Pharyngula

Stein had a ridiculous opinion piece recently published about how the bubble mortgage issue was containted to max $40B total in losses. Only off by an order of magnitude.

Posted by: Troy | August 22, 2007 12:57 PM

Anybody with a clue knows that propaganda like this is not how reputable scientists promote their ideas- just take a look at the Amazon reviews of Pivar's book for plenty of examples of how people do get that. (The funniest are the sarcastic "five star" ones.) Those who don't have a clue aren't reachable by definition, so let 'em waste their money watching Ben Stein be the idiot that he is. (My favorite Ben Stein moment is the time when he felt that his undergrad economics degree qualified him to tell Paul Krugman that the latter doesn't know anything about economics.)

Posted by: Steve LaBonne | August 22, 2007 1:02 PM

the intelligent design folks are crying their eyes out. maybe ben stein can teach them how to "take the red out"

Posted by: Rayzilla | August 22, 2007 1:05 PM

Heres what I wrote on the blog

So, lemme get this straight. You equate two of the greatest scientists ever and their need to get backing ( money ) so they had to pander to the church. Never mind that they were one step in the "god of the gaps" philosophy. If it can't be explained, "god did it". Thus a gap in knowledge is filled by god. And every scientist that has come along after them has improved upon their ideas and succeeded where they failed. Can you imagine Dr Saulk saying that god created polio and therefore, we don't need a vacination against it? If creationists want to be accepted as "real" sceintists, they should pony up real and I mean REAL scientific proof that there is a creator. So far they haven't and they can't. To quote Prof. Richard Dawkins "If you are in possession of this revolutionary secret of science, why not prove it and be hailed as the new Newton? Of course, we know the answer. You can't do it. You are a fake."

Posted by: Firemancarl | August 22, 2007 1:07 PM

Also, here's the press release.

Some highlights:

This isn't the latest Hollywood comedy; it's a disturbing new documentary that will shock anyone who thinks all scientists are free to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.

Ben Stein...is on a journey to answer one of the biggest questions ever asked: Were we designed or are we simply the end result of an ancient mud puddle struck by lightning?

Stein uncovers a long line of biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their reputations destroyed and their careers ruined by a scientific establishment that allows absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin's theory of random mutation and natural selection.

Funny. It seems to me that, say, Ernst Mayer and Dobzhansky led pretty fruitful careers, despite dissenting with certain tenets of Darwin's theory. Also, Darwin's theory of random mutation? Brotha didn't even know what DNA was yet.

Disgusting.

Posted by: Mike P | August 22, 2007 1:08 PM

And I thought their Dawkins quote on the intro flash was great. But of course, then they made the last sentence in scary red. "Help help! We're being repressed!" Cry me a river.

Posted by: Rey Fox | August 22, 2007 1:10 PM

You have to admit that you want to see this movie. I mean its going to be hindered by the fact that Stein is a decent actor, but still the whole premise is so ridiculous.

Posted by: Ian Monroe | August 22, 2007 1:12 PM

Well, damn. There goes my last bit of respect for Ben Stein. I know in recent years he's drifted more and more from "old-school fiscal conservative" toward "Bushie neocon," but he could usually be counted on to tow his own line more often than the party's. Now if only someone could win the Discovery Institute's money...

Incidentally, I would think that Jeffrey Jones is the bigger blemish on "Ferris Bueller's Day Off," what with his felony child porn conviction and status as a sex offender.

Posted by: Tom Foss | August 22, 2007 1:13 PM

More fun with corporate associations: Motive Entertainment, who is marketing the film, also promoted The Passion of the Christ and The Chronicles of Narnia. The stink does seem to clump together, doesn't it?

Posted by: Mike P | August 22, 2007 1:17 PM

I wrote a comment on Ben's blog about 20 minutes ago. It showed up immediately. I went back there after I saw that PZ had posted about this idiocy, and now my comment's gone. I suggest we bury the blog with comments and make the webmaster work if he wants to censor comments.

Actually, the censorship is funny given how much Ben rants in the trailer about scientists "censoring" any criticism of Darwinism.

