Banned-No Intelligence Allowed! -Trailer-

Ben Stein's New Movie exposing the suppression of new ideas into the science community concerning the origins and evolution of life.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• ben
• stein
• creation
• intelligent
• design
• banned

[jurnagin]

Learn from the past

I think it was Nostradamus who got in trouble with his ideas, so he wrote his quatrains or whatever you call them in a way that woulnt get him in trouble.

Thats what scientist's need to do today, make a movie or something showing God made the universe that we see today from a scientific standpoint. And then people will study Charles Darwin more closely and find many flaws that scientist already know, and cover up.

[SerpentSlayer1]

I agree

[SerpentSlayer1]

Hi Sweaty & Atriv I dont agree with your comments on ID regardless tho what the Movie is about is the facts of how scientests who profess any leaning towards ID and maby questioning Darwinian Natural Selection are immediaetly

branded,marginalized,judged and even ousted and fired. Ironic. The very thing that some atheistic proponantes of natural evolution cried about years ago,THEY are now doing to others who offer something that might contridict the status quo. CENCORSHIP & PERSECUTION.

[SerpentSlayer1]

If the Dover trial killed ID then The Monkey Trials killed evolution. Both ideas preval and only closed minds as seeminly yourself, choose to put on blinders to see only what you want to see.

Stein's video is about FREE SPEACH and free thinking ,which is what science is SUPPOSE to be about. Yet some of these instititions and peoples practice CENSORSHIP and supression of these ideas that built the era we live in today. THATS Stein's point. Guess you need to watch it again bubba.

[clttretr]

Another mistake Stein makes, is assuming that the Scientific Method is compatible with free speech. Unless you have evidence to back up your claims, then the scientific community will tear you to shreds. You can't just say whatever you want and expect to have it taught in schools as an "alternate theory." you need evidence, arguments, experiments, and research before you will be recognized, and "intelligent design" has none of these.

[Atriviality]

"Intelligent Design died in the Dover trial."

- It didn't die. It EVOLVED into "teach the controversy".

"Stein will live the rest of his life in disgrace and embarrassment for the tactics and lies used in this movie."

- The lies told OUTSIDE the movie are whoppers too. Check out what happened at the special advanced screenings.

"Expelled is a joke, and it has failed to inspire anyone."

-Well I think it's inspired the scientists not to trust creationists because they're deceitful liars.

[Darkfoster22]

Very good point and I agree.But I think poeple that don't unstand the bible for what it means.Help started this by running off at the mouth win they was wrong.

[bhaywa1]

here's the problem. how do have someone "peer review" your work when they refuse to do so? the problem is that these people are instantly ostracized because the evidence leads them where the establishment does not want to go. very similar to the way the established "church" subjected people like Galileo and others to ridicule hundreds of years ago. people with valid evidence are forced to shut up or get kicked out. people are losing their jobs because of conviction based on the evidence.

[Atriviality]

Science IS about free speech. A scientist presents their ideas and evidence, which is then put through the hazing ritual of "peer review". Peer review is brutal and only the best formulated ideas with the strongest evidence survive it (the majority fail). Instead of reworking their idea and/or finding better evidence when they fail, ID proponents tote the same ideas with the same evidence and whine to the world claiming they've been victimized.

[sweatytoothmadman]

The proponents of I.D. tried to insert there ideas threw legal mean rather than getting published and arguing their ideas in the peer reviewed process.

[sweatytoothmadman]

"Yet some of these instititions and peoples practice CENSORSHIP"

It's not censorship that holds these people back it's the fact that they try to change the peer review process. Take Stenberg for example, the paper he worked for required multiple people to review a paper but he published without any others cross checking Myers work. He tried to bypass the process just as he was quiting the paper, which would undermined the papers integrity.