Catholic Traditon vs Science - are we looking deep enough

[SpiritMeadow]

I saw it this evening. I thought it was excellent. Ben Stein did a beautiful job in exposing the fraudulent ideas that masquerade as science from some of the leading Darwinists.

I really enjoyed it. The animations on the life of the cell were spectacular. Dawkins, PZ Meyers & Michael Ruse come across as foolish and pompous as can be – merely by giving their unfiltered comments. The Darwin-Nazi connection was frightening and convincing. I only wish the film was longer and gave more time to Stephen Meyer (he is obviously brilliant). The David Berlinski segments were riveting – he’s another brilliant Darwin-doubter - ID proponent.

It was enought to make a modest case for the integrity of ID scholarship and put aside some of the distortions about ID theory itself. The film also focused on the academic repression of scientists who wanted to explore ID ideas - and that was handled very well. I really enjoyed the whole film.

You can pretend all you wish, evolution will still be true. Does it really work to just plug your ears and chant no evolution, no evolution.? Of course you are right and millions are wrong, That sure does something for the ego no doubt.

 

[reggieM]

Of course you are right and millions are wrong, That sure does something for the ego no doubt.

The Holy Apostles believed that very thing. They were right and millions were wrong. They didn’t do that for the ego boost it gave them though.

I’ve seen the errors of Darwinists in these posts on CAF many, many times. I’ve seen the dodging and cover-ups and the embarrassments. I don’t gloat about that or think that I’m smarter than anyone else. But to me, it painfully obvious that Darwinist theory (and the ideology surrounding it) has some serious weaknesses.

Other people can see the same thing. Expelled made this very clear. The show I attended was pretty full and everybody laughed at the the Darwinists and the film was generally well-received (a few people applauded).

Some day I will feel sorry for the people who defended Darwinian theory with so much conviction and emotion. I can understand their passion – they’re true believers and it’s sad in some ways to see them blind to the major problems that the theory holds.

But sadly, today, those people own the conversation and they are quite arrogant about their “certainties”. That is what Expelled had to expose some of this.

The fact that Darwinists can watch Richard Dawkins (if they even bother to see the film) say the things he does, and not feel embarrassed – it’s obvious that there’s an intellectual blindness at work. It probably comes from a too-passionate attachment to the evolutionary idea.

Expelled is a healthy corrective. I found it very enjoyable and quite insightful – as many others have (Expelled’s per-theater gross is the third highest of all films this weekend).

 

[reggieM]

This is a recent book from one of the guys featured in Expelled —

The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions

David Berlinski

booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=9256&SectionName=&PlayMedia=Yes

 

[mmortal03]

First of all, let me precede my comments by saying that I haven’t seen the film, but have read a lot about its contents, and am going to see it within the next month.

I saw it this evening. I thought it was excellent. Ben Stein did a beautiful job in exposing the fraudulent ideas that masquerade as science from some of the leading Darwinists.

I think religious people are being guided to focus on this issue, but it is clearly a false line of reasoning.

Religious people are getting confused about what these atheist scientists’ themselves are claiming is science and what isn’t. This is the perfect example of building up the straw man argument. These atheist scientists very well know what is the dividing line between science and philosophy, and they are not “masquerading fraud” in the slightest, unless you incorrectly presuppose that they are only allowed to talk about science in these type of forums.

Like I said, being able to discern what is science and what is philosophy is not something that Catholic individuals on this forum have a monopoly on.

Also, you can’t have your religious philosophy and then just choose whatever pieces of science that you would like that supports it. These atheist scientists aren’t calling out religious people for purely the actions of trying their hands at the proving of Creationist or I.D. areas by using science, but time and time again because they are doing the science wrong, and then parading it as good science. Science has a monopoly on what is good science.

But on the flip side, the religious, DON’T have a monopoly on what is good philosophy. But that isn’t even what the religious are criticizing these atheist scientists on, but on just the fact that they are USING philosophy in their arguments.

I really enjoyed it. The animations on the life of the cell were spectacular.

Atheists also consider these life processes as spectacular.

Dawkins, PZ Meyers & Michael Ruse come across as foolish and pompous as can be – merely by giving their unfiltered comments.

Besides the fact that these individuals were coerced under false pretenses to speak, they have been quoted afterward that their views were chopped up and misrepresented to suit the filmmakers’ beliefs.