Posted by: Orac | August 22, 2007 1:26 PM

There goes my last bit of respect for Ben Stein. I know in recent years he's drifted more and more from "old-school fiscal conservative" toward "Bushie neocon," but he could usually be counted on to tow his own line more often than the party's.

Inside every seemingly rational conservative lies a wackjob just waiting to pop out.

Posted by: rayzilla | August 22, 2007 1:30 PM

What Adam in #3 said...

Who are all of these biologists who have had their careers destroyed by being dissenters of evolution? Surely, this list is available. Seriously, who are these people and how have their careers been tanked? Surely Stein et al. want this list out there for the masses to see. Is there a list of the journal articles they have published where they advocate their heretical positions against the Great Darwin? And can we see the list of rebuttal articles where these heretical scientists have been taken to task for having the audacity to question the dogmatic religion that is Darwinism? Funny, nothing seems to reveal itself during a GEOREF search...but of course they're in on it. Is Stein instead going to put forth some other mechanism by which these inspired witnesses have been attacked by the orthodoxy (or are we to believe that Ben Stein has gotten access to all of those grant and manuscript reviews that clearly illustrate how those of us involved in the Great Conspiracy are 'keeping down' the righteous truth being put forth by these humble martyrs)?

Posted by: Josh | August 22, 2007 1:40 PM

Hmm, ID and Supply-side economics in one man.

One line review:
"Ben Stein shows his range in terms of crackpottery in this turd of a movie"

Oh, shit, now I will be sued.

Posted by: Tomas | August 22, 2007 1:46 PM

Quick, PZ! Call together the Secret Cabal of Atheist Scientists Who Crush Anything Which Deviates from Their Blind, Unreasoning Dogma! We can stop this 'movie' before it reveals its 'truth' to the world!

Yep, any remaining respect I had for Ben Stein just went away. There wasn't much left, so this film kind of vacuumed that remaining respect out of the hard-to-reach corners of my mind with a long-nosed attachment.

Posted by: gg | August 22, 2007 1:48 PM

It'd probably bomb, except that you'll get a whole bunch of the people who thought watching a Jew get killed by the Romans was excellent entertainment doing their duty by showing up and thinking that defaming science and scientists is the height of rebelliousness.

So it'll rake in plenty of money, most likely, and make the IDiots very pleased that an ignorant economist can be persuaded to shill IDiocy. Gee, they're really moving along with their research, as per the usual.

But I think it's curtains for Stein being seen as anything other than an old stupid (well, he's reasonably intelligent, but wasting his intellect in this and in other ways) conservative. I mean, really, he was okay, if far from being the literary genius and political theorist that he considered himself to be. ID and the rest of creationism are hardly going to be much affected by this, yet if Stein has jumped the shark as I think he has (not that he was ever exactly cool), it's going to be a good lesson for anyone else who thinks to shill snake oil, and it might further establish ID as anti-cool.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 22, 2007 1:49 PM

And we wonder how vicitimization has become so prevalent in America. We are, without a doubt, a largely Christian nation, and yet Christians are the ones persecuted against. Boo f'n woo, wallow and kneel in front of Caucasian Jesus.

Posted by: Tom @Thoughtsic.com | August 22, 2007 1:51 PM

#11: "I takes more than a cameo in Ferris Bueller's Day Off to make you cool."

How about doing a voice-over on Nickelodeon's 'The Fairly Odd Parents'? That radiates coolness! :)

Posted by: gg | August 22, 2007 1:52 PM

Re: my comment in "The aggravation of Trek"...

And so it goes in that cultural/art/science cesspool, Hollywoodland.

Try getting a science consultant hired onto THAT baby. And if they do hire one, try persuading them to listen to her. If they do, they wouldn't have any story left. If they don't, they can at least claim to have hired a representative of an opposing view for the sake of "fairness"...or at least its appearance.

That industry really IS all about cheating the audience.

Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | August 22, 2007 1:56 PM

Given that this film isn't listed on IMDB or even mentioned on Ben Stein's official website (despite having other 2007 works listed),

It's a 2008 movie, not a 2007 one.

