Time Magazine Reviews 'Expelled'

"Expelled" has a significant advertising budget, but no reviews listed at rottentomatoes.

The film was not submitted for review, as noted at Pharyngula and at Darwincentral.

The fishnet analogy is good one!

But in fairness, we need to consider the last paragraph of the review. We can take the high road, can't we? Let's not let fundamentalism define faith.

Stein was on the Today show Saturday a.m. First the announcer asked his opinion of the economy, since he's a well known economist.

Stein thinks scientist should keep an open mind on evolution, is not that sensible?

His opinion of the economy? It's fine. I'm sure you're relieved.

I'm please to see that the movie Expelled! is getting negative reviews in the mainstream press, but I fear that it may be irrelevent. The core demographic for this movie is conservative christians, who despise the the "liberal" media, so I don't know if they will have any effect on the number of people who see or are influenced the film. In fact, the negative reviews from mainstream critics could have a negative effect, i.e. conservative christians could think, "Ah, if the 'liberal' media doesn't like it, then it must be good!"

I'm not sure there's anything we can do about propaganda marketed to the faithful. Creos will lie to their flocks, and the flocks will lap it up, no surprises or recourse there. The problem with "Expelled" is that it's being deceptively marketed to the mainstream. I'm starting to see an ad for it running on the History channel, and that doesn't really look like what the movie's said to be really like. The only questions are, how many people will be duped into seeing it and disappointed, and how many will be duped into seeing it and sucked in?

In fairness to Stein, his opponents have hardly covered themselves in glory. Evolutionary biologists and social commentators have lately taken to answering the claims of intelligent-design boosters not with clear-eyed scientific empiricism but with sneering, finger-in-the-eye atheism. Biologist P.Z. Myers, for example, tells Stein that religion ought to be seen as little more than a soothing pastime, a bit like knitting. Books such as Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not Great and Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion often read like pure taunting, as when Hitchens pettily and pointedly types God as lowercase god. Tautology as typography is not the stuff of deep thought. Neither, alas, is Expelled.

rditmars: The fishnet analogy is good one! But in fairness, we need to consider the last paragraph of the review. We can take the high road, can't we? Let's not let fundamentalism define faith.

"In fairness to Stein, his opponents have hardly covered themselves in glory. Evolutionary biologists and social commentators have lately taken to answering the claims of intelligent-design boosters not with clear-eyed scientific empiricism but with sneering, finger-in-the-eye atheism. Biologist P.Z. Myers"

Myers' rudeness has almost single handedly saved the movie from being a complete waste of the reviewer's time. Just trying to look on the good side.

Myers’ rudeness has almost single handedly saved the movie from being a complete waste of the reviewer’s time. Just trying to look on the good side.

Expelled seems to have a huge advertising budget. I'm seeing ads for it all over the net, google, yahoo etc..People report a lot of ads on TV.

Advertising isn't cheap, there is some big money behind this film. I doubt it will make much money. Doesn't look like they care in the least either.

A convincing sign that this is just a propaganda film. Probably makes Coral Ridge's From Darwin to Hitler look tame. And will suffer the same fate, being shown late at night on Xian Trinity Broadcasting Network TV.

Not even going to see it for free. The message is:

science=evolution=atheism=mass murder. Can read that on the net every day whether one wants to or not.

If Premise is banking on a 'Passion' type success - i.e. box office success without no reviews - they missed the important element. BLOOD. 'Passion' had buckets, pools, lakes of it. It was a brutal, bloody, violent film from start to finish**

Whether you enjoy it or not, seeing a man brutalized and beaten to a bloody pulp has a certain fascination. And there is a large segment of the population very willing to spend money to witness it. While Ben Stein will beat your brain with a liquorish whip, he has no equivalent fascination. I can't help but look at a train wreck, I can easily not look at Stein.

Perhaps if Stein has shown Gonzalez being beaten to a bloody pulp by his tenure review committee there might have been a film to watch. It would have been just as factual too.

** Or so I'm told. I refuse to watch the entire film, although I have watched enough clips to get the gist.

"Stein nominally set out to make the case that academics who write about evolution are being muzzled or denied tenure if they so much as nod in the direction of intelligent design. It's impossible to know from the handful of examples he cites how widespread the problem is, but if there's anything to it at all, it's a matter well worth exposing."