But even without that, the alleged “pompousness” says nothing about their arguments. And the alleged “foolishness” is very debatable.

The Darwin-Nazi connection was frightening and convincing.

Hopefully this isn’t the tired old eugenics-Darwin-Nazi connection argument again. THe logic usually goes that anything that can be somehow linked to Nazism can ONLY be a bad thing. Hopefully, you can see the flaw in that logic.

The film also focused on the academic repression of scientists who wanted to explore ID ideas - and that was handled very well. I really enjoyed the whole film.

I think it is wrong that there have been scientists who just have certain beliefs being repressed, however, I usually haven’t heard all the specifics behind how much of that was going into their work, and it could be argued that not all scientists will ever truly be allowed to have free reign on their work for practical administrative purposes. With that said, you should also read up on the examples of Creationist/ID administrators firing people who wanted to teach evolution in their schools, or firing those who were against not teaching it.

 

[mmortal03]

The Holy Apostles believed that very thing. They were right and millions were wrong. They didn’t do that for the ego boost it gave them though.

Well, the Bible says they did it for good reasons, but, of course, why would it not say such a thing?

I’ve seen the errors of Darwinists in these posts on CAF many, many times. I’ve seen the dodging and cover-ups and the embarrassments. I don’t gloat about that or think that I’m smarter than anyone else. But to me, it painfully obvious that Darwinist theory (and the ideology surrounding it) has some serious weaknesses.

When you say “Darwinists”, do you mean “Evolutionary Biologists”? I love how the ID folks like to call these people “Darwinists” to make it seem as if they worship Darwin or something, and that one man, Darwin, is the end all be all to their work. Also, what are these serious weaknesses that you state that evolutionary theory has?

Other people can see the same thing. Expelled made this very clear. The show I attended was pretty full and everybody laughed at the the Darwinists and the film was generally well-received (a few people applauded).

Why wouldn’t they if their ideology was Creationism? Films usually attract the people who want to see them. You could find tons of laymen who would applaud any film in which your opinion of it would be the contrary. Just because something can convince a large group of average people doesn’t mean it is true.

Some day I will feel sorry for the people who defended Darwinian theory with so much conviction and emotion. I can understand their passion – they’re true believers and it’s sad in some ways to see them blind to the major problems that the theory holds.

But sadly, today, those people own the conversation and they are quite arrogant about their “certainties”. That is what Expelled had to expose some of this.

I am glad that you are also so certain that you are right, then, sir, even though you have said that you are more humble.

The fact that Darwinists can watch Richard Dawkins (if they even bother to see the film) say the things he does, and not feel embarrassed – it’s obvious that there’s an intellectual blindness at work. It probably comes from a too-passionate attachment to the evolutionary idea.

I’m going to need some examples. I guess I’m just going to have to go and pay up to see the film.

Expelled is a healthy corrective. I found it very enjoyable and quite insightful – as many others have (Expelled’s per-theater gross is the third highest of all films this weekend).

This is argumentum ad populum, pure and simple.

 

[reggieM]

Religious people are getting confused about what these atheist scientists’ themselves are claiming is science and what isn’t. .

I don’t think religious people are getting confused on that point. They can see the atheistic-Darwinists. These are big-name spokespersons with significant influence in our culture. Expelled shows us clearly what they think - unfiltered. There’s no confusion on that. They have some frightening ideas and some laughably absurd ideas. All of these are part of the evolutionist’s world.

This is the perfect example of building up the straw man argument.

The film is pointing to real scientists, not strawmen.

These atheist scientists very well know what is the dividing line between science and philosophy, and they are not “masquerading fraud” in the slightest, unless you incorrectly presuppose that they are only allowed to talk about science in these type of forums.

I don’t follow that point. The ideas of these atheists are not very well known - not at all. You have to see the film, and note the reaction of the audience when we hear what they have to say. They are certainly masquerading a fraud under the guise of science – that is very clear.

These atheist scientists aren’t calling out religious people for purely the actions of trying their hands at the proving of Creationist or I.D. areas by using science,

I’m not following what you’re saying. The atheists in this film are their own worst enemy. I would like to see any Catholic here on CAF defend what they said. Actually, I wouldn’t like it, but it would be remarkable to see.

Science has a monopoly on what is good science.

