Expelled

[Phil Lilley]

I've heard about it... coming out today. I may go see it tonight. Let you know how it is.

http://expelledthemovie.com

[Phil Lilley]

Expelled was moving. Everyone should see this movie. Unfortunately, there are places, cities where this movie has already been shunned. A student/friend who comes over from College of the Ozarks told me tonight they refuse to show it in Manhattan, KS (K-State), his home town.

That proves the point of the movie.

Lack of freedom of academia is a reality in virtually every science community in educational institutions in America.

Ben Stein does an excellent job, trying to give both sides a chance to explain themselves.

It's well thought out. It's alittle dry- he tries to spruce it up with excerpts from old movies and video scenes.

It's not really about the debate over what's right and wrong, or who's right and who's wrong- it's about the freedom to disagree, the freedom to discuss, the freedom of a differing opinion based on science, not religion. And, in this movie, Stein shows this philosophy has bled and will bleed into other fabric of our society.

Bottom line is freedom, and a lack thereof.

[Terry Beeson]

I heard Ben Stein talking about the movie in a radio interview the other day. It made me want to see the movie. Now I really want to see it...

[JobyKSU]

A student/friend who comes over from College of the Ozarks told me tonight they refuse to show it in Manhattan, KS (K-State), his home town.

Your friend is wrong - the movie is here, and is being advertised. Further - Manhattan is the type of community that I would expect to embrace this film.

Maybe I'm a bit defensive here, but I'm apparently still emotionally attached to the city

[Phil Lilley]

Great to hear. I had no reason to doubt him. I'll let him know.

[Al Agnew]

Guys, as the resident agnostic here, I don't expect to change anybody's mind once it's made up. But I've read a number of reviews and descriptions of the advance showing of the movie, and from all I've been able to read, it is absolutely NOT even-handed, nor accurate. It purposely distorts evolutionary theory in so many ways it would be ridiculous to anybody with a modicum of real understanding of evolution and natural selection. And its very strong statement blaming Darwinism for Hitler and his atrocities is outrageous. The accusations of universities firing or otherwise persecuting teachers for advocating Intelligent Design have already been proven to be either false or exaggerated in most, if not all cases.

Please, if you go see it, watch it objectively. Make your own decisions on whether you are being manipulated.

[mark hedger]

I guess I am a agnostic too. It is important to recognize that "message films" have an agenda and it behooves us to know as much as possible about the people who make and distribute those films. This applies to both sides of whatever issue is being portrayed; both sides are equally guilty of propagandizing. Keep an open mind.

[Phil Lilley]

I agree- both sides are guilty of exaggerating. Don't you think as science moves further in discovery, being able to see deeper into how life works, they will discover the how life started? I would think so.

I've heard and seen the ID side bring up the process of blood coagulation as evidence of design. Not versed to say why but something to do with the process and how there's no way this came about in an evolutionary process.

[Al Agnew]

Phil, the ID argument is that it takes a bunch of specialized proteins, all working in concert, in order for blood to coagulate, and if any one of them is left out, the process doesn't work...and since it wouldn't work unless all of them were present, there is no way that each one evolved independently. This is called the argument of irreducible complexity, and it's a favored one of ID proponents.

However, the blood coagulation process HAS been very elegantly explained by evolutionary biologists. The proteins involved are modified versions of digestive proteins found in the same organisms. Any one of them had uses for other purposes before being "borrowed" for the coagulation process. And there are plenty of examples in the animal kingdom of creatures lacking one or more of them, and their blood clots, but just not as perfectly as ours.

As I read somewhere else, the arguments ID proponents put forth DO have a valuable purpose...they are a catalyst for a lot of research that ends up showing how wrong they are.

[hoglaw]

As I read somewhere else, the arguments ID proponents put forth DO have a valuable purpose...they are a catalyst for a lot of research that ends up showing how wrong they are.

This is the greatest thing I'll read all day. Nova did a special not too long ago about the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case. When I was in law school, this was the hot debate and it was the basis for some of our intra-school competitions. You should try to find the Nova episode if you can. It's probably a free download. If you have any interest in the ID debate at all, I would strongly suggest finding the episode as it's the best example of an ID case building a lengthy trial record and going to appeal in the Circuits. The USSC has yet to rule on the issue, and I'm not sure if they denied Cert. in the Kitzmiller case or not.