Expelled – The New Ben Stein Movie


I always look forward to anything that has Ben Stein attached to it. Movies, articles, books, what have you. And in keeping with that tradition this movie is going into my “must see” list:

[flv:expelled.flv 400 300]

From the few reviews I have read of the movie from those who saw the still raw version at CPAC it appears the main thrust of the movie is academia intolerance. Science should always be about the research of new ideas and free debate. But when the film makers have to hide the faces of scientists who dare discuss ID in a rational way you know that this freedom doesn’t exist.

As for Intelligent Design, I don’t discount it. I’m sure there are some in the ID community who want to push the creationist version of life but to me ID could very well explain evolution. Who is say that a higher being didn’t put that first cell on this planet to set off evolution? Maybe, or maybe not. But at least let the free flow of ideas get thrown about in academia.

Ed Morrissey, who saw the film with a few thoughts:

the film does an excellent job of demonstrating atheism as a belief system. Atheism as represented by Richard Dawkings and others in this film gets exposed as exactly the kind of belief system they claim to despise. They can’t prove God exists — and they can’t prove God doesn’t exist. They make the common fallacy of arguing that absence of evidence amounts to evidence of absence.


Amusingly, Stein asks people how the first cell came to be. None of the scientists could give him a straight answer. Dawkins himself admits he doesn’t know and that no one else does, either — but postulates that aliens could have brought life to this planet, and then postulates that another alien civilization could have brought life to that planet, and so on. He then concedes that one entity could have been the original source … but insists that entity could not possibly have been God. For this he gives absolutely no evidence at all, relegating it as a belief system somewhat akin to Scientology.


Overall, though, the film presents a powerful argument not for intelligent design as much as for the freedom of scientific inquiry. If scientists get punished for challenging orthodoxy, we will not expand our learning but ossify it in concrete.

The producers delve a bit more into the subject matter:

Darwinian evolution theory is a viable scientific theory. Author of The God Delusion Richard Dawkins has stated that Darwin’s evolution theory has provided atheists with “intellectual fulfillment.” If you grant that, then you must also grant that it has given a great many racists “intellectual fulfillment,” too.

Here is how Darwin himself translated his own gloomy scientific theory into an even more disturbing worldview (from the Descent of Man)

‘At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropological apes… will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state…even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla’.

Now, before you protest the analogy, consider that Professor Dawkins himself understands full well the analogy – to the extent that he’d prefer to just side step it:

In his “The Ancestor’s Tale,” he posed the Welfare State as a challenge to Darwinism. When asked by an Austrian journalist in an interview (Die Presse -July 30, 2005) how he would justify that challenge?

Dawkins: “No self-respecting person would want to live in a Society that operates according to Darwinian laws. I am a passionate Darwinist, when it involves explaining the development of life. However, I am a passionate anti-Darwinist when it involves the kind of society in which we want to live. A Darwinian State would be a Fascist state.”

Or, in other words, “I really don’t want to think about it!”

The new film, ” EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed” does not presume to bury the theory of evolution… but it declines to praise it, either.
As a worldview…no thinking person (certainly no moral person) can view a scientific theory of life based on an undirected, purposeless and random process as anything but pessimism. Certain people, and many scientists are drawn to pessimism, and thus pessimistic scientific theories. But that does not make their theories, or them, for that matter, any more attractive or intelligent.

Pessimism is a malady to be overcome, not encouraged – and it is certainly not a quality (or a theory) to be celebrated. As history teaches us – inherently pessimistic scientific theories, like all decadent theories (socialism, communism) eventually give way to those that actually work.

The sixteenth President of the United States believed what our country’s founders believed and that The Bill of Rights so clearly stated – that all men were endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That’s a “theory” that works.

Choosing to believe in but one scientific theory that effectively negates the whole notion of an intrinsic intelligence, a higher power, an intelligent designer – is fine, if pessimism is what floats your boat.

But that is your choice – or at least it should be a “choice” – for there is ample scientific evidence accumulating under the theory of Intelligent Design that presents an equally compelling – and much more optimistic scientific perspective on life’s “origins.”

But currently, Big Science is still enamored with only the gloomy, 150-year old theory originally developed by Darwin, the man who believed that “superior” races would eventually wipe out the “inferior” races. The problem is…the scientific theory justifying that repugnant view is being forced on all of us, to the exclusion of any other scientific theories, in our nation’s public schools and taxpayer-funded government science institutions.

Abraham Lincoln ended slavery in America forever, to put to bed the whole notion of “inferior” races. And to be fair – the gentle Mr. Darwin himself did not favor slavery – even of those whom he described as being of the“savage races.”

Should the theory of Intelligent Design be allowed to be debated alongside Darwin’s depressing 150-year-old theory of Evolution? Should scientists who want to explore Intelligent Design Theory be shunned, ostracized and even fired from the teaching profession?

If you have to ask the questions – perhaps you don’t understand the difference between academic freedom… and the State-sponsored pessimism that is currently all but mandated by Big Science.

“EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed” is a new film that will open your eyes to the scientific evidence that challenges Darwin’s lurid theory of life. It reveals the distinctly non-scientific agenda that is driving Neo-Darwinism today. It also presents exciting new evidence accumulating behind the theory of intelligent design.

But most importantly – it will also remind you of the importance of maintaining the values of freedom and hope that Abraham Lincoln championed, and that some folks wish to deny us by fiat.

Pessimism is sort of a simplistic way to view it but they get the point across. If scientists who dare to embrace, or at least discuss ID are forced out of the academic world we know something has gone terribly wrong. Just as in the global warming field Ben Stein sees that many almost have to suppress a competing theory on how we got here because they owe their livelihood to the accepted version.