That really doesn’t make any sense. A key point in the movie is a question about who has the right to say what good science is or isn’t.

But that isn’t even what the religious are criticizing these atheist scientists on, but on just the fact that they are USING philosophy in their arguments.

No, that’s not correct. They’re criticizing what they’re actually saying.

they have been quoted afterward that their views were chopped up and misrepresented to suit the filmmakers’ beliefs.

I could not see any evidence that the quotes were “chopped up”. The key atheists were given plenty of time to talk.

But even without that, the alleged “pompousness” says nothing about their arguments. And the alleged “foolishness” is very debatable.

Well, if you’re going to defend Dawkins’ or Meyers’ comments in the film, that’s a different matter.

I think it is wrong that there have been scientists who just have certain beliefs being repressed, however, I usually haven’t heard all the specifics behind how much of that was going into their work

I found the film to be quite clear and convincing. Ben Stein did a good job to pursue the facts.

With that said, you should also read up on the examples of Creationist/ID administrators firing people who wanted to teach evolution in their schools, or firing those who were against not teaching it

I find that to be a remarkable comparison. I often hear it said on this forum that there are 100,000 Darwinists in comparison to a few hundred creationists. Darwinists own the science departments in all the schools. There’s not really an argument here. The repression that Expelled showed was quite clear to me.

 

[reggieM]

Well, the Bible says they did it for good reasons, but, of course, why would it not say such a thing?.

Because you believe it is a lie?

I love how the ID folks like to call these people “Darwinists” to make it seem as if they worship Darwin or something, and that one man, Darwin, is the end all be all to their work.

Yes, that’s the way it appears to me. I’ve seen that attitude countless times here on CAF.

Also, what are these serious weaknesses that you state that evolutionary theory has?

Do you think that evolutionary theory has any weaknesses?

I’m going to need some examples. I guess I’m just going to have to go and pay up to see the film.

I don’t know how you could continue to give your opinion on it without actually seeing it.

 

[reggieM]

This is argumentum ad populum, pure and simple.

Actually, it’s not an argument at all. It’s one man’s opinion on the film with some facts about the film.

I’m afraid that you’re reading my comments on the film as an argument against you or someone or something.

I just pointed out that I enjoyed it and why I enjoyed it. You might insist that I really didn’t enjoy it but I can assure you that you’d be wrong about that.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Think outside the box people! If the eucharist is truely present beneath the accidents of bread and wine and is immeasurable and not limited by time and space:

Then anyone who views creation with time and space and measureable eyes is deluded.

Just as in the Eucharist–the reality of the bread and wine which we do see does not cancel out the body, blood, soul, and Divinity of jesus which we do not see.

One is true–one is what we see.

So what we see may indicate evolution but what might have really happened might be on another plane like the eucharist.

And both things are not mutually exclusive.

Some of what we see could in fact be true–some of evolution could be true.

And it could be that way without negating the bible or Catholic teaching even though with the limited time and space and measureable eyes that we have–it might not be able to be seen with those eyes!

I don’t know what all about evolution and creation are true but i do know this–the eucharist is true. My soul is true.

And those things are true regardless of what science says.

True science doesn’t contradict the truth.

But true science never has been the whole truth!

Einstein could conceive of more than 3 or four dimensions.

Why shouldn’t the people of science and the people of faith be also as capable?

 

[buffalo]

Think outside the box people! If the eucharist is truely present beneath the accidents of bread and wine and is immeasurable and not limited by time and space:

Then anyone who views creation with time and space and measureable eyes is deluded.

Just as in the Eucharist–the reality of the bread and wine which we do see does not cancel out the body, blood, soul, and Divinity of jesus which we do not see.

One is true–one is what we see.

So what we see may indicate evolution but what might have really happened might be on another plane like the eucharist.

And both things are not mutually exclusive.

Some of what we see could in fact be true–some of evolution could be true.

And it could be that way without negating the bible or Catholic teaching even though with the limited time and space and measureable eyes that we have–it might not be able to be seen with those eyes!

I don’t know what all about evolution and creation are true but i do know this–the eucharist is true. My soul is true.

And those things are true regardless of what science says.

True science doesn’t contradict the truth.

But true science never has been the whole truth!

Einstein could conceive of more than 3 or four dimensions.

Why shouldn’t the people of science and the people of faith be also as capable?