One of the DI's strong selling (propaganda) points is the academic muzzling of "free speech." How widespread is the problem? That's what people can easily focus on and identify with. Gosh, who would object to free speech and teach the controversy, however contrived and set up by the DI folks. That's were the rub will come in, as in Florida and other states.
But it's clear even the Time reviewer has not made an effort to investigate the DI's false claims, and that will be true for the majority of people who see this debacle, and so they tacitly if not fully accept the DI's false claims.

. But it’s clear even the Time reviewer has not made an effort to investigate the DI’s false claims, and that will be true for the majority of people who see this debacle, and so they tacitly if not fully accept the DI’s false claims.

One obstacle to public understanding of evolution is the inherent broadness of the subject. The average laymen probably doesn't get how the major conclusions can be so firmly established when so many details are unknown.

What makes matters worse is when somebody offers speculative answers to difficult questions, like the origin of life. The proper answer should be "we don't know, but that doesn't affect other conclusions, like common ancestry"

"Somehow I can handle PZ much better than the dishonesty of fellow Christians."

Agreed! But I'm not concerned about myself. A public education campaign supported by the scientific community has become necessary, (the courts can not be counted on for long) and an "in your face", or, more precisely, "a finger in your eye", teaching style isn't going to produce success. Forget Myers. He's made himself an archetype. He's only useful now as an example to the rest of us of what not to do.

Books such as Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great and Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion often read like pure taunting, as when Hitchens pettily and pointedly types God as lowercase god.

Forget Myers. He’s made himself an archetype. He’s only useful now as an example to the rest of us of what not to do.

" I suspect the vast majority of books on evolution aren’t pushing atheism."

Irrelevant. Dawkins has made himself a prominent spokesman for the entire scientific communities' work. His framing (yes, framing) of science as being linked to atheism has greatly increased the problem of the majority of the population accepting "alternatives" as legitimate science. His framing is unnecessary, unhelpful to education, and not altogether truthful.

being linked to atheism has greatly increased the problem of the majority of the population

"Good cop, bad cop sort of thing."

Bad pedagogy. Reminds me of "teach the controversy". The students will "critically analyze it" and come to the correct answer. Biology just has to be taken back from the culture war.

Bad pedagogy. Reminds me of “teach the controversy”. The students will “critically analyze it” and come to the correct answer. Biology just has to be taken back from the culture war.

DavidK: "Stein nominally set out to make the case that academics who write about evolution are being muzzled or denied tenure if they so much as nod in the direction of intelligent design. It's impossible to know from the handful of examples he cites how widespread the problem is, but if there's anything to it at all, it's a matter well worth exposing." One of the DI's strong selling (propaganda) points is the academic muzzling of "free speech." How widespread is the problem? That's what people can easily focus on and identify with. Gosh, who would object to free speech and teach the controversy, however contrived and set up by the DI folks. That's were the rub will come in, as in Florida and other states. But it's clear even the Time reviewer has not made an effort to investigate the DI's false claims, and that will be true for the majority of people who see this debacle, and so they tacitly if not fully accept the DI's false claims.

Coulter, Stein, Dembski, etc. have all latched on to a sweet gravy train. As with all Republicanites, it's all about the money, all the time.

People recognise and are comfortable with familar narratives behind day to day life. So the story of the "little good guy vs the big evil guys who try to silence him" gives people a hook to base their understanding on.

The "rational good guys dealing firmly with a village idiot" - not a narrative embedded in peoples' psyches, and so not useful for refuting Expelled. On the other hand "Villagers beset by bandits call in the magnificent seven expert gunfighters" made the Dover trial understandable.

I guess we need a better narrative for refuting Expelled...

It’s impossible to know from the handful of examples he cites how widespread the problem is, but if there’s anything to it at all, it’s a matter well worth exposing

Anyone who relies on "Time" for information of any kind, on any subject, is a person whose knowledge on that subject is casually shallow and whose critical skills are non-existent. It isn't even interesting as dishonesty propaganda.

Tupelo: Anyone who relies on "Time" for information of any kind, on any subject, is a person whose knowledge on that subject is casually shallow and whose critical skills are non-existent. It isn't even interesting as dishonesty propaganda.

Quidam: If Premise is banking on a 'Passion' type success - i.e. box office success without no reviews - they missed the important element. BLOOD. 'Passion' had buckets, pools, lakes of it. It was a brutal, bloody, violent film from start to finish** Whether you enjoy it or not, seeing a man brutalized and beaten to a bloody pulp has a certain fascination. And there is a large segment of the population very willing to spend money to witness it. While Ben Stein will beat your brain with a liquorish whip, he has no equivalent fascination. I can't help but look at a train wreck, I can easily not look at Stein. Perhaps if Stein has shown Gonzalez being beaten to a bloody pulp by his tenure review committee there might have been a film to watch. It would have been just as factual too. ** Or so I'm told. I refuse to watch the entire film, although I have watched enough clips to get the gist.

