|
Released on the 18th of April in American theatres was the pro-Intelligent Design documentary (or to some, propaganda piece) Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.
Being an Australian resident, I have yet to view the film as it has not been released on our shores. However, as I am a film critic, a religious man (born, raised, and practicing Roman Catholic) and (mild) science buff, I have keenly kept a sharp eye on the film through its wondrously disastrous promotional campaign to its dismal turn at the American box office.
The following are my views on the whole Expelled debacle, which has generated controversy in the fields of science, religion, and film.
FIRST THINGS FIRST: WHAT IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN? |
Intelligent design is the claim that life cannot be the outcome of biological evolution by natural selection. Or, according to Australian attorney, science fiction writer and philosopher Russell Blackford, Intelligent Design “is a moderately sophisticated attempt to repackage Creationism and get it taught in schools”.
Many Intelligent Design advocates believe that with recent DNA research, which shows the unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that a designer with all of his wisdom and power created life in one fell swoop 10,000 years ago. This is in spite of the contradictory evidence provided by scientists that clearly show the Earth to be millions of years old, and that all of the Earth’s inhabitants have evolved during that time.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a documentary which expresses the plight of Intelligent Design advocates within the scientific community, who (they believe) have been bullied and harassed often at the expense of their jobs by their employers and peers because they dared to question the theories of Charles Darwin, and utter the dreaded words “Intelligent Design” as a counter theory to evolution.
The film is presented and narrated by Ben Stein, a popular television personality, former White House speech writer for Richard Nixon, and actor (famed for his role as a teacher in 1980’s teen comedy Ferris Bueller’s Day Off).
Stein took on the job because he believes that “big science in this area of biology has lost its way. Scientists are supposed to be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it may lead them, no matter what the implications are. Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, its anti-science. Its anti-the whole concept of learning”.
The cases of three discriminated scientists are focused upon. The first is Richard Sternberg, a double PhD biologist who in 2003 allowed a peer-reviewed research paper by ID advocate Stephen C. Myer (who described his evidence for a creator) to be published in the scientific journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, which Sternberg was the editor of at the time.
His decision to publish the paper drew outrage from the science community, with the journals publisher deeming that the paper was unsuitable for publication, for it did not meet the scientific standards of the journal, thus forcing Sternberg to resign from the magazine.
But according to Sternberg, officials from the National Centre for Science Education and the Smithsonian Institution began a co-ordinated smear and intimidation campaign to have Sternberg expelled from his position.
Second is Caroline Crocker, a former part time biology teacher at George Mason University, who says she was forced out of her job for briefly discussing problems with Darwinian theory, and for telling students that some scientists believe their is evidence for design in the universe.
And third is Guillermo Gonzalez, assistant professor of astronomy and physics, and co-author of The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. In 2005, Gonzalez was denied tenure at IOWA State University, due to efforts led by religious studies professor and faculty adviser to the ISU Atheist and Agnostic Society, Hector Avalos, who drafted a petition denouncing Intelligent Design that was signed by more than 120 ISU faculty.
Also interviewed are opponents of the Intelligence Design movement, most notably Eugene Scott, who is the Executive Director of the National Centre for Science Education; PZ Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota, Morris, militant atheist, and writer of popular science blog Pharyngula; and Richard Dawkins, Oxford Professor of Biology and author of the immensely popular atheist manifesto, The God Delusion.
These men view themselves as crusaders committed to the course of science and reason, for which Intelligent Design is neither. Expelled portrays them as something of a scientific Gestapo, destroying the careers and credibility of any scientist who dares bring the idea of a creator into any lab or class room. And whilst looking at many of the statements these men have made over the years, it is hard to deny the fact that there is a clear bias (or some might say bigotry) towards any scientist, or indeed anyone, with a religious slant.
Myers: “The only appropriate responses (to proponents of Intelligent Design) 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”.
Dawkins: “It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)”.
Myers: “(Geneticist Frances) Collins is in the pseudo-rationalist branch of liberal Christianity. That's fine, he's welcome to dither about in there…but seriously, it has no credibility and no greater rational foundation than the raving mad branches of fundamentalism. I oppose it. I think the only purpose of this kind of crap is to provide a smiling mask of benign ineffectuality to insanity, a sympathetic cover to allow the religious to excuse any inspection of their premises.”
With comments like these, it is of no wonder that many individuals with a religious or conservative slant within the scientific community believe that an atheist / secular with hunt is under way.
For further examples, just look at the anti-religious musings of comedian / Real Time host Bill Maher, or visit any message board dedicated to Dawkins, Maher, etc., and view the type of vulgar insults thrown at ID advocates or those with a religious slant. It is neither mature nor necessary, nor does it convey intelligence nor reason, and leaves Dawkins and the like open to scrutiny for their lack of class in presenting their criticisms.
|