Finally, we are on post 428 and someone has actually responded to the challenge of the title of this thread.

 

[drpmjhess]

I’m not following what you’re saying. The atheists in this film are their own worst enemy. I would like to see any Catholic here on CAF defend what they said. Actually, I wouldn’t like it, but it would be remarkable to see.

Of course you wouldn’t see it, because Catholics are not atheists.

 

[mmortal03]

This is a recent book from one of the guys featured in Expelled —

The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism And Its Scientific Pretensions

David Berlinski

booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=9256&SectionName=&PlayMedia=Yes

I looked it up. The author is an agnostic secular Jew, and his discussions in the book are probably important to consider if one hasn’t heard them elsewhere. However, I wouldn’t say that his words lend any new credence to belief in God, as his points could just as well be taken (e.g. just as seriously) from an agnostic atheist perspective. I’ll have to pick it up sometime and read the entire thing.

 

[mmortal03]

I don’t think religious people are getting confused on that point. They can see the atheistic-Darwinists. These are big-name spokespersons with significant influence in our culture. Expelled shows us clearly what they think - unfiltered. There’s no confusion on that. They have some frightening ideas and some laughably absurd ideas. All of these are part of the evolutionist’s world.

The film is pointing to real scientists, not strawmen.

I don’t follow that point. The ideas of these atheists are not very well known - not at all. You have to see the film, and note the reaction of the audience when we hear what they have to say. They are certainly masquerading a fraud under the guise of science – that is very clear.

I’m not following what you’re saying. The atheists in this film are their own worst enemy. I would like to see any Catholic here on CAF defend what they said. Actually, I wouldn’t like it, but it would be remarkable to see.

That really doesn’t make any sense. A key point in the movie is a question about who has the right to say what good science is or isn’t.

No, that’s not correct. They’re criticizing what they’re actually saying.

I could not see any evidence that the quotes were “chopped up”. The key atheists were given plenty of time to talk.

Well, if you’re going to defend Dawkins’ or Meyers’ comments in the film, that’s a different matter.

I found the film to be quite clear and convincing. Ben Stein did a good job to pursue the facts.

Maybe I misinterpreted what you were saying, but I am not just talking about the film, but about arguments I have heard from various religious individuals on these issues in the past here and elsewhere. Your initial comments sounded to me as being exactly like those. But once I see the film, I will get back to you within the context of strictly the film (if I don’t forget), as that is how you seemed to answer my points, as directly from the context of the film. I figured you would have followed the broader points I was making, but that was probably what confused you on a couple of my points. I’ll clarify them when I get the chance.

One thing I must comment on is how you want these atheists to both be “big-name spokespersons with significant influence in our culture” as well as believe that “the ideas of these atheists are not very well known - not at all”, unless you truly believe that there is some kind of hidden agenda. Just because you personally feel that Expelled seemed to be perfectly legitimate and that it did no manipulation and take things out of context doesn’t mean it didn’t. Like I said, when I see it, I’ll get back to you.

I find that to be a remarkable comparison. I often hear it said on this forum that there are 100,000 Darwinists in comparison to a few hundred creationists. Darwinists own the science departments in all the schools. There’s not really an argument here. The repression that Expelled showed was quite clear to me.

There IS an argument here. It doesn’t matter which side is doing it more, it just matters that both sides are doing it. And each instance/circumstance of it is not the same, either, so this really isn’t so simple. And you might be surprised, but “Darwinists” don’t own the science departments in all the schools. Not in the ones that are teaching I.D. they don’t.

 

[mmortal03]

Because you believe it is a lie?

It doesn’t have to be a total lie to include falsehoods. I would never claim that the Bible “is a lie” as that would be kind of harsh, and not very exacting.

Yes, that’s the way it appears to me. I’ve seen that attitude countless times here on CAF.

Okay, well, then you haven’t met good scientists here on CAF, then.

Do you think that evolutionary theory has any weaknesses?

Nice way to turn the question around and not answer it. I think it fulfills its domain well, so, no, I don’t think it has any real weaknesses.

I don’t know how you could continue to give your opinion on it without actually seeing it.

Good point. That is why I will get back to you.

Actually, it’s not an argument at all. It’s one man’s opinion on the film with some facts about the film.

I’m afraid that you’re reading my comments on the film as an argument against you or someone or something.

