Revision as of 05:44, 18 April 2008 editMackan79 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers7,363 edits →Promotion of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution: replacing an improved overview, for others to spend the rest of the day/night as they will← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 01:42, 29 December 2024 edit undoIxocactus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,378 edits Reverted 2 edits by Fluyt (talk): Not improvmentsTags: Twinkle Undo | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|2008 American documentary-style propaganda film}} | |||
{{semi-protected|small=yes}} | |||
{{distinguish|text= the 2014 comedy film ]}} | |||
{{future film}} | |||
{{use mdy dates|date=August 2023}} | |||
{{Infobox Film | |||
{{Infobox film | |||
| name = Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed | |||
| |
| name = Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed | ||
| |
| image = Expelled logo.jpg | ||
| |
| caption = Promotional release poster | ||
| |
| writer = Kevin Miller<br />]<br />Walt Ruloff | ||
| |
| starring = Ben Stein | ||
| |
| director = Nathan Frankowski | ||
| |
| producer = Logan Craft<br />Walt Ruloff<br />John Sullivan | ||
| |
| music = ]<br />Robbie Bronnimann | ||
| |
| editing = Simon Tondeur | ||
| |
| studio = Premise Media Corporation<br />Rampant Films | ||
| |
| distributor = ]<br />] <small>(US)</small><br />Con Dios Entertainment <small>(Australia)</small> | ||
| released = {{film date|2008|04|18|ref1=<ref name="Siegel_Variety">{{cite magazine |last=Siegel |first=Tatiana |date=February 15, 2008 |title=New mutation in Darwin debate |url=https://variety.com/2008/more/news/new-mutation-in-darwin-debate-1117981021/ |magazine=] |location=Sutton, London |issn=0042-2738 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref>}} | |||
| budget = ]3.5 million | |||
| |
| runtime = 96.5 minutes<ref name=mojo/> | ||
| |
| country = United States | ||
| |
| language = English | ||
| |
| budget = $3.5 million | ||
| |
| gross = $7.7 million | ||
}} | |||
| website = http://www.expelledthemovie.com/ | |||
|}} | |||
'''''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed''''' is a 2008 American ] directed by Nathan Frankowski and starring ].<ref name="Catsoulis">{{cite news |last=Catsoulis |first=Jeannette |date=April 18, 2008 |title=Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary |newspaper=The New York Times |location=New York |type=Movie review |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/movies/18expe.html |access-date=2008-12-03|quote=One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” is a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry. .... an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike.}}</ref><ref name="Puig_USAToday" /> It is presented as a ] promoting the ] that academia oppresses and excludes people who believe in ].<ref name=shermer>Shermer, Michael. "", ''Scientific American'', April 9, 2008. Retrieved May 26, 2018. "In a new documentary film, actor, game show host and financial columnist Ben Stein falls for the pseudoscience of intelligent design. .... Ben Stein's antievolution documentary film .... A final leitmotif running through Expelled is inscribed in chalk by Stein in repetitive lines on a classroom blackboard: 'Do not question Darwinism.' Anyone who thinks that scientists do not question Darwinism has never been to an evolutionary conference.".</ref><ref name="Dean_Scientists Feel">{{cite news |last=Dean |first=Cornelia |date=September 27, 2007 |title=Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html |newspaper=] |page=A1 |access-date=2007-09-28|quote=evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins received an e-mail message from a producer at Rampant Films inviting him to be interviewed for a documentary called 'Crossroads.' .... But now, Dr. Dawkins and other scientists who agreed to be interviewed say they are surprised — and in some cases, angered — to find themselves not in 'Crossroads' but in a film with a new name and one that makes the case for intelligent design, an ideological cousin of creationism. The film, 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,' also has a different producer, Premise Media.}}</ref><ref name="Motive_pressrelease">{{cite press release |last=Burbridge-Bates |first=Lesley |date=August 14, 2007a |title=What Happened to Freedom of Speech? |url=http://www.premisemedia.com/EXPELLED-PressRelease_08-22-07.pdf |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=Motive Entertainment; Premise Media Corporation |access-date=2016-01-05 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090325093015/http://www.premisemedia.com/EXPELLED-PressRelease_08-22-07.pdf |archive-date= March 25, 2009 |url-status= dead}}</ref> It portrays the scientific theory of ] as a contributor to ], ], ], ], and in particular ] atrocities in ].<ref name="Catsoulis" /><ref name="Whipple_CC">{{cite web |type=Blog |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3229 |title=Science Sunday: Intelligent Design Goes to the Movies |last=Whipple |first=Dan |date=December 16, 2007 |website=Colorado Confidential |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080327072855/http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3229 |archive-date=2008-03-27 |access-date=2016-01-05 }}</ref> Although intelligent design is a ] religious idea, the film presents it as science-based, without giving a detailed definition of the concept or attempting to explain it on a scientific level. Other than briefly addressing issues of ], ''Expelled'' examines intelligent design purely as a political issue.<ref name="Whipple_CC" /><ref name="Chang_Variety">{{cite magazine |last=Chang |first=Justin |date=April 11, 2008 |title=Review: 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed' |url=https://variety.com/2008/film/reviews/expelled-no-intelligence-allowed-1200535206/ |magazine=Variety |location=Sutton, London |issn=0042-2738 |access-date=2008-06-10}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/scanners/ben-stein-no-argument-allowed |title=Ben Stein: No argument allowed |last=Emerson |first=Jim |date=December 17, 2008 |website=RogerEbert.com |location=Chicago, IL |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-05 |quote=... it's easier to critique evolution ... than to mount evidence for intelligent design, and the filmmakers' failure to offer even a working definition of the term leaves them open to the common charge that it’s all unprovable, faith-based pseudo-science. ... One spokesman comes close to articulating a thought about Intelligent Design: 'If you define evolution precisely, though, to mean the common descent of all life on earth from a single ancestor via undirected mutation and natural selection -- that's a textbook definition of neo-Darwinism -- biologists of the first rank have real questions... 'Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence.' I think there's another word for that: 'tautology.'}}</ref> | |||
''This article is about the movie. For other uses of the term, see ]'' | |||
''Expelled'' opened in 1,052 movie theaters, more than any other documentary before it, and grossed over $2,900,000 in its first weekend.<ref name="mojorank">{{cite web |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=documentary.htm |title=Documentary Movies |website=Box Office Mojo |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2018-01-29}} Page ranks the highest grossing 'Documentary Movies' since 1982.</ref> It earned $7.7 million, making it the 33rd highest-grossing documentary film in the United States (as of 2018, and not adjusted for inflation).<ref name="mojorank" /> | |||
'''''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed''''' is a controversial film,<ref name=presskit>{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledthemovie.com/_downloads/expelled_press_kit.doc |title=Expelled Press Kit |accessdate=2008-04-16 |date=2008 |format=doc |publisher=expelledthemovie.com }}</ref><ref name=Newlegislation>{{cite web |url=http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/article416362.ece |title=Politics: State: New legislation to keep debate on evolution alive |accessdate=2008-03-15 |author=Shannon Colavecchio-Van Sickler |date=March 13, 2008 |publisher=] }}</ref> which claims that educators and scientists are being ] for their belief that there is ] in ].<ref>, retrieved 4/10/08</ref> Hosted by ], it claims that what the film calls "Big Science" allows no dissent from the ] of ], and blames evolution for a range of modern movements from ] to ].<ref name=nyt>{{cite news | author= |title=Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |work= |publisher= ]|date=], ] |accessdate=2007-09-28 }}</ref><ref name=pressrelease>{{cite web |author=Lesley Burbridge-Bates|publisher=|date=] |url=http://www.premisemedia.com/EXPELLED-PressRelease_08-22-07.pdf |title=''Expelled'' ] |accessdate=2007-09-29 |format= |work=}}</ref> It is due to be released on ], ].<ref name=Variety>{{cite web |url=http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117981021.html?categoryid=1019&cs=1&nid=2562 |title=New mutation in Darwin debate - Entertainment News, Weekly, Media - Variety |accessdate=2008-02-24 |author=Tatania Siegel |date= February 15, 2008 |publisher=]}}</ref> | |||
<!--trumped As of the weekend of April 12, 2008, the Expelled website was claiming the movie to be "satirical".<ref name="titleEXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed"/>--> | |||
Media response to the film has been largely negative. Multiple reviews, including those of '']'' and '']'', described the film as propaganda, with ''USA Today'' adding that it was "a political rant disguised as a serious commentary on stifled freedom of inquiry" and ''Scientific American'' calling it "a science-free attack on Darwin".<ref name=shermer /> '']'' deemed it "a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry" and "an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike".<ref name="Catsoulis" /> Response to the film from ] groups was generally positive, praising the film for its humor and for focusing on what they perceive as a serious issue.<ref name=":0" /> | |||
== Overview == | |||
===Promotion of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution === | |||
{| class="toccolours" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" | |||
|style="text-align: left;" |''"Anyone who thinks that scientists do not question Darwinism has never been to an evolutionary conference. ... It is perfectly okay to question Darwinism (or any other '']'' in science), as long as there is a way to test your challenge. Intelligent Design creationists, by contrast, have no interest in doing science at all."'' | |||
|- | |||
|style="text-align: left;" |'''-], one of the interviewees for the film.<ref name=Shermer2/> | |||
|} | |||
==Overview== | |||
The film sets out to be the ] equivalent of a ] documentary,<ref name="sciam-rennie"/> portraying ] as a ] theory, committed to ] and refusing to accept ideas with a religious component like ]. The film aims to promote intelligent design, which its producers define on their website as "certain features of the universe and of living things – such as the digital code in DNA and the molecular machines in cells — are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection"<ref name="titleEXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed"/> | |||
The film was directed by Nathan Frankowski and stars ].<ref name="Catsoulis" /><ref name="Puig_USAToday" /><ref name="Pallen2011">{{cite book |last=Pallen |first=Mark|title=The Rough Guide to Evolution|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EFBgeD0jEDAC&pg=PT417|date=1 September 2011|publisher=Rough Guides Limited|isbn=978-1-4093-5855-8|page=417}}</ref> Stein provides narrative commentary throughout the film. He is depicted as visiting a sequence of universities to interview proponents of intelligent design who claim to have been victimized, and evolutionary scientists who are presented as atheists. The film makes considerable use of vintage film clips, including opening scenes showing the ] being constructed as a metaphor for barriers to the scientific acceptance of intelligent design.<ref name="MovieMom">{{cite web |url=http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/moviemom/2008/10/expelled-no-intelligence-allow.html |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |last=Minow |first=Nell |author-link=Nell Minow |website=Beliefnet |publisher=Beliefnet, Inc. |location=Norfolk, VA |type=Movie review |access-date=2016-01-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/moviemom/2008/10/expelled-no-intelligence-allow.html |archive-date=2016-01-21 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The film takes aim at some scientific hypotheses of the origin of life, and presents a short animation portraying the inner workings of the cell to introduce the intelligent design concept of irreducible complexity, the claim that such complexity could not arise from spontaneous ]s.<ref name="Chang_Variety" /> The intelligent design proponents shown include ], who claims that ] influenced the Nazis.<ref name="Weikart_AmericanSpectator">{{cite magazine |last=Weikart |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Weikart |date=April 16, 2008 |title=Darwin and the Nazis |url=http://spectator.org/articles/43771/darwin-and-nazis |magazine=The American Spectator |location=Arlington, VA |publisher=American Spectator Foundation |issn=0148-8414 |access-date=2016-01-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://spectator.org/articles/43771/darwin-and-nazis |archive-date=January 21, 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The film also associates ]'s ambitions of a ] and the Holocaust to Darwinian ideas of ]. It does so using ] film clips of ] laboratories,<ref name="Chang_Variety" /> as well as statements of ] Uta George, director of the ]'s Memorial Museum.<ref>{{cite AV media |people=Frankowski, Nathan (Director) |year=2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |medium=Motion picture |time=01:06:40}}</ref> The film directly addresses intelligent design only superficially, focusing on how it is treated in ] rather than on issues involving the concept itself. It makes almost no attempt to define intelligent design or show any scientific evidence in favor of intelligent design. Instead, the film deals with the subject almost entirely from a political, rather than scientific, viewpoint. | |||
===Promotion of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution=== | |||
In a review of the film by '']'' editor John Rennie describes intelligent design as "a notion which firmly states that at one or more unspecified times in the past, an unidentified designer who might or might not be God somehow created whole organisms, or maybe just cells, or maybe just certain parts of cells—they're still deciding and will get back to you on that."<ref name="sciam-rennie"/> One review of the film, by Fox News, terms it ].<ref name=FOX/><ref>Other sources calling it Junk science: Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134–1138 American Society for Clinical Investigation, 2006.<br /> <cite>"Biologists aren't alarmed by intelligent design's arrival in Dover and elsewhere because they have all sworn allegiance to atheistic materialism; they're alarmed because intelligent design is junk science."</cite> H. Allen Orr. Annals of Science. New Yorker May 2005.<br/>Also, ] Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism.<br />• Mark Bergin. World Magazine, Vol. 21, No. 8 February 25 2006.</ref> In the film, Stein says that “Intelligent design was being suppressed in a systematic and ruthless fashion."<ref name=EEID>{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth/id |title=Expelled Exposed > Intelligent Design |date=2008|publisher=]|accessdate=2008-04-17}}</ref> One criticism of the film is that it ignores the many scientists who are religious and do not bring God in as part of their theories as testing requires holding constant some variables, and no one can “control” God, so scientific explanations are restricted to the natural causes that are testable, regardless of the religious views of the scientists.<ref name=EEEvolution>{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth/evolution |title=Expelled Exposed > Evolution |date=2008|publisher=]|accessdate=2008-04-17}}</ref> | |||
{{Further|Intelligent design |Intelligent design movement}} | |||
The film depicts intelligent design as an alternative to evolution, and claims it deserves a place in academia. This "design theory" is defined in the film by the ]'s ] as "the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence".<ref name="EEID" /> Stein says in the film that intelligent design is not taught or researched in academia because it is "suppressed in a systematic and ruthless fashion". The ] (NCSE), one of the groups discussed in the film, responds that "Intelligent design has not produced any research to suppress", and "The fundamental problem with intelligent design as science is that intelligent design claims cannot be tested."<ref name="EEID">{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/id |title=Intelligent Design |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=] |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-05 |url-status=dead |archive-date=2016-01-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/id }}</ref> | |||
The film responds to the outcome of the '']'' trial with Stein saying he thought science was decided by evidence, and not the courts.<ref name=Timonen/> The trial resulted when a public school district required the presentation of "Intelligent Design" as an alternative to evolution, and the court ruling concluded on the basis of expert testimony and the testimony of leading intelligent design proponents that intelligent design was a creationist religious strategy and was not science.<ref>]. The judgement concluded that intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents." {{cite court |litigants=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District |vol=04 |reporter= cv |opinion= 2688 |pinpoint= |court= |date=] ] }}, ].</ref><ref>{{cite court |litigants=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District |vol=04 |reporter= cv |opinion= 2688 |pinpoint= |court= |date=] ] }} ]</ref><ref>In about the film for the '']'', environmental journalist describes ] as "an ideological cousin of ]" and later as a "creationist idea".</ref><ref name=ForrestMayPaper>{{citation | url= http://www.centerforinquiry.net/uploads/attachments/intelligent-design.pdf| title = Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy| first = Barbara| last = Forrest| author-link = Barbara Forrest | date= May, 2007| month = May| year = 2007| publisher = ], Inc.| place = ]|accessdate = 2007-08-06}}.</ref><!-- no reliable source The producers of ''Expelled'' claim the scientific community have "conveniently dismissed as religious 'creationism',"<ref name="titleEXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed">{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledthemovie.com/chronicle.php?article=1 |title=EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed |accessdate=2008-04-03 |format= |work=}}{{Verify credibility|date=April 2008}} Keeps changing (and not in Wayback), so unreliable unless archived (using WebCite or similar) </ref>--> The court rejected the Discovery Institute's claims that intelligent design was not religiously motivated,<ref name=oreilly/><ref name=idnotCreationism/><ref>"The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory." ]</ref> and rebuffed the attempt to introduce it into public school science classes as a constitutional violation.<ref name="sciam-rennie"/><ref>) and "our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom." ]</ref><ref>In her article about the film for the ], environmental journalist describes ] as "an ideological cousin of ]" and a "creationist idea".</ref><ref></ref><ref>At the the 2005 '']'' trial it was concluded on the basis of expert testimony and the testimony of leading intelligent design proponents that ].</ref> | |||
In the United States federal court case '']'' (2005), intelligent design was judged a repackaged version of ] and as such introducing intelligent design in public school science classrooms was ] religious ].<ref>''See:'' | |||
The ] of the ] is that intelligent design is not science but ],<ref name="unscientific">See: 1) ] 2) ]. 3) The Discovery Institute's ] petition begun in 2001 has been signed by "over 700 scientists" as of ] ]. A four day ] petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and . More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism. According to '']'' "There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution as an explanation for the complexity and diversity of life on earth."{{cite news |first=Cordelia |last=Dean |title=Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |work= |publisher=]|date=September 27, 2007 |accessdate=2007-09-28 }}</ref><ref name=teachernet>{{cite web |url=http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=11890 |title=Teachernet, Document bank |accessdate=2007-10-01 |coauthors= |date=], ] |work= |publisher=] |quote=The ] claims there are aspects of the natural world that are so intricate and fit for purpose that they cannot have evolved but must have been created by an '].' Furthermore they assert that this claim is scientifically ] and should therefore be taught in science lessons. Intelligent design lies wholly outside of science. Sometimes examples are quoted that are said to require an 'intelligent designer'. However, many of these have subsequently been shown to have a scientific explanation, for example, the ] and ]s.<br> Attempts to establish an idea of the ']' needed for intelligent design are surrounded by complex ]. Despite this, the idea seems to be essentially a modern version of the old idea of the "]". Lack of a satisfactory scientific explanation of some phenomena (a 'gap' in scientific | |||
*{{harvnb|Gefter|2008}} | |||
knowledge) is claimed to be evidence of an intelligent designer.}}</ref><ref name="doi:10.1038/nmeth1207-983">{{cite journal |author= Nature Methods Editorial |title=An intelligently designed response|journal=Nat. Methods |volume=4 |issue=12 |pages=983 |year=2007 |doi=10.1038/nmeth1207-983}}</ref><ref name="doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7401131">{{cite journal |author= Mark Greener |title=Taking on creationism. Which arguments and evidence counter pseudoscience? |journal=EMBO Reports |volume=8 |issue=12 |pages=1107–1109 |year=2007 |doi=10.1038/sj.embor.7401131}}</ref> | |||
*''Kizmiller v. Dover'' opinion: | |||
with organisations including the US ] and the ] taking a stand against it.<ref>National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science.... It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom." {{Dead link|date=December 2007}} National Science Teachers Association Press Release ] ].<br/> "for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience." David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.<br /> "Creationists are repackaging their message as the pseudoscience of intelligent design theory." American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2001.</ref> The ] has stated that "intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life" are not science because they cannot be tested by ], do not generate any predictions, and propose no new ] of their own.<ref>National Academy of Sciences, 1999 </ref> Evolution, the ] that intelligent design and other forms of creationism set themselves in opposition to, is overwhelmingly accepted by scientists, with one source stating that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution."<ref> , ], quoting ] Professor ] (]). Retrieved ].</ref> The film claims that those who dare to question "Darwinism" are quickly silenced and that there is debate on many aspects of evolution.<ref name=EEID/><ref name=EECS>{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth/challenging |title=Expelled Exposed > Challenging Science |date=2008|publisher=]|accessdate=2008-04-17}}</ref> | |||
::{{Cite court |litigants=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District |vol=04 |reporter=cv |opinion=2688 |date=December 20, 2005 |quote=The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory.}} ] | |||
::{{Cite court |litigants=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District |vol=04 |reporter=cv |opinion=2688 |date=December 20, 2005 |quote=ur conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.}} ]</ref> In the film, the president of the Discovery Institute, ], denied that teaching intelligent design in science classes is an attempt to sneak religion into public schools.<ref name="sciam-rennie">{{cite magazine |last=Rennie |first=John |author-link=John Rennie (editor) |date=April 9, 2008 |title=Ben Stein's ''Expelled'': No Integrity Displayed |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ben-steins-expelled-review-john-rennie/ |magazine=Scientific American |location=Stuttgart |publisher=Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group |issn=0036-8733 |access-date=2016-01-05 |ref=Rennie 2008}}</ref> Stein, the Discovery Institute and ''Expelled''{{'}}s publicist, Motive Entertainment, have all used the film to build support for Academic Freedom bills in various states. | |||
These bills would permit educators in the public schools to independently introduce criticisms of or alternatives to evolution, but many view the bills as the latest in a series of anti-evolutionary strategies designed to bring creationism into the classroom.<ref>''See:'' | |||
*{{harvnb|Cotterell|2008}} | |||
*{{cite magazine |last=Lebo |first=Lauri |author-link=Lauri Lebo |date=January 28, 2010 |title=Academic Freedom Bill Season |url=http://religiondispatches.org/academic-freedom-bill-season/ |magazine=] |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=] |access-date=2016-01-05}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Gefter|2008}}</ref> | |||
===Claims that intelligent design advocates are persecuted=== | ===Claims that intelligent design advocates are persecuted=== | ||
The film contends that there is widespread persecution of educators and scientists who promote intelligent design, and a conspiracy to keep God out of the nation's laboratories and classrooms. The film contains interviews with educators and scientists in which they describe this persecution.<ref name="Dean_Scientists Feel" /><ref name="Motive_pressrelease" /> In the film, Stein says, "It's not just the scientists who are in on it. The media is in on it, the courts, the educational system, everyone is after them." Stein further accuses academia of having a dogmatic commitment to Darwinism, comparable to the 'party line' of the ].<ref name="Olasky_WorldMagazine">{{cite magazine |last=Olasky |first=Marvin |author-link=Marvin Olasky |date=April 5, 2008 |title=Seriously funny: Ben Stein takes on the debate-phobic Darwinian establishment |url=http://www.worldmag.com/2008/04/seriously_funny |magazine=] |location=Asheville, NC |publisher=WORLD News Group |volume=23 |issue=7 |issn=0888-157X |access-date=2016-01-05 }}</ref> ] of the National Center for Science Education stated that the filmmakers were exploiting Americans' sense of fairness as a way to sell their religious views and that she feared that the film would portray "the scientific community as intolerant, as close-minded, and as persecuting those who disagree with them. And this is simply wrong."<ref name="Dean_Scientists Feel" /> | |||
The producers claim that those opposing intelligent design "don't like the very idea of an intelligent cause because they don't like the idea of allowing even the possibility of the existence of an intelligent 'designer.' That might lead to scientific evidence in support of the unthinkable, i.e. G-O-D", and assert that those who oppose intelligent design "are simply wrong."<ref name="titleEXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed">{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledthemovie.com/chronicle.php?article=1 |title=EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed |accessdate=2008-04-03 |format= |work=}}{{Verify credibility|date=April 2008}}<!-- Keeps changing (and not in Wayback), so unreliable unless archived (using WebCite or similar) --></ref> What one reviewer describes as four or five examples of "ordinary academic backbiting"<ref name=CC/> are presented as evidence that scientists do not have the freedom to work within the framework of believing there is a God,<ref name=oreilly/> and used to allege that there is widespread persecution of educators and scientists who promote intelligent design, and a conspiracy to keep ] out of the nation’s laboratories and classrooms.<ref name=nyt/><ref name=pressrelease/><ref name="titleEXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed"/> | |||
===Portrayal of evolutionary science as atheistic=== | |||
In the film, Stein claims that scientists do not have the freedom to work within the framework of believing there is a God.<ref name=oreilly/> On the Expelled blog, Stein wrote: | |||
The film alleges that many scientists and the scientific enterprise are dogmatically committed to atheism,<ref name="EES&R">{{cite web|url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/science-religion |title=Science & Religion |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-05 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/science-religion |archive-date=2016-01-21 }}</ref><ref name="SixThings3">{{cite magazine |last1=Rennie |first1=John |last2=Mirsky |first2=Steve |author-link2=Steve Mirsky |date=April 16, 2008 |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/six-things-ben-stein-doesnt-want-you-to-know/ |title=Six Things in ''Expelled'' That Ben Stein Doesn't Want You to Know... |magazine=Scientific American |location=Stuttgart |publisher=Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group |issn=0036-8733 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> and that a commitment to ] in the scientific establishment is behind the claimed suppression of intelligent design.<ref name="EEID" /> | |||
{{cquote|1=Under a new anti-religious dogmatism, scientists and educators are not allowed to even think thoughts that involve an intelligent creator. Do you realize that some of the leading lights of "anti-intelligent design" would not allow a scientist who merely believed in the possibility of an intelligent designer/creator to work for him… EVEN IF HE NEVER MENTIONED the possibility of intelligent design in the universe? EVEN FOR HIS VERY THOUGHTS… HE WOULD BE BANNED.<ref>http://expelledthemovie.com/blog/2007/08/21/bens-blog/#more-4</ref>}} | |||
] addressed the issue of design explanations in science, saying that "many fields of study involve intelligent design, including archaeology, forensics, and the ] (SETI). An archaeologist, for example, examines the evidence—like a curiously shaped stone—to determine whether it might be the product of a human intelligence."<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Hawkins |first=Benjamin |date=Summer 2008 |title='Expelled' Professor Finds a Home at Southwestern |url=http://v7.swbts.edu/southwesternnews/snsu08/ |magazine=Southwestern News |location=Fort Worth, TX |publisher=] Communications Group |volume=66 |issue=3 |page=47 |issn=0038-4917 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> Stein contends that "There are people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can't possibly touch a higher power, and it can’t possibly touch God."<ref name="EES&R" /> | |||
'']'' criticised the film for failing to note that the ] deals only with explanations that can be tested or empirically validated, and so logically cannot use untestable religious or "design based" explanations.<ref name="SixThings3" /> | |||
The ] criticizes the film for the ]: representing scientists who are atheists as representative of all scientists, without discussing the many prominent scientists who are religious, and thus creating a ] between science and religion.<ref name="EES&R" /> The associate producer of the film, Mark Mathis, said that although he didn't get to decide who and what interviews made it into the film, it was his opinion that including ] biologist ] would have "confused the film unnecessarily". Mathis also questioned the intellectual honesty of a Catholic accepting evolution.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Mirsky |first=Steve |date=April 9, 2008 |title=A Conversation with ''Expelled'''s Associate Producer Mark Mathis |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-conversation-with-mark-mathis/ |magazine=Scientific American |location=Stuttgart |publisher=Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group |issn=0036-8733 |access-date=2016-01-05}} Audio recording: and (MP3); {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720030601/http://www.heardworld.com/higgaion/?p=999 |date=July 20, 2011 |title=partial transcript }}.</ref> Miller later noted that 40% of the members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science profess belief in a ].<ref name="Miller_BostonGlobe">{{cite news |last=Miller |first=Kenneth R. |author-link=Kenneth R. Miller |date=May 8, 2008 |title=Trouble ahead for science |url=https://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/05/08/trouble_ahead_for_science/ |work=] |type=Op-ed |location=Boston, MA |publisher=The Boston Globe Newspaper Company LLC |access-date=2008-05-08}}</ref> | |||
However, describing the film for '']'', Amanda Gefter wrote: | |||
