Truth and the Devil

The Intelligent Design creationists have tried all sorts of tactics to get their religious ideology taught in America’s science classrooms. They’ve written books, changed curricula, been involved in lawsuits, everything except actually doing science. Now, as a new extension of their PR assault on the media, they’re making a movie: Expelled — No Intelligence Allowed. It looks to be bullshit propaganda at its finest. Their website has a blog authored by the co-writer and MC of this film, Ben Stein. Let’s see what he has to say about the film.

I’m glad you found this site, because I want to share with you my thoughts from time to time here about a subject that is very near and dear to me: freedom. EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed is a controversial, soon-to-be-released documentary that chronicles my confrontation with the widespread suppression and entrenched discrimination that is spreading in our institutions, laboratories and most importantly, in our classrooms, and that is doing irreparable harm to some of the world’s top scientists, educators, and thinkers.
America is not America without freedom. In every turning point in our history, freedom has been the key goal we are seeking: the Mayflower coming here, the Revolution, the Civil War, World War II, the Cold War. Tens of millions came here from foreign oppression and made a life here. Why? For freedom. Human beings are supposed to live in a state of freedom. Freedom is not conferred by the state: as our founders said, and as Martin Luther King repeated, freedom is God-given. A huge part of this freedom is freedom of inquiry.

Freedom of inquiry is indeed important. It’s a virtue that I cherish above most others. However, freedom of inquiry has nothing to do with teaching Intelligent Design in classrooms. The point is to teach children the most accurate, supported hypothesis and theories we have so that they have the best understanding possible of the natural world. Intelligent Design is a hypothesis which is untestable and has no good evidence in its favor. Freedom of inquiry has to do with figuring out which theory is best and that’s already been done. Yelling about discrimination isn’t going to change the fact that Intelligent Design doesn’t actually do any science.

Freedom of inquiry is basic to human advancement. There would be no modern medicine, no antibiotics, no brain surgery, no Internet, no air conditioning, no modern travel, no highways, no knowledge of the human body without freedom of inquiry.
This includes the ability to inquire whether a higher power, a being greater than man, is involved with how the universe operates. This has always been basic to science. ALWAYS.

No real argument there, but you wouldn’t have modern medicine if you would do what Intelligent Design proponents do when they talk about biology. They assert that it’s too complex to figure out, and therefore God did it. What happens when that’s the driving philosophy behind knowledge? The Middle Ages. In a world driven by the idea that what happens to you is part of a divine plan or divine retribution, sickness was seen as God’s punishment. Why bother trying to treat something that God ordained? The advancements that have been made in modern science and medicine have been made in spite of belief in God, not because of it.

Some of the greatest scientists of all time, including Galileo, Newton, Einstein, operated under the hypothesis that their work was to understand the principles and phenomena as designed by a creator.
Operating under that hypothesis, they discovered the most important laws of motion, gravity, thermodynamics, relativity, and even economics.

Bringing up Einstein is a dishonest tactic. Einstein was essentially an atheist. His view of what God was had nothing to do with Christianity or traditional religion. He viewed the laws of the universe as God, which has produced no end of confusion since. Let’s hear what Einstein himself had to say on the subject.

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

Moving on…

Now, I am sorry to say, freedom of inquiry in science is being suppressed.
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.

Bullshit. A majority of the America’s scientists believe in a God of some sort. If Stein had actually talked to any he would know that. One of the most ardent defenders of science against Intelligent Design is Kenneth Miller, a practicing Roman Catholic. And, even though I think he’s a kook, what about Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project? He’s written a book about his religious beliefs. This is a blatant lie, and one that attempts to equate belief in God with belief in Intelligent Design creationism. Two very different things.

In today’s world, at least in America, an Einstein or a Newton or a Galileo would probably not be allowed to receive grants to study or to publish his research.
They cannot even mention the possibility that–as Newton or Galileo believed–these laws were created by God or a higher being. They could get fired, lose tenure, have their grants cut off. This can happen. It has happened.

The best example I can think of regarding this line of reasoning is Michael Behe. Intelligent Design’s top scientist and author of such books as Darwin’s Black Box and The Edge of Evolution. Behe is still a tenured professor at Lehigh University, despite advocating Intelligent Design for years.

Of course, this isn’t to say that they couldn’t or shouldn’t. If someone was going up for tenure and the majority of their research was faulty, or inaccurate, or didn’t exist (as with Intelligent Design), who thinks that they should be granted tenure?

This movie looks like it wants to equate belief in God with belief in Intelligent Design creationism. Intelligent Design make the specific claim that the diversity of life on this planet cannot be explained through natural processes and that a supernatural power (God) is needed to create it. Not only is this bad science (an argument from ignorance), it is also bad theology. What kind of God are we talking about who is incapable of creating natural laws to guide his creation and instead needs to intervene all the time to make things turn out right? Just like most fundamentalism, their God is a small god. Most importantly, they don’t really give a damn about freedom of inquiry, they care about getting their religion taught in classrooms and want to remove the entire basis of scientific knowledge (methodological materialism) from public life.

Of course, this movie will probably do quite well in Christian circles. It will probably have special screenings in churches just like the Passion of the Christ did. Of course, the irony will be lost of everyone attending. Most of all its going to provide a huge headache for scientists trying to get good science taught. I can only hope it won’t be as big as I fear it will be