I'm somewhat skeptical that this is in fact, legit.

Maybe it's well and good to be skeptical of it, but it has been claimed by IDiots like O'Leary for well over a week. I would suspect that they've been told, since undoubtedly it's going to be a bunch of ignorant church-goers (and I did not say that all church-goers are ignorant) who pay for the movie, and they want to get the word out to just those people.

So I've thought it sounded legit. Just my thoughts, whatever they mean to you.

Especially after someone pointed out that PZ is supposedly interviewed for such a sham. I'm not thinking for an instant he'd give permission for such an interview.

Um, I really don't know why he wouldn't.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 22, 2007 1:58 PM

"Inside every seemingly rational conservative lies a wackjob just waiting to pop out."

Yep - it's just like that scence in Alien. You'll be having a nice dinner, making pleasant conversation with someone, and then suddenly . . .

Posted by: Dan S. | August 22, 2007 1:59 PM

Now that's what you call a science fiction movie.

Posted by: Sonja | August 22, 2007 2:00 PM

Altabin

It seems to me that these neo-Aristotelians (excellent way of putting it, by the way, except that it demonizes poor Aristotle) actually think of themselves as struggling against oppressive elements of the Scientific Revolution. Just as the Enlightenment overcame the Dark Ages, so they too shall overcome the Enlightenment. It's baffling. And I haven't decided yet whether they're truly committed to their cause, or if they just like being ornery.

Posted by: Mike P | August 22, 2007 2:02 PM

I wonder if Stein's rebellious character will counsel a student not to get an abortion, as part of his mission of "stickin' it to the man."

Hell, he might even pull down the rotten edifice of poststructuralist thought, and lay waste to the Latina/o Studies department. It's totally those stuffed shirts' worst nightmare, dudes!

"Bad to the Bone"...sheesh. What fucking decade is it, again?

Posted by: Phila | August 22, 2007 2:03 PM

I would be lovely to do a satire of this, with the exact same premise but have astrology be what's "expelled". Bad ideas get "expelled" from schools. This is a good thing.

Posted by: pough | August 22, 2007 2:05 PM

As an aspiring educator, I am in despair. Just one more reason I am not cool - now I am a square Darwinist!

You know, I am planning to move to NYC to do a graduate degree in chemistry education. Things like this discourage me and make me want to stay in Canada, where this nonsense doesn't touch our classrooms, even in private catholic high schools. I graduated from a secondary school and a college where nuns were still living on the top floor. I'd come out of class and see one of the old sisters going to brush her teeth! And nobody ever dreamed of intelligent design in science class. For that matter, it wasn't even advocated in religion!

I have had a great deal of luck in my early schooling, and I feel a sense of duty to pay that forward. This is a battle - fellow slime-snake-monkey-mutants - that we must not lose!

Oh - and I have to say, I was not surprised that the intro to that stupid film's website featured a quotation from Richard Dawkins. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that his scathing wit (which I so enjoy reading in his books) will only galvanize the other team.

To speak the language of the enemy, "Thems fightin' words."

Posted by: kristen in montreal | August 22, 2007 2:12 PM

This is a cinema first. It's the first movie that's ever made me wish, with all of my heart, for nuclear war.

Big Science? If they wanted to take that angle, they wouldn't have hired Ben Stein. They would have hired a scrawny effusive trendoid with thick-rimmed glasses to put on some kind of skit in front of a university, and then post the video on whudafxup. He'd probably prance around issuing something like:

Did you know that in 1976, Big Science Executives published a manifesto for eugenics. They called it "The Selfish Gene" and tried to dismiss it later with obscure mathematics created by Garrett Hardin (who was a supporter of "The Bell Curve"). So, Big Science doesn't support eugenics? Whudafxup?

Posted by: Dustin | August 22, 2007 2:13 PM

it's a disturbing new documentary that will shock anyone who thinks all scientists are free to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.

I'm trying to remember when in my scientific training as an evolutionary biologist that I was told that I could not follow the evidence wherever it led.

Oh, yeah. Never.