In its review, the '']'' said "That's the real issue of ''Expelled'' — atheist scientists versus God — even though it wholly undercuts statements by intelligent design researchers early in the film that ID has nothing to do with religion." It described the failure to cover "how Christian evolutionists reconcile faith and science" as "perhaps the film's most glaring and telling omission", and said that the film rather "quickly dismissed ]] by a chain of quotes that brand them as liberal Christians and duped by militant atheists in their efforts to get religion out of the classroom".<ref>{{cite news |last=Hoover |first=Carl |date=April 19, 2008 |title=Review: Baylor officials among those attacked in 'Expelled' |url=http://www.robertmarks.org/InTheNews/2007_Media/080419_BaylorOfficialsAmongThoseAttacked_Tribune.htm |newspaper=] |type=Movie review |location=Atlanta, GA |publisher=] |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> Defending the film, the producer, Walt Ruloff, said that scientists like prominent geneticist ] keep their religion and science separate because they are "toeing the party line". Collins, who was not asked to be interviewed for the film in any of its incarnations, called Ruloff's claims "just ludicrous".<ref name="Dean_Scientists Feel" /> | |||
{{cquote|Its selling point is that academic freedom in the US is threatened by a vast conspiracy of atheist scientists, hypnotised by what Stein labels in the film the "Darwinian gospel". Supporters of ID are fired from their institutions or denied tenure, the film argues, while journalists who report on ID are silenced or shunned. This is an old trick. By claiming their views are suppressed, proponents of ID hope to be protected from criticism. When someone argues that ID is bogus, all they need do is yell: "See? Suppression!"<ref name=NewScientist12April2008> | |||
{{cite journal | last = Gefter | first = Amanda | date = 12 April, 2008 | title = Warning! They've Got Designs on You | journal = New Scientist | volume = 198 | issue = 2651 | pages = 46 | publisher = Reed Business Information, Ltd. | location = London, England }}</ref>}} | |||
===Claims that |
===Claims that the theory of evolution was necessary for the development of Nazism=== | ||
{{ |
{{Further|Nazi eugenics|Social Darwinism|Religion in Nazi Germany|Religious views of Adolf Hitler}} | ||
{| class="toccolours" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" | |||
|style="text-align: left;" |''"The film makers' logic is that by teaching evolution, the US public school system is telling children that there is no God, morality or free will. And this can lead to only one thing: Holocaust."'' | |||
|- | |||
|style="text-align: left;" |'''- Amanda Gefter, writing for ''New Scientist''<ref name=NewScientist12April2008 /> | |||
|} | |||
Richard Weikart, a historian and Discovery Institute fellow, appears in the film asserting that ]'s work in the 19th century influenced Adolf Hitler. He argues that Darwin's perception of humans not being qualitatively different from animals, with qualities such as ] arising from natural processes, undermines what Weikart calls the "Judeo-Christian conception of the ]".<ref name="Weikart_AmericanSpectator" /> Nazi ]s and concentration camps figure highly in the narrative of the film.<ref name="LyingforJesus">{{cite web |url=http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins |title=Lying for Jesus? |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |author-link=Richard Dawkins |website=RichardDawkins.net |publisher=] |location=Washington, D.C. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080406092110/http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins |archive-date=2008-04-06 |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> In the film, philosopher and Discovery Institute fellow ] says that Darwinism was a "]" cause for the Holocaust, and Uta George, director of the Hadamar Memorial in Germany, says that "the Nazis, they relied on Darwin. Yes, and German scientists."<ref>{{cite AV media |people=Frankowski, Nathan (Director) |year=2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |medium=Motion picture |time=01:08:11}}</ref> | |||
The film is largely devoted to portraying ] as responsible for ], ], ], ], ] and, in particular, ] atrocities in the ].<ref name=Timonen/><ref name=CC/> This is a common ] claim.<ref name=hitler-eugenics>{{cite web |url=http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth/hitler-eugenics |title=Hitler & Eugenics |accessdate=2008-04-16 |date=National Center for Science Education |work=Expelled Exposed |publisher=National Center for Science Education }}</ref> As ] notes, the film almost always inaccurately labels evolution with the outdated term "]" to imply an ideology.<ref>"Stein and Expelled rarely refer to "scientists" as I did—they call them Darwinists. Similarly, this review may have already used the word "evolution" about as often as the whole of ''Expelled'' does; in the movie, it is always Darwinism. The term is a curious throwback, because in modern biology almost no one relies solely on Darwin's original ideas... Yet the choice of terminology isn't random: Ben Stein wants you to stop thinking of evolution as an actual science supported by verifiable facts and logical arguments and to start thinking of it as a dogmatic, atheistic ideology akin to Marxism.", ].</ref> ] film critic Jeffrey Overstreet's "spoiler" describing the film’s specific content was also posted on the official ''Expelled'' website:<ref>, Jeffrey Overstreet, News on Film official website, ], ]</ref> | |||
{{cquote|Many scenes are centered around the Berlin Wall, and Ben Stein being Jewish actually visits many death camps and death showers. In fact, Nazi Germany is the thread that ties everything in the movie together. Evolution leads to atheism leads to eugenics leads to Holocaust and Nazi Germany.<ref name=overstreet/> }} | |||
''Scientific American'' editor ] wrote that the film repeatedly uses the term "Darwinism" instead of evolution to misportray science as though it were a "dogmatic, atheistic ideology".<ref>]: "Stein and Expelled rarely refer to 'scientists' as I did—they call them Darwinists. Similarly, this review may have already used the word 'evolution' about as often as the whole of ''Expelled'' does; in the movie, it is always Darwinism. The term is a curious throwback, because in modern biology almost no one relies solely on Darwin's original ideas... Yet the choice of terminology isn't random: Ben Stein wants you to stop thinking of evolution as an actual science supported by verifiable facts and logical arguments and to start thinking of it as a dogmatic, atheistic ideology akin to Marxism."</ref> | |||
The film opens with images of the ], and repeatedly uses what ] describes as the amateurish "]" technique of illustrating every point with images, including a ], fist fights, and above all Nazi ]s and ]s.<ref name=LyingforJesus>{{cite web |url=http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins |title='Lying for Jesus?' |accessdate=2008-04-16 |author=Richard Dawkins |authorlink=Richard Dawkins |date= |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote=}}</ref> In the film, intelligent design proponent ] says that Darwinism was a "necessary though not sufficient" cause for the Holocaust, and Stein presses the message of evolution being responsible without acknowledging more direct causes such as the economic ruin of Germany after the ] and the ] and ] dating back over seven centuries before ], particularly ]'s book '']''.<ref name=hitler-eugenics/><ref name="sciam-rennie"/> In fact, the works of Darwin were burned by the Nazi Party.<ref>In 1935 a document called ''"Prinzipelles zur Säuberung der öffentlichen Bücherein,"'' which translates as "Principles for the Cleansing of Public Libraries" had a specific section; "6. Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel)." {{cite web |url=http://www.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/burnedbooks/documents.htm |title=When Books Burn: Lists of Banned Books, 1933-1939 |accessdate=2008-04-15 |work= An exhibit sponsored by the University of Arizona Library }}</ref> The same purported linking of Hitler to Darwin was made in a ] film which the ] criticized as "an outrageous and shoddy attempt by D. James Kennedy to trivialize the horrors of the Holocaust. Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to exterminate the Jewish people."<ref name=hitler-eugenics/> | |||
], director of the Center for Bioethics at the ], wrote in his ] column that the film is a "frighteningly immoral narrative", including "a toxic mishmash of persecution fantasies, disconnected and inappropriate references to fallen communist regimes and their leaders and a very repugnant form of ] from the monotone big mouth Ben Stein".<ref name="Caplanreview">{{cite news |last=Caplan |first=Arthur |author-link=Arthur Caplan |date=April 21, 2008 |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/24239755 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140810035237/http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24239755/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=August 10, 2014 |title=Intelligent design film far worse than stupid: Ben Stein's so-called documentary ''Expelled'' isn't just bad, it's immoral |website=] |type=Opinion |location=Redmond, WA |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> Caplan sharply criticized what he described as Stein's willingness "to subvert the key reason why the Holocaust took place — racism — to serve his own ideological end. Expelled indeed."<ref name="Caplanreview" /> | |||
From a scientific viewpoint, any distorted misunderstanding of evolution incorporated in Hitler's thinking is irrelevant to the scientific validity of Darwin's theory of evolution.<ref name="sciam-rennie"/> ], who was interviewed for the film, wrote of this: | |||
In an April 7, 2008, interview with ], on the ] about the film, Stein said that science had led to the Nazi murder of children, and stated that "Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place. Science leads you to killing people."<ref name="Miller_BostonGlobe" /><ref>{{cite interview |last=Stein |first=Ben |author-link=Ben Stein |interviewer=] |title=Ben Stein: 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed' |url=http://www.itbn.org/index/detail/lib/Networks/sublib/TBN/ec/9wcHF3MjrdwjifURE6YXVRP_AmrtufAT |work=Behind the Scenes; First to Know |publisher=] |location=Costa Mesa, CA |date=April 2008 |access-date=2016-01-19}} Event occurs at 26:53.</ref> | |||
{{cquote|1=When Stein interviewed me and asked my opinion on the impact of Darwinism on culture, he seemed astonishingly ignorant of the many other ways that Darwinism has been used and abused by political and economic ideologues of all stripes.... Because Stein is a well-known ]... I pointed out how the captains of industry in the late 19th and early 20th centuries justified their beliefs in ] ] through the social Darwinism of 'survival of the fittest corporations.' ... Scientific theorists cannot be held responsible for how their ideas are employed in the service of non-scientific agendas.<ref name=Shermer2/>}} | |||
On April 29, 2008, the ] issued the following statement condemning the film's use of the Holocaust: | |||
==People presented in the film== | |||
{{quotation|text=The film ''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' misappropriates the Holocaust and its imagery as a part of its political effort to discredit the scientific community which rejects so-called intelligent design theory. | |||
The film portrays several people, who have featured in ], as victims of persecution by "Big Science" for their promotion of intelligent design. What one reviewer describes as four or five examples of "ordinary academic backbiting" are presented,<ref name=CC/> and it alleges that they are evidence of widespread persecution of educators and scientists who promote intelligent design.<ref name=nyt/><ref name=pressrelease/> Other intelligent design supporters such as ] ], ] faculty member ], ], ], ], reporter Pamela Winnick and ] ] also appear in the film. | |||
Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to exterminate the Jewish people and Darwin and evolutionary theory cannot explain Hitler's genocidal madness. | |||
In addition, the motion picture includes interviews with scientists and others who advocate the teaching of evolution and criticize intelligent design as an attempt to bring religion into the science classroom.<ref> , ], quoting ] Professor ] (]). Retrieved ].</ref> These include ]s ], ] and ], ] ], ] ] and ] ].<ref name=nyt/> | |||
Using the Holocaust in order to tarnish those who promote the theory of evolution is outrageous and trivializes the complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European Jewry.<ref name="ADLstatement">{{cite press release |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust |url=http://archive.adl.org/nr/exeres/25a3641b-c374-4f2b-9a96-c04e93960427,0b1623ca-d5a4-465d-a369-df6e8679cd9e,frameless.html |location=New York |publisher=] |date=April 29, 2008 |access-date=2016-01-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303232232/http://archive.adl.org/nr/exeres/25a3641b-c374-4f2b-9a96-c04e93960427,0b1623ca-d5a4-465d-a369-df6e8679cd9e,frameless.html |archive-date=March 3, 2016 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref>}} | |||
===Richard Sternberg=== | |||
{{main|Sternberg peer review controversy}} | |||
] is a Staff Scientist for the ] and a fellow of the ] (ISCID), an intelligent design advocacy group. He is the prominent figure in the ] which arose when, having served as editor of the scientific journal ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' and submitting his resignation in the previous year, he arranged for his last issue to include publication of a paper by leading intelligent design proponent ]. The review procedure was questioned and the journal subsequently declared that the paper "does not meet the scientific standards of the Proceedings" and would not have been published had usual editorial practices been followed.<ref name=nyt/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html |title=Council Statement |accessdate=2007-12-16 |date= |publisher= }}</ref> | |||
When '']'' writer Peter McKnight asked for Stein to comment on the Anti-Defamation League's statement, Stein replied, "It's none of their f---ing {{sic}} business."<ref name="SunreviewCanada">{{cite news |last=McKnight |first=Peter |date=June 21, 2008 |title=No intelligence allowed in Stein's film |url=http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec1-929d-92e8bc337364 |newspaper=] |location=Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada |publisher=] |access-date=2008-07-17 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121111070949/http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec1-929d-92e8bc337364 | |||
===Guillermo Gonzalez=== | |||
|archive-date=November 11, 2012 }}</ref> | |||
] is an ], an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at ] and a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's ]. He is also a fellow with the ] and co-authored ''].'' | |||
==People presented in the film== | |||
After the normal review of aspects such as his record of scientific publications (which had dropped sharply after he joined the faculty),<ref>"Under normal circumstances, Mr. Gonzalez's publication record would be stellar and would warrant his earning tenure at most universities, according to Mr. Hirsch. But Mr. Gonzalez completed the best scholarship, as judged by his peers, while doing postdoctoral work at the University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Washington, where he received his Ph.D. His record has trailed off since then. 'It looks like it slowed down considerably,' said Mr. Hirsch, stressing that he has not studied Mr. Gonzalez's work in detail and is not an expert on his tenure case. 'It's not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State.' That pattern may have hurt his case. 'Tenure review only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State,' said John McCarroll, a spokesman for the university." Richard Monastersky. ], May, 2007. Subscription needed</ref> he was not granted ] and promotion on the grounds that he "simply did not show the trajectory of excellence that we expect in a candidate seeking tenure in physics and astronomy." In the previous decade, four of the 12 candidates who came up for review in the department were not granted tenure.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iastate.edu/~nscentral/news/2007/jun/statement.shtml |title=Statement from Iowa State University President Gregory Geoffroy |author= |accessdate=2007-12-16 |date=], ] |work= |publisher=] }}</ref> The ''Expelled'' roadshow portrays Gonzalez as a victim of religious discrimination and the ] campaign asserts that his intelligent design writings should not have been considered in the review, a view that was contradicted by Gonzalez himself, when he listed ''The Privileged Planet'' as part of his tenure review file. Dr. Gregory Tinkler of Iowa Citizens for Science stated that "Being a religious scientist is perfectly normal and acceptable, but scientists are supposed to be able to separate science from non-science, and good research from bad. Academic freedom protects a scientist's ability to do science, not to pass off a political or religious crusade as science.”<ref name=CitizensforSciencePandas>{{cite web |url=http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/12/iowa-citizens-f-1.html#more |title=Iowa Citizens for Science Press Release on Gonzalez Case - The Panda's Thumb |accessdate=2008-03-05 |author=] |date= December 12, 2007 |publisher=] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iowascience.org/?p=37 |title=Iowa Citizens for Science - Gonzalez, Discovery Institute seek to replace science with politics, religion |accessdate=2007-12-16 |format= |work=}}</ref> | |||
The film portrays several people including ], ], and Caroline Crocker as victims of persecution by major scientific organizations and academia for their promotion of intelligent design and for questioning Darwinism. Other intelligent design supporters such as William A. Dembski, ], ], Paul Nelson, Pamela Winnick, and ], along with contrarian David Berlinski,<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Engber |first=Daniel |date=April 17, 2008 |title=Contrary Imaginations |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2189178/entry/2189361/ |journal=] |series=The Paranoid Style in American Science |location=Washington, D.C. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080422003924/http://www.slate.com/id/2189178/entry/2189361/ |archive-date=2008-04-22 |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> appear in the film as well. ''Expelled'' additionally briefly features numerous anonymous people, their faces darkened to make them unrecognizable, who say that their jobs in the sciences would be jeopardized if their belief in intelligent design were made public, one of whom states that he believes most scientists equate intelligent design with creationism, the ], and ]. | |||
In addition, the film includes interviews with scientists and others who advocate the teaching of evolution and criticize intelligent design as an attempt to bring religion into the science classroom. Those interviewed include ], ], ], ], ], ], and Eugenie Scott. | |||
===Caroline Crocker=== | |||
] is a trained biologist and currently serves as the Executive Director of the ]. She claims that her part-time faculty contract at ] where she taught ] was not renewed because her lecture promoted intelligent design, including statements that ] was not established (such as "No one has ever seen a dog turn into a cat in a laboratory"), that many scientists believe that complex life reveals the hand of an intelligent designer, that experiments that she said were supposed to prove evolution had been found to be false, and that ], ] and ] in Nazi Germany had been based on Darwin's ideas and on science. A university spokesman said her contract was not renewed for reasons unrelated to her views on intelligent design, and that though they wholeheartedly supported academic freedom, "teachers also have a responsibility to stick to subjects they were hired to teach, and intelligent design belonged in a religion class, not biology. Does academic freedom 'literally give you the right to talk about anything, whether it has anything to do with the subject matter or not? The answer is no.'"<ref name=Eden>{{cite web |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020300822_pf.html |title=Eden and Evolution |accessdate=2008-02-16 |author=Shankar Vedantam |date=February 5, 2006 |work= |publisher=The ] |quote=}}</ref> | |||
=== |
===The "Expelled"=== | ||
] is an engineering professor and director at ]<ref>{{cite web | |||
| url= http://www.ecs.baylor.edu/engineering/faculty/index.php?id=31104 | |||
| title= Full Vita: Robert J. Marks II | |||
|date= |year= |month= |format= |work= |publisher= ] | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 }}</ref> and author of numerous technical books and articles. The Baylor administration asked Marks to return an intelligent design research grant. Marks' collaborator in this project was Discovery Institute fellow William Dembski.<ref name=sbtexan>, Jerry Pierce, , January 28, 2008</ref><ref>, Jerry Pierce, , January 28, 2008</ref> In July and August 2007, they formed the short-lived Evolutionary Informatics Lab (EIL) at Baylor, and posted their work on the subject on a website hosted by the university. | |||
The university removed the website after receiving complaints. Baylor officials later allowed the website back on their server but required changes be made to the website so that it did not appear to be endorsed by the University.<ref name=ChronHiEd>, Elizabeth F. Farrell,]-Daily ed., September 4, 2007. subscription required</ref> | |||
=== |
====Richard Sternberg==== | ||
{{Main|Sternberg peer review controversy}} | |||
] is an author, historian of science, founder of ], and editor of its magazine ], which is largely devoted to investigating and debunking pseudoscientific and supernatural claims. He was interviewed for the movie by Stein and assistant producer ] and described feeling awkward about their motives soon after the interview began. | |||
''Expelled'' features excerpts from an interview Stein conducted with Richard Sternberg, described as an ] (he has two PhDs: ] (]) and ] (]))<ref name="Powell_WP">{{cite news |last=Powell |first=Michael |date=August 19, 2005 |title=Editor Explains Reasons for 'Intelligent Design' Article |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/18/AR2005081801680_pf.html |newspaper=] |location=Washington, D.C. |access-date=2012-09-25}}</ref><ref name="SternbergBio">{{cite web |url=http://www.richardsternberg.com/biography.php |title=Biography |last=Sternberg |first=Richard |website=RichardSternberg.org |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> and a former editor for a scientific journal associated with the ]. The film says his life was "nearly ruined" after he published an article by intelligent design proponent ] in 2004, allegedly causing him to lose his office, to be pressured to resign, and to become the subject of an investigation into his political and religious views. Sternberg defended his decision, stating that intelligent design was not the overall subject of the paper (being mentioned only at the end) and that he was attempting merely to present questions ID proponents had raised as a topic for discussion. He presented himself and Meyer as targets of religious and political persecution, claiming the chairman of his department referred to him as an "intellectual terrorist". Stein states that the paper "ignited a firestorm of controversy merely because it suggested intelligent design might be able to explain how life began", and goes beyond the findings of the ] to claim that Sternberg was "terrorized".<ref name="SixThings3" /><ref name="Powell_WP" /><ref name="EERS">{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/sternberg |title=Richard Sternberg |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151230000918/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/sternberg |archive-date=2015-12-30 }}</ref> Stein further alleges that U.S. Representative ] uncovered a campaign by the Smithsonian and the NCSE to destroy Sternberg's credibility, though he does not provide any details. | |||
{{cquote|1=For my part, the moment I sat down with Stein (with Mathis there) and he asked me that question about firing people for expressing dissenting views a dozen times, I realized that I was being manipulated to give certain answers they were looking for me to give. I asked them both, several times, if they had anything else to ask me about evolutionary theory or Intelligent Design. In frustration I finally said something like "Do you have any other questions to ask me or do you keep asking me this question in hopes that I'll give a different answer?"}} | |||
Sternberg, a staff scientist for the ] and also a fellow of the intelligent design advocacy group ] (ISCID), had resigned his position at the journal ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' six months before publication of the Meyers paper. The Council of the ] has stated that "Contrary to typical editorial practices, the paper was published without review by any associate editor; Sternberg handled the entire review process."<ref name="BSW">{{cite web |url=http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html |title=Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington |access-date=2014-08-27 |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070926214521/http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html |archive-date=September 26, 2007 }}.</ref> Although in the film Stein says the paper "suggested intelligent design might be able to explain how life began", it discussed the much later development of ] during the ] and deviated from the journal's topic of ] to introduce previously discredited claims about ]. The Society subsequently declared that the paper "does not meet the scientific standards of the ''Proceedings''" and would not have been published had typical editorial practices been followed.<ref name="EERS" /><ref name="BSW" /> Sternberg, contrary to the impression given by the film, was not an employee, but an unpaid Research Associate at the Smithsonian's ], a post which ran for a limited period. Also contrary to the way his career was depicted in the film, Sternberg still retained this position until 2007, when he was given the offer of continuing as a Research Collaborator.<ref name="SixThings3" /><ref name="SternbergBio" /> He continued to have full access to research facilities at the museum as of April 2008.<ref name="Kremer_Letter">{{cite magazine |last=Kremer |first=Randall |date=April 28, 2008 |title=For the Record |url=http://www.newsweek.com/id/132855 |magazine=] |type=Letter to editor |location=New York |publisher=Newsweek LLC |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080423212813/http://www.newsweek.com/id/132855 |archive-date=2008-04-23 |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> | |||
After a break and small talk the interview resumed and Shermer again expressed a sense that he was being manipulated: | |||
{{cquote|1=...they showed asking me about my books, and that's where I told him I thought ID was much closer to pseudoscience than science. Then he asked me AGAIN if I thought people should be fired....<ref name=Timonen>{{cite web | |||
| url= http://richarddawkins.net/article,2400,Expelled-Overview,Josh-Timonen | |||
| title= Expelled Overview | |||
| author= Josh Timonen | date= March 25, 2008 | publisher= RichardDawkins.net | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 | |||
}}</ref>}} | |||
====Caroline Crocker==== | |||
Eventually: | |||
''Expelled'' profiles Caroline Crocker, a former part-time ] lecturer at ] who became the center of controversy over intelligent design. In the film Stein states, "After she simply mentioned Intelligent Design in her cell biology class at the ... niversity, Caroline Crocker's sterling academic career came to an abrupt end", and she was ]. Crocker tells Stein that before the incident she was routinely offered jobs on the spot following an interview, but afterwards she was unable to find a position in academia. | |||
{{cquote|1=Stein finally asked my opinion on people being fired for endorsing Intelligent Design. I replied that I know of no instance where such a firing has happened. This seemingly innocent observation was turned into a filmic confession of ignorance when my on-camera interview abruptly ends there, because when I saw ''Expelled'' at a preview screening... I discovered that the central thesis of the film is a conspiracy theory about the systematic attempt to keep Intelligent Design creationism out of American classrooms and culture.<ref name=Shermer2>{{cite web | |||
| url=http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-04-17.html | |||
| title=Ben Stein's Blunder | |||
| author=Michael Shermer | |||
| accessdate=2008-04-17 | |||
}}</ref>}} | |||
According to the university and the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Crocker was not fired; her position was non-] track and her employment was on a course-by-course basis. She taught to the end of her contract, which was not renewed. A George Mason University spokesman said this was for reasons unrelated to her views on intelligent design, and that although they wholeheartedly supported academic freedom, "teachers also have a responsibility to stick to subjects they were hired to teach,... and intelligent design belonged in a religion class, not biology. Does academic freedom 'literally give you the right to talk about anything, whether it has anything to do with the subject matter or not? The answer is no.{{'"}}<ref name="Vedantam_WashingtonPost">{{cite news |last=Vedantam |first=Shankar |author-link=Shankar Vedantam |date=February 5, 2006 |title=Eden and Evolution |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/03/AR2006020300822_pf.html |newspaper=The Washington Post |page=W08 |access-date=2008-02-16}}</ref> | |||
Shermer has, however, stated that he believes that the film is effective in delivering its message to its target audience.<ref>, Skepticality ], April 1, 2008.</ref> | |||
The NCSE also stated that she did more than merely mention intelligent design, but in fact posed many refuted creationist arguments.<ref name="EECC">{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/crocker |year=2008 |title=Caroline Crocker |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> writer |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151229232554/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/crocker |archive-date=2015-12-29 }}</ref> Crocker also did find a position at ], where she was later profiled by '']''. The ''Post''{{'}}s article stated she claimed "that the scientific establishment was perpetrating fraud, hunting down critics of evolution to ruin them and disguising an atheistic view of life in the garb of science". Her lecture, which she said was the same she taught at George Mason, taught students ] about evolution and promoted intelligent design in a biology class, telling them that Nazi atrocities were based on Darwin's ideas and on science.<ref name="Vedantam_WashingtonPost" /> | |||
===Richard Dawkins=== | |||
] is a ] ], ] writer, and holds a professorship dedicated to Public Understanding of Science at the ].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/index.shtml |title=The Simonyi Professorship Home Page |accessdate=2008-03-08 |publisher=The University of Oxford}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/dawkins.html |title=The Third Culture: Richard Dawkins |accessdate=2008-03-08 |publisher=Edge.org}}</ref> Dawkins is portrayed as one of the leading members of "Big Science". In her review of the film for ''New Scientist'', Amanda Gefter comments on the film's presentation of Dawkins' interview, including showing him "in the make-up chair, a move calculated to demean since surely everyone else, including Stein, is powder-puffed off-camera", and describes "foreboding music" and a "low-lit room" filmed with "sinister camera angles" used as part of a appeal to "raw emotion" during his interview.<ref name=NewScientist12April2008 /> | |||
Crocker subsequently conducted a year of postdoctoral studies at the ] in 2006, and from early 2008 to the summer of 2008 was the first executive director of the ] (IDEA), which promotes intelligent design clubs at high schools and universities.<ref name="EECC" /><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ideacenter.org/about/history.php |title=History of the Center |website=] |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-23}}</ref> In 2009, Crocker became the founder and president of the American Institute for Technology and Science Education (AITSE), a California-based ] nonprofit organization that ceased operations in October 2013, leaving behind a moribund website, after Crocker left to pursue other interests and the AITSE board decided that AITSE had accomplished its purpose.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.americaninstitutetechnologyscienceeducation.com/about-aitse/history/ |title=About AITSE: History |website=American Institute for Technology and Science Education |location=Newport Beach, CA |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110425055818/http://www.americaninstitutetechnologyscienceeducation.com/about-aitse/history/ |archive-date=2011-04-25 |access-date=2016-01-24 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aitse.org/about/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121030054602/http://www.aitse.org/about/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-10-30 |title=About AITSE |website=American Institute for Technology and Science Education |access-date=2016-01-25 }}</ref> She is the author of the 2010 book ''Free to Think'', which includes a foreword by Ben Stein, published by micropublisher Leafcutter Press. | |||
===PZ Myers=== | |||
] is an Associate Professor of ] at ],<ref>{{cite web | |||
| url= http://www.morris.umn.edu/academic/biology/faculty.html#myers | |||
| title= Paul Myers, Associate Professor of Biology | |||
| publisher= ] | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 }} </ref> and the author of the science ] ]. In the film he is portrayed as a member of "Big Science". | |||
====Michael Egnor==== | |||
==Claims that film producers misled interviewees== | |||
{{Further|Michael Egnor}} | |||
The movie has been criticized by several of the interviewees, including Myers and Dawkins<ref>{{cite web | author = MacAskill, Ewen | url =http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2178958,00.html | title =Dawkins rails at 'creationist front' for duping him into film role | work = ]|date= ], ] }}</ref> and ] head ], who say they were misled into participating by being asked to be interviewed for a film named ''Crossroads'' on the "intersection of science and religion", with a ]<ref>{{cite web | |||
Michael Egnor, a ] professor at ], is presented in the film as the subject of persecution after writing a letter to high school students asserting that doctors did not need to learn evolution to practice their trade. Egnor, who is a signatory to the Discovery Institute's "]" and "]", presents himself as the victim of online smears and a campaign to get his university to force him into retirement, following his letter. When a citizen's group in Virginia sponsored an essay contest for high school students on the topic "Why I would want my doctor to have studied evolution", Egnor responded by posting the letter on an intelligent design website claiming that evolution was irrelevant to medicine.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/03/why_would_i_want_my_doctor_to003300.html |title=Why would I want my doctor to have studied evolution? |last=Egnor |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Egnor |date=March 9, 2007 |website=Evolution News & Views |publisher=] |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-08}}</ref> | |||
| title ="Crossroads" synopsis | |||
| publisher =Rampant Films | |||
| url =http://rampantfilms.com/ | |||
| accessdate =2007-12-12 }}, under "Properties" menu, select "Crossroads" icon | |||
</ref> which described the strong support that had been accumulated for evolution, and contrasted this with the religious who rejected it, and the controversy this caused<ref name=star>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/im_gonna_be_a_movie_star.php |title=I'm gonna be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆ |accessdate=2007-09-28 |author=] |date=] |work=] |publisher=], ]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/expelled_producer_seems_to_be.php|title=Expelled producer seems to be embarrassed about his sneaky tactics |accessdate=2007-09-28 |author=] |date=] |work=] |publisher=], ]}}</ref><ref>, , , ], ], ].</ref>: | |||
In the film, Stein describes this as "Darwinists were quick to try and exterminate this new threat", and Egnor says he was shocked by the "viciousness" and "baseness" of the critical response he received.<ref name="EEEgnor">{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/egnor |title=Michael Egnor |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150310160713/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/egnor |archive-date=2015-03-10 }}</ref> | |||
{{cquote|It has been the central question of humanity through the ages: How in the world did we get here? In 1859 Charles Darwin provided the answer in his landmark book, “The Origin of Species.” In the century and a half since, geologists, biologists, physicists, astronomers, and philosophers have contributed a vast amount of research and data in support of Darwin’s idea. And yet, millions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other people of faith believe in a literal interpretation that humans were crafted by the hand of God. The conflict between science and religion has unleashed passions in school board meetings, courtrooms, and town halls across America and beyond.|Defunct Rampant Films site for ''Crossroads''<ref>quatoed at , ]</ref>}} | |||
====Robert J. Marks II==== | |||
However, the movie was actually pitched to Stein as an anti-Darwin picture: | |||
{{Further|Robert J. Marks II}} | |||
{{cquote|I was approached a couple of years ago by the producers, and they described to me the central issue of ''Expelled'', which was about Darwinism and why it has such a lock on the academic establishment when the theory has so many holes. And why freedom of speech has been lost at so many colleges to the point where you can’t question even the slightest bit of Darwinism or your colleagues will spurn you, you’ll lose your job, and you’ll be publicly humiliated. As they sent me books and talked to me about these things I became more enthusiastic about participating. | |||
Robert J. Marks II is a professor at ] who had his research website shut down by the university and was forced to return grant money when it was discovered his work had a link to intelligent design. | |||
The research in question was for the ] which Marks formed with Discovery Institute fellow William A. Dembski,<ref name="Pierce_sbtexan">{{cite magazine |last=Pierce |first=Jerry |date=January 28, 2008 |title=Baptist professors featured in new film |url=http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5527&issue=1/28/2008 |magazine=Southern Baptist Texan |location=Grapevine, TX |publisher=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080208215219/http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5527&issue=1%2F28%2F2008 |archive-date=2008-02-08 |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last=Pierce |first=Jerry |date=January 28, 2008 |title=Q&A: 'Expelled's' Robert Marks |url=http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5534&issue=1/28/2008 |magazine=Southern Baptist Texan |location=Grapevine, TX |publisher=Southern Baptists of Texas Convention |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090827014816/http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5534&issue=1%2F28%2F2008 |archive-date=2009-08-27 |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-status=dead }}</ref> and which made use of the university's servers to host the website. The university removed the website after receiving complaints that it appeared to be endorsed by the university. Baylor officials later allowed the website back on their server but required changes be made to the website so that it did not appear to be endorsed by the university.<ref name="ChronHiEd">{{cite news |last=Farrell |first=Elizabeth F. |date=September 4, 2007 |title=Baylor U. Removes a Web Page Associated With Intelligent Design From Its Site |url=http://chronicle.com/article/Baylor-U-Removes-a-Web-Pag/121996/ |newspaper=] |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. |issn=0009-5982 |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-access=subscription }}</ref> The website was reestablished independently of Baylor University. | |||
====Guillermo Gonzalez==== | |||
Plus I was never a big fan of Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis’ Final Solution to their so-called “Jewish problem” and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust. So I was primed to want to do a project on how Darwinism relates to fascism and to outline the flaws in Darwinism generally.|Ben Stein|Mocked and Belittled|]<ref>, an interview with Ben Stein, ]</ref>}} | |||
{{Further|Guillermo Gonzalez (astronomer)}} | |||
Guillermo Gonzalez, an ] who had been an assistant professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at ] until May 2008, is interviewed by Stein, who claims that despite a "stellar" research record that led to the discovery of new planets, Gonzalez was denied ] in April 2007 because his book '']'' (2004), co-authored with ] and intelligent design advocate ], argued that the ] is intelligently designed. Gonzalez claims that prior to his tenure review, he was the subject of a campaign on campus to "poison the atmosphere" against him, and that he would almost certainly have been granted tenure had he not been an advocate for intelligent design. The film interviewed a member of the Iowa State University faculty who stated that Gonzalez was denied tenure because the university feared that if they granted Gonzalez tenure the university would become associated with the ]. | |||
Prior to the film's release Iowa State University addressed the controversy regarding Gonzalez's tenure by saying that after the normal review of his qualifications, such as his record of scientific publications (which had dropped sharply after he joined the faculty),<ref>{{cite news |last=Monastersky |first=Richard |date=May 21, 2007 |title=Advocate of Intelligent Design Who Was Denied Tenure Has Strong Publications Record |url=http://chronicle.com/daily/2007/05/2007052103n.htm |newspaper=The Chronicle of Higher Education |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. |issn=0009-5982 |access-date=2016-01-08 |url-access=subscription |quote=Under normal circumstances, Mr. Gonzalez's publication record would be stellar and would warrant his earning tenure at most universities, according to Mr. Hirsch. But Mr. Gonzalez completed the best scholarship, as judged by his peers, while doing postdoctoral work at the University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Washington, where he received his Ph.D. His record has trailed off since then. 'It looks like it slowed down considerably,' said Mr. Hirsch, stressing that he has not studied Mr. Gonzalez's work in detail and is not an expert on his tenure case. 'It's not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State.' That pattern may have hurt his case. 'Tenure review only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State,' said John McCarroll, a spokesman for the university.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1362 |title=Guillermo Gonzalez: Refereed Publications in Print |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-21}} | |||
On learning of the pro-intelligent design stance of the real film, Myers said "not telling one of the sides in a debate about what the subject might be and then leading him around randomly to various topics, with the intent of later editing it down to the parts that just make the points you want, is the video version of ] and is fundamentally dishonest."<ref name="star"/> Dawkins said, "At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front"; and Scott said, "I just expect people to be honest with me, and they weren't."<ref name="nyt"/> | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2007/12/a_handy_graphictimeline_of_gon.php |title=A Handy Graphic/Timeline of Gonzalez's Publication Drop |author=Evil Monkey |date=December 6, 2007 |work=Neurotopia |publisher=] |location=New York |type=Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080720035815/http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2007/12/a_handy_graphictimeline_of_gon.php |archive-date=2008-07-20}}</ref> he was not granted tenure and promotion on the grounds that he "simply did not show the trajectory of excellence that we expect in a candidate seeking tenure in physics and astronomy". Eli Rosenberg, the chairman of the Astronomy department, also noted that during Gonzalez's time at Iowa State, Gonzalez had failed to secure any form of substantial outside funding.<ref>{{cite news |last=Rossi |first=Lisa |date=June 1, 2007 |title=Little grant money a factor in tenure denial |url=http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070601/NEWS02/706010392/1001/BUSINESS04 |newspaper=] |location=Tysons Corner, VA Company }}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} Article available from the ] News Service (DOC).</ref> In the previous decade, four of the twelve candidates who came up for review in the department were not granted tenure.<ref>{{cite press release |last=Hacker |first=Annette |date=June 1, 2007 |title=Statement from Iowa State University President Gregory Geoffroy |url=http://www.public.iastate.edu/~nscentral/news/2007/jun/statement.shtml |website=News Service: Iowa State University |location=Ames, IA |publisher=Iowa State University |access-date=2016-01-10}}</ref> | |||
===Opponents of intelligent design=== | |||
Mathis called Myers, Dawkins and Scott a "bunch of hypocrites", and said that he "went over all of the questions with these folks before the interviews and I e-mailed the questions to many of them days in advance".<ref name="Lifesite">{{cite web |author=LifeSiteNews.com|publisher=|url=http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/oct/07100505.html |title=Atheist Scientists in Uproar|date=] |accessdate=2007-10-05 |format= |work=}}</ref><ref>, ], ], ], ]</ref> The film's proponents point out that Dawkins participated in the ] ] documentary '']'', whose producers, they allege, presented themselves to the Discovery Institute as objective filmmakers and then portrayed the organization as religiously-motivated and anti-scientific.<ref name="Lifesite"/><ref>, Katherine T. Phan, ], ], ]</ref><ref>, ], ], ], ].</ref> | |||
====Michael Shermer==== | |||
], executive director of the ] wrote a ] of the '']'', complaining about the deception. Speckhardt wrote, "If one needs to believe in a god to be moral, why are we seeing yet another case of dishonesty by the devout? Why were leading scientists deceived as to the intentions of a religious group of filmmakers?"<ref>, ], ], ], ], Published: ], ].</ref> | |||
{{Further|Michael Shermer}} | |||
Michael Shermer is an author, ], founder of ], and editor of its magazine ], which is largely devoted to investigating and debunking pseudoscientific and supernatural claims. He was interviewed for the film by Stein and Mark Mathis to get his take on intelligent design and evolution. Shermer describes intelligent design as "three quarters of the way to nonsense", and voices skepticism at the claims that numerous academics were fired for advocating it. | |||
Defending the movie, the producer, Walt Ruloff, said that scientists like prominent geneticist ] keep their religion and science separate only because they are "toeing the party line". Collins, who was not asked to be interviewed for the film in any of its incarnations, said that Ruloff's claims were "ludicrous".<ref name=nyt>{{cite news |author= |title=Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/science/27expelled.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin |work= |publisher= ]|date=], ] |accessdate=2007-09-28 }}</ref> When the editorial staff of '']'' asked Mathis why they did not include anybody like devout Catholic and prominent biologist ] in the movie, Mathis stated that his inclusion "would have confused the film unnecessarily" and went on to question Miller's intellectual honesty and orthodoxy as a Catholic because he accepts evolution.<ref>, ]. Audio recording: and . .</ref> | |||
Shermer, in an online column coinciding with the release of ''Expelled'', described feeling awkward about their motives soon after the interview began: | |||
==Lawsuits and alleged plagiarism== | |||
{{quotation|text=For my part, the moment I sat down with Stein (with Mathis there) and he asked me that question about firing people for expressing dissenting views a dozen times, I realized that I was being manipulated to give certain answers they were looking for me to give. I asked them both, several times, if they had anything else to ask me about evolutionary theory or Intelligent Design. In frustration I finally said something like "Do you have any other questions to ask me or do you keep asking me this question in hopes that I'll give a different answer?"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://richarddawkins.net/article,2400,Expelled-Overview,Josh-Timonen-RichardDawkinsnet |title=Expelled Overview |last=Timonen |first=Josh |date=March 25, 2008 |website=RichardDawkins.net |publisher=Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science |location=Washington, D.C. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080602213259/http://richarddawkins.net/article,2400,Expelled-Overview,Josh-Timonen-RichardDawkinsnet |archive-date=2008-06-02 |access-date=2016-01-25}}</ref>}} | |||
{{wikinews|'Expelled' producers accused of copyright violations}} | |||
After a break and small talk the interview resumed, but the questions continued to follow a similar vein: | |||
The film uses ] sequences that represent the internal functioning of cells. These sequences were attributed to ''Light Productions'' and ''Out of Our Mind Studios'' by '']''; Joseph Condeelis is listed as the lead animator.<ref name=Variety2 /> ] identified Tom Whaley as the animator.<ref>, ] ], retrieved April 12, 2008</ref> However, PZ Myers found similarities between the animation sequences of cellular internal operations from the film and a video from ] entitled ''],'' produced in 2006 by XVIVO. Myers noted that the same errors and omissions were present in both animations.<ref>, ], ] ], March 23, 2008.</ref> On April 9th, a ] letter was sent by David Bolinsky of XVIVO to the producers of ''Expelled'', alleging that they had infringed XVIVO's ]: | |||
{{quotation|text=Stein finally asked my opinion on people being fired for endorsing Intelligent Design. I replied that I know of no instance where such a firing has happened. This seemingly innocent observation was turned into a filmic confession of ignorance when my on-camera interview abruptly ends there, because when I saw ''Expelled'' at a preview screening... I discovered that the central thesis of the film is a conspiracy theory about the systematic attempt to keep Intelligent Design creationism out of American classrooms and culture.<ref name="Shermer2">{{cite magazine |last=Shermer |first=Michael |date=April 17, 2008 |title=Ben Stein's Blunder |url=http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-04-17/ |magazine=] |location=Altadena, CA |publisher=] |issn=1556-5696 |access-date=2008-04-17}}</ref>}} | |||
{{cquote|It has come to our intention that Premise Media and Rampant Films has produced a film entitled "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," which is scheduled for commercial release and distribution on April 18, 2008. To our knowledge, this film includes a segment depicting biological cellular activity that was copied by computer-generated means from a video entitled "The Inner Life of a Cell." XVIVO holds the copyright to all the models, processes, and depictions in this video, and has not authorized Premise Media or Rampant Films to make any use of this material. | |||
We have obtained promotional material for the "Expelled" film, presented on a DVD, which clearly shows in the "cell segment" the virtually identical depiction of material from the "Inner Life" video. Among the infringed scenes, we particularly refer to the segment of the "Expelled" film purporting to show the "walking" models of kinesic activities in cellular mechanisms. The segments depicting these models in your film are clearly based upon, and copied from, material in the "Inner Life" video.<ref>, April 9 2008</ref><ref>, ] ], April 9, 2008.</ref>}} | |||
Shermer has stated that he believes that the film is effective in delivering its message to its target audience.<ref>{{cite podcast |url=http://www.skepticality.com/no-intelligence-allowed/ |title=No Intelligence Allowed! |website=] |publisher=The Skeptics Society |last1=McCarthy |first1=Robynn |author-link1=Robynn McCarthy |last2=Colanduno |first2=Derek |author-link2=Derek Colanduno |date=April 1, 2008 |access-date=2011-11-27}} McCarthy interviews Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer.</ref> | |||
Intelligent design proponent ] had been compelled to discontinue using the same video after XVIVO accused him of copyright violation for using it in his lectures in 2007.<ref>, ], Uncommon Descent blog, 27 November 2007</ref> Commenting on the cease-and-desist letter to Expelled's producers, Dembski wrote: | |||
====Richard Dawkins==== | |||
{{cquote|I’ve gotten to know the producers quite well. As far as I can tell, they made sure to budget for lawsuits. Also, I know for a fact that they have one of the best intellectual property attorneys in the business. I expect that the producers made their video close enough to the Harvard video to get tongues awagging (Headline: "Harvard University Seeks ] Against Ben Stein and EXPELLED" — you think that might generate interest in the movie?), but different enough so that they are unexposed. | |||
{{Further|Richard Dawkins}} | |||
Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and ] writer. Dawkins is portrayed as one of the leading members of the scientific establishment. Dawkins' admission that his study of evolution aided his move towards atheism is used by the film to draw a positive connection between them. In her review of the film for '']'', ] comments on the film's presentation of Dawkins' interview, including showing him "in the make-up chair, a move calculated to demean since surely everyone else, including Stein, is powder-puffed off-camera", and describes "foreboding music" and a "low-lit room" filmed with "sinister camera angles" used as part of an appeal to "raw emotion" during his interview.<ref name="NewScientist12April2008">{{cite journal |last=Gefter |first=Amanda |date=April 12, 2008 |title=Review of Expelled: Don't forget to take your brains when you go! |url=http://www.expelledexposed.com/new_scientist.php |journal=] |location=Sutton, London |volume=198 |issue=2651 |page=46 |doi=10.1016/S0262-4079(08)60919-7 |issn=0262-4079 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080505071356/http://www.expelledexposed.com/new_scientist.php |archive-date=2008-05-05 |access-date=2016-01-05 }}</ref> | |||
In Dawkins' interview, the director focused on Stein's question to Dawkins regarding a hypothetical scenario in which intelligent design could have occurred.<ref name="LyingforJesus" /> Dawkins responded that in the case of the "highly unlikely event that some such ']' was responsible for designing life on this planet, the alien beings would THEMSELVES have to have evolved, if not by Darwinian selection, by some equivalent ']' (to quote ])". He later described this as being similar to ] and ]'s "semi tongue-in-cheek" example.<ref name="LyingforJesus" /><ref>{{cite news |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |date=April 18, 2008 |title=Gods and earthlings |url=https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-dawkins18apr18,0,2798612.story |newspaper=] |location=Chicago, IL |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080421045500/http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-dawkins18apr18,0,2798612.story |archive-date=2008-04-21 |url-status=dead |access-date=2008-04-17}}</ref> | |||
It was a nice touch on the producer’s part to use the same music as the XVIVO video. Presumably they got permission from the artist — or is that another possible oversight to explore? But then again, one of the producers was for years in the music business. So most likely they’re covered here as well. | |||
===Accusations that film producers misled interviewees=== | |||
BOTTOM LINE: Before you think the producers of EXPELLED are idiots, you might think that they are chess players who have seen several moves ahead. For instance, have you ever thought who stood to gain the most from the Machine Video featured at UD a week ago?<ref>William Dembski, Uncommon Descent April 10, 2008</ref>}} | |||
The film has been criticized by those interviewees who are critics of intelligent design (PZ Myers, Dawkins,<ref>{{cite news |last=MacAskill |first=Ewen |author-link=Ewen MacAskill |date=September 28, 2007 |title=Dawkins rails at 'creationist front' for duping him into film role |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/28/religion.film |work=] |location=London |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> Shermer,<ref name="SixThings3" /> and Eugenie Scott), who say they were misled into participating by being asked to be interviewed for a film named ''Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion'', and were directed to a ] implying an approach to the documentary crediting Darwin with "the answer" to how humanity developed:<ref name="moviestar">{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/22/im-gonna-be-a-movie-star/ |title=I'm gonna be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆ |last=Myers |first=PZ |author-link=PZ Myers |date=August 22, 2007 |work=] |publisher=ScienceBlogs |location=New York |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/28/expelled-producer-seems-to-be/ |title=''Expelled'' producer seems to be embarrassed about his sneaky tactics |last=Myers |first=PZ |date=August 28, 2007 |work=Pharyngula |publisher=ScienceBlogs |location=New York |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Monastersky |first=Richard |date=September 27, 2007 |title=Scientists Say Intelligent-Design Movie's Producers Deceived Them Into Participating |url=http://chronicle.com/article/Scientists-Say/39653 |newspaper=The Chronicle of Higher Education |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. |issn=0009-5982 |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> | |||
{{quotation|text=It has been the central question of humanity through the ages: How in the world did we get here? In 1859 Charles Darwin provided the answer in his landmark book, '']''. In the century and a half since, geologists, biologists, physicists, astronomers, and philosophers have contributed a vast amount of research and data in support of Darwin's idea. And yet, millions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other people of faith believe in a literal interpretation that humans were crafted by the hand of God. The conflict between science and religion has unleashed passions in school board meetings, courtrooms, and town halls across America and beyond.|source=Defunct Rampant Films website for ''Crossroads''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/background/interview-tactics |title=Questionable Interview Tactics |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-11 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/background/interview-tactics |archive-date=2016-01-21 }}</ref>}} | |||
On April 11th, two days after the cease-and-desist letter was sent, the following statement was posted on the ''Expelled'' blog:<ref>, 'Editor's Note' to a post, April 11 2008.</ref> | |||
{{cquote|Questions have been raised about the origination of some of the animation used in our movie EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed. Claims that we have used any animation in an unauthorized manner are simply false. Premise Media created the animation that illustrates cellular activity used in our film.|The Producers of "EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed" | |||
}} | |||
But before the interviewees were approached,<ref name="moviestar" /><ref name="steinworld">{{cite magazine |last=Basham |first=Megan |author-link=Megan Basham|date=April 19, 2008 |title=Mocked and belittled |url=http://www.worldmag.com/2008/04/mocked_and_belittled |magazine=WORLD |location=Asheville, NC |publisher=WORLD News Group |volume=23 |issue=8 |issn=0888-157X |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120907194107/http://www.worldmag.com/2008/04/mocked_and_belittled |archive-date=2012-09-07 |access-date=2016-01-11 |url-status=live}}</ref> the film had already been pitched to Stein as an anti-Darwinist picture: | |||
On April 14th the producers of ''Expelled'', Premise Media Corporation LP and C&S Production LP, filed suit in ] against XVIVO L.L.C. asking for Judge ] to rule that Premise owns the copyright on the images in question.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-txndce/case_no-3:2008cv00639/case_id-175993/ | title=Premise Media Corporation LP et al v. XVIVO L.L.C. | publisher=] | date=April 11th 2008 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2008-11-04}}</ref><ref>, Premise Media ], , 16 Apr 2008</ref><ref name=aggro/> The suit has been characterized by SA Smith, a prominent critic of the film and intelligent design as a 'SLAPP,' a ] intended to intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense so that they abandon their criticism or opposition.<ref name=slapp> SA Smith, ERV, April 16, 2008.</ref> Smith suggested that the film's producers filed suit in Texas because it is one of the few states that lacks protections for defendants against SLAPPs.<ref name=slapp/> | |||
{{quotation|text=I was approached a couple of years ago by the producers, and they described to me the central issue of ''Expelled'', which was about Darwinism and why it has such a lock on the academic establishment when the theory has so many holes. And why freedom of speech has been lost at so many colleges to the point where you can't question even the slightest bit of Darwinism or your colleagues will spurn you, you'll lose your job, and you'll be publicly humiliated. As they sent me books and talked to me about these things I became more enthusiastic about participating. | |||
Plus I was never a big fan of Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis' Final Solution to their so-called "Jewish problem" and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust. So I was primed to want to do a project on how Darwinism relates to fascism and to outline the flaws in Darwinism generally.|author=Ben Stein|source="Mocked and Belittled", ]<ref name="steinworld" />}} | |||
PZ Myers reported on April 15th, 2008 that it appears likely that some animation segments in the film were lifted from a ] documentary as well.<ref name=aggro>, ], ] ], April 15, 2008.</ref><ref>, S. A. Smith, ERV ], April 15, 2008.</ref> William Dembski published a longer statement from the producers of the film on his blog on April 15th, 2008 alleging that they had not engaged in any wrongdoing.<ref>, ], ], April 15, 2008.</ref> | |||
On learning of the pro-intelligent design stance of the real film, Myers said, "not telling one of the sides in a debate about what the subject might be and then leading him around randomly to various topics, with the intent of later editing it down to the parts that just make the points you want, is the video version of ] and is fundamentally dishonest".<ref name="moviestar" /> Dawkins said, "At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front", and Scott said, "I just expect people to be honest with me, and they weren't."<ref name="Dean_Scientists Feel" /> | |||
Producers of the film have also run into legal trouble over their unlicensed use of ]'s song '']'', having failed to seek the permission of the copyright holder, John Lennon's widow, ].<ref name=wsj> Ethan Smith. Wall Street Journal, April 16, 2008.</ref><ref name=Prefix>{{cite news |author=Ethan Stanislawski |title= UPDATE: Ben Stein did not acquire the rights to the Killers or John Lennon |url=http://www.prefixmag.com/news/update-ben-stein-did-not-acquire-the-rights-to-the/18179/ |publisher=Prefix Magazine |date=2008-04-16 |accessdate=2008-04-17 }}</ref> Premise Media responded by saying that they had only used 25 seconds of ''Imagine'' and this constituted ] under American copyright law.<ref name=wsj/> Subsequent reports emerged that the producers also had not acquired rights to music by the ].<ref name=Prefix/> | |||
Mathis called Myers, Dawkins and Scott a "bunch of hypocrites", and said that he "went over all of the questions with these folks before the interviews and I e-mailed the questions to many of them days in advance".<ref>{{cite press release |last=Burbridge-Bates |first=Lesley |date=October 4, 2007b |title=Atheist Scientists in Uproar over Movie: EXPELLED |url=http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/10-04-2007/0004675856&EDATE=THU+Oct+04+2007,+08:00+AM |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080509083719/http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=%2Fwww%2Fstory%2F10-04-2007%2F0004675856&EDATE=THU+Oct+04+2007%2C+08%3A00+AM |archive-date=2008-05-09 |access-date=2016-01-11 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | |||
==Academic Freedom Statute on Evolution== | |||
In the wake of the film, Motive Marketing, the film's PR agency, have teamed up with the ] to promote an "Academic Freedom Statute on Evolution", which, if passed, would legally protect teachers from any negative consequences for promoting anti-evolution beliefs in public schools. According to Amanda Gefter, this appears to be the latest campaign to "sneak" Intelligent Design into schools after the ''Kitzmiller'' trial ruled compulsory teaching of intelligent design unconstitutional.<ref name=NewScientist12April2008 /> At least one Discovery Institute press conference on the bill has included a screening of ''Expelled''.<ref name=NewScientist12April2008 /> | |||
], executive director of the ] wrote a ] of ''The New York Times'', writing, "If one needs to believe in a god to be moral, why are we seeing yet another case of dishonesty by the devout? Why were leading scientists deceived as to the intentions of a religious group of filmmakers?"<ref>{{cite news |last=Speckhardt |first=Roy |author-link=Roy Speckhardt |date=October 4, 2007 |title=Humanists vs. Evangelicals |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/opinion/l04scientist.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0 |newspaper=The New York Times |type=Letter to editor |location=New York |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> | |||
