Producers of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the film on Intelligent Design and Darwinism, have rejected claims made by some Darwinist scientists alleging they were tricked into being interviewed for the film.
The charges made by scientists who appeared in the film as proponents of Darwinian evolution entered the public spotlight when the New York Times published an article last month entitled “Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life’s Origin.”
In the Sept. 27 article, three scientists — Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion; Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education; and P.Z. Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota, Morris — told the Times that they felt deceived by producers of Expelled.
Premise Media Corporation, the makers of the film featuring television personality Ben Stein, responded Thursday to accusations, denying any wrongdoing.
"There is some serious mistreatment and downright reprehensible behavior going on here,” said Executive Producer Walt Ruloff, “but I can assure you it's not coming from us.
“We're just the ones exposing it.”
In Expelled, Stein – best known for his role in Visine eye drops commercials – highlights the long-standing controversial debate between supporters of Darwinism, which suggests the universe was created by chance, and Intelligent Design, which argues that the creation of life and the universe are results of an intelligent “designer.”
Through interviews with both Intelligent Design and Darwinian Evolution proponents, the movie is said to expose “the intimidation, persecution and career destruction that takes place when any scientist dares dissent from the view that all life on earth is the mere result of random mutation and natural selection,” according to producers.
“When our audience sees the stories of the real victims of scientific malpractice they're going to be outraged,” said Ruloff.
Dawkins, who has earned the label “Darwin’s Rottweiler” from the media, protested that makers of the movie did not inform him that they were representing “a creationist front,” in an e-mail written to the Times.
He also shared similar complaints with fellow atheist Meyers over the film’s title change from Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion to of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Both Dawkins and Meyers claim that changing the film’s title amounted to deception.
Mark Mathis, one of the film's producers, countered their allegations and said that they were a “bunch of hypocrites.”
According to the makers of the film, even Dawkins admitted that the title of his anti-religion documentary (Root of all Evil?) was chosen as a replacement for the original title late in the process. They maintain that movie's title was changed on the advice of marketing experts.
Furthermore, Expelled producers pointed out that Dawkins is involved in a documentary that attacks Intelligent Design theory. It is the makers of A War on Science who are deceptive, according to Expelled producers, since they approached Discovery Institute as objective filmmakers and then portrayed the organization as religiously-motivated and anti-scientific.
Mathis, who set up the interviews for Expelled, said the scientists who were interviewed were well-informed beforehand.
“I 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,” said Mathis. “The lady [and gentlemen] doth protest too much, methinks.”
Expelled producers have asserted that film will portray the scientists interviewed in a way that is consistent with their actual viewpoints or other public statements.
Despite the issues he has with the film, Meyers says he and other scientists who felt miscast will not seek a lawsuit.
“[N]ot even in my private conversations with Dawkins and Eugenie Scott about this movie has anyone even brought up the possibility of suing or somehow interfering with the release,” wrote Meyers on his blog.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is scheduled for release in February 2008.
On the Web: More information on Expelled and the online trailer at www.expelledthemovie.com.
Comments
I just saw the film yesterday afternoon and must say I thought Ben Stein and his crew did a pretty good job with the documentary. If in fact, the scientists interviewed, are claiming that they were misled, I believe it is only because they were exposed for what they truly are.
The following is an excerpt from my review of the film.
I just returned from watching Ben Stein's new controversial movie, Expelled. This movie was made to ensure that that American people had a better understanding of both secular view of the origins of life including Darwinism, Neo-Darwinism, intelligent Design and Creation. There are proponents on each side of the equation, who adamantly adhere to their own beliefs and understanding of how life started on earth.
Ben Stein took a somewhat lighthearted approach to engage academia from both sides of the fence, to get their opinions, ideas, beliefs and understandings on the table. Mr. Stein interviewed many doctors and professors of universities, biological scientists, and population geneticists from around the globe.
Read full article at: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/725485/ben_stein_expelled.html
Apparently this article is a bit of a straw man argument in that it talks about the complaints that some of the participants made and allegedly shows how those complaints are unfounded. However, there are criticisms of the Expelled movie that are far more damning and better articulated by the critics rather than someone paraphrasing the critics. I encourage everyone to read some of the detailed and documented errors, mistakes and possible outright lies espoused by the movie makers. See Expelled Exposed at http://www.expelledexposed.com/ for a better account of the problems with the movie. There are many.
There is definitely one wise and true premise in the trailer: Those who are insecure about their position are the most sensitive to questions and criticism. True science is willing to look at all points make judgements based on the facts. Evolutionists claim to be the "real scientists" yet they are by far the least inquisitive and closed minded individuals in the debate.
As a genuine scientist, engineer and born again Christian, I am amazed that people who say they believe in the Christian God can look at the world we live in with all its death, bloodshed, disease, suffering, carnage, disasters etc and say "Hey world - what a loving God we have! He made all this using macroevolution (a belief in molecules to man) with all of those terribly wasteful methods involving countless deaths to generate us, looked at it, said "It is very good!" and then decided to do something about it all by sending His Son, Jesus Christ into the world to destroy death - which of course He originally created in the first place if macroevolution is true". No wonder people don't want anything to do with Christianity - their God's a fascist dictator who delights in the suffering of His people! He's also a liar because He claims to be the author of life, yet created death. He's just the kind of God that Dawkins rages against (and who can blame him if God really is like that!). Of course, if everything was perfect in the beginning, with no death of living nephesh creatures, then the Christian indeed has something to look forward to when it's RESTORED to its former glory (Romans 8). But if macroevolution is true - then what is the creation going to be restored to - oh yes, more death & bloodshed (at which point people leave Christianity in droves because it's been "proven" false).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti science - I'm anti macroevolution. Microevolution (variation within the species) - is a scientific fact. But moths breed moths, pigs breed pigs etc... Non-life doesn't become life over a period of millions of years - that's a belief system that has hijacked the evidence for microevolution, portrayed it as what is termed "evolution" (really macroevolution) and claims to be science.
