Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed Page #4

all of life with it.

Physics used to be

newtonian physics.

Newton was physics.

And then you gotta

look to einstein,

general relativity.

It's not newton is enough.

I think, likewise,

what we're finding with darwin

Is that he had

some valid insights,

But it's not

the whole picture.

Okay, darwinism may not be

the complete picture,

But what made

these guys think

They had

the missing pieces?

I put this question

to dr. Stephen meyer,

Author of the paper

that originally got

Dr. Sternberg

in so much trouble.

Stein:
it's hard to believe

that this little town

Is the headquarters

of giant microsoft,

Which enabled mr. Gates

to become fantastically rich.

Maybe that's what

steve meyer's doing here.

Maybe this is somehow

going to make him

fantastically rich.

We'll pin him down

Like a butterfly

on a butterfly board--

A butterfly

on a killing board.

Coffee shop

straight ahead.

Stein:
newton is buried

in the genius's corner

At westminster abbey,

right?

That's correct, yeah.

Darwin is also buried

in westminster abbey.

Right. And so is darwin.

- right, right.

- right near each other.

And you're here in redmond

In a little building

without a sign, right?

[laughs]

And you're obviously

an incredibly smart guy,

But how dare you challenge

Someone who's buried

in the genius's corner

Next to newton

at westminster abbey.

Well, it may seem

a little cheeky,

But it's what scientists

are supposed to do.

When I was in cambridge,

One of my supervisors

often advised us

To beware the sound

of one hand clapping,

Which was a way of saying

if there's an argument

on one side,

There's bound to be

an argument on the other.

What I found in studying

the structure

Of the argument

in the origin of species

Is that for every

evidence-based argument

For one of darwin's

two key propositions,

There is an evidence-based

counterargument.

Well, but--is it a debate?

There's just you

and a couple of other guys

In a dinky little office

downtown, say, on one side,

And there's

the faculties of all

The great universities

in the world

on the other side.

Speaking with a great, uniform,

and authoritative voice.

Yes, right.

Well, in any case,

the debate

Really isn't going to be

settled by numbers.

It's going to be settled

by the evidence

and the arguments.

While I was still

in bill gates country,

Dr. Meyer

recommended I check in

With molecular biologist

jonathan wells.

What kind of names

do they call you?

- uh, creationist.

- what do you say

back to them

When they say you're

a creationist?

Well, I usually don't

get the opportunity.

What's at stake

for you, personally?

First of all,

I love science.

I think

the way darwinism

Corrupts the evidence,

distorts the evidence,

Is bad for science.

Well, the other scientists

will tell you

To just shut up

if you love science, okay?

Because you're sort of being

a bomb thrower into science.

I am upsetting

the applecart.

I think it deserves

to be upset in this case.

Why?

Because the evidence

is being distorted

To prop up a theory that

I think doesn't fit it.

Was darwinism

really that bad?

Perhaps a change of scenery

Would give me

a fresh perspective.

[man singing in french]

Mr. Berlinski,

I assume?

- ben stein,

what a pleasure to meet you.

- how are you, sir?

So, where are you

from originally?

I was born in new york,

spent 31 years in manhattan.

- yes.

- and I spent a lot of time

in california, too.

And tell me

all the various universities

Where you've studied

or taught.

I was at princeton,

then I had a professorship

at stanford.

Then I left stanford,

and I taught at rutgers.

I left rutgers,

and I taught

At the city college

in new york.

I left the city college

of new york.

I taught at the baruch college,

I taught at san jose--

What did you teach

at baruch college?

Anything they wanted.

Come on in.

Thank you, monsieur.

What an old building! Wow.

It's the oldest in paris.

You're kidding.

Merci, monsieur.

- ah, je vous entre.

- merci.

Stein:
wow,

this is fabulous.

Berlinski:

let's put it this way.

Before you can ask

is darwinian theory

correct or not,

You have to ask

the preliminary question

"is it clear enough

so that it could be correct?"

That's a very

different question.

One of my prevailing doctrines

about darwinian theory

Is, man, that thing

is just a mess.

It's like looking into

a room full of smoke.

Nothing in the theory

Is precisely, clearly,

carefully defined

or delineated.

It lacks all of the rigor

One expects from

mathematical physics,

And mathematical physics

lacks all the rigor

One expects

from mathematics.

So we're talking about

a gradual descent

Down the level

of intelligibility

Until we reach

evolutionary biology.

We don't even know

what a species is,

for heaven's sakes.

So his theory is smoke,

but elegant smoke.

There's a certain

elegance to it,

But I think einstein had

the appropriate remark:

He preferred to leave

elegance to his tailor.

A room full of smoke?

That certainly wasn't

what I was hearing

From prominent darwinists

like richard dawkins.

Evolution is a fact.

It's a fact which is

established as securely

As essentially any other fact

that we have in science.

Richard dawkins

is so confident

That evolution is a fact

And that therefore

god doesn't exist

That he has devoted

his entire life

To spreading

the evolution gospel.

I'm an atheist with respect

to the judeo-christian god

Because there is not

a shred of evidence

In favor

of the judeo-christian god.

It is completely

right to say

That since the evidence

for evolution

Is so absolutely,

totally overwhelming--

Nobody who looks at it

could possibly doubt that

If they were sane

and not stupid--

So the only remaining

possibility is that

they're ignorant,

And most people who

don't believe in evolution

are indeed ignorant.

But the people I spoke with

weren't ignorant.

They were

highly credentialed scientists.

So there had to be

something else going on here.

So you think the whole theory

of evolution is false

Or just certain parts of it?

Well, again, "evolution"

is a slippery word.

I would say minor changes

within species happen.

But darwin didn't write

a book called

How existing species

change over time.

He wrote a book called

the origin of species.

- he purported to show

how this same process--

- huh, I see.

...Leads to new species--

in fact, every species--

And the evidence

for that grand claim

Is, in my opinion,

almost totally lacking.

How does darwin--

or darwinism--say life began?

Well, he didn't know.

And, in fact, nobody knows.

So darwinism,

strictly defined,

Starts after

the origin of life

And deals only

with living things.

How can there be

a theory about life

Without a theory

about how life began?

Well, a grand, overarching

evolutionary story,

Of course, does include

the origin of life.

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes