Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

What a load of trash. The movie's main focus is trying to relate Darwin to Hitler - it Godwins itself right from the get go. To believe in the veracity of any of its scientific claims requires a near-total ignorance of modern microbiology, astronomy, and physics. Even the average person with an undergraduate degree, even one not science-related should be able to refute the scientific claims in this movie. It is childlike in its attempt to reconstruct biological principles, although it does precious little examination of actual science. Instead, most of the film dedicates itself to taking science out of context, making false allegations about teachers being fired for their belief, and generally propagandizing creationism and lying about its critics and their beliefs.

It's rare for the world's top film critics (The New York Times, Roger Ebert, the New York Daily News, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Newsday, Chicago Reader, Entertainment Weekly, New York Post, Village Voice, Time Magazine, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, USA Today, Newark Star-Ledger, the list goes on and on) to universally despise a film, but this one did it with its outlandish manipulations of fact, contempt for reason and truth, and willingness to, in a documentary, tell bald-faced lies about science, scientists, and the central claims of the film, bias in science education.

This movie has no redeeming qualities at all. If it were a person you would lock it away in prison. If it were a textbook you would keep it out of the classroom. It has nothing of value to offer, period.

Our family, including our 5 children ages 7 to 14, was enthralled with this movie. Ben Stein does a terrific job interviewing folks. The movie contains lots of clips from other sources which are witty and entertaining. Although our younger children didn't really understand the message, they were entertained. Our older children understood at different levels - even I will need to watch it several times to fully comprehend everything presented. The end is shocking, and absolutely amazing. Everyone should know what the evolution theory elite truly believe, as they admit on camera in this film.

Expelled is an entertaining movie, but careful research of the facts will leave you feeling very disappointed with the content. Expelled is similar to any Michael Moore documentary. Entertaining, but factually challenged and deeply flawed. This review is long, but it is necessary information for a productive "Expelled" watching experience.

The premise of the movie is that the "Darwinist" will not allow anyone to question evolution and will ruin the careers of anyone brave enough to believe in God. The first half of the movie talks about supposed academic silencing and bullying of several scientists and reporters. They include Richard Sternberg, Guillermo Gonzalez, Caroline Crocker, Robert Marks, and Pamela Winnick. The second half of the movie implied that most scientists who believe in evolution are atheists, and that evolution and its' atheist spawn are responsible for Hitler, Communism, and eugenics.

Now for the facts:

Claim: Dr. Sternberg was fired at the Smithsonian and as editor of a scientific journal for publishing an Intelligent Design(ID) article.
Truth: Dr. Sternberg was not fired. He gave his resignation six months before he published the ID paper and that month was scheduled to be his last as editor. He dishonestly circumvented the peer-review process to publish the paper. Dr. Sternberg was an unpaid research assistant at the Smithsonian whose contract was renewed for three more years after the ID paper controversy.

Claim: Caroline Crocker was fired for merely mentioning ID at George Mason University.
Truth: Caroline Croker was also not fired. She was only contracted to teach one class for only that semester, and her contract was not renewed. She has been steadily employed since then, contrary to her testimony.

Claim: Dr. Gonzalez was denied tenure because he wrote an Intelligent Design book.
Truth: 25% of professors in that department do not receive tenure when going before the board. Three other professors who where evolutionists also did not receive tenure. Dr Gonzalez published few papers, brought in few research grants, and none of the graduate students he advised graduated. He also specifically requested that his ID book be considered as part of the tenure process.

Claim: Baylor Professor Robert Marks was forced to destroy his website that Baylor hosted because it mentioned ID.
Truth: Baylor (a Baptist University) temporarily shut Marks site down because it implied Baylor supported Intelligent Design (ID) and that Marks operated an ID laboratory (untrue). Baylor then said that they would still host it if Marks simply put a disclaimer on the website that Baylor did not endorse his views and he was not operating a laboratory. Robert Marks refused.

Claim: Newspaper reporter Pamela Winnick was fired and blacklisted because she wrote about Intelligent Design.
Truth: Winnick continued writing in that paper for over two years after the supposed "career ending article". She has since published a book and written articles for The Wall Street Journal and The Weekly Standard.

Communism, contrary to the movie, did not accept Darwinism. It viewed communism as a biological statement based on capitalism, which was to be rejected.

The movie misrepresented the Holocaust and Darwin connection. Hitler misunderstood artificial vs. natural selection. Anti-Semitism was the cause of the Holocaust, not a scientific theory. The Anti-Defamation League issued a strongly worded statement against Expelled. In part they said, "Using the Holocaust in order to tarnish those who promote the theory of evolution is outrageous and trivializes the complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European Jewry."

The movie quote mines Darwin to make it sound as if he supported forced eugenics. Darwin actually said that eugenics would be "a great evil." They place blame for the eugenics movement on "Darwinist", even though many evolutionists where outspoken critics of the movement (including Clarence Darrow).

Also keep in mind:

Ben Stein lied about the subject of the movie to all the evolutionists interviewed. He told them it was not an Intelligence Design movie.

The large cheering crowd at the end is all extras. The scene took place at Pepperdine, but only about three students showed up for his talk. So he had to pay actors to give him a raucous standing ovation.