Ben Stein:

if they are Darwinists and they owe their jobs to being Darwinists, they are not going to challenge the orthodoxy because that would challenge the whole basis of their jobs and their lives. So they are not going to challenge the ideology that has given them lush positions in real life.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A theory becomes fact when it is proven. The theory of evolution is a theory. Science supposedly acts on fact. Proving theories to be fact or disproving them should be the goal of science. The fossil record is what scientists usually like to use to show evolution. Is it really evolution? Or does it just show similarities between species. Yet the fossil record only shows fully formed species. No one has ever found the fossil of a “monkey-fish” if you will. Consider the genetic code as being letters in a sentence. If you had a sentence, then a random mutation occurred changing a word, would it make the sentence into a new sentence, or something incomprehensible? I’ll put my faith in God instead of a 150 year old unproven theory. It takes just as much faith to believe in science as it does God. Remember, the best scientists in the world once believe that the world was flat and that the universe rotated around us.

Time to sound like a broken record. Theories in science don’t become facts. They are explanations. Referring to a science text book can clear up any problem you have with the vocabulary used in science contexts.

Fossils will always be fully formed animals. An animal would die if it were not fully formed, and would not be able to reproduce if it were dead. The fact that fossils of the past do not have any of today’s creatures is more the focus of where people should be looking, but that isn’t the only aspect that evolution claims. Again, reading a textbook and not comments to a blog would be a good start to critically evaluating the proponents of evolution AND whatever design theory you want to learn about.

The beauty about “believing” in science is that you don’t have to and you can still function within that environment. You can do the same tests as others, and you’ll have the unbiased opinion that is needed going in to not look for an answer before you have a question. It’s nice that you want to put faith somewhere, and that’s your right. Just remember, that 2000 year old book has been changed and reworded by people. You can either argue that point and agree that man has had an influence over “the Word” or you can assume that a book has made it 2,000 years, and people are not allowed to challenge it from things they learn, since the conclusion is drawn prior to the evidence being presented.

“But when the film makers have to hide the faces of scientists who dare discuss ID in a rational way you know that this freedom doesn’t exist.”

The other possibility is that the film is deliberately dishonest.

The creationists have their books, web sites, and blogs. They cannot be “suppressed”. If they really had a scientific idea, it would be properly discussed. But “God did it sometime somewhere somehow somewhy” is not science. So what, exactly, is “intelligent design” and how does it make predictions that can be called scientific?

I saw the movie in an advance screening and I thought the movie was hysterically funny, sad, powerful — the gamut of emotions ran through me. It will make people amused, angry, sad, hopeful, fearful.

See my review for more details:


Mark my words. It’s going to open big, get bigger, and then it’s going to stir up more controversy than ever before — and then it’s going to get bigger and have a longer run due to the controversy. All during this, the media will be saying it is tanking.

Of course. They have to. There is no other alternative except to admit the impending failure of the liberal worldview.

EXPELLED is entertaining. It’s hilarious, but it’s not meant to amuse.

The Greek word MUSE means to think or ponder something. A-MUSE-ment is the lack of thoughtful consideration.

In fact, most of the best humor is unintentional and deeply ironic.

This is an experience movie. People flocked to see The Passion of the Christ — one of the least entertaining movies you will ever want to see. A low budget film that made a billion.

EXPELLED is in the same vein. It begins in an upbeat light manner and slwoly descends into serious blackness. You can dismiss it, but it’s another one of these low-budget masterpieces whose producers have chosen to spend their few millions on advertising. And it’s going to get a big boost from word-of-mouth and grassroots efforts (like your blog).

I have to laugh when I read critics saying that Michael Moore’s style of jump-edited out-of-context mockumentary is better than EXPELLED.

It is a masterpiece compared to anything More has done. I know he is the patron saint of the radical left, but take out his political views and an ape with a camera could put together a better production. (No pun intended.)

I am a Christian who can’t stand some Christian movies becasue they have been historically schlocky, but this wasn’t a “Christian” movie (Stein is a Jew) and it had high production quality.

With the availability of high tech media production at a lower cost than ever before, we are seeing conservatives and Christians in particular turn the corner with high grossing efforts that are at once entertaining, informative, uplifting and provocative.

I wonder, would a public school teacher in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, be allowed to say the following:

“It is interesting to contemplate … [all the many forms of life on earth] … so different from each other, have all been produced by laws acting around us. … There is grandeur in this view of life, HAVING BEEN ORIGINALLY BREATHED BY THE CREATOR INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE; and that from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.”

Just imagine a public school teacher who says those words: that God creates life and places it on the earth in a few forms, and then that life evolves according to the physical and natural laws that God put into place in the universe.

Would that be allowed?


Why? Because the quote is from: On the Origin of the Species, Chapter XV, Recapitulation and Conclusion, By Charles Darwin.

If you are going to teach Darwin’s theory of evolution in public schools, you should teach what Darwin actually wrote about it.

Michael S. Class

Anthony and the Magic Picture Frame: The History Book with a Message for Today’s Young Americans

Read the book. Remember the truth. Share it with your children.

Web Site: http://www.MagicPictureFrame.com


“If you are going to teach Darwin’s theory of evolution in public schools, you should teach what Darwin actually wrote about it.”

Riiiiight. Darwin’s personal opinion about religion in the 1850s is soooo relevant to the proper teaching of the Modern Theory of Evolution.

While you’re teaching that quote in biology, we could teach this one in physics:

“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” –Albert Einstein

Of course, we could just leave god out of science class…

“It’s going to open big, get bigger, and then it’s going to stir up more controversy than ever before”

Your prediction has been falsified.

But there are now 1300+ comments on Roger Ebert’s blog after his review trashed this “mockumentary”.