Any film that seeks to put forward an alternative to the Scientific (atheistic) Establishment will come under attack because it undermines their arguments for the non-existence of God. Of course, those who seek to stand against them will be under the same attack as those who claimed to be under attack from the Establishment of the Church - just that the shoe's on the other foot now.
Try seeing the world in a different light - ie maybe the Bible IS correct in the science it contains - and allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten you. Or, you could just join the same side as the atheist and help undermine your own foundational beliefs. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?
The matter isn't about Science & Religion, it's about the inerrant Word of God. Of course, if you want to believe the Bible's full of errors, then ask yourself, maybe what you believe is in error instead of the Bible.
Come, let us reason together! Instead, we choose to shout down the opposition without allowing them a fair say. Even handed - methinks not.
Peace!
IfGodIs4us: "It was my understanding that one of the basic laws of physics contends that NOTHING, left on its own, progresses from a less-complex to a more-complex state".
I guess your understanding of the concept of "understanding" is limited. Evolution happens - the evidence is everywhere. Why not read a science book and find out how it works instead of pretending it doesn't.
Ashley wrote, in part, "ID is a dishonest scam to try to force evolution out of the schools, when it is the only and best scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth. Thanks for reading ". It was my understanding that one of the basic laws of physics contends that NOTHING, left on its own, progresses from a less-complex to a more-complex state. If that is true, then evolution is the WORST and LEAST scientific explaination for diversity. Regardless... watch the film, and look at the Darwinists' expressions when they describe those with whom they disagree. That, in and of itself, should bring a pause when considering these folks' "dispassionate, objective" stand on their beliefs.
I saw the pre-release. IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE FILM, MAKE NO JUDGEMENT... especially if you say you are open-minded to truth ... regardless of which side of the debate you believe is correct. SEE THE FILM. Period.
Mathis is simply lying. The Expelled title and theme were chosen prior to the interviews. Crossroads was not only a sham production, but it was was fronted by a sham production company they invented, Rampant Films, which had a professional looking website and several inconspicuous other projects: all have which have vanished and turned into links to the Expelled site. The address of the company also turned out to be a fake.
These guys don't understand the difference between being objective and the truth being something they don't want to hear, and simply starting out with an agenda to tell everyone what the truth is, regardless of whether it's true or not.
Contrary to the author's opinion that evolution 'suggests that the universe was created by chance', evolution has nothing to say about the origins of the universe. It simply explains how life developed. Not how life started. Not how the universe came to be.
also, i'll add this: that the majority of scientists in the U.S. and U.K. are Christian. Also, the majority of the scientists in both places are evolutionists. This is NOT an atheist philosophy, and ID is NOT just saying their is an intelligent designer. It all comes back to ID movement being dishonest period. NO, the earth is NOT 6000 years old according to SCIENCE, no, we did NOT appear exactly as we are now according to science. Science doesn't comment on God either for or against him. All of these Christian scientists seem to be able to find their belief and science and evolution compatible. IT'S NOT A CONSPIRACY.
I can't believe Ben Stein actually was so dishonest while making this movie. He DID lie, and told a number of scientists that the movie was named Crossroads, and was a neutral look at religion and science. Instead, Ben stein changed the name, and made it into an anti darwin, pro ID campaign. I should stress to all Christians not to be fooled by it's name. A Christian almost has to believe that everything was intelligently designed, it's pretty much a requirement. However, the actual movement of ID is in fact young earth creationism, stating that the earth is 6000 years old, man walked with dinos, and there is no such thing as evolution. They first started out as 'creationism', and when they realized that the 6000 year old earth and insulting Darwinism wasn't working, they changed the name, and edited some of their real beliefs to attempt to get into schools. If you are a Christian who accepts evolution, but believe God is directing it, you should call yourself Theistic evolutionists. ID is a dishonest scam to try to force evolution out of the schools, when it is the only and best scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth. Thanks for reading
I think this fiasco is just indicative of the dishonesty present in all creationist/ID arguments. There could NEVER be a world wide conspiracy among scientists. The reason is that the best way to get famous as a scientist prove somebody els's idea wrong. Anyone who could disprove evolution would become as famous and celebrated as Einstein! Scientists love proving each other wrong.
Look at the big picture. Is the premise of this movie really plausible? Are the prorducers really being honest? The movie says that the great scientist and Christian Francis Miller only pretends to believe in evolution because he is afraid of what other scientists will do if he admits his disbelief. Mr. Collins HIMSELF has responded that it is totally untrue and a ridiculous thing to say. Did they interview him for this movie? Of course not. Dishonest, one-sided, and sensationalist.
This is awesome publicity for the film!! THANK YOU, DARWIN!!! My honest prayer is that this film will open up the hearts and minds of those who watch it!
Secondly, whether or not the filmmakers were being purposely dishonest when conducting interviews makes little difference insofar as the ENTIRE plot of the film, expressly, "to expose the intimidation, persecution and career destruction that takes place when any scientist dares dissent from the view that all life on earth is the mere result of random mutation and natural selection" is nothing but a pack of lies.
Firstly, the phrase "Darwinist scientist" is a silly tautology...