NY Times: Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary

Can we now proclaim that Expelled has officially flunked? I don't think there's even one single, solitary mainstream reviewer who's given it a good review. That's pretty damned pathetic.

And it seems a good number of reviewers understand the difference between science and faith quite well. Gives me hope that I was right, and this movie really will be good for science in the long run. Can't wait to see reviewers testifying at school board hearings, LOL.

My Wife The Journalist reports that a favorable review has flooded (or perhaps surged) in.

By L. Brent Bozell III, it is entitled Ben Stein vs. Sputtering Atheists. I gather that it has appeared on 100% of the web sites and blogs that would tend to carry such items.

I just saw the NY Times and they *really* did not like Poor Ben's little effort one bit.

I have come here just to laugh until it hurts!

If the recent posts by Abby on her "ERV" blog and others are anything to go by, the *real* fun is yet to start. ('Imagine' not just ERV but Yoko Ono mad at you as well...)

Although the critics have seen through this sleazy ID-pimping, unfortunately the user reviews at AMC's site are glowing. Of course only knuckle-draggers will most likely go to see it, and certainly no bipedals on the first day. Still, the ongoing flogging by critics is sweet.

I just saw the documentary, I made my husband go with me. He doesn't follow the controversy at all, he thought it was excellent. I would estimate there were 150 or so people, no where near full but half full maybe. There was a lot of laughter at the black and white segments. People clapped after it was over, spontaneously, make of that what you will. I will tell people I know to see it.

Tell us, LV . . .when you and your husband see the Flintstones do you think you're watching a documentary?

I live in Chicago, the third or fourth largest city in the country depending on who you ask, but there's no theaters around here showing it. The nearest places are Skokie and Schaumburg which are a solid hour and a half out of the way.

I guess us poor Chicagoans aren't worthy of the 'truth' :(

I saw Expelled this afternoon. No surprises, of course, since so much of the movie has been revealed in clips and advance screenings. In one big lump, however, it is pretty nasty and exhausting. Does Ben Stein take all of this seriously (if so, he's a fool) or is it just a paycheck (in which case he's worse).

I wrote some extended comments here: [Link]

LV: I just saw the documentary, I made my husband go with me. He doesn't follow the controversy at all, he thought it was excellent. I would estimate there were 150 or so people, no where near full but half full maybe. There was a lot of laughter at the black and white segments. People clapped after it was over, spontaneously, make of that what you will. I will tell people I know to see it.

I guess us poor Chicagoans aren’t worthy of the ‘truth’ :(

You've got one of the nation's best natural history museums right there in Chicago: http://www.fieldmuseum.org/

So what are you complaining about?

I guess us poor Chicagoans aren’t worthy of the ‘truth’ :(

You've got one of the best natural history museums in the world right there in Chicago: http://www.fieldmuseum.org

So what the heck are you complaining about?

Ladies and gentlemen, don't forget to vote at http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm

A major point, made at least twice, was that Darwinism was not a sufficient component to the final solution, but it was a necessary component.

PvM, did you watch the film? Can you give us your own honest review?

Thanks.

WW has posted, and the turd's officially been dumped into the punchbowl!

I'm gettin' outta here, me.

William Wallace: A major point, made at least twice, was that Darwinism was not a sufficient component to the final solution, but it was a necessary component. PvM, did you watch the film? Can you give us your own honest review? Thanks.

tiredofthesos: WW has posted, and the turd's officially been dumped into the punchbowl! I'm gettin' outta here, me.

William Wallace: A major point, made at least twice, was that Darwinism was not a sufficient component to the final solution, but it was a necessary component.

PvM: As to the question if I watched the movie? I will be waiting for it to become available in a manner that will not require me to fund an anti-scientific movement which is proposing vacuous science and flawed theology.

WW,

History shows that Christianity was also a "necessaray component" for the final solution. In fact, it was apparently a much more necessary component than any scientific considerations.

It doesn't matter what a scientific theory is necessary for or even what it is used to justify. What matters is whether it is correct or not and that depends only on the evidence. From the evidence it is clear that evolution has occurred. If you don't like it, complain about those who misuse the science to justify their own agendas, don't complain about the science. Denying reality won't help anybody.

Now, what do you think is the greatest threat to the continued existence of Isreal, evolutionary biologists or those with religious motivations?

Darwin being necessary but not sufficient is just a lie. This has been discussed ad infinitum on PT and elsewhere for weeks.

What was odd was the complete lack of discussion of the influence of German variety Xianity on bringing about the Holocaust. It was considerable, one of the main inputs, a fact most real historians Xian and Jewish alike have agreed on in the last 63 years.

By now the Holocaust seems to have become a portable atrocity. A political football that one pins on groups they don't like.

German antisemitism dates back millenia. Martin Luther gave it a good boost with his Final Solution plan. Pogroms of Jews by Europeans have also been happening for centuries, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition. None of those read Darwin or needed to.

raven,

Thanks so much for your most recent post. For those who care to forget, Anti-Semitism was official Christian doctrine for centuries, long before either the Russian pogroms or Nazi Holocaust. Although a delusional narcissist like Disco Tute mendacious intellectual pornographer David Klinghoffer would argue otherwise, "Darwinism" had nothing to do with the Nazi Holocaust. Instead, both the prevalent strain of German Anti-Semitism and German Xian thought were responsible.

On another, but related, matter, I am absolutely delighted that Jeannette Catsoulis of The New York Times observed yesterday that "Expelled" is one of the "sleaziest documentaries" she has seen. I wonder how long The New York Times Business Section will continue publishing Ben Stein's columns. If they have ample sense, then they ought to drop Stein immediately as a featured columnist.

