I got around to seeing this earlier tonight, even though I believe in evolution, and I was pretty impressed. Ben Stein set out to clarify the idea that intelligent design =/= creationism, and he does a pretty good job of it. While the film lacks any kind of radical acts to hold audience attention (as opposed to say, Michael Moore, who’s great at using stunts to capture audience attention), Stein’s natural charisma keeps it from getting boring.

However, most of the evolutionists in the film are presented as babbling idiots, while all the promoters of intelligent design are open-minded and level-headed, so it’s lacking in that dimension. There are also times where Stein seems pretty intolerant of Darwinism, which is counter-productive to his message of “equal scientific freedom”.

Has anyone else caught this film?

L2 Posted:

I got around to seeing this earlier tonight, even though I believe in evolution, and I was pretty impressed. Ben Stein set out to clarify the idea that intelligent design =/= creationism, and he does a pretty good job of it. While the film lacks any kind of radical acts to hold audience attention (as opposed to say, Michael Moore, who’s great at using stunts to capture audience attention), Stein’s natural charisma keeps it from getting boring.

However, most of the evolutionists in the film are presented as babbling idiots, while all the promoters of intelligent design are open-minded and level-headed, so it’s lacking in that dimension. There are also times where Stein seems pretty intolerant of Darwinism, which is counter-productive to his message of “equal scientific freedom”.

Has anyone else caught this film?

Oh god. I hope this is a troll.

jesus. just read the wiki article on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed

ben stein is dumb. intelligent design is not a scientific theory. that does not mean it cannot be true, it just has nothing to do with science. stop making threads. praise god

They singled me out and evicted me, but they didn’t notice my guest. They let him go in escorted by my wife and daughter. I guess they didn’t recognize him. My guest was …

Richard Dawkins.

Well, I might have phrased myself badly there. I was impressed in the way he shows ID as being chastised by a large segment of the scientific community, including prominent men like Dawkins, but that message is pretty much ruined by the way he conducts his interviews and the way that he condemns evolution while trying to preach “equal scientific freedom”.

I’ll agree most of the film is bull****, and that he tries more to promote creationism than ID. But he’s at least got people talking about the issue, which means he was successful in some measure.

Marcos El Malo Posted:

Creationism = ID

ID is Creationism with camouflage.

that’s not true. regardless, ID belongs in the realm of philosophy rather than science.

Marcos El Malo Posted:

Creationism = ID

ID is Creationism with camouflage.

I’m not sure about what there is to even discuss (“people talking about the issue”Log in to see images!

Actually, Iowa is famous for having one of the best education systems in the country. It’s on the back of our quarter.

Anyway – I think that there are a lot of creationists who try to use ID as a camouflage, which ultimately hurts both Creationism and ID…But saying that intelligent design MUST be instituted by a god is an over generalization.

Programmers are creating more and more sophisticated programs everyday, taking on human-like characteristics all the time. In fact, the cyber-punk genre really romanticizes this idea, and you see machines as fully capable of human thought in sources like The Matrix and Ghost in the Shell. We can create man-made islands, lakes, etc., and we use selective breeding to optimize animal species such as pigs, cows, and dogs. Are we gods? Not in the sense that we use the word. However, the more and more we learn about the world, the closer we get to being Intelligent Designers ourselves.

More importantly, though…we’ve tried to create simple-celled organisms in laboratories, with sometimes hopeful results. We’ve also given thought to terra-forming Mars, actively bringing life to the planet.

L2 Posted:

Anyway – I think that there are a lot of creationists who try to use ID as a camouflage, which ultimately hurts both Creationism and ID…But saying that intelligent design MUST be instituted by a god is an over generalization.

Name on proponent of intelligent design who doesn’t believe that God is the intelligent designer.

Programmers are creating more and more sophisticated programs everyday, taking on human-like characteristics all the time. In fact, the cyber-punk genre really romanticizes this idea, and you see machines as fully capable of human thought in sources like The Matrix and Ghost in the Shell. We can create man-made islands, lakes, etc., and we use selective breeding to optimize animal species such as pigs, cows, and dogs. Are we gods? Not in the sense that we use the word. However, the more and more we learn about the world, the closer we get to being Intelligent Designers ourselves.

More importantly, though…we’ve tried to create simple-celled organisms in laboratories, with sometimes hopeful results. We’ve also given thought to terra-forming Mars, actively bringing life to the planet.

this is pretty irrelevant.

Just because we might be able to become Intelligent Designers ourselves doesn’t mean one designed us.

Haven’t seen it, don’t want to. BUT. Some scientist-types are enormous douchebags who overstep their bounds, trying to talk about religion and how it’s bull**** because we’re wired for it. (Meanwhile those who are pro-religion claim it’s proof God exists because we’re wired for it.)

Either way, this load of utter crap is paraded as science under the name of neurotheology. Now if you want to record brainwaves of Tibetan monks meditating, fine. But don’t start making metaphysical claims about it.

So yes, some anti-religion sentiment is fashionable in science. Nevertheless, Scientists: 1, Ben Stein: 0.

nanafabulous personjesus Posted:

Yeah it is. Any major proponent of intelligent design has admitted to believing that the intelligent designer is the God of Christianity.

Also, the wedge strategy makes this pretty clear as well.

Log in to see images!

ok maybe these people are using it as such but the literal concept of intelligent design has no religious labels on it. if they’re using it to reinforce their own personal beliefs i guess thats their prerogative.

ps i agree with you that it shouldn’t be taught in schools. that’s because it’s not science. we’re not really arguing here

edit – okay i just read the wedge thing and now i’m kind of ticked off. this point goes to you, i had no idea it started that way. that’s lame

BirdofPrey edited this message on 04/26/2008 1:49PM