==Critical reaction== | |||
==Charles Darwin quotation issue== | |||
Response to the movie from Christian groups and the Discovery Institute has been largely positive, praising the movie for its humor and for highlighting a serious issue.<ref name=cwfa>, including ], , , ], ]</ref><ref name="olasky">, Marvin Olasky, '']'', Vol. 23, No. 7, April 05, 2008.</ref><ref>, Tom Magnuson, ] ], ], ].</ref> Conservative radio commentator ]<ref name="limbaugh">, ], ] website, March 18, 2008.</ref> and | |||
In support of his claim that the theory of evolution inspired ], Ben Stein attributes the following statement to Charles Darwin's 1871 book '']'': | |||
] of '']'' (a critic of evolutionary biology and other scientific issues) also praised the film. One otherwise critical review praised the movie for highlighting the idea of academic freedom.<ref name=moore/> | |||
{{quotation|text=With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.<ref>{{cite AV media |people=Frankowski, Nathan (Director) |year=2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |medium=Motion picture |time=01:18:03}}</ref>}} | |||
The original source shows that Stein's selective reading of Darwin significantly changed the meaning of the paragraph by leaving out whole and partial sentences without indicating that he had done so. The original paragraph (words that Stein omitted shown in '''bold''' type) and the subsequent paragraph in the book state: | |||
Response from other critics was less favorable, particularly those in the science media. The film's extensive use of ]-style devices was commented upon,<ref name=moore> , Roger Moore, Frankly My Dear... Movies with Roger Moore, ], February 1, 2008</ref><ref name=CC/><ref name=NS>Gefter, Amanda: (blog), '']'', ], ].</ref><ref name=NSArticle>{{Citation|last=Gefter|first=Amanda|publisher=New Scientist|title=Warning! They've got designs on you|date=] ]|page=46|url=http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg19826512.100-film-review-iexpelled-no-intelligence-allowedi.html}}</ref> but the film was widely considered unamusing and unsubtle,<ref name=moore/> boring, poorly made,<ref name=FOX>, Roger Friedman, ], April 9, 2008</ref> and unconvincing.<ref name=NS/><ref name=moore/> | |||
{{quotation|text=With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; '''and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health'''. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; '''we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox'''. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. '''It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself,''' hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. | |||
The rhetorical approach was subject to much criticism, widely considered to be misleading and dishonest<ref name=CC>{{cite web |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3229 |title=Colorado Confidential: Science Sunday: Intelligent Design Goes to the Movies |accessdate=2008-02-16 |author=|date=], ] |format= |work= |publisher=] }}</ref><ref name=Guardian>{{cite web | |||
| url= http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2268344,00.html | |||
| title= "A step to the right" | |||
|author= |last= |first= |authorlink= |coauthors= | |||
|date= ], ] |publisher= ''The Guardian'' | |||
|pages= |language= |doi= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote= | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 }} </ref><ref name="sciam-shermer">http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=ben-steins-expelled-review-michael-shermer</ref> and was compared to that used by ]<ref name=moore/> and ].<ref name="sciam-shermer"/><ref name=NS/><ref name="sciam-rennie">http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=ben-steins-expelled-review-john-rennie</ref> The movie's use of Holocaust imagery (and other techniques)<ref name=NS/> to demonize evolution and those working in the field was a particular cause of concern and was considered distasteful<ref name=moore/><ref name=FOX/><ref name="sciam-rennie"/> and manipulative of the audience,<ref name=NSArticle /> with many critics surprised that Stein, being a Jew, was involved in a movie which exploited it in a "dishonest" way.<ref name=FOX/><ref name="sciam-rennie"/> Some wondered whether Stein was involved for purely mercenary reasons, or expressed concern for his career direction.<ref name=moore/><ref name=Guardian/><ref name=FOX/> The film's evasiveness with regards to actual information about intelligent design or evolution was criticized,<ref name=moore/><ref name=NS/> in particular that the movie failed to define either,<ref name=CC/> or adequately explain the nature of the scientific debate pictured, in particular omitting pertinent facts regarding the "expelled" scientists.<ref name=CC/><ref name="sciam-rennie"/> The movie was derided for a lack of historical accuracy with regards to Stalinism and the Holocaust, regardless of evolution's involvement in either.<ref name="sciam-rennie"/> | |||
'''The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.'''<ref name="SixThings3" /><ref>{{harvnb|Darwin|1871|pp=}}</ref><ref name="sciamMine">{{cite podcast |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/61D30BEB-A65E-7583-BB264FABBD4CD879/ |title=Never You Mine: Ben Stein's Selective Quoting of Darwin |website=60-Second Science |publisher=Scientific American |last=Mirsky |first=Steve |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref>}} | |||
The movie's promotional campaign also raised eyebrows, with many reviewers characterizing it as an attempt to drum up support from those who already agreed with its viewpoint while shielding the film from outside appraisal.<ref name=moore/> Many were of the opinion that the movie is "preaching to the converted",<ref name=CC/><ref name="sciam-rennie"/> and at least one reviewer was concerned that those asking questions at screenings were planted.<ref name=NS/> There were also fears that the film was another step towards "sneaking" the teaching of intelligent design into schools.<ref name=NSArticle /> | |||
According to John Moore writing for the Canadian '']'': | |||
===General media=== | |||
Dan Whipple of '']'',<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=9 |title=Colorado Confidential: About |accessdate=2008-02-16 |author=soapblox |date=], ] |publisher=] }}</ref> saw an early screening of the film at the ] in ] during the second week of December, 2007.<ref name=CC>{{cite web |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3229 |title=Colorado Confidential: Science Sunday: Intelligent Design Goes to the Movies |accessdate=2008-02-16 |author=|date=], ] |format= |work= |publisher=] }}</ref> Whipple was somewhat surprised that neither intelligent design nor evolution were defined in the film. According to Whipple, the film charges that intellectual freedom of intelligent design supporters is being restricted, but he was not able to find much substance in these claims when he investigated further. After the first half hour, Whipple reports that the film launches into a condemnation of evolution, blaming it for "Communism, the ], ], the Holocaust, atheism and Planned Parenthood."<ref name=CC/> Whipple remarks that the film ridicules the ] hypothesis, which is one of the alternatives to evolution sometimes suggested by intelligent design supporters. He also notes that the film acknowledges that evolution does not concern itself with ], and then attacks evolution for misrepresenting the origin of life. Scientists with hypotheses for abiogenesis are ridiculed for stating that this is still not understood. Overall, Whipple found it to be fairly boring and uncompelling.<ref name=CC/> Whipple subsequently reported that after his review the producers began asking people to sign ]s before seeing the film, which he thought ironic in relation to producer Walt Ruloff's statement that "What we're really asking for is freedom of speech, and allowing science, and students, people in applied or theoretical research to have the freedom to go where they need to go and ask the questions."<ref name=BraverScientists>{{cite web |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3463 |title=Colorado Confidential: The Search for Truth, God and Braver Scientists in 'Expelled' |accessdate=2008-02-16 |author= |date=], ]|work= |publisher=] }}</ref> | |||
{{quotation|text=Stein quotes from a passage in Darwin's writing that appears to endorse the notion that for a species to thrive the infirm must be culled. He omits the part where Darwin insists this would be "evil" and that man's care for the weak is "the noblest part of our nature". When I asked Stein about this on my radio show he deadpanned, "If any Darwin fans are listening and we have misquoted him, we are sorry; we don't mean to diss Darwin."<ref name="Moore_NP">{{cite news|last=Moore |first=John |author-link=John Moore (broadcaster) |date=June 23, 2008c |title=Science is not philosophy |url=https://nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=607100&p=2 |newspaper=] |location=Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada |publisher=Canwest |page=2 }}{{dead link|date=September 2016|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}.</ref>}} | |||
Roger Moore of '']'' previewed the film at the Northland Church in ], although the organizers attempted to belatedly rescind his invitation, as it had been mistakenly offered, and he refused to sign a ].<ref name="Metcalfe March 10">, John Metcalfe, ], March 10, 2008.</ref> Moore criticized the film's use of out of date research ("Citing scientific research as recent as 1953"), lack of factual evidence, the ineffectiveness of the movie's attempts at humor, and the use of imagery of the ], ] and ] to "in a not-quite-subliminal seduction way demonize the people who might hold a contrary view". The rhetorical approach is compared to "]"'s attempts to spread doubt about the health effects of smoking. The review described the movie's restricted pre-release screenings as "a stealth campaign, out of the public eye, preaching to the choir to get the word out about the movie without anyone who isn't a true believer passing a discouraging judgment on it."<ref name=moore/> | |||
The National Center for Science Education's ''Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks'' website also points out that the same misleading selective quotation from this passage was used by anti-evolutionist ] in the 1925 ], but the full passage makes it clear that Darwin was not advocating eugenics. The eugenics movement relied on simplistic and faulty assumptions about heredity, and by the 1920s evolutionary biologists were criticizing eugenics. ], who defended the teaching of human evolution in the Scopes Trial, wrote a scathing repudiation of eugenics.<ref name="hitler-eugenics">{{cite web |url=http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/hitler-eugenics |title=Hitler & Eugenics |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://expelledexposed.drupalgardens.com/the-truth/hitler-eugenics |archive-date=2016-01-21 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | |||
As a whole, Moore judged that the movie "makes good points about academic freedom and the ways unpopular ideas are shouted down in academia, the press and the culture", but "not offering evidence to back your side, where the burden of proof lies, makes the movie every bit as meaningful and silly as that transcendental metaphysical hooey of a couple of years back, '']''".<ref name=moore> , Roger Moore, Frankly My Dear... Movies with Roger Moore, ], February 1, 2008</ref> | |||
In a supplement to a review of ''Expelled'', ] curator ] cites Darwin's two paragraphs in their entirety, and says that in the context shown by the second paragraph "What we find is that Darwin's position is diametrically opposed to what Stein intimated."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhm.org/site/sites/default/files/polychaetous_annelids/Fitzhugh%20--%20Review%20of%20%27Expelled%27.pdf |title=''Expelled'' versus Charles Darwin – Ben Stein's quote mining |last=Fitzhugh |first=Kirk J. |author-link=Kirk J. Fitzhugh |work=Polychaetous Annelids |publisher=] |location=Los Angeles, CA |page=3 |access-date=2016-01-11 |archive-date=December 21, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151221120132/http://www.nhm.org/site/sites/default/files/polychaetous_annelids/Fitzhugh%20--%20Review%20of%20%27Expelled%27.pdf |url-status=dead }}<br />For both of Darwin's paragraphs in full, see {{harvnb|Darwin|1871|pp=}}.</ref> | |||
Though executive producer Logan Craft and Paul Lauer, head of the movie's PR agency Motive Marketing, have denied any involvement<ref name="Metcalfe March 10"/> an "online media alert" was apparently issued by Motive Marketing<ref> PZ Myers. Pharyngula, March 11, 2008</ref> lambasting the professional film critic for criticizing the movie. The alert characterizes Moore's review as a "security breech " and claims that Moore gained entry by impersonating a minister. In the alert, Ben Stein responds to Moore's charge that the film's manipulation of Holocaust imagery is "despicable", by stating that "The only thing I find despicable is when reporters sneak into screenings by pretending to be ministers. This is a new low even for liberal reporters."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/media_alert.php |title=Media alert!|accessdate=2008-03-11|author=] |date=] |work=] |publisher=], ]}}</ref> | |||
==Pre-release screenings== | |||
Based on the movie's ten-minute online preview, John Patterson of '']'' writes that due to Stein's involvement, "you'd expect a dishonest documentary, and apparently, we've got one". From his brief exposure "it seems to deploy all the loaded-dice arguments, the overdog's deep-seated sense of victimhood and conventional rightwing hysteria", "nd yes - you get all that in the first 10 minutes." He expresses regret that Stein has moved from comedy, where he is talented, to "political apologias, where his talents simply die".<ref name=Guardian/> | |||
As part of the pre-release marketing for the film, a web-based ] system page was publicized, offering free private film screenings.<ref name="CH!CAGO">{{cite web |url=http://onegreatcityblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/private-screening.html |title=Private Screening |last=Miglioratti |first=Phil |date=March 11, 2008 |website=CH!CAGO ~ One Great City |type=Blog |access-date=2008-03-23}}</ref> Persons filling out an online entry form were sent a reservation confirmation via email which stated that no ticket was needed and that IDs would be checked against a list of names.<ref name="AustringerExpelled">{{cite web |url=http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/03/20/expelled-from-expelled/ |title=Expelled from 'Expelled' |last=Elsberry |first=Wesley R. |author-link=Wesley R. Elsberry |date=March 20, 2008 |website=The Austringer |type=Blog |access-date=2008-03-23}}</ref><ref name="SantaClara">{{cite web |url=http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/03/expelled-gone-m.html |title=Expelled gone missing from Santa Clara |author=PvM |date=March 21, 2008 |website=] |publisher=] |location=Houston, TX |type=Blog |access-date=2008-03-23}}</ref> The producers also held invitation-only screenings for religious organizations and government officials, including screenings for legislators to promote anti-evolution Academic Freedom bills.<ref name="WSJschools" /> | |||
===Conservative Christian groups=== | |||
] of '']'' says that the film brought tears to his eyes and that the film is the "best thing that has been done on this issue, in any medium". Bethell asserts that the film promotes the position of ] of ] and ] of the ], and by many religious figures, that evolution and belief in God are compatible. However, he believes that the film exposes the persecution of those who hold this position by people like Richard Dawkins and William Provine.<ref>, Tom Bethell, ], February 19, 2008.</ref> | |||
In advance of release, the film was shown at private screenings to various ] conservative leaders, including American ] Christian author and ] ].<ref name="Metcalfe March 10">{{cite news |last=Metcalfe |first=John |date=March 10, 2008 |title=Disinvited to a Screening, a Critic Ends Up in a Faith-Based Crossfire |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/business/media/10stein.html |newspaper=The New York Times |location=New York |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> On March 11, 2008, a preview screening was held in ], for attendees at the annual convention of the ]. The ] organization ] reported that its leader, ], met Ben Stein beforehand to discuss promoting the film. It requested supporters to ask local movie theater managers to show the film, and to encourage their church leadership to buy out a local theater to show the film to as many people from that church as possible.<ref name="Looy_aig">{{cite web |url=https://answersingenesis.org/intelligent-design/a-meeting-of-minds/ |title=A Meeting of Minds |last=Looy |first=Mark |date=March 13, 2008 |publisher=] |location=Hebron, KY |access-date=2016-01-11}}</ref> | |||
American ] radio commentator ] states that this film is "fabulous" and "powerful." Limbaugh asserts that Darwinism does not allow for a belief in God, and that it has taken hold at every major intellectual institution. Limbaugh conflates liberty and creationism and freedom, and uses this as a segue into an attack on ] presidential hopeful ].<ref name="limbaugh"/> | |||
]'s Roger Friedman writes that "''Expelled'' is a sloppy, all-over-the-place, poorly made (and not just a little boring) 'exposé' of the scientific community" and echoes Patterson's concerns about Stein's career direction, stating that he "is either completely nuts or so avaricious that he's abandoned all good sense to make a buck" and "like some other celebrities, finally has shown his true colors and they aren't so pretty." Friedman criticizes the film's exploitation of the Holocaust, "hoping someone will latch onto an anti-Semitism theme here" but that it is "such a warped premise that no one's biting," and Stein's involvement, as a Jew, is "so distasteful you wonder what in — sorry — God's name — he was thinking when he got into this". Ultimately he concludes that "It will come and go without much fanfare" and that were the film to be shown in his area he'd "boycott the filmmakers for thinking of me as this gullible and unsophisticated."<ref name=FOX/> | |||
Justin Chang of ] also pans the film, although he clearly is amenable to assorted anti-evolution arguments. Chang writes, "If evolution is worth debating, it's worth debating well, and by a more intelligently designed film than this one".<ref name=Variety2>, Justin Chang, ], posted April 11, 2008, date in print April 14, 2008.</ref> | |||
Sean P. Means, movie reviewer for the ] wrote that the producers of Expelled are "hiding" the film from movie critics and "Every semi-knowledgeable moviegoer and reader of movie criticism knows what the words 'not screened for critics' means: The movie is a dog."<ref name="MeansSLT">{{cite news | url=http://www.sltrib.com/arts/ci_8903065 | title=Hiding 'Expelled' from critics a not-so-intelligent move | publisher=] | date=April 12, 2008 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2008-08-18}}</ref> Though Means withholds judgement on the content since he has not seen the film and was not invited to a screening, he explained that when producers do this it usually means the films are targeted to "teenagers and morons."<ref name="MeansSLT"/> In his article the author noted "I can't help but be struck by the irony of Stein's own words in the movie's introduction (which is also on YouTube): 'In my experience, people who are confident in their ideas are not afraid of criticism. So that tells me the Darwinists are afraid. They're hiding something'." Means then asked, "What, pray tell, are Stein and the "Expelled" producers hiding? And what are they afraid of?"<ref name="MeansSLT"/> | |||
'']'' film critic, Justin Chang, described "Expelled" as a "flimsy attempt to discredit Darwinist theory as the cornerstone of modern biology" and concluded the film would be "A probable punching bag for film critics and evolution proponents alike, docu will be a natural selection for Christian audiences and should spread like the gospel on homevid."<ref></ref> | |||
===Christian media=== | |||
On ], ], ] (CWA), a conservative Christian political action group, reviewed the film and posted a ] discussing the film featuring Mario Diaz, CWA's Policy Director for Legal Issues, and Matt Barber, CWA's Policy Director for Cultural Issues, who went to a prescreening.<ref name=cwfa>, including ], , , ], ]</ref> Diaz and Barber thought the movie was entertaining, funny and shocking. They looked forward to it being profound and controversial. They felt this movie presented an extremely credible case.<ref name=cwfa/> | |||
] of ''],'' featuring "Today's News, Christian Views", writes that this is a "seriously funny documentary" that should be rated R for being " reasonable, radical, risible, and right." Olasky agrees wholeheartedly with the premise of the movie that evolution produced the Holocaust, and asserts that in the ] he has seen many shelves of racist and antisemitic journals full of articles frequently "citing and applying Darwin".<ref name="olasky"/> | |||
===Screenings in support of Academic Freedom bills=== | |||
===Science media=== | |||
{{further|Academic Freedom bills}} | |||
Amanda Gefter, reviewing the film in '']'', described the movie as "pure propaganda" in the style of a "sub-standard Michael Moore flick" with "problematic references to the Holocaust". Echoing Roger Moore's concerns that the movie demonizes evolutionary biologists, she notes that dark lighting, foreboding music and sinister camera angles are used during an interview with ].<ref name=NSArticle /> She also observed that the movie makes explicit connections between Intelligent Design and religion, something which proponents of ID such as the ] have argued is not the case.<ref name=NSArticle /> Reporting in the magazine's blog on a screening and subsequent question and answer session, she expressed concern that several of those asking questions appeared to be members of staff who arranged the screening.<ref name=NS /> | |||
''Expelled'' was given pre-release screenings for ] and ] legislators in support of Academic Freedom bills in those states.<ref name="WSJschools" /> Such bills, often viewed as attacks on the teaching of evolution, have been introduced in ] in the United States since 2004, based on the claims by the Discovery Institute that teachers, students, and college professors face intimidation and retaliation when discussing scientific criticisms of evolution, and therefore require protection.<ref name="DIStatute">{{cite web |url=http://www.academicfreedompetition.com/freedom.php |title=Academic Freedom Act |website=Academic Freedom Petition |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-12}}</ref> The Florida screening, held in the ] theater of the ] of ], on March 12, 2008, was restricted to legislators, their spouses, and their legislative aides, with the press and public excluded. Under the ] they had to watch the film without discussing the issue or arranging any future votes.<ref>{{cite news |title=Legislature invited to movie about creationism debate |url=http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080311/NEWS0120/80311045/1075 |newspaper=] |location=Tysons Corner, VA |date=March 11, 2008 }}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Commenting on this, and the controversy over Roger Moore of the '']'' viewing the film despite attempts by the promoters to withdraw the invitation they had given him,<ref name="Rmoore">{{cite news |last=Moore |first=Roger |date=February 1, 2008 |title=Is Ben Stein the new face of Creationism? |url=http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_movies_blog/2008/02/is-ben-stein-th.html |newspaper=Orlando Sentinel |type=Movie review |location=Chicago, IL |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080203222054/http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_movies_blog/2008/02/is-ben-stein-th.html |archive-date=2008-02-03 |access-date=2016-01-12 }}</ref> House Democratic leader ] of ], stated, | |||
"It's kind of an irony: The public is expelled from a movie called ''Expelled''."<ref name="03/10/2008MiamiHerald">{{cite news |last=Caputo |first=Marc |date=March 10, 2008 |title=Ben Stein weighs in on evolution fight |url=http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/451272.html |newspaper=] |location=Sacramento, CA }}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> The screening was attended by about 100 people, but few were legislators,<ref name="Cotterell_tallahassee">{{cite news |last=Cotterell |first=Bill |date=March 13, 2008 |title=Lawmakers attend Tallahassee screening of movie by Ben Stein |url=http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080313/CAPITOLNEWS/803130323/1067/RSS15 |newspaper=] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080325203346/http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20080313%2FCAPITOLNEWS%2F803130323%2F1067%2FRSS15 |archive-date=2008-03-25 |access-date=2008-03-14 |url-status=dead }}</ref> and the majority of legislators stayed away.<ref name="Newlegislation">{{cite news |last=Colavecchio-Van Sickler |first=Shannon |date=March 13, 2008 |title=Legislation may keep evolution debate alive |url=http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/legislation-may-keep-evolution-debate-alive/416362 |newspaper=] |location=St. Petersburg, FL |access-date=2016-01-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304081817/http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/legislation-may-keep-evolution-debate-alive/416362 |archive-date=March 4, 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="eyes">{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=March 13, 2008 |title=Eyes wide open: Stealth politics is part of the plot |url=http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080314/OPINION01/803140322/1006/OPINION |newspaper=Tallahassee Democrat |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080318230612/http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20080314%2FOPINION01%2F803140322%2F1006%2FOPINION |archive-date=2008-03-18 |access-date=2008-03-14 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | |||
Shortly before the film's general release, Walt Ruloff held a ] at ] in ], on April 15, and announced his plans to use the film as part of a campaign to pass Academic Freedom bills in a variety of American states.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Bailey |first=Ronald |author-link=Ronald Bailey |date=April 16, 2008 |title=Flunk This Movie! |url=http://reason.com/archives/2008/04/16/flunk-this-movie |magazine=] |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=] |access-date=2016-01-12}}</ref> At least one Discovery Institute press conference on the bills has included a screening of ''Expelled''.<ref name="NewScientist12April2008" /> The issue was revived in 2009 when Florida Senator ] cited the film as one reason that he is sponsoring plans to introduce a bill requiring biology teachers to present the idea of intelligent design.<ref name="RadioTampa">{{cite news |last=Kinane |first=Seán |date=February 23, 2009 |title=Scientists oppose intelligent design bill |url=http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/scientists-oppose-intelligent-design-bill |work=] |location=Tampa, FL |publisher=Nathan B. Stubblefield Foundation |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090808034345/http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/scientists-oppose-intelligent-design-bill |archive-date=2009-08-08 |access-date=2016-01-12}}</ref> | |||
Following an unexpected private preview of the movie provided by associate producer ], '']'' is publishing a series of articles entitled , in which editor John Rennie, movie interviewee ], and Steve Mirsky review and discuss the movie. | |||
===PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins at Minnesota pre-release screening=== | |||
Across five pages, Shermer relates that he was surprised to see his ''alma mater'' ] feature so prominently as supporters of Stein in the opening of the movie, as "their mostly Christian students fully accept the theory of evolution" and it was during his studies there that Shermer himself learned about evolutionary biology and realized that he had been "hoodwinked" by creationism proponents. He explains that according to the university, only "two or three" students appear in the scene, and the remainder are hired extras. He discusses how he was misled about the subject of the movie and how his interview was edited, and various omissions of pertinent fact in the movie. He describes the movie's exploitation of Holocaust imagery as a "propaganda production would make Joseph Goebbels proud."<ref name="sciam-shermer"/> | |||
''Expelled'' interviewee PZ Myers was turned away from a pre-release screening of the film by a hired security guard as Myers, fellow interviewee Richard Dawkins, and members of Myers' family waited together in line to enter the theater. Myers said that he applied for tickets for himself and his guests on the website where the film's producers were offering free passes to the screening to the general public. Dawkins and Myers' family were allowed to attend, but Myers and Dawkins both concluded Dawkins would have been turned away as well if those promoting the film had recognized who he was.<ref>''See:'' | |||
*{{harvnb|Dean|2008}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Hewitt|2008}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Guess|2008}}</ref> | |||
This rejection of one of the evolution supporters prominently featured in the film created a furor as critics and supporters volleyed conflicting accounts of the incident. Myers wrote, "I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, ''Expelled'', a few minutes ago. Well, I '''tried''' … but I was '''Expelled'''!"<ref name="See Ben Stein's Movie">{{cite news |last=Guess |first=Andy |date=March 24, 2008 |title=See Ben Stein's Movie |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/03/24/expelled |work=] |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=Inside Higher Ed, Inc. |access-date=2016-01-12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171019232308/https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/03/24/expelled|archive-date=October 19, 2017}}</ref> Prior to this screening, Myers and Dawkins were both very public in their condemnations of the upcoming film, leading them to conclude this was the reason Myers was banned from the screening. Dawkins charged "P.Z. is in the film extensively. If anyone had a right to see the film, it was him."<ref name="twinc">{{cite news |last=Hewitt |first=Chris |date=March 21, 2008 |title=Biology prof expelled from screening of 'Expelled' |url=http://www.twincities.com/ci_8653837 |newspaper=] |location=Denver, CO |access-date=2008-03-21 }}</ref> | |||
Rennie believes that ''Expelled'' is "a movie not quite harmless enough to be ignored" and although its points are "all recycled from previous pro-ID works", "its heavy-handed linkage of modern biology to the Holocaust demands a response for the sake of simple human decency". He criticizes the rhetorical device of referring not to "scientists" but "darwinists," indicating that "Ben Stein wants you to stop thinking of evolution as an actual science supported by verifiable facts and logical arguments and to start thinking of it as a dogmatic, atheistic ideology akin to Marxism." He echoes Shermer's comments regarding the omission of facts, and in particular the way that the movie depicts Robert Sternberg is "shoddy investigation or deliberate propagandizing," but more generally its depictions of the other scientist and the histories of Stalinism and the Holocaust. | |||
Walt Ruloff countered that they were using the screenings to stimulate favorable publicity for the film,<ref name="Dean_No Admission">{{cite news |last=Dean |first=Cornelia |date=March 21, 2008 |title=No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/science/21expelledw.html |work=The New York Times |access-date=2016-01-12 }}</ref> and Mark Mathis confirmed that he ordered Myers turned away.<ref name="See Ben Stein's Movie" /> He wrote, "In light of Myers' untruthful ]ging about ''Expelled'' I decided it was better to have him wait until April 18 and pay to see the film. Others, notable others, were permitted to see the film. At a private screening it's my call." But he went on to say, "Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expel no one."<ref name="See Ben Stein's Movie"/> | |||
He observes that "the omission of science from Expelled was a deliberate choice", that "Ben Stein doesn't want you to recognize evolution versus ID as a conflict between valid scientific ideas and invalid ones" because then "it suddenly begins to look much more just when, say, universities don't reward faculty who fritter away their careers on ill-conceived theories". In summation he considers that it is "a film for ID creationism's religious base," "a rallying point to revive their morale." His closing remarks express concern for Stein, who "might have lost relatives in the Holocaust but is now appropriating it for an intellectually dishonest purpose".<ref name="sciam-rennie"/> | |||
