Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Expelled coming your way

Ben Stein's anti-science film, Expelled, will be in theaters nationwide this Friday, April 18. Since I wrote about this last week, the National Center for Science Education has unveiled their website Expelled Exposed. The site refutes the nonsense presented in the film as well as questions the examples of intelligent design martyrs.


While questioning whether people were really "expelled" for their openness to intelligent design, they provide at least one example of someone fired for not being "neutral" in the scientific "debate" between evolution and intelligent design.




MORE RESPONSES FROM THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY

Eugenie Scott, the director of the National Center for Science Education, was "bamboozled" (her word) into participating in the film. She is interviewed by Scientific American writer, Steve Mirsky, in his weekly podcast. The podcast also has an interview with Scientific American editor-in-chief, John Rennie, on his views after being shown the film by one of the associate producers.

Scientific American recorded the discussion between the producer and staff members after being shown the film. I'm not patient enough to listen to the hour-long discussion, but it was reportedly "energetic." Listen to it here.

Skeptic writer Michael Shermer also appears in the film and wrote about his experience and impressions in a recent column. He looks at the big and small ways the film deceives, including hiring extras for a scene at Pepperdine University when they couldn't recruit enough supporting students.

It looks like the scientific community is taking this film seriously.

The few film reviewers that have been permitted to see (or snuck into) a screening, haven't regarded it highly either.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Expelled Intelligence

Soon, Ben Stein's new "documentary" on intelligent design, Expelled, will hit theaters across the country. Over the past weeks, pre-release screenings have been shown across the country in order to drum up grassroots support for the controversial film.

Some people with scientific backgrounds have been able to see the film. The staff at Scientific American were treated to a private screening in their office. Minnesota biology professor, P.Z. Myers, who was also an unwitting guest in the film, was kicked out of a screening at the Mall of America. His guests, family members and friend Richard Dawkins were allowed to stay for some reason. Dawkins was also an unwitting interview subject in the film and is the most famous (or infamous) evolutionary biologist in the world today. Dawkins wrote about the experience in an essay called "Lying for Jesus."

The initial reports and reviews aren't encouraging. It appears the film spends little time actually defining evolutionary theory or even intelligent design. They do everything they can to connect evolutionary science to Nazi ideology and atrocities. Ben Stein actually appears at Nazi death camps in the film to underscore the point. The film gets its title from the notion that academics who have the audacity to question evolutionary theory and inquire into intelligent design get expelled from their jobs and profession. Some in the science community have begun to gather evidence that questions whether these are really intelligent design "martyrs."

Several of the scientists interviewed describe being bamboozled into participating in the film. A front company to the Canadian parent film company was presented to them. They were told the name of the film was something more balanced, despite the recent discovery that the domain name expelledthemovie.com was registered even before the interviews were conducted. So it's unlikely that the producers changed the name and focus of the film halfway through.

Dawkins and Myers discuss their film experience and impressions

Monday, April 7, 2008

Science Debate

Is science an important issue in the presidential election? Many scientists certainly think so.

Minnesotan Shawn Lawrence Otto has spearheaded a broad campaign to force the presidential candidates to participate in a science debate. The effort, dubbed Sciencedebate 2008, has been signed on by luminaries in the science, academic, legal, business, arts, and political arenas.

In a world where science is a central part of our ability to understand and solve problems, it is a shame that we know little where political candidates stand on scientific issues. Appropriate support of scientific research is what will enable us to tackle global climate change problems and develop new medical technologies. Science leads to technological advances that drive our economy and improve our standards of living.

What's more, science itself has been unfortunately politicized during the current administration in disastrous ways. Will the future White House occupant use or ignore scientific facts?

The group has already set a date, location, and moderator for a science debate ahead of the Pennsylvania primary. The date is April 18. They invited the candidates. Unfortunately, Obama's campaign said no, Clinton's campaign was non-committal, and the McCain campaign hasn't even responded. A plan B debate has been slated in Oregon in May. Hopefully, the candidates can be pressured to participate.

Here's one of the Sciencedebate 2008 supporters on YouTube. Dr. Susan Wood resigned from the FDA in 2005 in protest of the Bush administration's political interference in order to stonewals approval of over-the-counter status of Plan B emergency contraception.






Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Quote: Science or Beer?

The New York Times reports For scientists, a beer test shows results as a litmus test

Key quote from Dr. Matthew Symonds:

“It’s rather devastating to be told we should drink less beer in order to increase our scientific performance."