Ben Stein's New Movie "Expelled" | Intelligent Design Support

  • Thread starter sas3
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Movie
In summary, Ben Stein is a smart guy who has been brainwashed by his parents into thinking that Darwinian evolution is a bad thing. His new movie, "Expelled," supposedly in support of intelligent design, is not very good.
  • #1
sas3
Gold Member
208
9
What is going on with Ben Stein?
He has a new movie coming out called "Expelled" supposedly in support of intelligent design?
Here is the link to the movie’s page;
http://expelledthemovie.com

It has a few "open and anonymous" forums, so have fun.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Either he's ignorant or has succumbed to money, or both.

I think the subtitle "No intelligence allowed" is so appropriate! :smile: Obviously no intelligence in that movie.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Who the hell is ben stein (I know who he is), and why does anyone care what he has to say?

He should go back to making shows like worlds smartest model.


I guess studying economics and law gives you some authority to talk about science. Or more likely, it makes you look like a pompous fool.

I just watched the trailer, all I can say is: awwwww, religious scientists arnt getting any respect and are kicked out of the scientific community. Poor babies.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
The forums on that page have me in tears (Both humor and sadness).
The humor part is obvious; the sadness comes from the fact that so many people are so brainwashed by a religion that they can no longer think for themselves.
 
  • #5
OMG, that is so misleading.
We, the undersigned American citizens, urge the adoption of policies by our nation’s academic institutions to ensure teacher and student academic freedom to discuss the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian evolution. Teachers should be protected from being fired, harassed, intimidated, or discriminated against for objectively presenting the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory. Students should be protected from being harassed, intimidated, or discriminated against for expressing their views about the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory in an appropriate manner
Since Intelligent Design doesn't meet any scientific criteria, it should not be allowed to be discussed.

And if you read how what scientists said was taken out of context and misrepresented, it's pathetic.

This is just nauseating.
 
  • #6


Hey, its dumb and dumber.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #7
I can't remember reading about Darwin saying lightning struck a puddle of mud. :confused:
 
  • #8
Teachers should be protected from being fired, harassed, intimidated, or discriminated against for objectively presenting the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory.
To my knowledge, no teacher has been fired, harassed, intimidated, or discriminated against for objectively presenting the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory. The problems arises when alternative non-scientific theories (mythologies) are introduced.
 
  • #9
Evo said:
Either he's ignorant or has succumbed to money, or both.

I think the subtitle "No intelligence allowed" is so appropriate! :smile: Obviously no intelligence in that movie.

Yeah, the irony of them picking that for its tagline is delicious.
 
  • #10
Would you say evolutionary biology is a forensic science or an empirical science?
Now, I am not talking about small scale adaptations one can track in a species, but the long scale, historical-paleontological-theoretical evolutionary biology.
 
  • #11
Evo said:
OMG, that is so misleading. Since Intelligent Design doesn't meet any scientific criteria, it should not be allowed to be discussed.

And if you read how what scientists said was taken out of context and misrepresented, it's pathetic.

This is just nauseating.

This is the thing I can't stand. "Discussing the strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian Theory" is one thing. As far as I see it, Evolution is a very good scientific theory, but I don't think any scientific theory is perfect. Eventually it will be expanded upon and, sorry for the pun, evolve into an even better theory.

So, I would not be against discussing the strengths and weaknesses of ANY theory in a science class. All theories have weaknesses and they should be discussed, not forgotten.

The problem is that discussing weaknesses seems to be translated as "teaching intelligent design," when the two are not the same thing. You do not discuss the weaknesses of a theory by pushing a pseudo theory in it's place.

This quote from the movie's site is misleading in more ways than one.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Adussault said:
Would you say evolutionary biology is a forensic science or an empirical science?
Define "forensic science".
 
  • #13
Is Ben Stein that guy with the really annoying monotone? He does the clear eyes commercial.
 
  • #14
binzing said:
Is Ben Stein that guy with the really annoying monotone? He does the clear eyes commercial.

Yep, that's the guy. I always had the illusion that he was pretty smart. Just goes to show me...
 
  • #15
Hilarious and relevant;

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/expelled.php"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
Just saw this:
lisab said:
Yep, that's the guy. I always had the illusion that he was pretty smart. Just goes to show me...
He is pretty smart. That's what is so troubling about this. I once saw a 60 Minutes piece on him where they talk about how his parents pounded knowledge into him (which, of course, could have also brainwashed him). Here's a bio: He was valedictorian of Hillary Clinton's class at Yale law!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Stein
 
Last edited:
  • #17
Smart people do stupid things, too. Nobody is immune to it.

Just that, someone that smart being that stupid is pretty rare.
 
  • #18
LtStorm said:
Hilarious and relevant;

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/expelled.php"

Hypocrisy at its best! "expelled from their Expelled movie"

I guess they gave the movie the right name.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Holy crap that is HILARIOUS! HAHAHAHAHAHAH!
 
  • #20
I have not seen the movie, but I had heard about it. I have also read small-scale reports of scientists being discriminated against because of religious beliefs that they make known. I've seen this discrimination with my own eyes.

I firmly believe that only science should be taught in science classes, theology and beliefs have their place, etc. I'm not defending the film; I have not seen it. I'm simply saying that the idea of a documentary about such discrimination is not as absurd as some here seem to think it is.

I'm aware that I've probably just opened a can of worms. Personally, I find science versus religion debates dull and nonsensical; I will not respond to anyone who wishes to engage in such a debate, but you all are welcome to it. I also do not have a wide idea of what kind of discrimination occurs and the scale of the problem, but I know it exists, because I have seen it happen once. Feel free to comment and debate, but I'm not likely to respond, as I'm wary of the way controversial subjects can get hostile, and that is not my intent.
 