Critics of the film publicly ridiculed Myers' ejection as a public relations blunder. Eugenie Scott, who also appeared in the film, was quoted to say she and fellow supporters of evolution were enjoying "a horselaugh" over the episode.<ref name="Dean_No Admission" /> Myers said, "I could not imagine a better result for this. They've shown themselves to be completely dishonest and that they're trying to hide the truth about their movie, which is to my advantage. And they've shown themselves to be such flaming idiots."<ref name=twinc/> Dawkins described the event as "a gift" and said "we could not ask for anything better".<ref name="Dean_No Admission" /> | |||
In a podcast, Mirsky talks with Expelled interviewee Eugenie Scott and how she was "bamboozled" into appearing. | |||
==Promotion== | ==Promotion== | ||
The promotion of ''Expelled'' was primarily managed by Motive Entertainment, an agency that promoted the 2004 blockbuster film '']'', with another three public relations firms also hired. The producers spent an estimated $8.5 million to market their film, with an additional $3.5 million spent on the production, resulting in a $12 million total budget.<ref name="Robbins_NumberCrunch">{{cite magazine |last=Robbins |first=Shawn |date=August 28, 2012 |title=Number Crunch: How Well Do Politics and Hollywood Really Mix? |url=http://pro.boxoffice.com/news/2012-08-number-crunch-how-well-do-politics-and-hollywood-mix |magazine=] |location=New York |access-date=2016-01-26 }}{{dead link|date=September 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> The promoters targeted primarily religious audiences, providing sweepstakes and rewards to churches selling the most tickets, and offered sums of up to $10,000 to schools that sent their students to watch the film.<ref name="pubradio">{{cite podcast |url=http://www.marketplace.org/2008/04/04/life/films-marketing-intelligently-designed |title=Is film's marketing intelligently designed? |last=Vanek-Smith |first=Stacey |website=] |publisher=] |date=April 4, 2008 |time=22:36 |access-date=2016-01-12}}</ref> In advance of the film's release, producers Walt Ruloff, Mark Mathis, and Logan Craft provided interviews to various Christian media outlets promoting the film and emphasizing its potential to impact the evolution debate.<ref>''See:'' | |||
The promotion of the film is being managed by Motive Marketing, which was responsible for promoting '']'', '']'', and '']''.<ref>, </ref> A total of four ] firms have been hired.<ref>, ], ], April 4, 2008.</ref> The film's website includes ]s, additional material, press articles, and a ]. The blog's first entry was an ] from Ben Stein which explains his personal premise for the movie. Stein utilizes arguments based on ], ] and the beliefs of historically prominent scientists. He also accuses the modern American scientific establishment as being "a new anti-religious ]". The letter claims that ], ] and ] based their work and discoveries on creationist assumptions, and that they would not be allowed to pursue their science in the anti-religious scientific atmosphere that exists today.<ref name=letter>, ], ], ].</ref> | |||
*{{cite podcast |host=Intelligent Design The Future |url=http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2007-08-27T14_35_24-07_00 |title=Expelling Dogma: Executive Producer Walt Ruloff and Expelled (Part I) |website=] |publisher=The Discovery Institute |date=August 27, 2007 |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite podcast |host=Intelligent Design The Future |url=http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2007-08-29T10_52_26-07_00 |title=Nothing Up His Sleeve: Executive Producer Walt Ruloff and Expelled (Part II) |website=PodOmatic |publisher=The Discovery Institute |date=August 27, 2007 |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite podcast |url=http://web.mac.com/profg/iWeb/Site/Podcast/7D1AFD6C-C07F-11DC-B69C-000A959E8368.html |title=Interview with Mark Mathis, producer of 'Expelled' with Ben Stein |last=Greene |first=Bill |website=Podcast: Bill Greene Show |date=January 11, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080118012357/http://web.mac.com/profg/iWeb/Site/Podcast/7D1AFD6C-C07F-11DC-B69C-000A959E8368.html |archive-date=2008-01-18 |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite podcast |host=Intelligent Design The Future |url=http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2008-02-04T15_39_42-08_00# |title=Behind the Scenes with Expelled Associate Producer |website=PodOmatic |publisher=The Discovery Institute |date=February 4, 2008 |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite magazine |last=Pierce |first=Jerry |date=January 28, 2008 |title=Q&A: 'Expelled' producer Logan Craft |url=http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5533&issue=1/28/2008 |magazine=Southern Baptist Texan |location=Grapevine, TX |publisher=Southern Baptists of Texas Convention |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080208215213/http://www.texanonline.net/default.asp?action=article&aid=5533&issue=1%2F28%2F2008 |archive-date=2008-02-08 |access-date=2016-01-14 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Motive Entertainment also sent a representative to meet with religious leaders and stress the film's intelligent design creationist message, inspiring many to actively promote the film within their own religious communities.<ref name="pubradio" /> Some ] outlets promoted the film as well.<ref>''See:'' | |||
*{{cite press release |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |url=http://www.christiancinema.com/catalog/newsdesk_info.php?newsdesk_id=431 |date=September 23, 2007 |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=] |access-date=2007-09-29 }} Press release based on {{harvnb|Burbridge-Bates|2007a}} press release. | |||
*{{cite news |last=Phan |first=Katherine T. |date=September 28, 2007 |title=Ben Stein Confronts Dominance of Darwinian Thought in New Film: Intelligent Design vs. Darwinism |url=http://www.christianpost.com/news/ben-stein-confronts-dominance-of-darwinian-thought-in-new-film-29497/ |work=] |location=Washington, D.C. |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite magazine |last=Ireland |first=Michael |date=September 23, 2007 |title=Ben Stein exposes the frightening agenda of the Darwinian Machine in new movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |url=http://www.christiantoday.com.au/article/ben.stein.exposes.the.frightening.agenda.of.the.darwinian.machine.in.new.movie.expelled.no.intelligence.allowed/3281.htm |magazine=] |location=Carol Stream, IL |publisher=Christianity Today International |via=Assist News Service |access-date=2016-01-14 }} Story based on uncredited {{harvnb|Burbridge-Bates|2007a}} press release. | |||
*{{cite web |last=Bridges |first=Jared |date=November 28, 2007 |title='Expelled' Live Lecture Webcast at 11:00AM EST |url=http://www.frcblog.com/2007/11/expelled-live-lecture-webcast-at-1100am-est/ |website=] |location=Washington, D.C. |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=August 29, 2007 |title=New documentary to expose academic punishment for those against Big Bang Theory |url=https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/10252/new-documentary-to-expose-academic-punishment-for-those-against-big-bang-theory |agency=] |location=Denver, CO |access-date=2016-01-14 }} | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.drdino.com/expelled-the-movie.php? |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |year=2007 |website=drdino.com |publisher=] |location=Pensacola, FL |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080417031733/http://www.drdino.com/expelled-the-movie.php |archive-date=2008-04-17 |access-date=2016-01-14 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | |||
Organizations affiliated with the Discovery Institute helped publicize the film.<ref>''See:'' | |||
The film's website asks for submissions of personal stories of discrimination against students for suggesting design or questioning Darwinian theory, with the enticement that a winning story, or stories, will be featured in the film.<ref name=shoutout> Premise Media Corporation, Accessed ]</ref> | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/09/24/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |date=September 24, 2007 |website=] |location=Colorado Springs, CO |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071128011517/http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/09/24/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed |archive-date=2007-11-28 |access-date=2016-01-15}} PR Newswire's August 22, 2007, re-release of {{harvnb|Burbridge-Bates|2007a}} press release. | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.discovery.org/a/4182 |title=What Happened to Freedom of Speech? Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |date=August 22, 2007 |website=] |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-15}} Reprint of {{harvnb|Burbridge-Bates|2007a}} press release. | |||
*{{cite podcast |host=Intelligent Design The Future |url=http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2007-08-22T16_27_14-07_00 |title=New Video Podcast: ''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' the new film on the ID controversy |website=PodOmatic |publisher=Discovery Institute |date=August 22, 2007 |access-date=2016-01-15}}</ref> It used its ''Evolution News & Views'' website and blog to publish over twenty articles tying its promotion of ''Expelled'' to its effort to pass the "Evolution Academic Freedom Act" (SB2692) in Florida.<ref name="RemFlorAcadFreeBill">{{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2008/03/prepared_remarks_for_florida_a004984.html |title=Prepared Remarks for Florida Academic Freedom Bill Press Conference |last=West |first=John G. |author-link=John G. West |date=March 12, 2008 |website=Evolution News & Views |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-15 }} | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://archive.flsenate.gov/Session/index.cfm?Mode=Bills&SubMenu=1&BI_Mode=ViewBillInfo&BillNum=2692&Year=2008&Chamber=Senate |title=Senate 2692: Relating to The Teaching of Chemical and Biological Evolution |year=2008 |website=Florida Senate Website Archive |access-date=2016-01-19 |archive-date=October 5, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151005094501/http://archive.flsenate.gov/session/index.cfm?Mode=Bills&SubMenu=1&BI_Mode=ViewBillInfo&BillNum=2692&Year=2008&Chamber=Senate |url-status=dead }}</ref> | |||
Stein appeared in the ] programs '']'' and the '']'' to talk about the film. In his interview with political commentator ], O'Reilly characterized intelligent design as the idea that "a deity created life", and Stein responded that "There's no doubt about it. We have lots and lots of evidence of it in the movie."<ref name=oreilly>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/10/24/official-denial-unofficial-end/ |title=Official denial, unofficial endorsement |last=Myers |first=PZ |date=October 24, 2007 |work=Pharyngula |publisher=ScienceBlogs |location=New York |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-15}}</ref> The Discovery Institute quickly issued a statement that when Bill O'Reilly conflated intelligent design with creationism he was mistakenly defining it as an attempt to find a ], and lamented that "Ben referred to the 'gaps' in Darwin's theory, as if those are the only issues that intelligent design theory addresses."<ref name="idnotCreationism">{{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/10/intelligent_design_is_not_crea004387.html |title=Intelligent Design is Not Creationism (No Matter What Bill O'Reilly Thinks) |last=Crowther |first=Robert |date=October 24, 2007 |website=Evolution News & Views |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2016-01-15}}</ref> | |||
Stein and the producers hosted a telephone press conference facilitated by Motive Entertainment's representative ]. Participating journalists were required to submit their questions in advance for screening and just two questions posed by members of the press were answered. One of the journalists participating, Dan Whipple of the '']'', contrasted the carefully staged and stringently controlled press conference with Ruloff's statement that "What we're really asking for is freedom of speech, and allowing science, and students, people in applied or theoretical research to have the freedom to go where they need to go and ask the questions". He called it "hypocritical in its supposed defense of 'freedom of expression.'"<ref name="BraverScientists">{{cite web |url=http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3463 |title=The Search for Truth, God and Braver Scientists in 'Expelled' |last=Whipple |first=Dan |date=February 15, 2008 |website=Colorado Confidential |type=Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080218160410/http://www.coloradoconfidential.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3463 |archive-date=2008-02-18 |access-date=2016-01-15}}</ref> | |||
===The "Expelled Challenge"=== | |||
In order to promote the film, the website "GetExpelled.com"<ref> http://www.getexpelled.com/index.php , a website "specifically designed for students, teachers, pastors, youth leaders and organizations to provide useful tools and resources to promote the ideas surrounding ".</ref> launched "The Expelled Challenge"<ref></ref> which offers to pay schools up to ]10,000 to send students to see the movie. The program offers between $5 and $10 for every ticket stub submitted by the school within the first two weeks of the release of the film.<ref name = ChallengeFAQ></ref> ] noted that at the upper end of the range, the value of the reward is probably greater than the actual ticket price.<ref name = Austringer/> | |||
==Reception== | |||
The program also recommends a "school-wide mandatory field trip" as "the best way to maximize your school's earning potential"<ref name = ChallengeFAQ/><ref>Q: What's the best way to get our school families to come out to the movies?<br>A: In speaking with Christian Schools, we've found that hosting a school-wide “mandatory” field trip is the best way to maximize your school's earning potential. Send a field trip home with your middle school and high school students, have each child pay for their own ticket, then collect the stubs at the door once you get to the movie theater. With this model, you also will be able to benefit from the ticket stubs purchased by parents who choose to come as well.</ref> Elsberry criticizes this as a call to "take children away from classrooms, fill their heads with obnoxiously delivered misinformation, and profit off of it."<ref name = Austringer>{{cite web|url= http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/01/16/flunked-not-expelled-gaming-the-movie-ratings/|title= Flunked, Not Expelled: Gaming the Movie Ratings|accessdate= 2008-01-16|last= Elsberry|first= Wesley R.|authorlink= Wesley R. Elsberry|date= 16 January 2008 |work= The Austringer|quote= }}</ref> | |||
''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' was not screened in advance for ],<ref name="MeansSLT">{{cite news |last=Means |first=Sean P. |date=April 13, 2008 |url=http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/arts/ci_8903065 |title=Movies: Hiding 'Expelled' from critics a not-so-intelligent move |newspaper=] |access-date=2016-01-15}}</ref> and when the film was released, it received negative reviews. | |||
The film's extensive use of ]-style devices was commented upon,<ref>''See:'' | |||
A similar program called the "Adopt-A-Theater Campaign" was announced in March, 2008. The goal is to produce a competition among church groups and other organizations to see which can generate the largest group sale of movie theater tickets to see the film. The five largest groups to register and attend a screening will be awarded ]1,000.<ref>, ]</ref><ref>, ], ] ], March 29, 2008.</ref> | |||
*{{harvnb|Whipple|2007}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Moore|2008a}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Moore|2008b}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Gefter|2008}}</ref> but the film was mainly characterized as boring, exaggerated, and unconvincing.<ref>''See:'' | |||
*{{harvnb|Moore|2008c}} | |||
*{{cite news |last=Friedman |first=Roger |author-link=Roger Friedman |date=April 9, 2008 |title=Ben Stein: Win His Career |url=https://www.foxnews.com/story/mariah-careys-new-album-first-review |work=] |type=Movie review |location=Los Angeles, CA |publisher=] |access-date=2016-01-17}} | |||
*{{harvnb|Moore|2008}}</ref> Others found it insulting and offensive to the religious.<ref>''See:'' | |||
*{{harvnb|Catsoulis|2008}} | |||
*{{cite news |last=Savlov |first=Mark |date=April 25, 2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |url=http://www.austinchronicle.com/calendar/film/2008-04-25/612799/ |newspaper=] |type=Movie review |location=Austin, TX . |access-date=2016-01-17}}</ref> '']''{{'}}s film review called it "an appallingly unscrupulous example of hack propaganda".<ref>{{cite news |last=Lacey |first=Liam |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |date=June 27, 2008 |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/expelled-no-intelligence-allowed/article1056626/ |newspaper=] |type=Movie review |location=Toronto, Ontario, Canada |access-date=2016-01-17}}</ref> '']'' called it an "anti-science propaganda masquerading as a Michael Moore-ish fool's journey, full of disingenuous ploys, cheap tricks, and outright mendacity".<ref>{{cite news |last=O'Keefe |first=Mary Christa |date=June 26, 2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed: There's lies, damn lies and then there's Expelled |url=http://www.vueweekly.com/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/ |newspaper=] |type=Movie review |issue=662 |location=Edmonton, Alberta, Canada |access-date=2016-01-17}}</ref> While noting that the film is technically well made (with good photography and editing), ] lambasted the content of the film: | |||
{{cquote|text=This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions (Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies, and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about religion.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/win-ben-steins-mind |title=Win Ben Stein's mind |last=Ebert |first=Roger |author-link=Roger Ebert |date=December 3, 2008 |website=RogerEbert.com LLC |location=Chicago, IL |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-17}}</ref>}} | |||
Multiple reviews, including those of '']'' and '']'', described the film as propaganda.<ref name="Catsoulis" /><ref name="Puig_USAToday">{{cite news |last=Puig |first=Claudia |date=April 17, 2008 |title=Also opening: 'Bin Laden,' 'Intelligence,' 'Forbidden Kingdom' |url=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/movies/reviews/2008-04-17-also-opening_N.htm |work=USA Today |location=Tysons Corner, VA |access-date=2016-01-05 |quote=Ben Stein is startlingly one-sided in his unnatural selection of experts. ... This is propaganda, a political rant disguised as a serious commentary on stifled freedom of inquiry. <br>A documentarian is not required to be objective, but Stein's point of view is blatant advertising.}}</ref><ref name="sciam-shermer">{{cite magazine |last=Shermer |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Shermer |date=April 9, 2008 |title=''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed''--Ben Stein Launches a Science-free Attack on Darwin |url=http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ben-steins-expelled-review-michael-shermer/ |magazine=Scientific American |location=Stuttgart |publisher=Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group |issn=0036-8733 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> The '']''{{'}}s rating was "1 star (poor)",<ref>{{cite news |last=Moore |first=Roger |date=April 20, 2008a |title='Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed' (Ben Stein monkeys with evolution) |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/chi-18-expelled-review,0,3010472.story |newspaper=Chicago Tribune |type=Movie review |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080420173851/http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/chi-18-expelled-review,0,3010472.story |archive-date=2008-04-20 |access-date=2016-01-18}} Adapted from the ''Orlando Sentinel'' review. | |||
===Promotional interviews with producers=== | |||
</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Moore |first=Roger |date=April 18, 2008b |title='Expelled': Ben Stein's doc devolves into a ludicrous rant |url=https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2008/04/18/expelled-ben-steins-doc-devolves-into-a-ludicrous-rant/ |newspaper=Orlando Sentinel |type=Movie review |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> while '']'' described it as "a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry" and "an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike".<ref name="Catsoulis" /> | |||
The ] (AAAS) issued a statement to say it was "especially disappointed to learn that the producers of an intelligent design propaganda movie called ''Expelled'' are inappropriately pitting science against religion".<ref name="AAASPressRelease" /> It went on to say the organization "further decries the profound dishonesty and lack of civility demonstrated by this effort", and said the film "seeks to force religious viewpoints into science class--despite court decisions that have struck down efforts to bring creationism and intelligent design into schools".<ref>{{cite press release |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=AAAS: Statement Regarding the Importance of the Integrity of Science as Depicted in Film |url=http://archives.aaas.org/docs/resolutions.php?doc_id=457 |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=American Association for the Advancement of Science |date=April 18, 2008 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> They also described the film as dishonest and divisive propaganda, aimed at introducing religious ideas into public school science classrooms.<ref name="AAASPressRelease">{{cite press release |last=Lempinen |first=Edward W. |date=April 18, 2008 |title=New AAAS Statement Decries 'Profound Dishonesty' of Intelligent Design Movie |url=http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/0418expelled.shtml |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=American Association for the Advancement of Science |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080425000539/http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/0418expelled.shtml |archive-date=2008-04-25 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> ], founder and late chairman of the ], called the film "anti-science propaganda" and an "exercise in anti-intellectualism at its worst".<ref></ref> | |||
Walt Ruloff, executive director of the film, was interviewed on the Discovery Institute's ''ID the Future'' ].<ref name=idI>, ], ], ].</ref><ref name=idII>, ], ], ].</ref> Ruloff said that "Ben Stein obviously a great intellect, considered one of the smartest people as far as a ] personality in the United States." Ruloff said that the dominant "Darwinist orthodoxy" was unfairly discriminating against religious scientists, discouraging any of the "future great minds" coming from the 85% of the American public that are religious. He felt Darwinism was preventing scientists from ], and therefore hurting science and ]. He said he was surprised how widespread and entrenched the suppression of intelligent design is. Ruloff said that the emphasis on Darwinism was also preventing scientific advances with implications for ], since scientists told him off-camera that as much as 30% of their scientific results had to be suppressed and were essentially "shelved" (particularly in ] synthesis, and Ruloff claimed this percentage is growing). He alleges that he learnt that the standard response in ] and ] for most questions is "no you can't do that" because the ideas violated Darwinism, so Darwinism is a "science-stopper." Ruloff described the team he had assembled to make the film, and said he was glad that for the director, he had managed to hire Nathan Frankowski, who had previously been second unit director for the controversial ] ], ]. Ruloff said he was looking forward to the film opening on ], February 12th, 2008,<ref name=idI/><ref name=idII/> though the movie would later be delayed.<ref name=Mathis>, Bill Greene Show, January 11, 2008</ref> | |||
Response to the film from conservative Christian groups was generally positive, praising the film for its humor and for focusing on what they perceive as a serious issue.<ref name=":0">''See:'' | |||
In January 2008, one of the producers of ''Expelled,'' Mark Mathis, was interviewed on a Victory Broadcast Service Radio program, whose mission is to "spread the Good News of Jesus Christ".<ref name=Mathis>, Bill Greene Show, January 11, 2008</ref> Mathis stated that it was unfair that "90% of the American public" believes that there is design in nature but in Academia, the opposite is true (independent surveys show that popular support for some form of theistic influence in the origin of species is below 45% as of 2007). Mathis said that at one time the Church had very strong control over science, and this was reasonable since the Church "advanced" science, and that now there is a backlash with the pendulum swinging the other way. Instead, Mathis said that now the Church of Atheism and Secularism excludes all ideas that are contrary to atheistic beliefs in climatology, biology and politics. Stein asks questions of scientists who subscribe to evolution "]-style," and that it is "hilarious" to watch the scientists trying to answer, according to Mathis. Mathis stated that it was unreasonable for the scientists to claim that they were misled, since he personally contacted them and conducted the interviews and was quite open with them, and the scientists cashed the paychecks he gave them for their interviews. Mathis expressed surprise that the scientists answered his questions in a manner that was consistent with their publications, and supported evolution in the interviews and disparaged intelligent design. He was particularly dismissive of the complaints of Richard Dawkins since Dawkins was in the movie '']'' and wrote the book ''].'' Mathis said the reason that Darwinists oppose intelligent design is that this will mean they have to share grant money with intelligent design and cut into their book sales. Mathis predicted that this movie will have a big impact on the debate about evolution and government policy. Mathis stated that the movie will appear in the first or second week of April, 2008, but that the release date is not yet firm.<ref name=Mathis/> Mathis was also interviewed by the Discovery Institute's Rob Crowther in February of 2008.<ref name=idI2>, ], ], ].</ref> | |||
*{{harvnb|Olasky|2008}} | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.cwfa.org/articles/14428/CFI/misc/index.htm |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |date=December 27, 2007 |website=] |location=Washington, D.C. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080105061941/http://www.cwfa.org/articles/14428/CFI/misc/index.htm |archive-date=2008-01-05}} | |||
*{{cite web |url=http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/12/06/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed_four_st |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Four Stars |last=Magnuson |first=Tom |date=December 6, 2007 |website=Access Research Network |location=Colorado Springs, CO |type=Blog |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071208183102/http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/12/06/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed_four_st |archive-date=2007-12-08 |access-date=2016-01-17}} Page also {{Cite web |url=http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/12/06/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed_four_st |title=In the News - Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Four Stars |access-date=December 18, 2007 |archive-date=June 5, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110605120209/http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/12/06/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed_four_st |url-status=bot: unknown }}.</ref> ], a senior editor of '']'', said that the "only complaint about ''Expelled'', scheduled for April release, is that its ending came all too soon".<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Bethell |first=Tom |author-link=Tom Bethell |date=April 18, 2008 |title=No Intelligence Allowed! |url=http://spectator.org/articles/44070/no-intelligence-allowed |magazine=The American Spectator |location=Arlington, VA |publisher=American Spectator Foundation |issn=0148-8414 |access-date=2016-01-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://spectator.org/articles/44070/no-intelligence-allowed |archive-date=January 21, 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref> '']'' gave ''Expelled'' of 3 out of 4 stars.<ref name="Moring_ChristianityToday">{{cite magazine |last=Moring |first=Mark |date=April 18, 2008 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |url=http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/aprilweb-only/expelled.html |magazine=Christianity Today |type=Movie review |location=Carol Stream, IL |publisher=Christianity Today International |issn=0009-5753 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> '']'' gave ''Expelled'' 4.5 out of 5 stars, saying that "your opinion of the film will with almost complete certainty be predicted by your opinions on Darwinism vs Intelligent Design".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://screenrant.com/review-expelled-no-intelligence-allowed-vic-1530/ |title=Review: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |last=Holtreman |first=Vic |date=April 19, 2008 |website=Screen Rant |publisher=Valnet Inc. |location=Saint-Laurent, Quebec, Canada |type=Movie review |access-date=2016-01-17 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://screenrant.com/review-expelled-no-intelligence-allowed-vic-1530/ |archive-date=January 21, 2016 }}</ref> | |||
The film has been used in private screenings to legislators as part of the ] for so-called ].<ref name="WSJschools">{{cite news |last=Simon |first=Stephanie |date=May 2, 2008 |title=Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120967537476060561 |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |location=New York |page=A10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080505055724/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120967537476060561.html |archive-date=2008-05-05 |access-date=2016-01-05}}</ref> | |||
Executive Producer Logan Craft, chairman of the board of Premise Media, was interviewed by Jerry Pierce for the Southern Baptist Texan, official publication of the ], in January of 2008.<ref name=craft>, Jerry Pierce, , January 28, 2008</ref> Craft said that the reason intelligent design is so controversial is that it is a scientific challenge to "]," not a religious challenge. Craft said that it was clear with the discovery of ] that the ] basis of science must be discarded and the supernatural admitted into science. Craft stated that as ] and ] had been rejected, ] must be cast aside as well, calling the trio the "the three bearded men, or ] of the 19th century." Craft's main complaint about Darwin was that his theory was too simple to describe the ].<ref name=craft/> | |||
Stein received the Freedom of Expression Award for his work in ''Expelled'' from the Home Entertainment Awards at the ]'s Home Media Expo 2008 held at the ] in ].<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Gruenwedel |first=Erik |date=June 24, 2008 |title=EMA Awards Honor Veterans and Newcomers |url=http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/ema-awards-honor-veterans-and-newcomers-13009 |magazine=] |location=Santa Ana, CA |publisher=Questex Media Group |access-date=2016-01-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121224435/http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/ema-awards-honor-veterans-and-newcomers-13009 |archive-date=January 21, 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite press release |last1=Erhardt |first1=Megan |last2=Hutchins |first2=Mary Beth |date=June 24, 2008 |title=Star of EXPELLED Ben Stein to receive 'Freedom of Expression Award' |url=http://www.crnewswire.com/news_details.php?nid=414 |location=Las Vegas, NV |publisher=CR Newswire |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090805222652/http://www.crnewswire.com/news_details.php?nid=414 |archive-date=2009-08-05 |access-date=2016-01-18}}</ref> | |||
===Press conferences=== | |||
A 50 minute telephone press conference with Stein and the producers was held in late January 2008. Dan Whipple of '']'' reported that journalists had to submit their questions by email in advance for screening, and at the conference "softball" questions were posed by Paul Lauer, a representative of the film's public relations firm. Only four outside questions were used, all from Christian organizations with only two of them from "the press". Questions came from the policy/lobbying groups ] and the ] of the ], the Christian program ''Listen Up TV'', and the ''Colorado Catholic Herald''. Whipple described ''Expelled'' as appearing to be anti-rational, and cited Stein describing problems with Darwin's Theory of Evolution as being the unanswered questions "Where did life come from?... How did the cell get so complex? ... Assuming it all did happen by Random Mutation and Natural Selection, where did the laws of gravity come from. Where did the laws of thermodynamics come from? Where did the laws of motion and, of heat come from?"<ref name=BraverScientists/> | |||