I just pointed out that I enjoyed it and why I enjoyed it. You might insist that I really didn’t enjoy it but I can assure you that you’d be wrong about that.

You completely have that right to an opinion, and yes, I misread where you were coming from. It is just that this thread has been much more than just about opinions, so I thought it odd for you to just come in and give some whimsical thumbs up to the film without giving us and hard logical reasons backing why you thought the arguments in the film were good ones. It would be like going to see the “Passion of the Christ” and then coming back to a thread about the accuracy of film, and just mentioning how you thought the film was pretty cool and you liked the special effects!

 

[Michael_G]

‘Expelled’ looks at academia’s efforts to silence opposition to Darwinism Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 4/18/2008 8:00:00 AM

http://www.onenewsnow.com/uploadedImages/Media/Images/expelled_movie.jpgA movie opening in theaters nationwide today examines how educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure, and even fired for questioning Darwinism.

The movie is called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed and stars Ben Stein. Filmed in documentary style, Expelled shows the viewer how the debate about the origin of life is one-sided on college campuses and academic institutions worldwide.

Also featured in the documentary are professors on both sides of the issue – those who have been blacklisted because they question Darwinism, and those who defend evolution and refuse to believe that the universe could have been brought about by an intelligent being.

Stein, who is a former presidential speechwriter, actor, and author, finds it amazing that many of the intellectual elite allow no dissent from Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection.

“The intelligentsia said at a certain point that Adolf Hitler was the wave of the future, and so the intelligentsia is often wrong and in fact I’d say they’re wrong at least as often as they’re right,” explains Stein. “We aim to show that they’re wrong again. You know what else? We’re sick of being pushed around by the intelligentsia.”

According to Stein, Darwinism played a role in the Holocaust as the social elite of that time used Darwinian principles to justify purging society of “inferior” races. He also warns that in today’s culture, Darwinism is continuing to have a negative impact on social and moral issues.

Stein and the movie’s producers are hopeful Expelled will spark more freedom when it comes to teaching about the origins of life.

 

[reggieM]

I think it fulfills its domain well, so, no, I don’t think it has any real weaknesses.

I find that surprising. I can find many weaknesses in the theory.

Here’s just one of many items that expose a serious weakness in the theory.

msnbc.msn.com/id/13342029/

A search on “Gansus yumenensis missing link” would show more similar items.

Perhaps even less specific – what about the conflict between the theories of punctuated equilibrium and gradualism?

As I see it, an obvious weakness with evolutionary theory is that one of those theories is wrong. Or perhaps both are correct, but then those who hold only one or the other are wrong. (I hesitate to suggest that both could be wrong if one is).

 

[Michael_G]

Expelled from ‘Expelled’: Documentary exposes the persecution of academics who support Intelligent Design theory
4/12/2008 2:56:00 PM
By Jill Stanek -Worldnetdaily

