September 27, 2007

Scientists Say Intelligent-Design Movie's Producers Deceived Them Into Participating

Several prominent scientists, including Richard Dawkins, the University of Oxford biologist, say they were manipulated, under false pretenses, into appearing in a movie that supports intelligent design, according to today’s New York Times.

The scientists say they were told that the film, a documentary titled Crossroads, would examine the intersection of science and religion. But press notices about the movie, now titled Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, say that it shows how “university professors unmercifully crush any fellow scientists who dare question the prevailing system of belief,” namely Darwinian evolution. The movie also asserts that professors were fired because they challenged evolutionary theory. Included in the film is the case of Guillermo Gonzalez, an astronomer who was denied tenure this year at Iowa State University.

The Discovery Institute, a leading supporter of intelligent design, plugs the movie, which stars Ben Stein and is scheduled to open in February.

But PZ Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota at Morris, says on his blog, Pharyngula, that the movie’s producers were dishonest in representing its premise to him. In a post today, he says the original description of the project on the movie’s Web site “was a well-groomed merkin designed to cover the disease-raddled organs of whorish professional liars.” —Richard Monastersky

Comments

1. Ironic that the hypothesis of the movie is absolutely correct: scientists DO crush colleagues who go against the prevailing theories, especially if the contrarians are hawking religious superstitions as science. But even legitimate science is crushed by closed-minded academic cabals and vested interests.

   — marci    Sep 27, 11:56 AM    #

2. Why is it surprising that media distort and misrepresent to entice prominent scientists to participate? The NYTimes, Nature, BBC’s Horizon show, and the like have set the standard for others in the field. See the New Energy Times Special Report of 2007 on Bubble Nuclear Fusion. What is needed is strong and effective retribution for such actions, which, unfortunately is often impossible for individuals when facing the legal might of the offendors.

   — Rusi Taleyarkhan    Sep 27, 03:40 PM    #

3. Oh, the poor “intellectuals” were “misled.” Perhaps they should contact the National Geographic or other so-called “institutions” that do the same thing in their phony “documentaries.” Films that are funded to the max (ever wonder where they get all that $$$ to go around the world?) so that they can get their prejudicial “scientific theories” out to the masses. Theories which are usually based on nothing more than an “assumption” And we all know what happens when you “assume” something.

   — steve    Sep 27, 03:52 PM    #

4. I nominate PZ Myers for the quote of the year award. Memorable (if repugnant) imagery for a biologist!

   — siegfried    Sep 27, 03:54 PM    #

5. It’s really tragic how Intelligent Design gets shunted aside by those evil, narrow-minded biologists. Much like the poor astrologers are persecuted by astronomers, the alchemists by the chemists, and so forth. What’s interesting is that these buckeroos never say where they got their exemption from the ninth commandment. Apparently lying for the Lord is somehow okay.

   — Dan Kirklin    Sep 27, 03:55 PM    #

6. Why would anyone trust a documentary filmmaker to give an accurate portrayal of both sides of an issue? Michael Moore had made a fortune convincing peple to appear in his movies where he selectively edits and manipulates the footage to make them appear to be saying whatever he wants them to say. Considering how celebrated and popular Moore is among the so-called intelligentsia, why are we so stunned that other documentary filmmakers with whom we might not agree would do the same thing?

   — J. Ward    Sep 27, 03:57 PM    #

7. There is much to agree with in the two posts by marci and the other by Rusi. That is, I agree that scientists do crush colleagues who go against the prevailing theories and that major media around the world do the same thing and do it all the time. We also share similar moral intuitions that doing such things is bad. Not all ends justify all means.

   What we lack is a consensus about who can get away with it. What we tend to do is allow those who use this tactic (whose position we agree) get a free pass on the method and we vigorously attack those with whom we disagree when they do it. It seems to me that produces the sort of status quo we presently have on these methods. I don’t know if we’ve ever had a golden age where this hasn’t gone on. But if we want to change it, it likely means that one side is going to have to bite the bullet and scream at their own folk and the other side better respond in kind. Otherwise we will just get more of the same and therefore more of what we deserve because we remained silent.

   — Jim    Sep 27, 04:16 PM    #

8. Yes, it’s absolutely shameful the degree to which unpopular arguments are crushed these days. Why, anyone can look out the window and see the world is flat, yet try getting that point established in any geography classroom! Where is there room for both sides of the issue? You are absolutely right, National Geographic is hopelessly committed to the round Earth hypothesis, and has ruthlessly discarded every grant application I’ve sent them…

   — Cal    Sep 27, 05:08 PM    #

9. It is interesting that by reading the posts, even those who don’t state on which side of the fence they stand it is easy do see which side they are on. Using deceit and subterfuge is unacceptable no matter who uses it. We live in a world where nobody is willing to be upfront about their beliefs and to support those beliefs with empirical evidence.

   — Bob    Sep 27, 05:44 PM    #

10. “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”
    For a movie full of so many factual distortions, I’m at least impressed with the disarming honesty of the tag line…

    Firstly, Guillermo Gonzalez should quit whining – it’s incredibly hard to get tenure, but most people don’t act like a martyr when they fail.

    Intelligent Design should never be taught in the classroom until it has validated itself through the normal scientific channels. Oddly, I don’t remember the researchers behind the Big Bang Theory lobbying for it to be taught in schools before it became accepted, or any other reasonable scientific theory. Of course, that’s because ID is just a PR machine for trying to force Creationism into the classroom, not a real scientific endeavour.

    — Darren    Sep 28, 07:36 AM    #

11. As Dawkins has pointed out, it’s possible for one side of the debate to simply be wrong. People who believe in Creationism do not support their beliefs with empirical evidence because they cannot. People who “believe” in evolution—the unifying theory of all of biology—have plenty of empirical evidence, from many different areas, to support their ideas.

    Bob Park said it best: Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right.

    — landsnark    Sep 28, 08:00 AM    #

12. Evolution’s opponents keep proclaiming its demise, while those of us in academia cannot be unaware of how fruitful and vibrant a field of research this is.

    I was surprised recently to learn just how long the claims of evolution’s imminent demise have been made, though!

    http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2007/09/rumors-of-evolutions-death-have-been.html

    — James    Sep 28, 11:25 PM    #

13. I find it odd that people would say that creationism has no evidence to suport it when the theory of evolution has also been disproven. Yet it remains in our textbooks. Even example which have since been outed as hoaxes remain. This does not make sense. For more info about this stuff you should check out
    www.drdino.com
    Very interesting and he is willing to debate with anyone!

    — Dusty    Oct 24, 05:52 PM    #

Previous: Graduate Management Admission Council Looks to Fuel Its Growth Overseas
Next: Drug Industry Said to Exert Vast Power Over Research by Ghost-Managing Articles