Skip to comments."EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed" I just saw the movie. This may be a re-post.
Posted on 12/12/2009 7:26:56 AM PST by PatriotCJC
Thank you Ben Stein!!! This movie is a MUST SEE!
Absolutely and amazing movie when you consider the scams of today....shows Hitler and Stalin taking the same path as Global Warming scammers, a Marxist President, and a culpable Dem run congress.
A must see!
The freedom to legitimately challenge Big Sciences orthodoxy without persecution.
The debate over evolution is confusing and to some, bewildering: Wasnt this all settled years ago? The answer to that question is equally troubling: Yes and no.
The truth is that a staggering amount of new scientific evidence has emerged since Darwins 150-year-old theory of lifes origins. Darwin had no concept of DNA, microbiology, The Big Bang, Einsteins Theory of Relativity or of the human genome.
Each of these discoveries has, in one way or another, led a growing number of scientists to reconsider the simple view espoused by Darwin that life is a random, purposeless, chance occurrence. The universe, and life itself is turning out to be far more complex and mysterious than Darwin could possibly have imagined.
Darwins theory isnt a single idea. Instead, it is made up of several related ideas, each supported by specific arguments. Of the three, only Evolution #1 can be said to be scientifically settled.
When you see the word evolution. You should ask yourself, Which of the three definitions is being used? Because arguments and evidence supporting #1 do not support #2 or #3!
The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the apparent design in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed rejects the notion that the case is closed, and exposes the widespread persecution of scientists and educators who are pursuing legitimate, opposing scientific views to the reigning orthodoxy.
The American publics awareness and beliefs vis-à-vis our governments expanding role in defining the curriculum in Americas schools, universities and institutions of science.
Neo-Darwinian theory contends that life is the result of a random, purposeless process.
Neo Darwinian theory is taught in schools as if it is the only plausible scientific explanation of how life originated and developed. Yet Intelligent Design theory has recently emerged to challenge neo-Darwinian theory.
Both are scientific theories, and the debate is therefore legitimate. Why is the debate being suppressed?
At stake are two very consequential views of existence: Is life purposeful, and intelligently designed? Or is it random and purposeless?
Knowing this - should our government be engaged in official, de facto promotion of the exclusively secular, materialist worldview inherent in neo-Darwinian theory in our nations public schools, universities and research institutions? Why?
There is growing support among scientists that there is evidence of intelligent design operating in nature. Yet these scientists, researchers and educators are being routinely persecuted for their scientific views. Who is behind this persecution? Why is this happening in America? How did this situation develop?
Should the enterprise of science somehow be treated differently from all other forms of human knowledge, and accorded a special privilege that exempts it from robust debate or inquiry, especially when such debate or inquiry may alter viewpoints that raise important questions concerning larger issues that extend beyond the limits of science itself?
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed presents a point-of-view so powerful, that it literally forces a re-examination of these issues.
We all know that ideas have consequences.
And our country was founded on principles of free and open debate.
The differences between these two worldviews are certainly consequential. So why the suppression of scientific debate?
If in our publicly funded schools, universities and institutions our children continue to be taught only this: that all life on earth is the result of a purposeless, meaningless and undirected process of random mutation and natural selection
What are the consequences over time of teaching this one-sided worldview as if it were fact rather than theory?
Such a change in our governments official policy represents a deeply troubling shift in our cultural identity and a radical departure from the very principles upon which our country was built. America is the first Democracy that was founded on the distinctive worldview that a Creator conferred inalienable rights on human beings, rather than the State, or another institution, such as Big Science.
So how was it decided that the teaching of such a profoundly different worldview should become the official position of the United States of Americas public institutions?
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed looks to scientists on both sides of the issue
and reveals some truly shocking answers.
In other words, should Science be exempt from scientific process?
I went to the movies and saw it when it came out last year. Beyond the intelligent design/evolution debates, it really brings out the little known secret in the science/medicine disciplines and academia that ANYONE who disagrees with the politically correct group-think is blackballed (i.e. the scientists who question global warming).
Thanks for that synopsis. The 3 definitions represent a shell game evolutionists like to play here at FR. One gent claims evolution is observable and happening daily even though he knows he’s referring to definition 1 while others are debating definition 2 or 3.
“In other words, should Science be exempt from scientific process?”
The scientific process ends when “the science is settled” on issues that are not presently observable (see definition 2 and 3 above). No?
When the movie first came out, I remember hearing that Ben Stein spent a lot of his own money to make the movie and to get it into theaters. Many theaters were not interested in showing it, so I made it a point to go see it, even though I rarely go to a theater to see first run movies.
I’m glad the movie is still making the rounds. I heard Dr. Stephen Meyer on a radio program not too long ago, and found him to be quite interesting.
I watched it just now, VERY GOOD!
Consensus is Stagnation of Thought
The 3 definitions represent a shell game evolutionists like to play here at FR. One gent claims evolution is observable and happening daily even though he knows hes referring to definition 1 while others are debating definition 2 or 3.
I usually break it down into two parts (with #2 and #3 together) and call it "micro-evolution and macro-evolution...
And we do see micro-evolution, which is what the "evolutionists" are showing "us" and saying that this is the proof for "macro-evolution"...
The problem is -- they don't have any proof at all, for macro-evolution and simply keep talking about micro-evolution (when "showing" things to us) and go on and on about their grandiose theory of how all life came into being, from nothing and chance (which is macro-evolution)... LOL...
Indeed. It would never occur to me to rip and burn CDs that I rent from Netflix. I've never even heard of a program called DVD Shrink 3.2. Never, I tell you never!!!!!!!!!
:-) ... it’s all for a good cause...