Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed! A Movie Review |
THE
EVENT -
During April 2008, the movie "Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed," was
released for public viewing. This presentation tells a story from
the perspective of Ben Stein, who is columnist, speech writer,
entertainer, and intellectual spokesperson. |
We were
privileged to get an invitation to view the movie “Expelled – No
Intelligence Allowed” as a preview to the anticipated release
in the spring of 2008. This screening took place in mid-December
2007. If you have followed anything concerning the debate on evolution
and any form of alternate thinking, other than classic Darwinism,
you’ll find this film intriguing. If you love evolution only,
you’ll be rocked off your chair. Ben Stein asks the tough
questions … all we need do is sit back and take it all in … it
is a movie, but it is ultimately about who we are! Director, WindowView.org |
About Design: From the Words Of Others! The following quotations and citations have come to us by e-mail from scientists who we consider reliable. If you find a need for a correction to any of the following, let us know, by e-mail! |
Some Quotations: What Do Others Say About ID? "One
might now consider the design hypothesis as the best explanation
for the origin
of irreducibly
complex systems in living organisms. Although
some may argue this is merely an argument from ignorance, we regard it
as an inference to the best explanation given what
we know about the powers of intelligent as opposed to strictly natural
or material ca uses ... In all irreducibly complex systems in which the
cause of the system
is known by experience or observation, intelligent design or engineering played
a role in the origin of this system."
|
Abiogenesis: Life From Chemicals The following
is very authoritative, coming from Leslie Orgel, who has
for several
decades been in the forefront of research on abiogenesis.
He wrote (1998) |
| Quotes about the Origin of Life "There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter." Dr. Verner Gitt, creationist, information theory expert. "It's a shame that there are few hard facts when it comes to the origin of life. We have a rough idea when it began on earth and some interesting theories about where, but the how part has everyone stumped. Nobody knows how a mixture of chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell." Paul Davies, Astrobiologist "Many investigators feel uneasy about stating in public that the origin of life is a mystery, even though behind closed doors they freely admit that they are baffled. There seem to be two reasons for this unease. Firstly, they feel it opens the door to religious fundamentalists and the god of the gap pseudo science. Secondly, they worry that a frank admission of ignorance will undermine funding, especially for the search for life in space. Paul Davies "One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous origin of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation." George Wald, Nobel Prize biologist. "It has become inordinately difficult even to begin to think of constructing a naturalistic theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism." Philosophy Now. "The notion that not only the biopolymers, but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on earth is evidently nonsense of the highest order ..." Sir Fred Hoyle, outstanding astrophysicist, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, both professed atheists. |
| False Charges Against ID Evolution is science and ID is not, but is only faith. (There are agnostics and atheists who along with theists accept the idea of intelligent design in nature.) There is no evidence for ID. It merely attributes gaps in science to the supernatural. (Books and articles supporting ID and creation are mostly about scientific evidence. Almost all scientists agree life appears to be designed; evolutionists say this is an illusion, but others believe it appears to be designed because it was designed.) It is creation in disguise and was devised about 20 years ago to get religion and the Bible into schools after laws that asked for teaching of creation and evolution were declared illegal. (This is easily seen to be false. ID has been accepted since the early history of man by great observers such as Socrates, King David, Albert Einstein, and a large multitude of others.) Science excludes supernatural explanations, therefore ID is not science. (This exclusion by definition is arbitrary and self serving for evolutionists. Science should not avoid reasonable explanations. ID has religious implications, but so does Darwinism.) Creation by ID is un-falsifiable, not observed by man, and cannot be experimentally reproduced. (Evolution theory has the same restrictions which do not necessarily exclude either explanation.) ID articles are not in peer reviewed journals and other publications. (Articles supporting ID are usually banned from main line publications, but there are exceptions. See ARN.org.) ID and creation are anti-science, and are part of a war on science by the religious right. (This so called war on science is a fabrication. Evolution is opposed by many because they believe it is poor science at best. Many of the greatest scientists through the ages were believers in creation and/or ID.) The Discovery Institute instigated attempts to get ID taught in schools such as in Dover Pennsylvania. (The Dover situation was not started or approved of by Discovery Institute nor most other main ID and creationist organizations. Discovery Institute actually asked Dover School board to stop this attempt.) ID is religion, and religion is not allowed in public schools. (ID proponents are often religiously motivated, but ID is not essentially religious. It is a reasonable inference from observation. Most leading dogmatic evolutionists are atheists. What are their motivations?) There is little doubt about the Darwinian theory of evolution. Almost all scientists accept it. (Although a minority, there are thousands of scientists highly critical of Darwinism.) Why do believers in ID not admit that they believe the intelligent designer is God? (Most IDers do believe this, but quite a number of others do not. The main point is that observations of nature lead many people to conclude that nature is designed.) ID is not plausible since nature shows mistakes, vestigial organs and cruelty. (Mistakes and useless structures are very questionable. Even if these are true, that would not nullify the theory of intelligent design. These issues are addressed mainly by philosophy and theology.) Evolution does not exclude the existence of God, so theists need not be concerned or have to propose ID. (Evolution is essentially an atheistic theory of origins. Also, a God who does not act as creator and/or is undetectable in nature is very different from the view of God in most religions.) |
(032708)
References of Interest
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
