For the purpose of this article I will define Neo-Darwinism as 'the sole scientific authority that accounts for how life began and how it became what it is today.'  While I am sure that many 'evolutionists' will readily point out that the Theory of Evolution (TOE) does not address the origin of life, many of the scientists who profess a strict belief in the TOE also believe in abiogenesis or 'life from lifelessness' aka spontaneous generation.  However good the TOE is, it has some serious problems, some real gaps, so to speak.  Many scientists have begun to notice these problems or gaps and tried to address them while staying true to their pet theory.

However, some scientists have tried to address this by going beyond the TOE (thinking outside of the box), much to their dismay.  By tendering that the complexity of life (i.e. the simple cell, bacterium, the structure and content of DNA, the fine tuning of the universe) and myriad other observed phenomena all have ear markers of design by an intelligent source and cannot be possible via the current accepted consensus of Neo-Darwinism.  Almost before the ink dries on their conclusions, they find themselves blackballed, ostracized, and Expelled.  Enter Ben Stein and his new movie--

Expelled--No Intelligence Allowed. 

His heroic and, at times, shocking journey confronting the worlds top scientists, educators and philosophers, regarding the persecution of the many by an elite few.

Ben travels the world on his quest, and learns an awe-inspiring truth...that bewilders him, then angers him...and then spurs him into action!

Ben realizes that he has been “Expelled,” and that educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired – for the “crime” of merely believing that there might be evidence of “design” in nature, and that perhaps life is not just the result of accidental, random chance.

To which Ben Says: "Enough!" And then gets busy. NOBODY messes with Ben.

The following video is from the Fox News broadcast of The O'Reilly Factor where Bill O'Reilly interviews Ben Stein about the movie Expelled.  It would seem that O'Reilly isn't actually on Ben's side, but shares some of his opinions.  Watch for yourself and see what you think both of O'Reilly and what Ben has to say about his new movie.  The interview is 4 minutes and 41 seconds long.

Ben Stein, the lovable, monotone teacher from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and The Wonder Years is on a journey to answer one of the biggest questions ever asked: Were we designed or are we simply the end result of an ancient mud puddle struck by lightning? Stein, who is also a lawyer, an economist, a former presidential speechwriter, author and social commentator, is stunned by what he finds on his journey. He discovers an elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma. But even worse, along the way, Stein uncovers a long line of biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their reputations destroyed and their careers ruined by a scientific establishment that allows absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection.

“Big Science in this area of biology has lost its way,” says Stein. “Scientists are supposed to be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it may lead, no matter what the implications are. Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, it’s anti-science. Its anti-the whole concept of learning.”

Expelled uncovers that educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired in some cases for the fact that they believe there is evidence of “design” in nature, challenging the idea that life is a result of random chance. For example, Stein meets Richard Sternberg, a double PhD biologist who allowed a peer-reviewed research paper describing the evidence for intelligence in the universe to be published in the scientific journal Proceedings. Not long after publication, officials from the National Center for Science Education and the Smithsonian Institution where Sternberg was a research fellow began a coordinated smear and intimidation campaign to get the promising young scientist expelled from his position. This attack on scientific freedom was so egregious that it prompted a congressional investigation.

On his journey, Stein meets other scientists such as astrobiologist Guillermo Gonzalez, who was denied tenure at Iowa State University in spite of his extraordinary record of achievement. Gonzalez made the mistake of documenting the design he has observed in the universe. There are others, such as Caroline Crocker, a brilliant biology teacher at George Mason University who was forced out of the university for briefly discussing problems with Darwinian Theory and for telling the students that some scientists believe there is evidence of design in the universe. The list goes on and on.

Unlike some other documentary films, Expelled doesn’t just talk to people representing one side of the story. The film confronts scientists such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, influential biologist and atheist blogger PZ Myers and Eugenie Scott, head of the National Center for Science Education.

The creators of Expelled crossed the globe over a two-year period, interviewing scores of scientists, doctors, philosophers and public leaders. The result is a startling revelation that freedom of thought and freedom of inquiry have been expelled from publicly-funded high schools, universities and research institutions.

“The incredible thing about Expelled is that we don’t resort to manipulating our interviews for the purpose of achieving the ‘shock effect,’ something that has become common in documentary film these days,” said Walt Ruloff, co-founder of Premise Media and co-Executive Producer. “People will be stunned to actually find out what elitist scientists proclaim, which is that a large majority of Americans are simpletons who believe in a fairy tale. Premise Media took on this difficult mission because we believe the greatest asset of humanity is our freedom to explore and discover truth.”

The extensive grass roots campaign for Expelled, spearheaded by Motive Entertainment president, Paul Lauer, will include nationwide screenings and endorsements with key leaders, promotional materials, a promotional resource DVD, publicity, radio promotions and Internet. In addition, a pre-launch campaign will include unprecedented partnerships and a widespread campaign together with educators, youth, scientists, families and the media nationwide.