===Box office and home video sales=== | |||
Producer Walt Ruloff claimed that they had interviewed "hundreds and hundreds of scientists who wouldn't even talk" because of their fears for their career prospects if they strayed from the current orthodoxy or from a "Darwinian position." Whipple contrasted this with his own experience of interviewing many scientists holding very unorthodox ideas who were "forthright, diligent and feverishly eager to promote their ideas," and not finding any refusing to defend their research.<ref name=BraverScientists/> | |||
As of September 2018, ''Expelled'' has grossed over $7.7 million and was the 33rd highest-grossing documentary film in the United States since 1982, and was the 9th highest-grossing political documentary film since 1982.<ref name="mojorank" /><ref>{{cite web |url=https://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=politicaldoc.htm |title=Documentary - Political |website=Box Office Mojo |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2018-01-29}} Page ranks the highest grossing 'Documentary - Political' films since 1982.</ref> ''Expelled'' opened in 1,052 movie theaters, earning $2,970,848 for its opening weekend with a $2,824 theater average.<ref name=mojo>{{cite web |url=https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008) |website=Box Office Mojo |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2008-04-21}}</ref> Prior to the film's opening, producer Walt Ruloff said the film could top the $23.9-million opening for Michael Moore's 2004 ] against President ], '']'', the best launch for a documentary to date.<ref name="projector">{{cite news |last=Friedman |first=Josh |date=April 18, 2008 |title='Expelled' may defy low expectations |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-apr-18-fi-projector18-story.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |access-date=2016-01-18}} | |||
*{{cite news |last=Friedman |first=Josh |date=April 18, 2008 |title='Expelled' could exceed box-office forecasts |url=https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-projector18apr18,1,4982009.story |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080516225842/http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-projector18apr18,1,4982009.story |archive-date=2008-05-16 |access-date=2016-01-18}}</ref> ''Expelled''{{'}}s returns were impressive for a film in the typically low grossing documentary genre, but it was far surpassed by both Moore's 2007 '']'' and ''Fahrenheit 9/11''.<ref name="mojorank" /> | |||
''Expelled''{{'}}s ] releases distributed by ] grossed over $5,990,000 in total sales as of January 2016.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Expelled-No-Intelligence-Allowed#tab=summary |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |website=] |publisher=Nash Information Services |location=Beverly Hills, CA |access-date=2016-01-26}}</ref> | |||
Another telephone press conference was held March 28, 2008.<ref name=NewsLI>, posted by News LI Editor, edited by C. Cuizon, , Society section, March 26, 2008.</ref> PZ Myers listened in on the initial part of this press conference, and then (having heard the password to talk into the call during pre-conference chatter) challenged the producers for "lying". The producers were flustered when Myers confronted them with the information that there had been ] long before Charles Darwin's theory. Myers asked them if they had ever heard of the word "]." At this, the producers claimed that Myers was dishonestly listening to the telephone conference, and Myers was asked to leave the conference call. He did so, after first providing the press with an email address where he could be contacted.<ref>, ], ] ], March 28, 2008 </ref><ref>, Rebecca Watson, ], March 28th, 2008</ref> | |||
==Bankruptcy and film rights== | |||
On March 28th, 2008, Many members of the staff at Scientific American were invited to view the film. After which, they began an interview with Mark Mathis which was recorded and is hosted on their website.<ref name=sciammathis></ref> In the interview, Mathis claims the overt use of Nazi imagery and quote-mining of scientists was not his decision, but instead blames unnamed superiors. He concedes that the cases of the scientists shown in the film are inflated (again, not his decision) and makes erroneous claims regarding the Dover vs. Kitzmiller case which the editors factcheck on the same page. | |||
Premise Media Holdings, LP, the company that produced ''Expelled'', filed for ] on December 29, 2009. On May 31, 2011, the company filed a motion, declaring its desire to sell all properties and rights related to the film at auction pursuant to the bankruptcy proceeding.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ncse.com/news/2011/06/expelled-block-006695 |title=Expelled on the block? |date=June 6, 2011 |publisher=National Center for Science Education |location=Oakland, CA |access-date=2016-01-18}}</ref> The rights to the film were sold at an online auction for $201,000 on June 28, 2011, to an unnamed bidder.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/view-the-bankruptcy-court-bids-for-expelled/ |title=View the Bankruptcy Court Bids for 'Expelled' |author=The Curmudgeon |date=June 24, 2011 |website=The Sensuous Curmudgeon |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-27}}</ref> | |||
==See also== | |||
===Promotional efforts by others=== | |||
{{Portal|Religion|Evolutionary biology}} | |||
The film is being promoted by ] media<ref>{{cite web |publisher=|url=http://www.christiancinema.com/catalog/newsdesk_info.php?newsdesk_id=431 |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |date=]|accessdate=2007-09-29 |format= |work=}}.<br>• , , ], ].<br>• , Katherine T. Phan, ], ], ].<br>• , ], ]n ], ], ].<br>• , ] ], ], ].<br>• , , ], ].</ref> and by organizations affiliated with the ].<ref>{{cite web |publisher=] |date=]|url=http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/3/2007/09/24/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed |title=In the News - Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed |accessdate=2007-09-29 |format= |work=}}</ref><ref name = future>{{cite web |publisher=|date=]|url=http://www.idthefuture.com/2007/08/new_video_podcast_expelled_no.html |title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed the new film on the ID controversy |accessdate=2007-09-29 |format= |work=}}</ref><ref>, Premise Media, ], ], ], ]</ref> As part of the ] one of the institute's websites, ''Intelligent Design the Future'', makes the claim that ''Expelled'' "reveals the stark truth: Darwinists have been conspiring to keep design out of classrooms, out of journals, and out of public discourse."<ref name = future/> | |||
*] | |||
The Discovery Institute has published more than twenty articles featuring on its evolutionnews.org website and blog, tying its promotion of Expelled in with its effort to pass the "]" in Florida.<ref name=RemFlorAcadFreeBill>{{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2008/03/prepared_remarks_for_florida_a.html |title= Prepared Remarks for Florida Academic Freedom Bill Press Conference |accessdate=2008-04-17 |date=2008 |format=html |publisher=http://www.discovery.org }}</ref> | |||
*'']'' | |||
*'']'' | |||
*'']'' | |||
*'']'' | |||
==References== | |||
Many others in the Christian and Creationist communities are anxiously anticipating this movie. For example, Dr. Georgia Purdom of ], a ] organization, discussed the film and the promotional campaign in an article that appeared December 17, 2007 on the AiG website.<ref name=Purdom>, , AiG–U.S., ] website, ], ].</ref> Purdom is glad that the film will highlight the discrimination against scientists who rely on the ], instead of human reason, for their work. She complains that the only scientists featured appear to be connected with the ], rather than creationists like herself. Purdom also expresses uneasiness about the "]" approach of intelligent design and this film, since it does not look like it will promote the Bible as a better source of truth than the ] or human reason. She equates the use of human reason with ].<ref name=Purdom/> | |||
'''Informational notes''' | |||
{{notelist}} | |||
'''Citations''' | |||
Ray Bohlin of ] also wrote about the upcoming film on the Probe Ministries website.<ref name=Bohlin>, , ] ]</ref> Bohlin claims that the persecution of scientists who question Darwinism has led to the dismissal of tenured faculty. He also states that it was possible to doubt Darwin in biology ] in the 1980s, but it is no longer possible because of increasing restriction of academic freedom.<ref name=Bohlin/> | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
'''Bibliography''' | |||
==Screenings== | |||
* {{cite book |last=Darwin |first=Charles |author-link=Charles Darwin |year=1871 |title=The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex |location=London |publisher=] |oclc=550912 |title-link=The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex }} The book is available from . Retrieved 2016-01-11. | |||
As part of the pre-release marketing for the film, a web-based ] system page was publicized,<ref name=CH!CAGO>{{cite web |url=http://onegreatcityblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/private-screening.html |title=One Great City ~ CH!CAGO: Private Screening |accessdate=2008-03-23 }}</ref> offering free private movie screenings.<ref name=RSVPSystem>{{cite web |url=http://rsvp.getexpelled.com/events/special/expelled |title=Expelled - RSVP System |accessdate=2008-03-23 }}</ref> Persons filling out an online entry form were sent a reservation confirmation via email which stated that no ticket was needed and that IDs would be checked against a list of names.<ref name=AustringerExpelled>{{cite web |url=http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/03/20/expelled-from-expelled/ |title=The Austringer » Expelled from “Expelled” |accessdate=2008-03-23 |author=Wesley R. Elsberry |authorlink=Wesley R. Elsberry |date=21 Mar 2008}}</ref><ref name=SantaClara>{{cite web |url=http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/03/expelled-gone-m.html |title=Expelled gone missing from Santa Clara - The Panda's Thumb |accessdate=2008-03-23 |date=March 21, 2008 }}</ref> The producers have also held invitation only screenings for religious organizations and government officials. Some of the screenings have been controversial. | |||
'''Further reading''' | |||
===Conservative Christian groups=== | |||
{{Refbegin}} | |||
In advance of release, the film was shown at private screenings to various Christian conservative leaders such as ].<ref name="Metcalfe March 10"/><ref>"Question: What would you like to say to Darwin?" Stein: "You are a wealthy man, you married a wealthy woman, why don’t you just live quietly out in the countryside and not torture us with your half-baked suppositions, which have caused so much misery?" (, Jennifer Mesko, Citizenlink, April 4, 2008)</ref><ref>, ] (]), Broadcast Archives, April 07, 2008</ref> On ], ], a preview screening was held in ] for attendees at the annual convention of the ]. The ] organization ] reported that its leader ] met Ben Stein beforehand to discuss ways that the film can have a major impact on the ]. It requested supporters to ask local movie theater managers to show the film, and to encourage their church leadership to buy out a local theater to show the film to as many people from that church as possible.<ref name=aig>{{cite web |url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/03/13/meeting-of-minds |title=A Meeting of Minds - Answers in Genesis |accessdate=2008-03-15 |author= Mark Looy, CCO, AiG–U.S |date=March 13, 2008 }}</ref> | |||
* {{cite journal |last=Branch |first=Glenn |author-link=Glenn Branch |date=September–December 2008 |title=Divergence over 'Expelled' |url=http://ncse.com/rncse/28/5-6/divergence-over-expelled |journal=Reports of the National Center for Science Education |location=Berkeley, CA |publisher=] |volume=28 |issue=5–6 |pages=52–53 |issn=2158-818X |access-date=2016-01-26}} | |||
* {{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/09/28/ny-times-on-expelled-movie/ |title=NY Times on Expelled Movie |last=Brayton |first=Ed |date=September 28, 2007 |work=Dispatches from the Creation Wars |publisher=] |location=New York |type=Blog |access-date=2016-01-25 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150907035610/http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2007/09/28/ny-times-on-expelled-movie/ |archive-date=September 7, 2015 |url-status=dead }} | |||
* {{cite report |last=Souder |first=Mark |author-link=Mark Souder |title=Intolerance and the Politicization of Science at the Smithsonian |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/media/pdf/2008-04-09_expelled_souter-report-sternberg.pdf |publisher=] |type=Staff report |date=December 11, 2006 |access-date=2016-01-25}} | |||
* {{cite journal |last=Wilkes |first=Gregory Chad |date=October 2008 |title=''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' |url=https://www.unomaha.edu/jrf/vol12no2/Reviews/Expelled.htm |journal=] |type=Movie review |location=Omaha, NE |publisher=] |volume=12 |issue=2 |issn=1092-1311 |access-date=2016-01-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150910002951/http://www.unomaha.edu/jrf/vol12no2/Reviews/Expelled.htm |archive-date=2015-09-10 |url-status=dead }} | |||
{{Refend}} | |||
==External links== | |||
===Florida legislators=== | |||
{{Wikiquote}} | |||
In ], representative ] who had filed House 1483: Relating to Teaching Chemical and Biological Evolution,<ref name="titleSession :Bills : flsenate.gov">{{cite web |url=http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/index.cfm?Mode=Bills&Submenu=1&BI_Mode=ViewBillInfo&Billnum=1483&Year=2008 |title=Session :Bills : flsenate.gov |accessdate=2008-03-10 |format= |work=}}</ref> an "]" reflecting a ], invited Florida legislators to a private screening of ''Expelled''. The screening held in the ] Theater of the ] of ], on ], ]. It was stated that the event had been approved by House General Counsel and was not paid for by a lobbyist/principal.<ref name="titlePharyngula: Its a propaganda film!">{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/its_a_propaganda_film.php |title=Pharyngula: It's a propaganda film! |accessdate=2008-03-10 |author= |authorlink= |coauthors= |date= |format= |work= |publisher= |pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote=}}</ref><ref name=FloridalegislaturegettingExpelled>{{cite web |url=http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=497 |title=Florida Citizens for Science � Blog Archive � Florida legislature getting Expelled |accessdate=2008-03-10 |author= |authorlink= |coauthors= |date= |format= |work= |publisher= |pages= |language= |archiveurl= |archivedate= |quote=}}</ref> The legislation has been criticized as trying to allow biblical creationists to bring religious teachings into classrooms, but Hays states that the bill is simply drafted to allow teachers and students to discuss "the full range" of problems and ideas surrounding Darwin's theory, without fear of punishment. He and his co-sponsor Senator ] were both unable to name any teachers in Florida who have been disciplined for being critical of evolution in the science classroom. Hays said "I want a balanced policy. I want students taught how to think, not what to think. There are problems with evolution. Have you ever seen a half-monkey, half human?" The bill is seen as an attempt to undermine recently adopted education standards, which have been opposed by supporters of intelligent design but which, according to a majority of the education board, already support the right to teach students how to question evidence and analyze ]. The film and the bill have been described by critics as going hand in hand with the intelligent design ].<ref name=03/10/2008MiamiHerald>{{cite web |url=http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/451272.html |title=Ben Stein weighs in on evolution fight - 03/10/2008 - MiamiHerald.com |accessdate=2008-03-11 |author=Marc Caputo |date=March 10, 2008 |work= |publisher=] }}</ref><ref name=OrlandoSentinelFloridaHouse>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_education_edblog/2008/03/academice-freed.html |title=Orlando Sentinel - Academic freedom, evolution and Ben Stein's Expelled movie --the Florida House may consider them all |accessdate=2008-03-12 |author=LesliePostal |date= March 10, 2008 |work= |publisher= }}</ref> | |||
*{{mojo title|id=expelled|title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed}} | |||
*{{IMDb title|id=1091617|title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed}} | |||
*{{Metacritic film|title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed}} | |||
*{{rotten-tomatoes|id=expelled_no_intelligence_allowed|title=Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed}} | |||
{{Portal bar|Religion}} | |||
The invitation was restricted to legislators, their spouses, and their legislative aides. The press and public were excluded, and when the House general counsel was asked if that was legal under the Florida ] he stated that it was technically legal as long as they just watched the film without discussing the issue or arranging any future votes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080311/NEWS0120/80311045/1075 |title=Legislature invited to movie about creationism debate : news-press.com : The News-Press |accessdate=2008-03-13 |format= |work=}}</ref> Commenting on this, and the controversy over Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel managing to view the film against the wishes of the film company, House Democratic leader ] of ] stated, | |||
''It's kind of an irony: The public is expelled from a movie called Expelled.''<ref name=03/10/2008MiamiHerald/> | |||
The screening was attended by about 100 people, but few were legislators,<ref name=lawm>{{cite web |url=http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080313/CAPITOLNEWS/803130323/1067/RSS15 |title=Lawmakers attend Tallahassee screening of movie by Ben Stein : tallahassee.com : Tallahassee Democrat |accessdate=2008-03-14 |format= |work=}}</ref> and the majority of legislators stayed away.<ref name=eyes>{{cite web |url=http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080314/OPINION01/803140322/1006/OPINION |title=Eyes wide open : tallahassee.com : Tallahassee Democrat |accessdate=2008-03-14 }}</ref><ref name=Newlegislation/> In a press conference afterwards Stein said the documentary showed that the academic freedom bill was needed. The legislation tells instructors to teach the "full range" of "scientific information" about biological and chemical evolution. During the press conference John Stemberger of the evangelical Florida ], one of the drafters of the bill, said that intelligent design could not be taught, though "criticisms" of evolution could, and the teacher would have to follow the curriculum. Stein said it was the teacher who would decide what was "scientific information", and Casey Luskin, an attorney with the ], said that intelligent design constituted "scientific information", but that the bill was not intended to settle that question. The ] saw this as acknowledgement that the bill would make it easier to bring up religiously tinged intelligent design in public-school science classrooms.<ref name=03/15/2008MiamiHerald>{{cite web |url=http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/454417.html |title=Intelligent Design could slip into science class - 03/13/2008 - MiamiHerald.com |accessdate=2008-03-15 |author=Marc Caputo |date=March 15, 2008 |work= |publisher=] }}</ref> ] considered that this would enable the Discovery Institute to recruit sympathetic teachers to introduce religiously-motivated antievolution arguments, and lawsuits would depend on someone with standing being willing to become a plaintiff. ] of the Discovery Institute said that "scientific information" would be determined by science teachers themselves in consultation with their science curriculum staff and their school boards. This would bypass the Florida education standards identified by science domain experts and education experts.<ref name=AustringerWestSpins>{{cite web |url=http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/03/14/florida-john-west-spins-+wildly-to-cover-luskins-back/ |title=The Austringer » Florida: John West Spins Wildly to Cover Luskin's Back |accessdate=2008-03-16 |author=Wesley R. Elsberry |authorlink=Wesley R. Elsberry |date=14 March 2008 }}</ref> | |||
===PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins at Minnesota screening=== | |||
''Expelled'' interviewee ] followed the online procedure to reserve seats for himself and guests under his own name to attend a showing at the ] in ] on ] , ], but shortly before the film started a security guard told him that the assistant producer Mark Mathis had instructed that Myers be removed from the premises.<ref name=latenightquickone>{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/a_late_night_quick_one.php |title=Pharyngula: A late night quick one |accessdate=2008-03-23 |author=PZ Myers |authorlink=PZ Myers |date=March 21, 2008 }}</ref> Myers described being expelled in this way as showing off "the hypocrisy of these people, as well as their outright incompetence." His guests were allowed in, including fellow interviewee ], who asked in a question and answer session at the end of the film why Myers had been excluded. Dawkins later said that "if anyone had a right to see the film, it was . The incompetence, on a public relations level, is beyond belief."<ref name=twinc>{{cite web |url=http://www.twincities.com/ci_8653837 |title=Biology prof expelled from screening of 'Expelled' - TwinCities.com |accessdate=2008-03-21 |author= Chris Hewitt |date=03/21/2008 |publisher=]}}</ref> Dawkins described the event as "a gift" and that "we could not ask for anything better."<ref name = DeanNYT>{{cite news | first = Cornelia | last = Dean| authorlink = | title = No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/science/21expelledw.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin | work = ] | publisher = | date = 2008-03-21 | accessdate = 2008-03-21 }}</ref> | |||
One blog claimed that Myers had gatecrashed the showing. Jeffrey Overstreet, a film critic for ], cited an e-mail from a college student who was at the screening. The student assumed that Dawkins and Myers had not been invited, and suggested that Myers had been "hustling and bothering" invited guests. The student subsequently stated that Myers "didn't cause a disruption per se; he was kindly escorted out."<ref name=overstreet>], ", ''The Looking Closer Journal'', Retrieved ], ]</ref><ref>], ,''Christianity Today Blog'', Retrieved ], ]</ref><ref name=latenightquickone/> However, the producer later wrote: | |||
{{cquote|Yes, I turned Mr. Myers away. He was not an invited guest of Premise Media. This was a private screening of an unfinished film. I could have let him in, just as I invited Michael Shermer to a screening in Nashville. Shermer is in the film as well. But, in light of Myers' untruthful blogging about ''Expelled'' I decided it was better to have him wait until April 18 and pay to see the film. Others, notable others, were permitted to see the film. At a private screening it's my call. | |||
Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expell '''' no one.<ref>Inside Higher Ed, "", March 24, 2008</ref>}} Myers described this as an admission by Mathis that Myers had not been "unruly" or "gatecrashing", but had been thrown out "on a petty, arbitrary, vindictive whim" without legitimate cause.<ref name="titlePharyngula: An admission from Mark Mathis">{{cite web |url=http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/an_admission_from_mark_mathis.php |title=Pharyngula: An admission from Mark Mathis |accessdate=2008-03-25 |format= |work=}}</ref> In an email to another blog, Mathis stated that "I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more."<ref>], 2008]</ref> | |||
ChristianityToday liveblog cited Myers as saying that he'd heard that the film is "not only boring and poorly made, but is ludicrous in its dishonesty. Apparently, a standard tactic is to do lots of fast cuts between biologists like me or Dawkins or Eugenie Scott and shots of Nazi atrocities. It's all very ham-handed. The audience apparently ate it up, though. Figures. Christians have a growing reputation for their appreciation of dishonesty." The student who had e-mailed described the film as "subtly clever and occasionally funny", and reported that the movie they had seen was a rough Director's Cut with occasional things out of sync or appearing to jump. The soundtrack included well known music, but Mathis indicated that music cues might change before the final cut.<ref name=overstreet/> | |||
<!-- these spins by the DI and the producers need to be balanced by commentary from Myers or Dawkins, or by a third party Regarding this incident, ] of the ] claims that "There is a growing fear by the producers that Darwinists may be trying to get into the showings to make bootleg copies (for the Web?), possibly in hopes of damaging the commercial value." He also expressed amazement that Dawkins was allowed to attend the preview and described both P.Z. Myers and Richard Dawkins as "anti-intellectual, bullying poseurs" and "small men who are above all afraid of a fair contest"<ref> {{cite web |url=http://www.evolutionnews.org/2008/03/richard_dawkins_worlds_most_fa.html |title=Richard Dawkins, World's Most Famous Darwinist, Stoops to Gate-crashing Expelled |accessdate= 2008-03-24|author=Bruce Chapman |date= March 2008 |work=Evolution News and Views |publisher= Discovery Institute}}</ref>--> | |||
In a press release dated March 25, 2008, Mathis claimed that the decision to expel Myers was made well in advance, as soon as it was noted that Myers, Dawkins, and "a group of other atheists" had signed up to view the movie, and was a deliberate PR move to capitalize on the irony. The release claims that Myers is "distraught" and that he had been calling upon others to sneak into screenings for "many weeks".<ref>, Premise Media press release, Business Wire, March 25, 2008.</ref> Myers responded that he only felt "a little guilty that I'd escaped a bad movie while my friends and family were stuck with watching it" and that he has never requested that people sneak into screenings or "even asked them to sign up for them, as I did". He observed that Dawkins was registered only as an anonymous guest — the press release claim that he "oddly used his formal surname 'Clinton' instead of Richard to sign up" was erroneous.<ref>, ]</ref> Dawkins did offer his passport as identification when he arrived at the screening. It shows both of his forenames, giving his full name as "Clinton Richard Dawkins."<ref name = DeanNYT/> | |||
===Reports of false cancellation notices for screenings=== | |||
The Seed science blogger John M. Lynch (of "Stranger Fruit") has reported receiving an email (to him and several others) stating that the screening he was to attend had been moved one hour earlier.<ref>{{cite web | |||
| url= http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2008/03/even_m7pmore_on_expelled_in_te.php | |||
| title= Even more on Expelled in Tempe | |||
|author= John Lynch | date= March 31, 2008 |publisher= Stranger Fruit | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 }} </ref> He later received an email (to him and five others)<ref name="strangerfruit/2008/04/">{{cite web | |||
| url= http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/2008/04/expelled_in_tempe_the_final_co.php | |||
| title= Expelled in Tempe: The Final Countdown | |||
|author= John Lynch | date= April 2, 2008 |publisher= Stranger Fruit | |||
| accessdate= 2008-04-04 }} </ref> stating that the RSVP screening he was set to attend had been canceled. One of the other individuals to receive this email phoned the theater, which revealed that the screening was set to go ahead anyway. He attended, and found that his name was no longer on the guest list, but after some negotiation (presenting his confirmation email and stating he was not representing any organization) he was allowed to view the movie. Lynch proposed a guest pre-screening process was set up in response to the Myers and Dawkins incident, and uses this as evidence.<ref></ref> | |||
==See also== | |||
*] | |||
*], a ] documentary about ] and the ] trial. | |||
*], a documentary contrasting the debate between intelligent design proponents and the scientific establishment that supports evolution. | |||
== References == | |||
{{reflist|2}} | |||
==External links== | |||
* | |||
*{{imdb title|1091617}} | |||
* — A ] site examining the claims made in the movie and the actions of its producers. | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 01:42, 29 December 2024
2008 American documentary-style propaganda film Not to be confused with the 2014 comedy film Expelled (film).
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed | |
---|---|
Promotional release poster | |
Directed by | Nathan Frankowski |
Written by | Kevin Miller Ben Stein Walt Ruloff |
Produced by | Logan Craft Walt Ruloff John Sullivan |
Starring | Ben Stein |
Edited by | Simon Tondeur |
Music by | Andy Hunter Robbie Bronnimann |
Production companies | Premise Media Corporation Rampant Films |
Distributed by | Vivendi Entertainment Rocky Mountain Pictures (US) Con Dios Entertainment (Australia) |
Release date |
|
Running time | 96.5 minutes |
Country | United States |
Language | English |
Budget | $3.5 million |
Box office | $7.7 million |
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a 2008 American propaganda film directed by Nathan Frankowski and starring Ben Stein. It is presented as a documentary promoting the conspiracy theory that academia oppresses and excludes people who believe in intelligent design. It portrays the scientific theory of evolution as a contributor to communism, fascism, atheism, eugenics, and in particular Nazi atrocities in the Holocaust. Although intelligent design is a pseudoscientific religious idea, the film presents it as science-based, without giving a detailed definition of the concept or attempting to explain it on a scientific level. Other than briefly addressing issues of irreducible complexity, Expelled examines intelligent design purely as a political issue.
Expelled opened in 1,052 movie theaters, more than any other documentary before it, and grossed over $2,900,000 in its first weekend. It earned $7.7 million, making it the 33rd highest-grossing documentary film in the United States (as of 2018, and not adjusted for inflation).
Media response to the film has been largely negative. Multiple reviews, including those of USA Today and Scientific American, described the film as propaganda, with USA Today adding that it was "a political rant disguised as a serious commentary on stifled freedom of inquiry" and Scientific American calling it "a science-free attack on Darwin". The New York Times deemed it "a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry" and "an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike". Response to the film from conservative Christian groups was generally positive, praising the film for its humor and for focusing on what they perceive as a serious issue.
Overview
The film was directed by Nathan Frankowski and stars Ben Stein. Stein provides narrative commentary throughout the film. He is depicted as visiting a sequence of universities to interview proponents of intelligent design who claim to have been victimized, and evolutionary scientists who are presented as atheists. The film makes considerable use of vintage film clips, including opening scenes showing the Berlin Wall being constructed as a metaphor for barriers to the scientific acceptance of intelligent design. The film takes aim at some scientific hypotheses of the origin of life, and presents a short animation portraying the inner workings of the cell to introduce the intelligent design concept of irreducible complexity, the claim that such complexity could not arise from spontaneous mutations. The intelligent design proponents shown include Richard Weikart, who claims that Darwinism influenced the Nazis. The film also associates Adolf Hitler's ambitions of a master race and the Holocaust to Darwinian ideas of survival of the fittest. It does so using stock footage film clips of Nazi concentration camp laboratories, as well as statements of sociologist Uta George, director of the Hadamar killing centre's Memorial Museum. The film directly addresses intelligent design only superficially, focusing on how it is treated in academia rather than on issues involving the concept itself. It makes almost no attempt to define intelligent design or show any scientific evidence in favor of intelligent design. Instead, the film deals with the subject almost entirely from a political, rather than scientific, viewpoint.
Promotion of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution
Further information: Intelligent design and Intelligent design movementThe film depicts intelligent design as an alternative to evolution, and claims it deserves a place in academia. This "design theory" is defined in the film by the Discovery Institute's Paul Nelson as "the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence". Stein says in the film that intelligent design is not taught or researched in academia because it is "suppressed in a systematic and ruthless fashion". The National Center for Science Education (NCSE), one of the groups discussed in the film, responds that "Intelligent design has not produced any research to suppress", and "The fundamental problem with intelligent design as science is that intelligent design claims cannot be tested."
