National Center for Science Education

Creationist Film Crew Not 'Honest' in Landing Interviews

Submitted by Anonymous on Friday, 9/28/2007 5:49 pm

Crossroads promo As we noted earlier this month, Ben Stein—of Richard Nixon and “Ferris Bueller” fame—is starring in an anti-evolution documentary called “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.” While the movie isn’t set to be released until February, scientists are already accusing its producers of dishonesty—and not for claiming that “Intelligent Design” creationism is a valid scientific theory. As various outlets are reporting, several scientists well known for refuting anti-evolution activists say the producers for the film hid their agenda, portraying the project innocently as “Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion” (still listed on the web site of the supposed production company).

From the New York Times:

If he had known the film’s premise, Dr. Dawkins said in an e-mail message, he would never have appeared in it. “At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front,” he said.

Eugenie C. Scott, a physical anthropologist who heads the National Center for Science Education, said she agreed to be filmed after receiving what she described as a deceptive invitation.

“I have certainly been taped by people and appeared in productions where people’s views are different than mine, and that’s fine,” Dr. Scott said, adding that she would have appeared in the film anyway. “I just expect people to be honest with me, and they weren’t.” …

Walt Ruloff, a producer and partner in Premise Media [producer of “Expelled”], also denied that there was any deception. Mr. Ruloff said in a telephone interview that Rampant Films [which approached the scientists as producers of “Crossroads”] was a Premise subsidiary, and that the movie’s title was changed on the advice of marketing experts, something he said was routine in filmmaking. …

Another scientist who was, P. Z. Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota, Morris, said the film’s producers had misrepresented its purpose, but said he would have agreed to an interview anyway. But, he said in a posting on The Panda’s Thumb Web site, he would have made a “more aggressive” attack on the claims of the movie.

As for Stein, who rails in the movie against the scientific establishment’s supposed unsavory suppression of creationism, he claims innocence, adding that if he had his druthers, the movie would be called “From Darwin to Hitler”—an homage, perhaps, to the late televangelist D. James Kennedy.

Creationists Ramp up War on Satire

Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 1/17/2007 6:35 pm

In 2005, after the Kansas School Board took steps to promote creationist objections to science education, an outraged Oregon State University Physics student decided something had to be done. Rather than organize a letter writing campaign or protest in the streets, Bobby Henderson turned to an age-old tool of social commentary, satire. Henderson ‘founded’ a new religion called Pastafarianism whose followers worship a noodly deity called the “Flying Spaghetti Monster.” In a fun and playful way, Henderson’s Pastafarianism highlights both the religious motivation of advocates of so-called “intelligent design,” and the weaknesses in their arguments. Perhaps owing to the effectiviness of Henderson’s parody, the anti-evolution Discovery Institute has recently launched an attack on Pastafarianism. In a post on Discovery’s blog last month, the loquacious Casey Luskin takes aim at the Flying Spaghetti Monster:

During the holiday season, many Americans take time to seriously and respectfully reflect on Judeo-Christian religious beliefs. Not so for one website, the “Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster" (FSM), a pro-evolution satire against intelligent design. They exhibit no interest in treating Christian holidays with respect. Aside from the anti-Christian Christmas cards, the FSM website sells "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster," which is a mockery of the Christian New Testament. Anyone who has ever studied the paraphernalia in a Christian bookstore will recognize that the FSM shirts with dead Christian fish symbols and the word "Truth" are mocking Christianity. They even sell an FSM car icon to mock the “Jesus fish” icon. I've seen a couple FSM car icons on the road here in Seattle. It's funny, but clearly the FSM concept aims to mock those who seriously believe in Judeo-Christian religious views.

Not content to limit the struggle against satire to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, yesterday Luskin focused his attention on a column posted on the aptly named web publication, “The Spoof.” The piece, clearly written in a jocular tone, includes a fictional scientist arguing against “intelligent design” by claiming that penguins are “the work of a total moron". Luskin was unimpressed:

Spoof.com should realize that they weren’t really spoofing anything, and that Darwinists make these fallacious arguments with a straight face all the time.

In response to Luskin’s screed, National Center for Science Education’s Glenn Brock asks “Why would mocking traditional religion be of concern to a purely scientific organization?" An interesting question indeed. For his part Luskin’s colleague, John West, attempts to answer Brock’s question, but perhaps Luskin and West are simply unwilling to accept that the target of these parodies is not religion or science, but the doctrine of intelligent design creationism that they peddle?

Teachers of Evolution Seek to Destroy "Childhood Joy and Ambition," Says Schlafly

Submitted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 8/16/2006 9:57 am

Creationism advocates are furious about the recent loss of an anti-evolution majority on the Kansas school board. Watergate figure and high-profile Religious Right operative Chuck Colson bemoaned the “censorship” of not mandating the instruction of “Intelligent Design” creationism in public schools. Wichita pastor Terry Fox (who quit his church shortly after the election to be a full-time activist against same-sex marriage, abortion, and evolution) called evolution a “cult” and “the mother of all liberalism” and cited the “homosexual agenda[]” and “taking Christ out of Christmas” as related reasons to elect right-wing school board members. Board member Connie Morris, who called evolution a “fairytale” and lost her bid for re-election to a moderate, blamed the “lying liberal media” for her defeat, and Kansas “Intelligent Design” advocate John Calvert complained of a “propaganda” campaign of “systematic misinformation” that Kansas might have trouble competing for science-related business if it maintained a standard of science education opposed by almost all scientific societies.

Now right-wing stalwart Phyllis Schlafly weighs in, claiming that those who take their cues on public-school science curricula from scientists are out to stifle children’s laughter and quash their dreams:

Liberals see the political value to teaching evolution in school, as it makes teachers and children think they are no more special than animals. Childhood joy and ambition can turn into depression as children learn to reject that they were created in the image of God.

Schlafly claims that “The issue in the Kansas controversy was not intelligent design and certainly not creationism,” preferring to refer to “the movement to allow criticism of evolution.” She notes that the Kansas standards point to a non-binding statement that came out of the congressional conference committee negotiating the No Child Left Behind Act that singles out evolution as a “controversy” and calls on schools to teach the “full range of scientific views that exist.”

But as the National Center for Science Education details, the so-called Santorum Amendment – partially designed by “Intelligent Design” advocates as part of a long-term strategy to undermine scientific instruction – was never passed into law.