Expelled: Reviewing The Reviewrs

Since the reviewers were so kind to dedicate their time and minds to reviewing the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, I thought I should return the favor by reviewing their reviews.

Since the reviewers were so kind to dedicate their time and minds to reviewing the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, I thought I should return the favor by reviewing their reviews. The following is my brief analysis of some of the reviews I found online. _______________________ TV GUIDE- Ken Fox http://www.tvguide.com/movies/expelled-intelligence-allo ... First a point about his opening comment. “It's hard to pinpoint the most insulting aspects of this obvious propaganda piece from Ben Stein,” This means that the film is so bad that just about every aspect of it is insulting, so much so that it is hard to say which part is the most insulting. However in his concluding paragraph we find these words: “But surely the film's greatest offense is…” So apparently it was not so hard to find the worst offence of the film after all. Could this be a hint that Ken Fox is so set on blasting the film that he really isn’t paying attention to what he is saying? Let’s examine his complaints. He says: “What's so insulting? Perhaps it's the way the film skews its perspective to the point where evolutionary theory is made to appear old-school, reactionary and intolerant of such innovative ideas as Creationism,” My question to Fox is, why would that be “Insulting” if it were true? The fact is that evolution is “old school” but not as old as Creationism which by the way was not the subject of the film but always seems to be injected by Darwinist to cloud the real issue. And evolutionists are reactionary and intolerant of any idea that threatens their pet theory, which was one of the points of the film. He continues" “Or maybe it's the way a flag-waving Stein casts responsible attempts to keep faith-based belief outside the realm of empirical science as a violation of free speech and a threat to our American way of life,” Here Fox reveals his bias and ignorance at the same time, for him to refer to the education and science institutions attempts to keep I.D. from being taught in the schools as “reasonable”, exposes his bias towards anti-Darwinian teaching and the freedom of speech in this case. For him to refer to I.D. as a “Faith Based Belief” without recognizing that the same is true of Darwinian evolution, thus placing it too, outside of “empirical science”, exposes his ignorance as to what “empirical science” is. Since there is far more evidence of “empirical science” supporting I.D. (and creationism), than there is for Darwinian evolution, it is amazing that such people as Fox who present themselves as being knowledgeable of the subjects that they are writing about, are not the least bit embarrassed about their role in propagating the myth of evolution as intelligent truth. He continues: “likening conditions in this "scientific gulag" to life in East Berlin (the film makes ample use of Cold War-era newsreel, kitschy social engineering films from the '50s and footage of Stalin).” Naturally such comparison would be insulting to anyone who refused to acknowledge the connection, not because it is not true, but rather because they do not like anyone connecting the dots to make the clear connection that shows a common mind set among such people. He Continues: “Or maybe it's the way in which the lack of evidence supporting "I.D." is glossed over in favor of a one-sided attack on Darwinism's "failings," like evolutionary theory's inability to provide a simplistic answer to the huge question of how life was first created.” His placing the “failings” in Quotes is an indication that he does not believe there are failings in Darwinism. Also, it should be pointed out that I. D. and Creationism do not insist on “Simplistic” answers to major questions like the origin of live. But they do insist on honest and intelligent answers, which evolutionists refuse to give. It would have been nice if Fox had given us an example of what he means by “lack of evidence supporting I.D.”. Aside from that, Darwinism has far more problems then the question of the origin of life. Namely, the complexity of even the lowest of life forms, which even Darwin himself acknowledged would discredit his theory, the lack of transitional forms, (living or dead), and the numerous lies and deceptions that have been and are being propagated in his name to defend evolution. He goes on to say: “Perhaps the real insult comes from the cloying sympathy heard in Stein's voice as he interviews those brave Darwin-doubters who sacrificed to what he characterizes as a vast, anti-I.D. conspiracy involving the Academy, the media and the courts, the undisguised sneer with which he dismisses speculative evolutionary theories as "science fiction," and the tone with which he poses loaded, ridiculous questions to the likes of Oxford biologist and pop-atheist Richard Dawkins.” So, sensible questions are considered “Loaded and ridiculous” when asked of evolutionist. And it seems that (in his view) it is insulting to have or show sympathy for victims of Darwinist tyranny. But since evolutionary theories ARE science fiction, I see no problem here. He goes on to say: “Any of these factors can be taken as an affront to viewers expecting a clear, reasoned argument from a documentary.” Now just how simple does he hope his readers are? I saw the movie and it was clear and reasoned to me. And I take it as an affront to suggest that he can determine for the viewers what is clear and reasoned. He then say: "But surely the film's greatest offense is the utter shamelessness with which it exploits the Holocaust, veering far off topic for a side trip to Nazi killing centers at Hadamar and Dachau in an attempt to tar Darwin with the old "Evolution led directly to eugenics and the Final Solution" brush." I find it offensive for someone to suggest that making the clear connection between Nazism and Darwinian evolution is exploitation, and to refer to it as “tarring Darwin” is almost laughable. The connection between Darwinism and Nazism is an established fact. To say that to address this subject is “veering way off topic” indicates just how poor his perception is and how far he must strain to condemn the film. So much for the Ken Fox review. Needless to say I could not contact him. ____________________________ Ben Stein, Propagandist, in Expelled by Vadim Rizov-Village Voice April 15th, 2008 12:00 AM Notice his early comment: “…..Expelled, a propaganda "documentary"….” By now you may have noticed that this is a repeated accusation. But “Propaganda” has to do with intentional misinformation, something that none of these negative reviewers have proven or even attempted to prove. He then says: “His thesis: Teaching Darwinian evolution but ignoring intelligent design in America's public schools and universities is the biggest threat to American freedom today—bigger, presumably, than Al Qaeda, Iraq, and the recession combined.” This was not the “thesis” of the movie and the writer knows it. He intentionally misrepresents the movies point; this is a tactic of propaganda that he accuses Stein of. Oooopss!, Were not supposed to notice that. I have to cut off here because space will not allow for my complete review of the reviewers here. ______________________ For the complete article on my review of the reviewers see the following web sites below. Http://www.tnyct.com Http://www.nychristiantimes.com