Watch the trailer for Expelled--No Intelligence Allowed

7 minutes 36 seconds

The Issue:

The freedom to legitimately challenge “Big Science’s” orthodoxy…without persecution.

The debate over evolution is confusing and to some, bewildering: “Wasn’t 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 Darwin’s 150-year-old theory of life’s origins. Darwin had no concept of DNA, microbiology, The Big Bang, Einstein’s 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.

Darwin’s theory isn’t 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.”

• Evolution#1: First, evolution can mean minor changes in features of individual species – changes that take place gradually over a (relatively) modest period of time.

• Evolution # 2: The Theory of Universal Common Descent - the idea that all the organisms we see today are descended from a single common ancestor somewhere in the distant past. This theory paints a picture of the history of life on earth as a great branching tree, from a single cell that “somehow” materialized.

• Evolution#3: A cause or mechanism of change, the biological process Darwin thought was responsible for this branching pattern. Darwin argued that natural selection had the power to produce fundamentally new forms of life. Together, the ideas of Universal Common Descent and natural selection form the core of Darwinian evolutionary theory. “Neo – Darwinian” evolution combines our knowledge of DNA and genetics to claim that mutations in DNA provide the variation upon which natural selection acts.

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!

What Is Intelligent Design?

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.

For more information on Ben Stein’s journey visit www.expelledthemovie.com.

In the interview by Bill O'Reilly did you notice that he didn't really come out and say that he agrees with Ben Stein, but he did say that he always wondered why there couldn't have been some sort of 'blurb' in the class room about 'some theologians believe that a higher power is responsible for all of creation' or something like that?  I am sure glad that he isn't the front man in this fight for rights and freedom.  I have had conversations with atheists that have actually wondered how it is wrong to exclude scientists from peer reviewed publication, after all; “How do you tell the difference between religious individuals being unjustly excluded from publication simply because of their religious beliefs, and religious individuals being justly excluded from publication because their preconceived faith commitments to a non-scientific position lead them to write shoddy, fallacious, or evidentially unsupported papers that cannot withstand peer review?”

I don't know about you, but for me, I object to the exclusion at all!  These people claim they don't see the wrong in denying a scientist to have freedom of inquiry, but they actually defend their 'right' to do so.   If the situation we reversed they would be yelling at the top of their lungs about how scientific progress was being hindered and tampered with.  We would hear catcalls of "Fascist!" and "Commie!" and "Inquisition!" you name it.  They choose not to see the disparity.

It is hard to believe in today's day and age, especially in the United States, that basic freedoms are being denied individuals.  It isn't Intelligent Design or Creationism that is under attack it is Free Thought, Free Speech, indeed Freedom itself wears a bulls-eye today.

I will end this article by repeating the following:

I will admit, that Religion does in the end require Faith. But, in the same breath, I would tender …so also do the unobserved planks of the Theory of Evolution (Neo-Darwinism).

Why?

Because no-one has ever observed the earth's creation or the formation/creation of the universe. 

Nor has anyone ever observed natural selection producing fundamentally new forms of life.

Nor has anyone ever observed organisms descending from a single common ancestor.

I say this to neither goad nor disparage anyone in any way, but to simply point out the inconsistency inherent to this line of thought.  A postmodern division has occurred wherein one has consigned religion to the sphere of “VALUE” (which takes it out of the realm of true or false) while at the same time purports that ‘non-religion’ or ‘atheism’ through the mechanism of ‘Science’ retains sole ownership of sphere of “FACT”.

Allegedly “Religion” is: Irrational, Non-cognitive, Subjective, and Relative to personal preferences and individual choice, while the other "Neo-Darwinistic 'Science'" is supposedly: Rational, Verifiable, Objective, Universally Valid "Scientific" knowledge that is binding on everyone.

Yet both require the following:

The willing belief in something that has not/cannot be observed and as such is de facto a firm belief in something for which there is no proof.

This in a single word is called FAITH.

Neo-Darwinism (along with many Atheists adherents) calling itself ‘Science’ grabs the label of FACT for itself and relegates the VALUE label to religion. Neo-Darwinism commonly called “Evolutionary science” or simply “Evolution” is put forth as: Binding on everyone.

While Religion is presented as: Relative to personal preference and individual choice.

This thought process, that so pervades Western Society, implies a dichotomy where none exists.

It seems unreasonable and hypocritical to classify one belief system (Religion) as “Irrational and Subjective” based upon its failure to meet specific criteria (because no-one has seen it), while labeling another belief system (Neo-Darwinistic 'Science') as “Factual and Objective” that also fails to meet those same criteria.

After having said all of that...

go see the movie!

Mark Long

March 2008

P.S.  I you have questions, comments, or just want to talk more on the subject, feel free to start a thread on our forum, The Reality Check Forum.

Bye!