Prominent Christians evolutionists like Ken Miller (practicing Catholic) and Frances Collins (born-again Evangelical), where not interviewed because "it might confuse the audience", according to the producers.

99.9% of scientists in the US believe in evolution, and 40% of those also believe in a personal God. Contrary to Expelled, science and evolution can go together.

The Discovery Institute said that ID is not a religious belief. A Bush appointed judge in the Dover trial said it is. The Discovery Institutes' own leaked "Wedge Document" says that the groups goal is to promote Christian values and belief in God through Intelligent Design.

Evolution is science, while Intelligent Design is philosophy. That is why even many Christian scientists are against taching Intelligent Design as science.

Just so you know, I'm not an athiest, but an evangelical Christian.

Sorry for the length of this review, but I think it is all necessary information. Keep it in mind as you watch an entertaining intelligent design propaganda movie!

It seems most of the positive reviews are long winded and don't tell you anything at all about this movie. To make it short - Expelled is absolutely terrible. Ben Stein is trying to explain something he clearly does not understand. The movie confuses facts, and misrepresents theories and facts. Terms are used wrong, and terms are even invented to just prove an incorrect point. Quotes and situations are taken completely out of context just to progress an invalid point.

I would sell my copy for 0.01, but I wouldn't want to burden anybody with having their mind filled with fabricated information.

I am really disappointed that some Christians see a need for a movie like this. The movie reflects an unfortunate attitude of suspicion that many Christians seem to have toward science. It is insulting to Christians who are involved in science. And there are many, aside from the meager selection shown in the movie. With only one exception I noticed, all the Darwinists they showed were atheists. The exception was John Polkinghorn, whose interviews were presented so that his evolutionary views were hidden. Very misleading as to his true position. I'm sure he would be insulted at the finished version of this movie. I notice they didn't interview Ken Miller or Francis Collins, or even Mike Behe of their own discovery institute who accepts common ancestry.

Throughout the movie acceptance of Darwinian evolution as a theory is confused with a philosophy of naturalism. A philosophy of naturalism is the belief that there is no reality other than the physical reality we can sense. Not even the possibility of a God. However a methodology of naturalism, the exclusion of super-natural explanations, is the tool of science, and simply how we all deal with the world. Even the most devoutly religious engage in the kind of intellectual maneuver that Ben Stein characterizes as organized atheism when used by science. Any of us who gets in their car to find it won't start will raise the hood to see what's wrong, or if you're not mechanically inclined call AAA. We Christians might even say a little prayer. But most people will not blame demons. Many Christians, myself included, will see a divine purpose in it, as in all things, but most will not call on supernatural intervention on God's part. We've all seen natural explanations turn up too many times before. Christians believe, and the Bible teaches, that God uses natural forces to accomplish his will.

Super-natural explanations cannot be considered by science. They cannot be tested by physical means and all must be given equal validity on that basis. Super-natural claims can be evaluated but not by scientists. Evaluation of Super-natural claims is in the realm of philosophy and religion. History has shown that natural explanations are often found for phenomena that had been regarded as super-natural.

The scientific establishment is portrayed in the movie as suppressing freedom of inquiry and taking sides on a debate over intelligent design within the scientific community. But there is no debate over intelligent design within the scientific community. It is universally regarded as un-scientific. The only way Intelligent Design could be scientific is if the designer were natural. Advocates of ID rightly point to the fields of archeology and extra-terrestrial research as examples of attempts by mainstream science to detect design. But the designer in each case is a part of nature. Even if scientific evidence points conclusively to design, proposing any super-natural designer is no more acceptable than simply saying "God did it". When scientists like Richard Dawkins say that the findings of science support atheism they are 1) not engaging in science and 2) wrong (my opinion and not based on science). ID proponents make the mistake of attacking Dawkins' science instead of his philosophy.

I believe unquestionably in intelligent design. But that belief is based on faith and has little to do with science. As such my belief in ID is unshakable. Belief in ID that is based, or even substantially supported, by science is dangerous for a number of reasons. First it reflects a weakness or insufficiency of faith. We shouldn't need a "sign" to believe in God. Also, it is subject to the ever-changing tide of opinion in science, a very weak foundation for belief. And any scientific proof that shows the existence of God must be believed by all who are able to follow the proof. Would God force us to believe by allowing us to find proof of his existence?

Finally, the movie gives a tragic example of why belief in ID should be based on faith and not vice versa. Near the end, Will Provine gives his testimony as to how he became an atheist. Ben Stein says that his story is typical of the atheistic supporters of Darwinism that he talked to, and we can probably believe Ben on this. Will relates how his belief in design was gradually eroded as he learned in college how the design he thought he saw in nature was explained by natural causes. This discovery destroyed his faith, because his faith was never based on anything solid. His faith was based on belief in ID. And when that crumbled so did his faith. How many kids getting ready for college have faith that is based on ID, or some doctrine, or some particular interpretation of the Bible?


I'm giving two stars because I see the quality in the production. And it is very convincing and effective. I have friends who liked this movie a lot.

(Edited to replace Francis Crick with Francis Collins)