Posted by: Carlie | August 22, 2007 2:15 PM

Man, I'm a Canadian and this still pissed me off.

Anyway, my comment to Ben's blog (might still be censored, I guess I should be careful what I think):

--

Not falsifiable. Not science. See 'Sober, Elliott. "What is Wrong with Intelligent Design," The Quarterly Review of Biology: March 2007.'

Can anti-ID types be shrill and strident on the issue? Sure. So can pro-ID types. Doesn't have any bearing on the truth or worth of their statements.

The issue is: can the potential involvement of a designing force be proven or disproven in the scientific arena? The answer is no.

Further, any approach that says "Can't understand; God must've done it," hinders scientific inquiry, feeds anti-intellectual sentiment and further erode's America's admirable advancements in science and technology. Also see 'Charles P. Pierce, "Greetings from Idiot America," Esquire Magazine: November 2005.'

Ben, think of your country. I mean it: think. Being great with trivia is one thing, but come-on, THINK.

Posted by: mojoandy | August 22, 2007 2:20 PM

Zeno,

Ah, touché. It's a touch of meta-criticism. I suppose it does add some subtle shallowness to that heinous character. Now, I propose we cast Matthew Broderick (lord knows he doesn't have anything better to do), Mia Sara and Alan Ruck in a counter-production.

"Anyone? Something-D-O-O biology. Doo-doo biology."

Posted by: Mike P | August 22, 2007 2:23 PM

May I take a dissenting position here? This film will certainly prove to be the most awful bollocks, of course. But:

1. Stein, pillock that he is, was perfect in Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Not much to show for a life's work, I know. But he did have his perfect 15 seconds.

2. Neither Stein nor Jones is a "blemish" on FB'sDO. They are actors. The former turned in a very good, though very small performance. The latter was mildly good, though in a more prominent role. When away from their workplace, the former is a jackass; the latter apparently has some very serious problems and has done some some very bad things. But I am not sure what their real-life personae have to do with their work in this film. OJ Simpson is almost certainly a double murderer, and I despise him. For all that, he provided one of the funniest scenes ever filmed (and I hear he wasn't half bad in a different area of entertainment, either). Yes, when we see Stein or Jones in FB'sDO, or Simpson in The Naked Gun, it's perhaps natural that we'd need to stifle feelings of contempt, disgust or very severe contempt and disgust, respectively. But that's what we need to do, if what we want to do is watch a film.

3. I hope the people making Expelled lose their shirts. But I have to commend them for taking the trouble to make the film. If you read Roy Edroso (and if you don't, you are criminally negligent), you'll know he is constantly mocking the likes of Roy Medved and Jason Appuzzo for decrying "liberal Hollywood" to earn their wingnut welfare checks. If you think movies should be getting out the wingnut talking points (sez Roy), well then, make those movies. Gibson did it with his antisemitic S/M pornfest, and now Stein (or whatever moneyed troglodyte is behind him) is doing the same. Fair play to them. Let a hundred flowers bloom, because sunlight is the best disinfectant. Or something. As for normal people, our goal should not be to silence the trogs, but to expose them. And I think the truth will conquer.

Posted by: Mrs Tilton | August 22, 2007 2:28 PM

Mrs Tilton,

With all due respect, I don't think anybody is saying the movie shouldn't be made. On the contrary; I believe most of us are sharpening our claws so that we can tear it to pieces when it is released.

Posted by: Mike P | August 22, 2007 2:33 PM

With all due respect, I don't think anybody is saying the movie shouldn't be made. On the contrary; I believe most of us are sharpening our claws so that we can tear it to pieces when it is released.

Well, I'm saying it shouldn't be made, or shouldn't have been made. I'm against all lies, and from what I can gather from the the promotional materials, the gist of the movie is going to be one rank lie, that the failed "hypothesis" of ID has been kept out of the lab and the classroom simply because it has "intelligent" in the title, and not because Stein and the rest of those who make God out to be a liar (ID's premise is little different from Last Thursdayism, that God designed everything to look like it evolved by MET mechanisms) have never produced any kind of evidence worthy of the name.