In the United States federal court case Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005), intelligent design was judged a repackaged version of creationism and as such introducing intelligent design in public school science classrooms was unconstitutional religious infringement. In the film, the president of the Discovery Institute, Bruce Chapman, denied that teaching intelligent design in science classes is an attempt to sneak religion into public schools. Stein, the Discovery Institute and Expelled's publicist, Motive Entertainment, have all used the film to build support for Academic Freedom bills in various states. These bills would permit educators in the public schools to independently introduce criticisms of or alternatives to evolution, but many view the bills as the latest in a series of anti-evolutionary strategies designed to bring creationism into the classroom.
Claims that intelligent design advocates are persecuted
The film contends that there is widespread persecution of educators and scientists who promote intelligent design, and a conspiracy to keep God out of the nation's laboratories and classrooms. The film contains interviews with educators and scientists in which they describe this persecution. In the film, Stein says, "It's not just the scientists who are in on it. The media is in on it, the courts, the educational system, everyone is after them." Stein further accuses academia of having a dogmatic commitment to Darwinism, comparable to the 'party line' of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education stated that the filmmakers were exploiting Americans' sense of fairness as a way to sell their religious views and that she feared that the film would portray "the scientific community as intolerant, as close-minded, and as persecuting those who disagree with them. And this is simply wrong."
Portrayal of evolutionary science as atheistic
The film alleges that many scientists and the scientific enterprise are dogmatically committed to atheism, and that a commitment to materialism in the scientific establishment is behind the claimed suppression of intelligent design. William A. Dembski addressed the issue of design explanations in science, saying that "many fields of study involve intelligent design, including archaeology, forensics, and the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). An archaeologist, for example, examines the evidence—like a curiously shaped stone—to determine whether it might be the product of a human intelligence." Stein contends that "There are people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can't possibly touch a higher power, and it can’t possibly touch God." Scientific American criticised the film for failing to note that the scientific method deals only with explanations that can be tested or empirically validated, and so logically cannot use untestable religious or "design based" explanations.
The National Center for Science Education criticizes the film for the fallacy of composition: representing scientists who are atheists as representative of all scientists, without discussing the many prominent scientists who are religious, and thus creating a false dichotomy between science and religion. The associate producer of the film, Mark Mathis, said that although he didn't get to decide who and what interviews made it into the film, it was his opinion that including Roman Catholic biologist Kenneth R. Miller would have "confused the film unnecessarily". Mathis also questioned the intellectual honesty of a Catholic accepting evolution. Miller later noted that 40% of the members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science profess belief in a personal God.
In its review, the Waco Tribune-Herald said "That's the real issue of Expelled — atheist scientists versus God — even though it wholly undercuts statements by intelligent design researchers early in the film that ID has nothing to do with religion." It described the failure to cover "how Christian evolutionists reconcile faith and science" as "perhaps the film's most glaring and telling omission", and said that the film rather "quickly dismissed by a chain of quotes that brand them as liberal Christians and duped by militant atheists in their efforts to get religion out of the classroom". Defending the film, the producer, Walt Ruloff, said that scientists like prominent geneticist Francis Collins keep their religion and science separate because they are "toeing the party line". Collins, who was not asked to be interviewed for the film in any of its incarnations, called Ruloff's claims "just ludicrous".
Claims that the theory of evolution was necessary for the development of Nazism
Further information: Nazi eugenics, Social Darwinism, Religion in Nazi Germany, and Religious views of Adolf HitlerRichard Weikart, a historian and Discovery Institute fellow, appears in the film asserting that Charles Darwin's work in the 19th century influenced Adolf Hitler. He argues that Darwin's perception of humans not being qualitatively different from animals, with qualities such as morality arising from natural processes, undermines what Weikart calls the "Judeo-Christian conception of the sanctity of human life". Nazi gas chambers and concentration camps figure highly in the narrative of the film. In the film, philosopher and Discovery Institute fellow David Berlinski says that Darwinism was a "necessary though not sufficient" cause for the Holocaust, and Uta George, director of the Hadamar Memorial in Germany, says that "the Nazis, they relied on Darwin. Yes, and German scientists."
Scientific American editor John Rennie wrote that the film repeatedly uses the term "Darwinism" instead of evolution to misportray science as though it were a "dogmatic, atheistic ideology".
Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in his MSNBC column that the film is a "frighteningly immoral narrative", including "a toxic mishmash of persecution fantasies, disconnected and inappropriate references to fallen communist regimes and their leaders and a very repugnant form of Holocaust denial from the monotone big mouth Ben Stein". Caplan sharply criticized what he described as Stein's willingness "to subvert the key reason why the Holocaust took place — racism — to serve his own ideological end. Expelled indeed."
In an April 7, 2008, interview with Paul Crouch, Jr., on the Trinity Broadcasting Network about the film, Stein said that science had led to the Nazi murder of children, and stated that "Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place. Science leads you to killing people."
On April 29, 2008, the Anti-Defamation League issued the following statement condemning the film's use of the Holocaust:
The film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed misappropriates the Holocaust and its imagery as a part of its political effort to discredit the scientific community which rejects so-called intelligent design theory.
Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to exterminate the Jewish people and Darwin and evolutionary theory cannot explain Hitler's genocidal madness.
Using the Holocaust in order to tarnish those who promote the theory of evolution is outrageous and trivializes the complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European Jewry.
When Vancouver Sun writer Peter McKnight asked for Stein to comment on the Anti-Defamation League's statement, Stein replied, "It's none of their f---ing [sic] business."
People presented in the film
The film portrays several people including Richard Sternberg, Guillermo Gonzalez, and Caroline Crocker as victims of persecution by major scientific organizations and academia for their promotion of intelligent design and for questioning Darwinism. Other intelligent design supporters such as William A. Dembski, Stephen C. Meyer, Jonathan Wells, Paul Nelson, Pamela Winnick, and Gerald Schroeder, along with contrarian David Berlinski, appear in the film as well. Expelled additionally briefly features numerous anonymous people, their faces darkened to make them unrecognizable, who say that their jobs in the sciences would be jeopardized if their belief in intelligent design were made public, one of whom states that he believes most scientists equate intelligent design with creationism, the religious right, and theocracy.
In addition, the film includes interviews with scientists and others who advocate the teaching of evolution and criticize intelligent design as an attempt to bring religion into the science classroom. Those interviewed include PZ Myers, William B. Provine, Richard Dawkins, Michael Ruse, Michael Shermer, Christopher Hitchens, and Eugenie Scott.
The "Expelled"
Richard Sternberg
Main article: Sternberg peer review controversyExpelled features excerpts from an interview Stein conducted with Richard Sternberg, described as an evolutionary biologist (he has two PhDs: biology (molecular evolution) and systems science (theoretical biology)) and a former editor for a scientific journal associated with the Smithsonian Institution. The film says his life was "nearly ruined" after he published an article by intelligent design proponent Stephen C. Meyer in 2004, allegedly causing him to lose his office, to be pressured to resign, and to become the subject of an investigation into his political and religious views. Sternberg defended his decision, stating that intelligent design was not the overall subject of the paper (being mentioned only at the end) and that he was attempting merely to present questions ID proponents had raised as a topic for discussion. He presented himself and Meyer as targets of religious and political persecution, claiming the chairman of his department referred to him as an "intellectual terrorist". Stein states that the paper "ignited a firestorm of controversy merely because it suggested intelligent design might be able to explain how life began", and goes beyond the findings of the United States Office of Special Counsel to claim that Sternberg was "terrorized". Stein further alleges that U.S. Representative Mark Souder uncovered a campaign by the Smithsonian and the NCSE to destroy Sternberg's credibility, though he does not provide any details.
Sternberg, a staff scientist for the National Center for Biotechnology Information and also a fellow of the intelligent design advocacy group International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID), had resigned his position at the journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington six months before publication of the Meyers paper. The Council of the Biological Society of Washington has stated that "Contrary to typical editorial practices, the paper was published without review by any associate editor; Sternberg handled the entire review process." Although in the film Stein says the paper "suggested intelligent design might be able to explain how life began", it discussed the much later development of phyla during the Cambrian explosion and deviated from the journal's topic of systematics to introduce previously discredited claims about bioinformatics. The Society subsequently declared that the paper "does not meet the scientific standards of the Proceedings" and would not have been published had typical editorial practices been followed. Sternberg, contrary to the impression given by the film, was not an employee, but an unpaid Research Associate at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, a post which ran for a limited period. Also contrary to the way his career was depicted in the film, Sternberg still retained this position until 2007, when he was given the offer of continuing as a Research Collaborator. He continued to have full access to research facilities at the museum as of April 2008.
Caroline Crocker
Expelled profiles Caroline Crocker, a former part-time cell biology lecturer at George Mason University who became the center of controversy over intelligent design. In the film Stein states, "After she simply mentioned Intelligent Design in her cell biology class at the ... niversity, Caroline Crocker's sterling academic career came to an abrupt end", and she was blacklisted. Crocker tells Stein that before the incident she was routinely offered jobs on the spot following an interview, but afterwards she was unable to find a position in academia.
According to the university and the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Crocker was not fired; her position was non-tenure track and her employment was on a course-by-course basis. She taught to the end of her contract, which was not renewed. A George Mason University spokesman said this was for reasons unrelated to her views on intelligent design, and that although they wholeheartedly supported academic freedom, "teachers also have a responsibility to stick to subjects they were hired to teach,... and intelligent design belonged in a religion class, not biology. Does academic freedom 'literally give you the right to talk about anything, whether it has anything to do with the subject matter or not? The answer is no.'"
The NCSE also stated that she did more than merely mention intelligent design, but in fact posed many refuted creationist arguments. Crocker also did find a position at Northern Virginia Community College, where she was later profiled by The Washington Post. The Post's article stated she claimed "that the scientific establishment was perpetrating fraud, hunting down critics of evolution to ruin them and disguising an atheistic view of life in the garb of science". Her lecture, which she said was the same she taught at George Mason, taught students creationist claims about evolution and promoted intelligent design in a biology class, telling them that Nazi atrocities were based on Darwin's ideas and on science.
Crocker subsequently conducted a year of postdoctoral studies at the Uniformed Services University in 2006, and from early 2008 to the summer of 2008 was the first executive director of the Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center (IDEA), which promotes intelligent design clubs at high schools and universities. In 2009, Crocker became the founder and president of the American Institute for Technology and Science Education (AITSE), a California-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that ceased operations in October 2013, leaving behind a moribund website, after Crocker left to pursue other interests and the AITSE board decided that AITSE had accomplished its purpose. She is the author of the 2010 book Free to Think, which includes a foreword by Ben Stein, published by micropublisher Leafcutter Press.
Michael Egnor
Further information: Michael EgnorMichael Egnor, a neurosurgery professor at Stony Brook University, is presented in the film as the subject of persecution after writing a letter to high school students asserting that doctors did not need to learn evolution to practice their trade. Egnor, who is a signatory to the Discovery Institute's "A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" and "Physicians and Surgeons who Dissent from Darwinism", presents himself as the victim of online smears and a campaign to get his university to force him into retirement, following his letter. When a citizen's group in Virginia sponsored an essay contest for high school students on the topic "Why I would want my doctor to have studied evolution", Egnor responded by posting the letter on an intelligent design website claiming that evolution was irrelevant to medicine.
In the film, Stein describes this as "Darwinists were quick to try and exterminate this new threat", and Egnor says he was shocked by the "viciousness" and "baseness" of the critical response he received.
Robert J. Marks II
Further information: Robert J. Marks IIRobert J. Marks II is a professor at Baylor University who had his research website shut down by the university and was forced to return grant money when it was discovered his work had a link to intelligent design. The research in question was for the Evolutionary Informatics Lab which Marks formed with Discovery Institute fellow William A. Dembski, and which made use of the university's servers to host the website. The university removed the website after receiving complaints that it appeared to be endorsed by the university. Baylor officials later allowed the website back on their server but required changes be made to the website so that it did not appear to be endorsed by the university. The website was reestablished independently of Baylor University.
Guillermo Gonzalez
Further information: Guillermo Gonzalez (astronomer)Guillermo Gonzalez, an astrophysicist who had been an assistant professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Iowa State University until May 2008, is interviewed by Stein, who claims that despite a "stellar" research record that led to the discovery of new planets, Gonzalez was denied tenure in April 2007 because his book The Privileged Planet (2004), co-authored with analytic philosopher and intelligent design advocate Jay W. Richards, argued that the universe is intelligently designed. Gonzalez claims that prior to his tenure review, he was the subject of a campaign on campus to "poison the atmosphere" against him, and that he would almost certainly have been granted tenure had he not been an advocate for intelligent design. The film interviewed a member of the Iowa State University faculty who stated that Gonzalez was denied tenure because the university feared that if they granted Gonzalez tenure the university would become associated with the intelligent design movement.
Prior to the film's release Iowa State University addressed the controversy regarding Gonzalez's tenure by saying that after the normal review of his qualifications, such as his record of scientific publications (which had dropped sharply after he joined the faculty), he was not granted tenure and promotion on the grounds that he "simply did not show the trajectory of excellence that we expect in a candidate seeking tenure in physics and astronomy". Eli Rosenberg, the chairman of the Astronomy department, also noted that during Gonzalez's time at Iowa State, Gonzalez had failed to secure any form of substantial outside funding. In the previous decade, four of the twelve candidates who came up for review in the department were not granted tenure.
Opponents of intelligent design
Michael Shermer
Further information: Michael ShermerMichael Shermer is an author, science historian, founder of The Skeptics Society, and editor of its magazine Skeptic, which is largely devoted to investigating and debunking pseudoscientific and supernatural claims. He was interviewed for the film by Stein and Mark Mathis to get his take on intelligent design and evolution. Shermer describes intelligent design as "three quarters of the way to nonsense", and voices skepticism at the claims that numerous academics were fired for advocating it.
Shermer, in an online column coinciding with the release of Expelled, described feeling awkward about their motives soon after the interview began:
For my part, the moment I sat down with Stein (with Mathis there) and he asked me that question about firing people for expressing dissenting views a dozen times, I realized that I was being manipulated to give certain answers they were looking for me to give. I asked them both, several times, if they had anything else to ask me about evolutionary theory or Intelligent Design. In frustration I finally said something like "Do you have any other questions to ask me or do you keep asking me this question in hopes that I'll give a different answer?"
After a break and small talk the interview resumed, but the questions continued to follow a similar vein:
Stein finally asked my opinion on people being fired for endorsing Intelligent Design. I replied that I know of no instance where such a firing has happened. This seemingly innocent observation was turned into a filmic confession of ignorance when my on-camera interview abruptly ends there, because when I saw Expelled at a preview screening... I discovered that the central thesis of the film is a conspiracy theory about the systematic attempt to keep Intelligent Design creationism out of American classrooms and culture.
Shermer has stated that he believes that the film is effective in delivering its message to its target audience.
Richard Dawkins
Further information: Richard DawkinsRichard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and popular science writer. Dawkins is portrayed as one of the leading members of the scientific establishment. Dawkins' admission that his study of evolution aided his move towards atheism is used by the film to draw a positive connection between them. In her review of the film for New Scientist, Amanda Gefter comments on the film's presentation of Dawkins' interview, including showing him "in the make-up chair, a move calculated to demean since surely everyone else, including Stein, is powder-puffed off-camera", and describes "foreboding music" and a "low-lit room" filmed with "sinister camera angles" used as part of an appeal to "raw emotion" during his interview.
In Dawkins' interview, the director focused on Stein's question to Dawkins regarding a hypothetical scenario in which intelligent design could have occurred. Dawkins responded that in the case of the "highly unlikely event that some such 'Directed Panspermia' was responsible for designing life on this planet, the alien beings would THEMSELVES have to have evolved, if not by Darwinian selection, by some equivalent 'crane' (to quote Dan Dennett)". He later described this as being similar to Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel's "semi tongue-in-cheek" example.
Accusations that film producers misled interviewees
The film has been criticized by those interviewees who are critics of intelligent design (PZ Myers, Dawkins, Shermer, and Eugenie Scott), who say they were misled into participating by being asked to be interviewed for a film named Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion, and were directed to a blurb implying an approach to the documentary crediting Darwin with "the answer" to how humanity developed:
It has been the central question of humanity through the ages: How in the world did we get here? In 1859 Charles Darwin provided the answer in his landmark book, The Origin of Species. In the century and a half since, geologists, biologists, physicists, astronomers, and philosophers have contributed a vast amount of research and data in support of Darwin's idea. And yet, millions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other people of faith believe in a literal interpretation that humans were crafted by the hand of God. The conflict between science and religion has unleashed passions in school board meetings, courtrooms, and town halls across America and beyond.
— Defunct Rampant Films website for Crossroads
But before the interviewees were approached, the film had already been pitched to Stein as an anti-Darwinist picture:
I was approached a couple of years ago by the producers, and they described to me the central issue of Expelled, which was about Darwinism and why it has such a lock on the academic establishment when the theory has so many holes. And why freedom of speech has been lost at so many colleges to the point where you can't question even the slightest bit of Darwinism or your colleagues will spurn you, you'll lose your job, and you'll be publicly humiliated. As they sent me books and talked to me about these things I became more enthusiastic about participating. Plus I was never a big fan of Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis' Final Solution to their so-called "Jewish problem" and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust. So I was primed to want to do a project on how Darwinism relates to fascism and to outline the flaws in Darwinism generally.
— Ben Stein, "Mocked and Belittled", WORLD
On learning of the pro-intelligent design stance of the real film, Myers said, "not telling one of the sides in a debate about what the subject might be and then leading him around randomly to various topics, with the intent of later editing it down to the parts that just make the points you want, is the video version of quote-mining and is fundamentally dishonest". Dawkins said, "At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front", and Scott said, "I just expect people to be honest with me, and they weren't."
Mathis called Myers, Dawkins and Scott a "bunch of hypocrites", and said that he "went over all of the questions with these folks before the interviews and I e-mailed the questions to many of them days in advance".
Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association wrote a letter to the editor of The New York Times, writing, "If one needs to believe in a god to be moral, why are we seeing yet another case of dishonesty by the devout? Why were leading scientists deceived as to the intentions of a religious group of filmmakers?"
Charles Darwin quotation issue
In support of his claim that the theory of evolution inspired Nazism, Ben Stein attributes the following statement to Charles Darwin's 1871 book The Descent of Man:
With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The original source shows that Stein's selective reading of Darwin significantly changed the meaning of the paragraph by leaving out whole and partial sentences without indicating that he had done so. The original paragraph (words that Stein omitted shown in bold type) and the subsequent paragraph in the book state:
With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected, by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage.
According to John Moore writing for the Canadian National Post:
Stein quotes from a passage in Darwin's writing that appears to endorse the notion that for a species to thrive the infirm must be culled. He omits the part where Darwin insists this would be "evil" and that man's care for the weak is "the noblest part of our nature". When I asked Stein about this on my radio show he deadpanned, "If any Darwin fans are listening and we have misquoted him, we are sorry; we don't mean to diss Darwin."
The National Center for Science Education's Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks website also points out that the same misleading selective quotation from this passage was used by anti-evolutionist William Jennings Bryan in the 1925 Scopes Trial, but the full passage makes it clear that Darwin was not advocating eugenics. The eugenics movement relied on simplistic and faulty assumptions about heredity, and by the 1920s evolutionary biologists were criticizing eugenics. Clarence Darrow, who defended the teaching of human evolution in the Scopes Trial, wrote a scathing repudiation of eugenics.
In a supplement to a review of Expelled, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County curator Kirk J. Fitzhugh cites Darwin's two paragraphs in their entirety, and says that in the context shown by the second paragraph "What we find is that Darwin's position is diametrically opposed to what Stein intimated."
Pre-release screenings
As part of the pre-release marketing for the film, a web-based RSVP system page was publicized, offering free private film screenings. Persons filling out an online entry form were sent a reservation confirmation via email which stated that no ticket was needed and that IDs would be checked against a list of names. The producers also held invitation-only screenings for religious organizations and government officials, including screenings for legislators to promote anti-evolution Academic Freedom bills.
Conservative Christian groups
In advance of release, the film was shown at private screenings to various Christian conservative leaders, including American evangelical Christian author and psychologist James Dobson. On March 11, 2008, a preview screening was held in Nashville, Tennessee, for attendees at the annual convention of the National Religious Broadcasters. The young Earth creationist organization Answers in Genesis reported that its leader, Ken Ham, met Ben Stein beforehand to discuss promoting the film. It requested supporters to ask local movie theater managers to show the film, and to encourage their church leadership to buy out a local theater to show the film to as many people from that church as possible.
Screenings in support of Academic Freedom bills
Further information: Academic Freedom billsExpelled was given pre-release screenings for Florida and Missouri legislators in support of Academic Freedom bills in those states. Such bills, often viewed as attacks on the teaching of evolution, have been introduced in state legislatures in the United States since 2004, based on the claims by the Discovery Institute that teachers, students, and college professors face intimidation and retaliation when discussing scientific criticisms of evolution, and therefore require protection. The Florida screening, held in the IMAX theater of the Challenger Learning Center of Tallahassee, Florida, on March 12, 2008, was restricted to legislators, their spouses, and their legislative aides, with the press and public excluded. Under the Florida Sunshine Law they had to watch the film without discussing the issue or arranging any future votes. Commenting on this, and the controversy over Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel viewing the film despite attempts by the promoters to withdraw the invitation they had given him, House Democratic leader Dan Gelber of Miami Beach, Florida, stated, "It's kind of an irony: The public is expelled from a movie called Expelled." The screening was attended by about 100 people, but few were legislators, and the majority of legislators stayed away.
Shortly before the film's general release, Walt Ruloff held a press conference at The Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., on April 15, and announced his plans to use the film as part of a campaign to pass Academic Freedom bills in a variety of American states. At least one Discovery Institute press conference on the bills has included a screening of Expelled. The issue was revived in 2009 when Florida Senator Stephen R. Wise cited the film as one reason that he is sponsoring plans to introduce a bill requiring biology teachers to present the idea of intelligent design.
PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins at Minnesota pre-release screening
Expelled interviewee PZ Myers was turned away from a pre-release screening of the film by a hired security guard as Myers, fellow interviewee Richard Dawkins, and members of Myers' family waited together in line to enter the theater. Myers said that he applied for tickets for himself and his guests on the website where the film's producers were offering free passes to the screening to the general public. Dawkins and Myers' family were allowed to attend, but Myers and Dawkins both concluded Dawkins would have been turned away as well if those promoting the film had recognized who he was.
This rejection of one of the evolution supporters prominently featured in the film created a furor as critics and supporters volleyed conflicting accounts of the incident. Myers wrote, "I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was Expelled!" Prior to this screening, Myers and Dawkins were both very public in their condemnations of the upcoming film, leading them to conclude this was the reason Myers was banned from the screening. Dawkins charged "P.Z. is in the film extensively. If anyone had a right to see the film, it was him."
Walt Ruloff countered that they were using the screenings to stimulate favorable publicity for the film, and Mark Mathis confirmed that he ordered Myers turned away. He wrote, "In light of Myers' untruthful blogging about Expelled I decided it was better to have him wait until April 18 and pay to see the film. Others, notable others, were permitted to see the film. At a private screening it's my call." But he went on to say, "Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expel no one."
Critics of the film publicly ridiculed Myers' ejection as a public relations blunder. Eugenie Scott, who also appeared in the film, was quoted to say she and fellow supporters of evolution were enjoying "a horselaugh" over the episode. Myers said, "I could not imagine a better result for this. They've shown themselves to be completely dishonest and that they're trying to hide the truth about their movie, which is to my advantage. And they've shown themselves to be such flaming idiots." Dawkins described the event as "a gift" and said "we could not ask for anything better".
Promotion
The promotion of Expelled was primarily managed by Motive Entertainment, an agency that promoted the 2004 blockbuster film The Passion of the Christ, with another three public relations firms also hired. The producers spent an estimated $8.5 million to market their film, with an additional $3.5 million spent on the production, resulting in a $12 million total budget. The promoters targeted primarily religious audiences, providing sweepstakes and rewards to churches selling the most tickets, and offered sums of up to $10,000 to schools that sent their students to watch the film. In advance of the film's release, producers Walt Ruloff, Mark Mathis, and Logan Craft provided interviews to various Christian media outlets promoting the film and emphasizing its potential to impact the evolution debate. Motive Entertainment also sent a representative to meet with religious leaders and stress the film's intelligent design creationist message, inspiring many to actively promote the film within their own religious communities. Some Christian media outlets promoted the film as well.
Organizations affiliated with the Discovery Institute helped publicize the film. It used its Evolution News & Views website and blog to publish over twenty articles tying its promotion of Expelled to its effort to pass the "Evolution Academic Freedom Act" (SB2692) in Florida.
Stein appeared in the cable television programs The O'Reilly Factor and the Glenn Beck Program to talk about the film. In his interview with political commentator Bill O'Reilly, O'Reilly characterized intelligent design as the idea that "a deity created life", and Stein responded that "There's no doubt about it. We have lots and lots of evidence of it in the movie." The Discovery Institute quickly issued a statement that when Bill O'Reilly conflated intelligent design with creationism he was mistakenly defining it as an attempt to find a divine designer, and lamented that "Ben referred to the 'gaps' in Darwin's theory, as if those are the only issues that intelligent design theory addresses."
Stein and the producers hosted a telephone press conference facilitated by Motive Entertainment's representative Paul Lauer. Participating journalists were required to submit their questions in advance for screening and just two questions posed by members of the press were answered. One of the journalists participating, Dan Whipple of the Colorado Confidential, contrasted the carefully staged and stringently controlled press conference with Ruloff's statement that "What we're really asking for is freedom of speech, and allowing science, and students, people in applied or theoretical research to have the freedom to go where they need to go and ask the questions". He called it "hypocritical in its supposed defense of 'freedom of expression.'"
Reception
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed was not screened in advance for film critics, and when the film was released, it received negative reviews.
The film's extensive use of Michael Moore-style devices was commented upon, but the film was mainly characterized as boring, exaggerated, and unconvincing. Others found it insulting and offensive to the religious. The Globe and Mail's film review called it "an appallingly unscrupulous example of hack propaganda". Vue Weekly called it an "anti-science propaganda masquerading as a Michael Moore-ish fool's journey, full of disingenuous ploys, cheap tricks, and outright mendacity". While noting that the film is technically well made (with good photography and editing), Roger Ebert lambasted the content of the film:
This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions (Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies, and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about religion.
Multiple reviews, including those of USA Today and Scientific American, described the film as propaganda. The Chicago Tribune's rating was "1 star (poor)", while The New York Times described it as "a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry" and "an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike".
The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) issued a statement to say it was "especially disappointed to learn that the producers of an intelligent design propaganda movie called Expelled are inappropriately pitting science against religion". It went on to say the organization "further decries the profound dishonesty and lack of civility demonstrated by this effort", and said the film "seeks to force religious viewpoints into science class--despite court decisions that have struck down efforts to bring creationism and intelligent design into schools". They also described the film as dishonest and divisive propaganda, aimed at introducing religious ideas into public school science classrooms. Paul Kurtz, founder and late chairman of the Center for Inquiry, called the film "anti-science propaganda" and an "exercise in anti-intellectualism at its worst".
Response to the film from conservative Christian groups was generally positive, praising the film for its humor and for focusing on what they perceive as a serious issue. Tom Bethell, a senior editor of The American Spectator, said that the "only complaint about Expelled, scheduled for April release, is that its ending came all too soon". Christianity Today gave Expelled of 3 out of 4 stars. Screen Rant gave Expelled 4.5 out of 5 stars, saying that "your opinion of the film will with almost complete certainty be predicted by your opinions on Darwinism vs Intelligent Design".
The film has been used in private screenings to legislators as part of the Discovery Institute intelligent design campaign for so-called Academic Freedom bills.
Stein received the Freedom of Expression Award for his work in Expelled from the Home Entertainment Awards at the Entertainment Merchants Association's Home Media Expo 2008 held at the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Box office and home video sales
As of September 2018, Expelled has grossed over $7.7 million and was the 33rd highest-grossing documentary film in the United States since 1982, and was the 9th highest-grossing political documentary film since 1982. Expelled opened in 1,052 movie theaters, earning $2,970,848 for its opening weekend with a $2,824 theater average. Prior to the film's opening, producer Walt Ruloff said the film could top the $23.9-million opening for Michael Moore's 2004 polemic against President George W. Bush, Fahrenheit 9/11, the best launch for a documentary to date. Expelled's returns were impressive for a film in the typically low grossing documentary genre, but it was far surpassed by both Moore's 2007 Sicko and Fahrenheit 9/11.
Expelled's home video releases distributed by Vivendi Entertainment grossed over $5,990,000 in total sales as of January 2016.
Bankruptcy and film rights
Premise Media Holdings, LP, the company that produced Expelled, filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on December 29, 2009. On May 31, 2011, the company filed a motion, declaring its desire to sell all properties and rights related to the film at auction pursuant to the bankruptcy proceeding. The rights to the film were sold at an online auction for $201,000 on June 28, 2011, to an unnamed bidder.
See also
- Rejection of evolution by religious groups
- Flock of Dodos
- Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial
- The Root of All Evil?
- The Voyage that Shook the World
References
Informational notes
Citations
- Siegel, Tatiana (February 15, 2008). "New mutation in Darwin debate". Variety. Sutton, London. ISSN 0042-2738. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)". Box Office Mojo. Seattle, WA. Retrieved April 21, 2008.
- ^ Catsoulis, Jeannette (April 18, 2008). "Resentment Over Darwin Evolves Into a Documentary". The New York Times (Movie review). New York. Retrieved December 3, 2008.
One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" is a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry. .... an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike.
- ^ Puig, Claudia (April 17, 2008). "Also opening: 'Bin Laden,' 'Intelligence,' 'Forbidden Kingdom'". USA Today. Tysons Corner, VA. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
Ben Stein is startlingly one-sided in his unnatural selection of experts. ... This is propaganda, a political rant disguised as a serious commentary on stifled freedom of inquiry.
A documentarian is not required to be objective, but Stein's point of view is blatant advertising. - ^ Shermer, Michael. "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed--Ben Stein Launches a Science-free Attack on Darwin", Scientific American, April 9, 2008. Retrieved May 26, 2018. "In a new documentary film, actor, game show host and financial columnist Ben Stein falls for the pseudoscience of intelligent design. .... Ben Stein's antievolution documentary film .... A final leitmotif running through Expelled is inscribed in chalk by Stein in repetitive lines on a classroom blackboard: 'Do not question Darwinism.' Anyone who thinks that scientists do not question Darwinism has never been to an evolutionary conference.".
- ^ Dean, Cornelia (September 27, 2007). "Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin". The New York Times. p. A1. Retrieved September 28, 2007.
evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins received an e-mail message from a producer at Rampant Films inviting him to be interviewed for a documentary called 'Crossroads.' .... But now, Dr. Dawkins and other scientists who agreed to be interviewed say they are surprised — and in some cases, angered — to find themselves not in 'Crossroads' but in a film with a new name and one that makes the case for intelligent design, an ideological cousin of creationism. The film, 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,' also has a different producer, Premise Media.
- ^ Burbridge-Bates, Lesley (August 14, 2007a). "What Happened to Freedom of Speech?" (PDF) (Press release). Los Angeles, CA: Motive Entertainment; Premise Media Corporation. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 25, 2009. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Whipple, Dan (December 16, 2007). "Science Sunday: Intelligent Design Goes to the Movies". Colorado Confidential (Blog). Archived from the original on March 27, 2008. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Chang, Justin (April 11, 2008). "Review: 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'". Variety. Sutton, London. ISSN 0042-2738. Retrieved June 10, 2008.
- Emerson, Jim (December 17, 2008). "Ben Stein: No argument allowed". RogerEbert.com (Blog). Chicago, IL. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
... it's easier to critique evolution ... than to mount evidence for intelligent design, and the filmmakers' failure to offer even a working definition of the term leaves them open to the common charge that it's all unprovable, faith-based pseudo-science. ... One spokesman comes close to articulating a thought about Intelligent Design: 'If you define evolution precisely, though, to mean the common descent of all life on earth from a single ancestor via undirected mutation and natural selection -- that's a textbook definition of neo-Darwinism -- biologists of the first rank have real questions... 'Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence.' I think there's another word for that: 'tautology.'
- ^ "Documentary Movies". Box Office Mojo. Seattle, WA. Retrieved January 29, 2018. Page ranks the highest grossing 'Documentary Movies' since 1982.
- ^ See:
- Olasky 2008
- "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Concerned Women for America. Washington, D.C. December 27, 2007. Archived from the original on January 5, 2008.
- Magnuson, Tom (December 6, 2007). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Four Stars". Access Research Network (Blog). Colorado Springs, CO. Archived from the original on December 8, 2007. Retrieved January 17, 2016. Page also "In the News - Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Four Stars". Archived from the original on June 5, 2011. Retrieved December 18, 2007.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link).
- Pallen, Mark (September 1, 2011). The Rough Guide to Evolution. Rough Guides Limited. p. 417. ISBN 978-1-4093-5855-8.
- Minow, Nell. "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Beliefnet (Movie review). Norfolk, VA: Beliefnet, Inc. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Weikart, Richard (April 16, 2008). "Darwin and the Nazis". The American Spectator. Arlington, VA: American Spectator Foundation. ISSN 0148-8414. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Frankowski, Nathan (Director) (2008). Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Motion picture). Event occurs at 01:06:40.
- ^ "Intelligent Design". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- See:
- Gefter 2008
- Kizmiller v. Dover opinion:
- Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005) ("The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory."). Disclaimer, p. 43
- Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 04 cv 2688 (December 20, 2005) ("ur conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."). Curriculum, Conclusion, p. 137
- Rennie, John (April 9, 2008). "Ben Stein's Expelled: No Integrity Displayed". Scientific American. Stuttgart: Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. ISSN 0036-8733. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- See:
- Cotterell 2008
- Lebo, Lauri (January 28, 2010). "Academic Freedom Bill Season". Religion Dispatches. Los Angeles, CA: USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Gefter 2008
- Olasky, Marvin (April 5, 2008). "Seriously funny: Ben Stein takes on the debate-phobic Darwinian establishment". WORLD. Vol. 23, no. 7. Asheville, NC: WORLD News Group. ISSN 0888-157X. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ "Science & Religion". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Rennie, John; Mirsky, Steve (April 16, 2008). "Six Things in Expelled That Ben Stein Doesn't Want You to Know..." Scientific American. Stuttgart: Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. ISSN 0036-8733. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Hawkins, Benjamin (Summer 2008). "'Expelled' Professor Finds a Home at Southwestern". Southwestern News. Vol. 66, no. 3. Fort Worth, TX: Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Communications Group. p. 47. ISSN 0038-4917. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ' Mirsky, Steve (April 9, 2008). "A Conversation with Expelleds Associate Producer Mark Mathis". Scientific American. Stuttgart: Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. ISSN 0036-8733. Retrieved January 5, 2016. Audio recording: part 1 and part 2 (MP3); partial transcript at the Wayback Machine (archived July 20, 2011).
- ^ Miller, Kenneth R. (May 8, 2008). "Trouble ahead for science". Boston.com (Op-ed). Boston, MA: The Boston Globe Newspaper Company LLC. Retrieved May 8, 2008.
- Hoover, Carl (April 19, 2008). "Review: Baylor officials among those attacked in 'Expelled'". Waco Tribune-Herald (Movie review). Atlanta, GA: Cox Newspapers. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Dawkins, Richard. "Lying for Jesus?". RichardDawkins.net. Washington, D.C.: Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. Archived from the original on April 6, 2008. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Frankowski, Nathan (Director) (2008). Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Motion picture). Event occurs at 01:08:11.
- Rennie 2008: "Stein and Expelled rarely refer to 'scientists' as I did—they call them Darwinists. Similarly, this review may have already used the word 'evolution' about as often as the whole of Expelled does; in the movie, it is always Darwinism. The term is a curious throwback, because in modern biology almost no one relies solely on Darwin's original ideas... Yet the choice of terminology isn't random: Ben Stein wants you to stop thinking of evolution as an actual science supported by verifiable facts and logical arguments and to start thinking of it as a dogmatic, atheistic ideology akin to Marxism."
- ^ Caplan, Arthur (April 21, 2008). "Intelligent design film far worse than stupid: Ben Stein's so-called documentary Expelled isn't just bad, it's immoral". NBC News (Opinion). Redmond, WA. Archived from the original on August 10, 2014. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Stein, Ben (April 2008). "Ben Stein: 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'". Behind the Scenes; First to Know (Interview). Interviewed by Paul Crouch, Jr. Costa Mesa, CA: Trinity Broadcasting Network. Retrieved January 19, 2016. Event occurs at 26:53.
- "Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust" (Press release). New York: Anti-Defamation League. April 29, 2008. Archived from the original on March 3, 2016. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- McKnight, Peter (June 21, 2008). "No intelligence allowed in Stein's film". The Vancouver Sun. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: Canwest. Archived from the original on November 11, 2012. Retrieved July 17, 2008.
- Engber, Daniel (April 17, 2008). "Contrary Imaginations". Slate. The Paranoid Style in American Science. Washington, D.C. Archived from the original on April 22, 2008. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- ^ Powell, Michael (August 19, 2005). "Editor Explains Reasons for 'Intelligent Design' Article". The Washington Post. Washington, D.C. Retrieved September 25, 2012.
- ^ Sternberg, Richard. "Biography". RichardSternberg.org. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- ^ "Richard Sternberg". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on December 30, 2015. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- ^ "Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington". Archived from the original on September 26, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2014..
- Kremer, Randall (April 28, 2008). "For the Record". Newsweek (Letter to editor). New York: Newsweek LLC. Archived from the original on April 23, 2008. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- ^ Vedantam, Shankar (February 5, 2006). "Eden and Evolution". The Washington Post. p. W08. Retrieved February 16, 2008.
- ^ writer (2008). "Caroline Crocker". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on December 29, 2015.
- "History of the Center". Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. Seattle, WA. Retrieved January 23, 2016.
- "About AITSE: History". American Institute for Technology and Science Education. Newport Beach, CA. Archived from the original on April 25, 2011. Retrieved January 24, 2016.
- "About AITSE". American Institute for Technology and Science Education. Archived from the original on October 30, 2012. Retrieved January 25, 2016.
- Egnor, Michael (March 9, 2007). "Why would I want my doctor to have studied evolution?". Evolution News & Views. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- "Michael Egnor". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on March 10, 2015. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Pierce, Jerry (January 28, 2008). "Baptist professors featured in new film". Southern Baptist Texan. Grapevine, TX: Southern Baptists of Texas Convention. Archived from the original on February 8, 2008. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Pierce, Jerry (January 28, 2008). "Q&A: 'Expelled's' Robert Marks". Southern Baptist Texan. Grapevine, TX: Southern Baptists of Texas Convention. Archived from the original on August 27, 2009. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Farrell, Elizabeth F. (September 4, 2007). "Baylor U. Removes a Web Page Associated With Intelligent Design From Its Site". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. ISSN 0009-5982. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
- Monastersky, Richard (May 21, 2007). "Advocate of Intelligent Design Who Was Denied Tenure Has Strong Publications Record". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. ISSN 0009-5982. Retrieved January 8, 2016.
Under normal circumstances, Mr. Gonzalez's publication record would be stellar and would warrant his earning tenure at most universities, according to Mr. Hirsch. But Mr. Gonzalez completed the best scholarship, as judged by his peers, while doing postdoctoral work at the University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Washington, where he received his Ph.D. His record has trailed off since then. 'It looks like it slowed down considerably,' said Mr. Hirsch, stressing that he has not studied Mr. Gonzalez's work in detail and is not an expert on his tenure case. 'It's not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State.' That pattern may have hurt his case. 'Tenure review only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State,' said John McCarroll, a spokesman for the university.
- "Guillermo Gonzalez: Refereed Publications in Print". Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 21, 2016.
- Evil Monkey (December 6, 2007). "A Handy Graphic/Timeline of Gonzalez's Publication Drop". Neurotopia (Blog). New York: ScienceBlogs. Archived from the original on July 20, 2008.
- Rossi, Lisa (June 1, 2007). "Little grant money a factor in tenure denial". The Des Moines Register. Tysons Corner, VA Company. Article available from the Iowa State University News Service here (DOC).
- Hacker, Annette (June 1, 2007). "Statement from Iowa State University President Gregory Geoffroy". News Service: Iowa State University (Press release). Ames, IA: Iowa State University. Retrieved January 10, 2016.
- Timonen, Josh (March 25, 2008). "Expelled Overview". RichardDawkins.net. Washington, D.C.: Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. Archived from the original on June 2, 2008. Retrieved January 25, 2016.
- Shermer, Michael (April 17, 2008). "Ben Stein's Blunder". eSkeptic. Altadena, CA: The Skeptics Society. ISSN 1556-5696. Retrieved April 17, 2008.
- McCarthy, Robynn; Colanduno, Derek (April 1, 2008). "No Intelligence Allowed!". Skepticality (Podcast). The Skeptics Society. Retrieved November 27, 2011. McCarthy interviews Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer.
- ^ Gefter, Amanda (April 12, 2008). "Review of Expelled: Don't forget to take your brains when you go!". New Scientist. 198 (2651). Sutton, London: 46. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(08)60919-7. ISSN 0262-4079. Archived from the original on May 5, 2008. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Dawkins, Richard (April 18, 2008). "Gods and earthlings". Los Angeles Times. Chicago, IL. Archived from the original on April 21, 2008. Retrieved April 17, 2008.
- MacAskill, Ewen (September 28, 2007). "Dawkins rails at 'creationist front' for duping him into film role". Guardian Unlimited. London. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- ^ Myers, PZ (August 22, 2007). "I'm gonna be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆". Pharyngula (Blog). New York: ScienceBlogs. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Myers, PZ (August 28, 2007). "Expelled producer seems to be embarrassed about his sneaky tactics". Pharyngula (Blog). New York: ScienceBlogs. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Monastersky, Richard (September 27, 2007). "Scientists Say Intelligent-Design Movie's Producers Deceived Them Into Participating". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. ISSN 0009-5982. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- "Questionable Interview Tactics". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- ^ Basham, Megan (April 19, 2008). "Mocked and belittled". WORLD. Vol. 23, no. 8. Asheville, NC: WORLD News Group. ISSN 0888-157X. Archived from the original on September 7, 2012. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Burbridge-Bates, Lesley (October 4, 2007b). "Atheist Scientists in Uproar over Movie: EXPELLED" (Press release). Los Angeles, CA: PR Newswire. Archived from the original on May 9, 2008. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Speckhardt, Roy (October 4, 2007). "Humanists vs. Evangelicals". The New York Times (Letter to editor). New York. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Frankowski, Nathan (Director) (2008). Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Motion picture). Event occurs at 01:18:03.
- Darwin 1871, pp. 168–169
- Mirsky, Steve. "Never You Mine: Ben Stein's Selective Quoting of Darwin". 60-Second Science (Podcast). Scientific American. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Moore, John (June 23, 2008c). "Science is not philosophy". National Post. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: Canwest. p. 2..
- "Hitler & Eugenics". Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks. Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Fitzhugh, Kirk J. "Expelled versus Charles Darwin – Ben Stein's quote mining" (PDF). Polychaetous Annelids. Los Angeles, CA: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. p. 3. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 21, 2015. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
For both of Darwin's paragraphs in full, see Darwin 1871, pp. 167–169. - Miglioratti, Phil (March 11, 2008). "Private Screening". CH!CAGO ~ One Great City (Blog). Retrieved March 23, 2008.
- Elsberry, Wesley R. (March 20, 2008). "Expelled from 'Expelled'". The Austringer (Blog). Retrieved March 23, 2008.
- PvM (March 21, 2008). "Expelled gone missing from Santa Clara". The Panda's Thumb (Blog). Houston, TX: The TalkOrigins Foundation, Inc. Retrieved March 23, 2008.
- ^ Simon, Stephanie (May 2, 2008). "Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools". The Wall Street Journal. New York. p. A10. Archived from the original on May 5, 2008. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Metcalfe, John (March 10, 2008). "Disinvited to a Screening, a Critic Ends Up in a Faith-Based Crossfire". The New York Times. New York. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- Looy, Mark (March 13, 2008). "A Meeting of Minds". Hebron, KY: Answers in Genesis. Retrieved January 11, 2016.
- "Academic Freedom Act". Academic Freedom Petition. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- "Legislature invited to movie about creationism debate". The News-Press. Tysons Corner, VA. March 11, 2008.
- Moore, Roger (February 1, 2008). "Is Ben Stein the new face of Creationism?". Orlando Sentinel (Movie review). Chicago, IL. Archived from the original on February 3, 2008. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- Caputo, Marc (March 10, 2008). "Ben Stein weighs in on evolution fight". Miami Herald. Sacramento, CA.
- Cotterell, Bill (March 13, 2008). "Lawmakers attend Tallahassee screening of movie by Ben Stein". Tallahassee Democrat. Archived from the original on March 25, 2008. Retrieved March 14, 2008.
- Colavecchio-Van Sickler, Shannon (March 13, 2008). "Legislation may keep evolution debate alive". St. Petersburg Times. St. Petersburg, FL. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- "Eyes wide open: Stealth politics is part of the plot". Tallahassee Democrat. March 13, 2008. Archived from the original on March 18, 2008. Retrieved March 14, 2008.
- Bailey, Ronald (April 16, 2008). "Flunk This Movie!". Reason. Los Angeles, CA: Reason Foundation. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- Kinane, Seán (February 23, 2009). "Scientists oppose intelligent design bill". WMNF. Tampa, FL: Nathan B. Stubblefield Foundation. Archived from the original on August 8, 2009. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- See:
- ^ Guess, Andy (March 24, 2008). "See Ben Stein's Movie". Inside Higher Ed. Washington, D.C.: Inside Higher Ed, Inc. Archived from the original on October 19, 2017. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- ^ Hewitt, Chris (March 21, 2008). "Biology prof expelled from screening of 'Expelled'". Pioneer Press. Denver, CO. Retrieved March 21, 2008.
- ^ Dean, Cornelia (March 21, 2008). "No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film". The New York Times. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- Robbins, Shawn (August 28, 2012). "Number Crunch: How Well Do Politics and Hollywood Really Mix?". BoxOffice. New York. Retrieved January 26, 2016.
- ^ Vanek-Smith, Stacey (April 4, 2008). "Is film's marketing intelligently designed?". Marketplace (Podcast). American Public Media. Event occurs at 22:36. Retrieved January 12, 2016.
- See:
- Intelligent Design The Future (August 27, 2007). "Expelling Dogma: Executive Producer Walt Ruloff and Expelled (Part I)". PodOmatic (Podcast). The Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- Intelligent Design The Future (August 27, 2007). "Nothing Up His Sleeve: Executive Producer Walt Ruloff and Expelled (Part II)". PodOmatic (Podcast). The Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- Greene, Bill (January 11, 2008). "Interview with Mark Mathis, producer of 'Expelled' with Ben Stein". Podcast: Bill Greene Show (Podcast). Archived from the original on January 18, 2008. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- Intelligent Design The Future (February 4, 2008). "Behind the Scenes with Expelled Associate Producer". PodOmatic (Podcast). The Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- Pierce, Jerry (January 28, 2008). "Q&A: 'Expelled' producer Logan Craft". Southern Baptist Texan. Grapevine, TX: Southern Baptists of Texas Convention. Archived from the original on February 8, 2008. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- See:
- "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" (Press release). Los Angeles, CA: ChristianCinema.com. September 23, 2007. Retrieved September 29, 2007. Press release based on Burbridge-Bates 2007a press release.
- Phan, Katherine T. (September 28, 2007). "Ben Stein Confronts Dominance of Darwinian Thought in New Film: Intelligent Design vs. Darwinism". The Christian Post. Washington, D.C. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- Ireland, Michael (September 23, 2007). "Ben Stein exposes the frightening agenda of the Darwinian Machine in new movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Christian Today. Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today International. Retrieved January 14, 2016 – via Assist News Service. Story based on uncredited Burbridge-Bates 2007a press release.
- Bridges, Jared (November 28, 2007). "'Expelled' Live Lecture Webcast at 11:00AM EST". Family Research Council (Blog). Washington, D.C. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- "New documentary to expose academic punishment for those against Big Bang Theory". Denver, CO. Catholic News Agency. August 29, 2007. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". drdino.com. Pensacola, FL: Creation Science Evangelism. 2007. Archived from the original on April 17, 2008. Retrieved January 14, 2016.
- See:
- "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Access Research Network. Colorado Springs, CO. September 24, 2007. Archived from the original on November 28, 2007. Retrieved January 15, 2016. PR Newswire's August 22, 2007, re-release of Burbridge-Bates 2007a press release.
- "What Happened to Freedom of Speech? Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Center for Science and Culture. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. August 22, 2007. Retrieved January 15, 2016. Reprint of Burbridge-Bates 2007a press release.
- Intelligent Design The Future (August 22, 2007). "New Video Podcast: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed the new film on the ID controversy". PodOmatic (Podcast). Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- West, John G. (March 12, 2008). "Prepared Remarks for Florida Academic Freedom Bill Press Conference". Evolution News & Views. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- "Senate 2692: Relating to The Teaching of Chemical and Biological Evolution [SPCC]". Florida Senate Website Archive. 2008. Archived from the original on October 5, 2015. Retrieved January 19, 2016.
- Myers, PZ (October 24, 2007). "Official denial, unofficial endorsement". Pharyngula (Blog). New York: ScienceBlogs. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- Crowther, Robert (October 24, 2007). "Intelligent Design is Not Creationism (No Matter What Bill O'Reilly Thinks)". Evolution News & Views. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- Whipple, Dan (February 15, 2008). "The Search for Truth, God and Braver Scientists in 'Expelled'". Colorado Confidential (Blog). Archived from the original on February 18, 2008. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- Means, Sean P. (April 13, 2008). "Movies: Hiding 'Expelled' from critics a not-so-intelligent move". The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved January 15, 2016.
- See:
- See:
- Moore 2008c
- Friedman, Roger (April 9, 2008). "Ben Stein: Win His Career". Fox News (Movie review). Los Angeles, CA: Fox Entertainment Group. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Moore 2008
- See:
- Catsoulis 2008
- Savlov, Mark (April 25, 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". The Austin Chronicle (Movie review). Austin, TX . Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Lacey, Liam (June 27, 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". The Globe and Mail (Movie review). Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- O'Keefe, Mary Christa (June 26, 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed: There's lies, damn lies and then there's Expelled". Vue Weekly (Movie review). No. 662. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Ebert, Roger (December 3, 2008). "Win Ben Stein's mind". RogerEbert.com LLC (Blog). Chicago, IL. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Shermer, Michael (April 9, 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed--Ben Stein Launches a Science-free Attack on Darwin". Scientific American. Stuttgart: Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. ISSN 0036-8733. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Moore, Roger (April 20, 2008a). "'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed' (Ben Stein monkeys with evolution)". Chicago Tribune (Movie review). Archived from the original on April 20, 2008. Retrieved January 18, 2016. Adapted from the Orlando Sentinel review.
- Moore, Roger (April 18, 2008b). "'Expelled': Ben Stein's doc devolves into a ludicrous rant". Orlando Sentinel (Movie review). Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- ^ Lempinen, Edward W. (April 18, 2008). "New AAAS Statement Decries 'Profound Dishonesty' of Intelligent Design Movie" (Press release). Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Archived from the original on April 25, 2008. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- "AAAS: Statement Regarding the Importance of the Integrity of Science as Depicted in Film" (Press release). Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science. April 18, 2008. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Expelling All Reason: CFI’s Paul Kurtz Joins the Chorus of Critics Dismissing Ben Steins Expelled as Anti-Science Propaganda
- Bethell, Tom (April 18, 2008). "No Intelligence Allowed!". The American Spectator. Arlington, VA: American Spectator Foundation. ISSN 0148-8414. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Moring, Mark (April 18, 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Christianity Today (Movie review). Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today International. ISSN 0009-5753. Retrieved January 5, 2016.
- Holtreman, Vic (April 19, 2008). "Review: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Screen Rant (Movie review). Saint-Laurent, Quebec, Canada: Valnet Inc. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Gruenwedel, Erik (June 24, 2008). "EMA Awards Honor Veterans and Newcomers". Home Media Magazine. Santa Ana, CA: Questex Media Group. Archived from the original on January 21, 2016. Retrieved January 17, 2016.
- Erhardt, Megan; Hutchins, Mary Beth (June 24, 2008). "Star of EXPELLED Ben Stein to receive 'Freedom of Expression Award'" (Press release). Las Vegas, NV: CR Newswire. Archived from the original on August 5, 2009. Retrieved January 18, 2016.
- "Documentary - Political". Box Office Mojo. Seattle, WA. Retrieved January 29, 2018. Page ranks the highest grossing 'Documentary - Political' films since 1982.
- Friedman, Josh (April 18, 2008). "'Expelled' may defy low expectations". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved January 18, 2016.
- Friedman, Josh (April 18, 2008). "'Expelled' could exceed box-office forecasts". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on May 16, 2008. Retrieved January 18, 2016.
- "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". The Numbers. Beverly Hills, CA: Nash Information Services. Retrieved January 26, 2016.
- "Expelled on the block?". Oakland, CA: National Center for Science Education. June 6, 2011. Retrieved January 18, 2016.
- The Curmudgeon (June 24, 2011). "View the Bankruptcy Court Bids for 'Expelled'". The Sensuous Curmudgeon (Blog). Retrieved January 27, 2016.
Bibliography
- Darwin, Charles (1871). The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray. OCLC 550912. The book is available from The Complete Work of Charles Darwin Online. Retrieved 2016-01-11.
Further reading
- Branch, Glenn (September–December 2008). "Divergence over 'Expelled'". Reports of the National Center for Science Education. 28 (5–6). Berkeley, CA: National Center for Science Education: 52–53. ISSN 2158-818X. Retrieved January 26, 2016.
- Brayton, Ed (September 28, 2007). "NY Times on Expelled Movie". Dispatches from the Creation Wars (Blog). New York: ScienceBlogs. Archived from the original on September 7, 2015. Retrieved January 25, 2016.
- Souder, Mark (December 11, 2006). Intolerance and the Politicization of Science at the Smithsonian (PDF) (Staff report). Committee on Government Reform. Retrieved January 25, 2016.
- Wilkes, Gregory Chad (October 2008). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed". Journal of Religion and Film (Movie review). 12 (2). Omaha, NE: University of Nebraska at Omaha. ISSN 1092-1311. Archived from the original on September 10, 2015. Retrieved January 26, 2016.
External links
- Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed at Box Office Mojo
- Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed at IMDb
- Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed at Metacritic
- Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed at Rotten Tomatoes
- 2008 films
- 2008 documentary films
- 2008 independent films
- American films with live action and animation
- American documentary films
- American independent films
- American propaganda films
- Films scored by Andy Hunter (DJ)
- Intelligent design controversies
- Films shot in Brussels
- Films shot in Ecuador
- Pseudoscience documentary films
- 2000s English-language films
- 2000s American films
- English-language documentary films
- English-language independent films
- Conspiracist media