Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Whose the designer?

ID is not science. It provides no possible testable mechanism for what they propose.

Evolution by natural selection offers perfectly good (and proven) explanations and mechanisms of how a code arose in DNA.

 

NO, that would not be a valid conclusion. Judging from the responses, I think most posters emphatically DISagree.

Intelligent design is neither.

 

The best responses can be found in this link:

Pharyngula: The appropriate responses to Expelled

In a nutshell, there has been anti-semitism and breeding for thousands of years before Darwin. If Hitler and the Nazis said they based their understanding on Darwin (which they didn't) it was a very flawed understanding.

 

I've been reading this forum for several months now, but have never felt the need to register. However, as a pastafarian I feel it is necessary to speak up on behalf of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Consider this excerpt from a letter to the Kansas School Board:

"I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him."


The entire letter can be read here: Open Letter To Kansas School Board at Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and we are even endorsed by the academic community: Academic Endorsements - page 1 at Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

 

All praise the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the all knowing, all saucy, all delicious creator of all, may his glory be known to all.

 

So say we all!

Although the FMS was involved in an ugly honduran pirate eugenics program.

 

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Wow. Thanks. I needed that.

Now that I know the way this thread is turning, I can feel content about letting what I've said be and not feel the need to give any more thought to putting together thought out responses.

On a related (but seperate) note, it appears that the movie has been very successful in its first weekend. Talk about a disappointment. . .

 

Well. Can you tell us what do you think it is about, so that we can tell you how wrong you are?

 

A lot of crappy films post strong opening weekends then see a significant drop off every week beyond that. I wouldn't be too worried just about opening weekend numbers. There's always the "curiosity" factor. Not too mention the fact that many people will be seeing the film with very little knowledge of what it's about, who's behind it and the controversy surrounding it.

Expelled Exposed

 

Actually, the movie didn't do that well according to this wikipedia excerpt:

Expelled opened in 1,052 theaters, earning $1.2 million at the box office in its first day and earned $2,970,848 for its opening weekend ($2,824 theater average).[117] Originally, Walt Ruloff, the movie's executive producer, "said the film could top the $23.9-million opening for Michael Moore's polemic against President Bush, "Fahrenheit 9/11," the best launch ever for a documentary."[118] Reviewing Expelled's opening box office figures, Nikki Finke of the Los Angeles Weekly wrote that considering the number of screens showing the film, the ticket sales were "feeble", demonstrating "there wasn't any pent-up demand for the film despite an aggressive publicity campaign." Finke further wrote, "So much for the conservative argument that people would flock to films not representing the "agenda of liberal Hollywood". (Just for comparison purposes: left-wing Michael Moore's most recent Sicko made $4.4 million its opening weekend from only 441 theaters, and his Fahrenheit 9/11 made $23.9 million its opening weekend from 868 venues.)"

 

Moore's documentaries are always going to do well, so comparing them to other films are not fair. It had the 8th best opening weekend for a documentary. That's damn good, particularly considering that it only opened on a small number of screens. Assuming that the numbers don't fall off too drastically (which is a legitimate possibility), I think that the movie could be considered a financial success.

I think that denying that the film was a success is counterproductive. What we really need to be looking at is what we are doing wrong in our science education/communication that such a movie is able to gain such traction.

 

I think a good place to start would be to end the funding of private schools with public money. We should be teaching people HOW to think, not WHAT to think.

 

Scientists don't waste much time debating ID for the same reason Historians don't spend much time debating the Iranian claims that the Holocaust is a hoax. The claims are absurd to begin with, and there is zero hope of ever convincing their proponents of that fact.

Rob

 

Interesting question. Our math and science education is lagging behind other industrialized countries and possibly could be the reason for all this ID /creationism discussion.

However, is that the only reason or just a contributing factor? It has been argued that the US is still a religious country, while other industrialized countries have become more secular. Organizations such as the Christian Coalition have influenced American politics to a point where political candidates are forced to affirm their faith. Televangelists and other religious personalities such as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are in the ear of a lot of people who make policies. Perhaps the concept of a separation between church and state isn't strong enough?

 

Not to mention bulk ticket buys by a few religious nutballs, which are then distributed discounted or free to church groups.

 

Lest anyone take "Expelled" as credible, suggest you look at:

Expelled Exposed

"Expelled" are rehashed religion arguments resolved long ago. There is no conflict between science and religion. The conflict is within religion, who wants to be accepted as science without following the scientific method or principles. Science is always falsifiable. ID is dogmatic, based on faith, does not publish in peer-reviewed journals, and was thoroughly discredited in Dover vs. Kitzmiller (key ID witnesses clearly lied on the witness stand). The ID folks even went so far as to state that astrology qualifies as "science."

I am disappointed Ben Stein stepped into this morass, but then, economics is the "dismal science."

 

Where does it say in the constitution that there is to be a separation of Church and state? I thought it just said that the state shall not impose any religion on the people.