A public education campaign supported by the scientific community has become necessary, (the courts can not be counted on for long) and an “in your face”, or, more precisely, “a finger in your eye”, teaching style isn’t going to produce success. Forget Myers. He’s made himself an archetype. He’s only useful now as an example to the rest of us of what not to do.

Dawkins has made himself a prominent spokesman for the entire scientific communities’ work. His framing (yes, framing) of science as being linked to atheism has greatly increased the problem of the majority of the population accepting “alternatives” as legitimate science. His framing is unnecessary, unhelpful to education, and not altogether truthful.

With most IDers it's not about money. In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin.

Of course if after Expelled the majority of the quislings posting as evos under TO, PT, and pee wee's site were accidently attacked by swarms of rabid tetse flys or trampled by hords of turd eating feral pigs, that would be a bonus and speed the desired process.

I plan to launch a campaign to get President Bush to award Ben Stein the Presidential Metal of Freedom before he leaves office. I urge all of the sane people to join this worthwhile effort to honor one of America's great heros, thinkers, patriots, and the friend of truth loving people everywhere.

I plan to launch a campaign to get President Bush to award Ben Stein the Presidential Metal of Freedom before he leaves office. I urge all of the sane people to join this worthwhile effort to honor one of America’s great heros, thinkers, patriots, and the friend of truth loving people everywhere.

— Keith Eaton

keith: Of course if after Expelled the majority of IDiot quislings posting as nice smelling farts were accidently attacked by swarms of rabid tetse flys or trampled by hords of turd eating feral pigs, that would be a bonus and speed the desired process.

Anyone who relies on “Time” for information of any kind, on any subject, is a person whose knowledge on that subject is casually shallow and whose critical skills are non-existent. It isn’t even interesting as dishonesty propaganda.

One obstacle to public understanding of evolution is the inherent broadness of the subject. The average laymen probably doesn’t get how the major conclusions can be so firmly established when so many details are unknown.

keith spewed: I plan to launch a campaign to get President Bush to award Ben Stein the Presidential Metal of Freedom before he leaves office. I urge all of the sane people to join this worthwhile effort to honor one of America's great heros, thinkers, patriots, and the friend of truth loving people everywhere.

keith: In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin.

keith: With most IDers it's not about money. In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin. This is an amazing example of delusional mentation. How this does not cause severe cognitive dissonance and resulting psychiatric illness is beyond me.

Steven Fonken:

keith: With most IDers it's not about money. In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin.

This is an amazing example of delusional mentation. How this does not cause severe cognitive dissonance and resulting psychiatric illness is beyond me.

keith: With most IDers it's not about money. -Riiiiiight In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin. -There is so much wrong with this sentence, that I just can't bother. Of course if after Expelled the majority of the quislings posting as evos under TO, PT, and pee wee's site were accidently attacked by swarms of rabid tetse flys or trampled by hords of turd eating feral pigs, that would be a bonus and speed the desired process. -Tetse flys don't get rabies I plan to launch a campaign to get President Bush to award Ben Stein the Presidential Metal of Freedom before he leaves office. I urge all of the sane people to join this worthwhile effort to honor one of America's great heros, thinkers, patriots, and the friend of truth loving people everywhere. -By all means, do what you can to keep the Decider busy.

Magda:

keith: In my case, I simply prefer to have science return to an open inquiry, freedom of speech, free marketplace of ideas construct integrated with ethics and philosophy so the how is balanced with the why, etc. as in the 2000 years preceeding Darwin.

Some people do also lack an education in history of science, not just in science itself...

-Tetse flys don't get rabies

for the purpose of corrupting our children and brainwashing them to walk on all fours and barking when they want their supper.

Proponents of Intelligent Design and Creationism do not dispute Micro-Evolution, only Macro-Evolution. I watched the film, and believe that it is very accurate. Atheists (Evolutionists) have a monopoly on the "facts" of science. The movie is not about agree with either, but allowing the freedom of debate. We are still in America .

Atheists (Evolutionists) have a monopoly on the “facts” of science.

but allowing the freedom of debate.