On April 18, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” will boast the largest U.S. opening of any documentary film ever.
Scheduled for release in 1,000 theatres, “Expelled” will be hotter than “Farenheit 9/11,” which debuted on 868 screens, and much more convenient to see than “An Inconvenient Truth,” which I was surprised to find opened on only four screens nationwide despite all the hype, peaking at 587 before its appeal melted.
What’s “Expelled” about? Synopsizes CNS News:
“Expelled” calls attention to the plight of highly credentialed scholars who have been forced out of prestigious academic positions because they proposed Intelligent Design as a possible alternative to Charles Darwin’s 150-year-old theories about the origins of life.
Instead of entertaining a debate on the merits of competing theories, the scientific establishment has moved to suppress the ID movement in a “systematic and ruthless” way at odds with America’s founding principles, the film asserts.
Liberals have been going ape about “Expelled” for months as it has been screened around the country.
On March 20, two Darwinian defenders, who accepted payment to talk like buffoons on the film, tried to bust into a private screening in Minnesota.
“PZ” Myers, a University of Minnesota biology professor and proprietor of the popular atheist blog Pharyngula, was quickly expelled, much as he condones expelling professors who deviate from the monkey line, as he wrote on The Panda’s Thumb blog:
The only appropriate responses [to Intelligent Design proponents] should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing and humiliation of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy far-right politicians." ~ Comment #35130, PZ Myers, June 14, 2005
Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist at Oxford who wrote the book “The God Delusion,” gained entry only by foregoing his evolved surname for the formal, Clinton.
Myers then disrupted an “Expelled” conference call with reporters the next day.
These uncivilized spectacles caused a liberal mass meltdown. According to an “Expelled” press release, the “Expelled” controversy held the No. 1 slot in the blogosphere all day March 24, as registered by Nielson’s BlogPulse, and garnered over 800 Technorati results.
If we are seeing this meltdown on the left even before “Expelled” officially opens, expect a Big Bang on April 18.
“This is not a scientific battle; this is a worldview battle,” “Expelled” producer Mark Mathis told me. Mathis has encountered unbridled hostility from the scientific establishment, i.e., avowed Darwinists, at previews.
“Expelled” connects atheism and Darwinism with no missing link, one of the film’s two major flashpoints.
Darwinism is a specific evolutionary theory that excludes everything but material processes in the design of all life forms. No Intelligent Design allowed.
“What’s driving it is Darwinism is a foundational principle - scientific validation of secularism, atheism, liberalism - and that it strikes at the core of who they are,” said Mathis.
“Secondarily, these scientists are the high priests of the biggest question ever asked. They have all the authority, knowledge, power, funding,” continued Mathis. “This is ground they own exclusively. They look down their elitist noses at the unwashed ignorant religious masses and scoff. That’s why they respond with such extreme hostility. They are very concerned that if this monolith cracks, then the whole thing could crash.”
Indeed, “Expelled” is already making a difference. Last month, Ben Stein, star of “Expelled,” screened it for Florida legislators as they prepared to present a bill guaranteeing academic freedom in their schools. It looks ready to pass.
Last week, Stein screened “Expelled” to Missouri lawmakers followed by a press conference promoting three academic freedom bills germinating there.
Not only is Darwinism foundational to atheism, it is foundational to eugenics, the other reason for the left’s apoplexy against “Expelled,” according to Mathis. They cannot tolerate the connection “Expelled” draws between Darwinism and Adolf Hitler.
Or Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.
“Planned Parenthood is a direct outgrowth of Darwinism,” said Mathis. “Sanger was an open proponent of eugenics, and Darwinism is an idea that naturally leads to eugenics, which they are denying,” said Mathis. “But they are compatible.”
That Hitler and Nazism drew from Darwinism is irrefutable. “Hitler said genocide of Jews was doing good, cleansing the world of ‘useless eaters’ and strengthening formation of an ‘Aryan’ race of super-humans,” said Mathis.
One complaint Darwinist scientists interviewed for “Expelled” have not lodged is that the filmmakers applied Michael Moore cut-and-paste editing to make them look bad. The film includes many of their long, uninterrupted thoughts.
That’s also part of their problem.

 

[Michael_G]