Regards,

John

P. S. Am delighted to see that William Wallace continues to function as one of our resident Disco Tute IDiot Borg drones. He's obviously enjoying his membership in the Disco Tute IDiot Borg Collective.

The great thing about listening to "intellectuals" talk is that they think they are better than the rest of us. The great thing to watch is NY Times and it's subscriber rate plummet every quarter because people are beginning to see that the paper is no better than a propaganda piece of the left. It isn't worth the paper it's printed on anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/business/media/31papercnd.html?ex=1319864400&en=085a075e9ab0ddd7&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

And to be ignorant to the fact that social darwinism didn't contribute to the thinking of the Nazi's is just plain denial.

Why don't you intellectual, ivory-tower loving sycophants stay where you belong... in exile.

Tedro

So, then, Tedro, would you prefer that the United States have more anti-intellectual policies, like Cambodia, when it was run by the Khmer Rouge, where being a teacher, knowing a foreign language or even wearing glasses were considered to be crimes to be punished by torture and execution?

Jeannette Catsoulis wrote, "In its fudging, eliding and refusal to define terms, the movie [Expelled] proves that the only expulsion here is of reason itself."

The proponents of intelligent design have failed to define their so-called theory. As nearly as I can tell, intelligent design is the assertion that an intelligent designer designed and created the universe, including living things in their present forms.

Is this a reasonably accurate definition of intelligent design?

Stanton: So, then, Tedro, would you prefer that the United States have more anti-intellectual policies, like Cambodia, when it was run by the Khmer Rouge, where being a teacher, knowing a foreign language or even wearing glasses were considered to be crimes to be punished by torture and execution?

the conclusion of intelligent design is that an intelligent designer designed and created the universe and all the living things in their present forms. The actual scientific theory is that in an unknowable time in the past an undefinable intelligent designer or designers did using a power that cannot be understood (and may no longer be active anywhere in the observable universe) and leaving no discernable evidence of it created everything in the universe in its present form for no apparent purpose. When you consider all of the useful technology that will be developed from the practical applications of this intellectual milestone it just boggles the mind.

The proponents of intelligent design have failed to define their so-called theory. As nearly as I can tell, intelligent design is the assertion that an intelligent designer designed and created the universe, including living things in their present forms. Is this a reasonably accurate definition of intelligent design?

Tedro:

"This country certainly doesn’t need any more people like those idiots in Berkley that have more respect for socialism then our military."

Is there a scintilla of a chance that Tedro knows who Phillip E. Johnson is or where he teaches?

It's socialism that pays for the military.

Uhhhhh.... Tedro. We're in exile? But I thought that us pointy head intellectual liberal types were actually in control, and exiling all the free-thinking conservatives? Isn't that the point of the movie? Amazing the power we have in exile. Food for thought there.

But wait! Maybe what makes intellectuals so gosh-darned slippery and frustrating is that they actually READ and THINK. For example, you claim above that the liberal NY Times is loosing subscribers because they are liberal. But doesn't the article that you linked to say that ALL print media are loosing out? And, hmmmmmmm.....interesting....I notice the the conservative WSJ has lost even more subscribers. But gosh darned, look even further! There it is at the bottom! It says that the audience for these major papers is actually up when you count on-line readers! What do you know. Don't that just beat all.

Now for my "liberal intellectual" opinion. Your assertions make little sense. But saying something like that and then citing and giving a link to an article which is diametrically opposed to your point is just, well....you fill in the blank.

And to be ignorant to the fact that social darwinism didn’t contribute to the thinking of the Nazi’s is just plain denial.

I find his contributions quite helpful in exposing the vacuity of ID.

sorry, but at the level his arguments are presented, the only thing he is exposing is how insane he is.

this is not an honest argument from you, Pim.

This country certainly doesn’t need any more people like those idiots in Berkley that have more respect for socialism then our military.

What a hoot!

The 'college educated' Tedro moron is apparently ignorant of the fact that current 5-10% NIH grant pay lines are completely inconsistent with the existence of a 'pointy headed, gov't coddled intellectual elite....emphasis on govt coddled

I went to see it with my sister in law, and I was a little disappointed. I thought they would spend more time explaining the research work that everyone is doing rather than just on the politics. I was also a bit upset that they only spent about 5 seconds on the Panspermia hypothesis and wrote it in as a BEM/sci-fi theory. Personally I do not agree with either the fundamentalist creationists, or the fundamentalist Darwinists. I think the simplest solution is that of the immortal intelligence – in which an origin does not need to be found because the ultimate origin does not exist. That matter, energy, and life are self-existent and eternal with no end and no beginning – the entire “origins” debate is pointless. There is no origin.

Louis Pasteur :
I have been looking for spontaneous generation during twenty years without discovering it. No, I do not judge it impossible.... You place matter before life, and you decide that matter has existed for all eternity. How do you know that the incessant progress of science will not compel scientists... to consider that life has existed during eternity and not matter?

From http://panspermia.org/thebegin.htm
Main page here: http://panspermia.org/
For anyone who is tired of hearing about origins theories.

That matter, energy, and life are self-existent and eternal with no end and no beginning

Jamie said: ... Personally I do not agree with either the fundamentalist creationists, or the fundamentalist Darwinists...

Louis Pasteur : I have been looking for spontaneous generation during twenty years without discovering it. No, I do not judge it impossible.... You place matter before life, and you decide that matter has existed for all eternity. How do you know that the incessant progress of science will not compel scientists... to consider that life has existed during eternity and not matter? ...

I find these posts very interesting, despite the subject, but why all the despair over a trivial propaganda vehicle? That trollop at the NYT obviously lacks the journalistic expertise to write a piece that will detract attention from the movie. Journalists are despicable beings, and film-makers just as appalling. I have no use for either. This debate will never end, I am sorry to say.