

Science Center sued for rejecting anti-evolution film - prat
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/12/science-center-sued-for-rejecting-antievolution-film.ars

======
prat
I finished watching Ben Stein's "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"
documentary. I thought the documentary was good, in that it talked about
otherwise reputable scientists/teachers being expelled from their institutions
because their name appeared in the context of ID where they did not vehemently
reject it. Even if they didn't support or believe in ID, if they wrote an
article merely wondering out loud about it, they were expelled. Interesting
part is that in most cases authorities denied that that was the reason for the
firing - eventhough their termination letter mentioned it.

~~~
mani824
These people deserve to be bashed. The next thing they'll say would contradict
another established scientific theory and then they would ask to include it in
curriculum.

~~~
prat
That statement could be made about anyone contradicting any well established
theory. I am not putting the ID guy on a pedestal with Galileo or some such
sacrificed truth seeker. All I am saying is that beleif in ID is not like
child molestation for which one should be expelled from job.

~~~
bbgm
Would you fire someone for teaching that the earth is at the center of the
universe? Because ID pretty much falls into the same category. What people
should be doing is being upfront about the reasons for firing rather than
trying to hide them.

Clarification: Firing is only relevant if they are actually teaching life
sciences. If they aren't then it is a personal belief and doesn't really
matter

~~~
prat
Your clarification was actually my next point. Many of them were in fields not
remotely connected with biology.

------
jrockway
I hate the name "American Freedom Alliance" for an organization whose goal is
to control people through religion. It should rename itself to the "American
Brainwashing Alliance". Not quite as catchy, I guess...

------
prat
I also think that the question is no longer about which theory is true.. Its
about which side do you belong to and how stupid can you be to even raise the
topic of ID.

~~~
prat
here is an example.. The movie got 3.7 on IMDB - the lowest I have seen yet. I
think the movie is not badly made - it been punished for being sympathetic
towards (not ID but) people who believe in ID
<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091617/>

~~~
tptacek
The movie is well put together but, according to convincing descriptions from
Roger Ebert (and many others), frequently dishonest.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
I hate to weigh in here, cause it looks like one of those no-win
conversations, but I don't understand.

Are you saying that Ebert called Ben Stein a liar? That's usually what the
word "dishonest" means. (as opposed to "mistaken")

EDIT: The reason I ask is that I've seen a lot of adjectives applied to
creationists (as opposed to true ID'ers) Words like "mistaken",
"superstitious", "simple-minded", "pig-headed", "anti-academic", etc

But never liar. It just wouldn't fit in with the rest of the words commonly
used.

~~~
tptacek
I don't even understand what you're asking, Daniel. You should read the
article. Like most of what he writes on his blog, it's excellent.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
I just tried. Looks like a bunch of straw-man nonsense to me.

I like Ebert and have watched him for a long time on S&E (and later E&R). But
I've always thought he was a bit too mushy-headed for me and for that reason
have never been a fan of his blog. He was always the one to get caught up in
the "feel" of a movie, even when the production values, acting, and directing
stunk. In fact, Ebert is the person that turned me off to movie reviews in
general. When I want reviews, I use an aggregation service like
RottenTomatoes.

Like I said, no-win discussion. I'm certainly not a creationist, but calling
them liars doesn't seem very productive. Make fun of them all you want, but
calling a very religious person a liar seems completely counter-productive.

~~~
tptacek
I am so confused. Where in that article does he call very religious people ---
no, wait, _anyone_ \--- a "liar"? Did you read it? Read it again. It's good.