**
gopusa.com/commentary/cmolin/2008/cdm_04221.shtml

Ben Stein Assails The Intelligentsia**
By Carol Devine-Molin
April 22, 2008
Ben Stein’s new documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” is a riveting expose of the intolerant academic community that systematically declares war on anyone or any institution * that dares to question liberal Darwinian orthodoxy. “Correct speak” and “correct think” are de rigueur among scholars, who are expected to toe the line that “evolution” and “natural selection” are the be all and end all when it comes to deciphering the origins of mankind.
Thankfully, a few brave scholars have had the intestinal fortitude to challenge Darwinian theory, which cannot properly account for the creation of complex biological mechanisms. These academicians have underscored that the statistical odds are infinitesimal that human DNA could have emerged by evolutionary means as posited by Darwin. By raising the specter of “Intelligent Design”, these renegade scholars have been subjected to terrible smears and utter ruination of their scientific careers. But should anyone be astonished? The modus operandi of the Leftist intelligentsia has always been to protect and perpetuate the big propaganda machine and destroy anyone at variance with dogma.
The keepers of the flame of scholarly “knowledge” are march-in-lockstep secular progressives that view “Intelligent Design” as nothing short of watered-down “Creationism” derived from the Bible. In response, the dissenters maintain that their challenge to the Darwinian framework has nothing to do with religiosity or Christianity. Rather, they find the concept of evolution intrinsically flawed, and they simply want the opportunity to examine a competing theory – Intelligent Design – without fear of being impugned or ostracized. And why shouldn’t these scholars be able to contemplate their navels and debate theories without fear of reprisal? Isn’t that what scholars are supposed to do?
Academic freedom is the vital issue at stake. The intelligentsia’s strong-arm tactics to enforce ideological purity are anti-American, immoral and simply not conducive to good science. What is to be done? Ben Stein did his part by a bit of consciousness raising and sounding the clarion call on behalf of the beleaguered scholars that have come up against the Leftist elites. Now it’s up to Americans to look beyond the guise of “happy face liberalism” to see the real tyranny posed by the political Left that has a virtual stranglehold on academia.
Ben Stein is a controversial guy and not surprisingly, “Expelled” has raised the ire of some in the mainstream media by linking Darwinian theory with atheistic Nazism. Journalist Jeffrey Kluger of Time magazine noted that: “Stein argues that there is a clear line from Darwinism to euthanasia, abortion, eugenics and–wait for it–Nazism. Theories of natural selection, it’s claimed, were a necessary if not sufficient condition for Hitler’s killing machine to get started. The truth, of course, is that the only necessary and sufficient condition for human beings to murder one another is the simple fact of being human. We’ve always been a lustily fratricidal species, one that needed no Charles Darwin to goad us into millenniums of self-slaughter.”
Mr. Kluger is cynical, yes, but a real hoot. So we are to believe that mankind is thoroughly rancid and easily transformed into a bunch of homicidal maniacs? From that perspective, we might as well ditch the fields of social psychology, forensic psychology and criminology, and stop sorting out and examining the twisted ideas and sick societal agendas that give rise to mass murder and genocide. I mean, according to Kluger, we’re not going to be able to prevent the slaughter anyway. The truth of the matter is that when the Nazis perpetrated the Holocaust, they were indeed influenced by Darwin, eugenics and the concept of “natural selection” in efforts to create their “master race”. At the very least, Darwinian theory provided the Nazis with the rationale to enact their heinous ethnic cleansing for the “greater good”.

Ben Stein has provided his audience with incisive analysis – The Nazis were dyed-in-the-wool atheists who fancied themselves as mini-gods poised to develop their man-made utopia. Part and parcel of that plan was to rid the gene pool of all so-called “undesirables” including the Jews, gypsies, handicapped and political dissenters. Darwinian theory, which takes God out of the equation in man’s creation, facilitated an atmosphere that devalued human life in Nazi Germany. And let there be no mistake, the Nazis were not conservatives or right-wingers, but ardent socialists and fascists, as adeptly delineated by Jonah Goldberg in his bestseller, “Liberal Fascism”, which chronicles the history of the political Left.*

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Expelled is garbage plain and simple and the only people who tout it are those who’s faith requires a literal adherence to Genesis. Learn a tad of Catholic teaching and a bit of theology and then you won’t need to look so foolish claiming that evolution is a hoax. This docucomedy is simple junk theology, It can in no way be considered science.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The Holy Apostles believed that very thing. They were right and millions were wrong. They didn’t do that for the ego boost it gave them though.

I’ve seen the errors of Darwinists in these posts on CAF many, many times. I’ve seen the dodging and cover-ups and the embarrassments. I don’t gloat about that or think that I’m smarter than anyone else. But to me, it painfully obvious that Darwinist theory (and the ideology surrounding it) has some serious weaknesses.

Other people can see the same thing. Expelled made this very clear. The show I attended was pretty full and everybody laughed at the the Darwinists and the film was generally well-received (a few people applauded).

Some day I will feel sorry for the people who defended Darwinian theory with so much conviction and emotion. I can understand their passion – they’re true believers and it’s sad in some ways to see them blind to the major problems that the theory holds.

But sadly, today, those people own the conversation and they are quite arrogant about their “certainties”. That is what Expelled had to expose some of this.

The fact that Darwinists can watch Richard Dawkins (if they even bother to see the film) say the things he does, and not feel embarrassed – it’s obvious that there’s an intellectual blindness at work. It probably comes from a too-passionate attachment to the evolutionary idea.

Expelled is a healthy corrective. I found it very enjoyable and quite insightful – as many others have (Expelled’s per-theater gross is the third highest of all films this weekend).

Yeah, you are right up there with the apostles no doubt. Spend your money and watch it 10 times if it makes you feel good. It changes not a thing of course. Stiffen up your faith and you won’t need to rely on docucomedies to support your fundamentalism.