  • #21
Discrimination based on religion, like you claim to have seen, is bad.

But what these people here are claiming is that "big science" is an honest-to-God conspiracy aimed at stifling "Intelligent Design" and protecting "Darwinism". That is just insane.

They give as an example an astrophysicist that was denied tenure at a university because of his ID beliefs. They fail to mention that once he was employed there his number of publications dropped, so they dumped him like they would anybody else.
 
  • #22
Cyrus said:
Who the hell is ben stein (I know who he is)

I echo the question, and I don't know who he is. The face and the stupidity both seem familiar to me, but I can't put them together into one package.

Cyrus said:
I just watched the trailer

I admire your tolerance; I made it into about the 2 minute mark and had to bail.

Kurdt said:
I can't remember reading about Darwin saying lightning struck a puddle of mud. :confused:

I suspect that this is a bastardized account of Stanley Miller's experiment in the 50's when he put a bunch of ammonia and methane and whatnot into an enclosure, submitted it to a very energetic electrical discharge, and found some life precursors such as amino acids in the resultant mix.

edit: Never mind. I know why the face seems familiar. There's an actor whose name I can't recall... he always plays the robotic sort of dude like an undertaker or something. Seems to me that he was most active in the 60's-70's, appearing in stuff like Bewitched.
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Intelligent design, anyone?...anyone?...anyone?
 
  • #24
Danger said:
I echo the question, and I don't know who he is. The face and the stupidity both seem familiar to me, but I can't put them together into one package.

...

edit: Never mind. I know why the face seems familiar. There's an actor whose name I can't recall... he always plays the robotic sort of dude like an undertaker or something. Seems to me that he was most active in the 60's-70's, appearing in stuff like Bewitched.

He's an interesting guy. He's been an actor and a game show host, but he's also been a lawyer and a White House speech writer for Nixon and Ford. According to IMDB.com, he didn't start acting until the 1980s.
 
  • #25
Cyrus said:
Intelligent design, anyone?...anyone?...anyone?

Seems like a no-sale, dude. Throw it back on the docket. Maybe if you package it with a Porsche, somebody will bid the next time.
 
  • #26
Whoaaahhh, Laura... so I'm actually thinking of the same guy? With my lack of time-sense, the 80's are just as likely... oops! I just remembered that I saw him in colour. We didn't have colour TV when Bewitched was on. Maybe it's more of a 'Murder, She Wrote' environment that I saw him in.
Anyhow, nobody ever accused actors of being intelligent. The two most officially bright ones that I know of are David Doyle (Bosley on Charlie's Angels) and Sharon Stone at 160 and 158 respectively... but we all know how everyone here feels about IQ scores. The best that it can indicate is a capacity to learn. Whether or not it's put to use is another matter. And look at Tom Cruise (look, but don't listen :-p) He's actually a pretty good actor, but dumb as a stump. I'm not saying that because of his religion; John Travolta is a fellow Scientologist, but I respect him, aside from that movie fiasco of 'Battlefield Earth'.
I wouldn't really put down speech-writer for Nixon and Ford on my resumē, if I were him; that would be akin to saying that you were the navigator on the Titanic.
 
  • #27
Laura, I got your PM, but I'm having trouble trying to free up the mailbox, so I have to reply in public. It won't let me respond privately.
Since I've seen 'The Mask' a couple of times, I think that it must be the same guy. I liked his acting; too bad that I can never respect him again.
 
  • #28
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/4624/bensteinthumbph8.jpg

Danger, meet Ben Stein.

Ben Stein, meet Danger.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
PZ Myers wanted to see this movie with his family and a guest.
From http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/expelled.php
Pharyngula said:
I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was Expelled!
The guards managed to stop Myers, but not his guest. Oops.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #30
Dont worry, I am NOT going to pay to see this movie. I am going to DOWNLOAD it.
 
  • #31
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4609561480192587449&q=ben+stein&total=372&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

Dumb and dumber. So if there is no 'god' we would all just go around killing each other, it wouldn't matter. /quote

Also, he says lightning struck a mud puddle.

Wow, some people should stop talking about ideas outside their realm of knowledge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #32
Laura1013 said:
I firmly believe that only science should be taught in science classes, theology and beliefs have their place, etc. I'm not defending the film; I have not seen it. I'm simply saying that the idea of a documentary about such discrimination is not as absurd as some here seem to think it is.

Expelled is a creationist propaganda film about trying to teach creationism in science classrooms. In fact it's so bad that (according to people who have seen it), the film actually argues "Evolution leads to atheism leads to eugenics leads to Holocaust and Nazi Germany".

(http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/03/21/creationism-evolution-and-nazis-yes-nazis/)

They even deliberately lied to get interviews with scientists and educators. It's also heavily ironic that, while claiming "darwinists" are oppressing free exchange of ideas in science classrooms, they actively try to censor negative criticism.

I'm aware that I've probably just opened a can of worms. Personally, I find science versus religion debates dull and nonsensical; I will not respond to anyone who wishes to engage in such a debate, but you all are welcome to it.

IMO, since this is about some insanely deluded people trying to teach religion in science classrooms, there isn't anything meaningful to debate.
 
Last edited:
  • #33


Richard Dawkins interviews PZ Myers on why he was expelled, yet, Dawkins was allowed to see the film.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
:smile:
That's priceless!
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
3
Replies
102
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • New Member Introductions
Replies
2
Views
118
  • Materials and Chemical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
879
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
180
Back
Top