Of course it's completely allowed for ID to do research (wonder why they almost never exercise that particular right, and why the tiny bit that is done has to be, well, pathetic and clearly not actual research into ID), to teach lies to the poor little saps put into "religious schools" (yes, I was one of them), and to put out propaganda instead of coming up with a single legitimate scientific datum. That's not the same thing as saying that such lies ought to be told, for they are an offense to humans of all beliefs and levels of knowledge.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 22, 2007 2:43 PM

mojoandy (#55) - Not only are you Canadian, so is Walter Ruloff, one of the two major moneymen behind Premise Films, the movie's financial backer. I guess he's grateful that God's been so good as to give him a 9500-sq-ft $10.5 million estate in British Columbia: http://www.canadianchristianity.com/cgi-bin/bc.cgi?bc/bccn/0499/city

Posted by: jud | August 22, 2007 2:49 PM

Ugh, and this 500 pound pile of rotting whale placenta is supposed to come out on Darwin's birthday... Excuse me, I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Posted by: Traffic Demon | August 22, 2007 2:51 PM

So, I've been thinking. Since this is a documentary, it probably isn't going to be a "mainstream" release, right? Even a Moore documentary doesn't get nearly as many theatres as most A-list releases. So Motive is going to want to hype it. And how will they do that? Probably the same way they hyped Passion, with a heavy "grassroots" church-congregation campaign, which IIRC was instrumental in raising it to the success it acheived. I remember many articles at the time talking about this as a new business model.

So, here's my (probably too optimistic) thought: Although of course the stats among the faithful favor the IDers, the stats also tell us that there are a significant number of theists who reject typical ID. The religious (mainly Jewish) backlash against Passion was significant enough to get noticed, so much so as to help establish Gibson's present shaky public image. Assuming a similar backlash occurs here, might we be able to use that backlash to foster a broader discussion?

In the defense of evolution (and in other areas), we atheists have been asking our Christian allies to make their voices heard, to be noticed saying "That is not my Christianity." Perhaps this will present them a much-needed opportunity to do so, with a public that seems increasingly interested in having this conversation.

Posted by: rrt | August 22, 2007 2:52 PM

If you do go see it, perhaps pay for a different movie and sneak into this so at least the money is skewed away from Ben.

Posted by: THz | August 22, 2007 2:57 PM

Let's see, the best quote for this from Ferris Bueller's Day Off:

"Bullshit? . . Bullshit? . . Bullshit? . . Bullshit? . ."

Besides, isn't Ben Stein an economist, NOT a scientist?

I'm sorry, but having Ben Stein in a "crockumentary" to give it a sense of truth is like saying Alan Colmes gives Fox News legitimacy.

Posted by: Gilgamesh | August 22, 2007 2:58 PM

Loc,

You're right it's "Salk". Oh well. If they can get crap wrong, so can I! BTW, my comment is still there, lets see how long it is though...

Posted by: Firemancarl | August 22, 2007 2:59 PM

PZ (#63) - Different film altogether. See http://rampantfilms.com/rampantfilms.swf - click on "Properties," then the thumbnail image for "Crossroads."

Posted by: jud | August 22, 2007 3:00 PM

I did do a talking heads thing for some documentarians earlier this summer, but they talked me into it by saying it was about the intersection of science and religion -- and they had a list of other people they'd talked to, which included some of those others. They also gave me the name of their company, Rampant Films, which looked like a sensible documentary outfit.

PZ, you may have been had. Mark Mathis of Rampant Films (which indeed lists an upcoming documentary on science and religion on their site) is also the associate producer for Expelled. Unless your interview agreement was very specific as to what they were planning to use it for, they may have taken some of the material and put it in this (likely) crapfest.

Posted by: Andrea | August 22, 2007 3:02 PM

#82: "I'll start giving Ben Stein a call when I need dirty deeds, done dirt cheap."

Well, considering he's a diehard neocon, it'll be more like, "Dirty deeds, done ineffectively and at exorbitant cost to the taxpayer."

Posted by: gg | August 22, 2007 3:05 PM