is far more shooking

"The film is largely devoted to portraying evolution as responsible for Communism, Fascism, atheism, eugenics, Planned Parenthood and, in particular, Nazi atrocities in the Holocaust.[14][38] This is a common creationist claim.[41] As Scientific American notes, the film almost always inaccurately labels evolution with the outdated term "Darwinism" to imply an ideology.[42] Christianity Today film critic Jeffrey Overstreet's "spoiler" describing the film’s specific content was also posted on the official Expelled website:[43]
“ Many scenes are centered around the Berlin Wall, and Ben Stein being Jewish actually visits many death camps and death showers. In fact, Nazi Germany is the thread that ties everything in the movie together. Evolution leads to atheism leads to eugenics leads to Holocaust and Nazi Germany.[44] ”

The film opens with images of the Berlin Wall, and repeatedly uses what Richard Dawkins describes as the amateurish "Lord Privy Seal" technique of illustrating every point with images, including a guillotine, fist fights, and above all Nazi gas chambers and concentration camps.[45] In the film, intelligent design proponent David Berlinski says that Darwinism was a "necessary though not sufficient" cause for the Holocaust, and Stein presses the message of evolution being responsible without acknowledging more direct causes such as the economic ruin of Germany after the World War I and the racism and anti-semitism dating back over seven centuries before Charles Darwin, particularly Martin Luther's book On the Jews and Their Lies.[41][8] In fact, the works of Darwin were burned by the Nazi Party.[46] The same purported linking of Hitler to Darwin was made in a Coral Ridge Ministries film which the Anti-Defamation League criticized as "an outrageous and shoddy attempt by D. James Kennedy to trivialize the horrors of the Holocaust. Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to exterminate the Jewish people."[41]

From a scientific viewpoint, any distorted misunderstanding of evolution incorporated in Hitler's thinking is irrelevant to the scientific validity of Darwin's theory of evolution.[8] Michael Shermer, who was interviewed for the film, wrote of this:
“ When Stein interviewed me and asked my opinion on the impact of Darwinism on culture, he seemed astonishingly ignorant of the many other ways that Darwinism has been used and abused by political and economic ideologues of all stripes.... Because Stein is a well-known economic conservative... I pointed out how the captains of industry in the late 19th and early 20th centuries justified their beliefs in laissez faire capitalism through the social Darwinism of 'survival of the fittest corporations.' ... Scientific theorists cannot be held responsible for how their ideas are employed in the service of non-scientific agendas.[7]"

this is evil"


OMG, seriously? the Nazi atrocities were carried out by people who were into mysticism with different ideas gleaned from christianity and german paganism (as far as I understand it.) secret society shit. It was a call to restore germany to it's former glory (a pagan glory which predates evolution).

Laissez fair (I can't spell) also predates (1790s from wikipedia) evolutionary theory and the "Social Darwinism" is just a buzz word that came later and has little to nothing to do with darwin's theories only borrows his name to illustrate a similar phenomenon.

the ideas presented in this summary are infuriating. This sounds like one of those "he's right behind you!!!" yelling at the screen type movies.

Hi delete.

delete said: "
cbit said: "You think that a point of view which says that the universe and everything in it was created for the benefit of human kind, and that you know what the creator of the universe wants from us, is humble?"
could you please quote a christian book that says those things? i know the bible doesn't."

Did god not create the (material) universe as a kind of testing ground for mankind? Also: does the bible not lay down a set of commands from god? My bible knowledge is rusty, but I think that was the general idea.

because i have rational and more than rational proof about this matter (do atheists accept "more than rational" or do they say that's equal to "irrational"?)

There is no 'more than rational'. You're talking about irrationality at that point.

delete said: "also, a few pages ago Spark told that religion is a totally personal matter and i agree 100%."

I'm not sure exactly what you might mean here. If a person's religion is kept personal, yes it's a personal matter. As soon as you make your views public, you have to be prepared for them to be criticised.

delete said: "
cbit said: "You think that a point of view which says that the universe and everything in it was created for the benefit of human kind, and that you know what the creator of the universe wants from us, is humble?"
could you please quote a christian book that says those things? i know the bible doesn't."


Here we go, about the dominion over everything part, maybe you missed this bit:

teh bible, psalm 8 said: "
8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
8:6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:
8:7 All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field;
8:8 The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas."

when i say personal i mean that the way i understand and express my faith to god isn't the same with anyone else's. of course criticism should be accepted.

"Did god not create the (material) universe as a kind of testing ground for mankind?"

Nope. That's not correct. The "commands from god" part isn't right either. I would try to write something about these things but i'm afraid my lacking knowledge of english plus my tiredness right know would make it at least incomplete, if not incorrect.

Yes, ok, there is no "more than rational". let me rephrase: i have evidence that god exists. this evidence can't be communicated in any language that exists today (art & math included). people knew about the electron's existence long before they could prove it and formulate it with math.

Comically, the makers of Expelled boobed badly with stolen material they used for the film. They ripped off an animation from Harvard called the inner life of the cell. They used unlicensed clip of 'imagine' by john lennon and apparently licensed a track from the killers under false pretenses. Lawsuit city.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18

Register / login
You must be a member to reply or post. signup or login