Seeing Ben Stein’s Hollywood screening of his new documentary, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (http://expelledthemovie.com), provided an eye-opening look into how far American science has veered from its commitment to freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech. The documentary opens in select theaters nationally starting April 18. Find a theater in your area and see this challenging film.
If that film wasn’t unsettling enough, watching 60 Minutes’ Leslie Stahl give a 14-minute endorsement to Al Gore’s global warming message provided yet another look into the annoying arrogance of scientific orthodoxy. How embarrassing to watch the once-hard-hitting show provide softball after softball to the former Vice President!
When asked about those who disagreed with his views, Gore minimized the “few” whose “silly political games” aren’t to be taken seriously. He likened the dissenters to ancient flat-earth defenders.
When Ms. Stahl countered that many pretty impressive people disagree, including Vice President Dick Cheney, Gore and millions of liberal viewers were given their opportunity to laugh. Leslie could have pointed to Richard Lindzen, the MIT climatologist, or any of the 19,000 scientists who believe the “inconvenient truth” that global warming is probably natural and not a crisis (www.oism.org/pproject). She could have asked why Gore has not appeared with any of the scientists who have willingly offered to debate the issue!
Although Ben Stein’s documentary looks at the treatment of scientists studying Intelligent Design (ID), the movie’s main target is “science” as practiced in the “politically correct” American universities and supported by our government agencies. Ben Stein, using both his intellect and quick-witted humor, interviews scientists who consider any mention of ID as a “science sin” against Saint Darwin worthy of forced banishment from the scientific community. By challenging the status quo, you risk being punished. Many have paid a price for even questioning orthodoxy.
Dr. Richard Von Sternberg lost his editorial role with a Smithsonian Institute journal for including a peer-reviewed research article by Stephen Meyer that dared support Intelligent Design. Stephen Meyer shared the comment of a wise mentor, “As a scientist, beware of the sound of one hand clapping.” Science is built and evolves through responsible disagreement and critical analysis. Science needed Darwin to challenge the views of his time. Science now needs “new Darwins” capable of tearing down the politically correct walls of today’s scientific orthodoxy.
The Discovery Institute in Seattle provides over 700 scientists who have signed the “Scientific Dissent from Darwinism” list. Some scientists listed are not religious but remain dedicated to reclaiming the purity of scientific inquiry and open, peer-reviewed scientific study. As one scientist said, “Questions that aren’t answered don’t go away.”
Many of the scientists interviewed were unprepared for the vicious attacks they would receive from the “scientific gulag” of entrenched Darwinism. Richard Dawkins, a strong critic of ID and religion, pointed to “overwhelming evidence” supporting Darwin’s evolutionary theory. To Dawkins, believing otherwise is to be “ignorant” or “insane.”
Whether it’s ID or global warming, a wall has been erected that forbids study of a whole line of hypotheses. That means no grants, no support and no access to the best scientific journals! Jonathan Wells, another scientist interviewed, asserted the obvious, “Science isn’t settled by orthodox pronouncements but by evidence.”
After all, what are responsible scientists afraid of? If their theories are true, they will withstand whatever evidence critical scientists can produce. Truth in science must continually be tested. Scientists don’t want to be silenced; they just want the freedom to follow the evidence wherever it leads. This isn’t science versus religion; it’s scientific evidence versus scientific evidence.
When research by the Paleontologist, Meave Leakey, showed last August that two species of early human ancestors lived at the same time in Kenya, this didn’t work well with the pictures of the hunched-over ape evolving across a page to the man in a business suit. When Homo erectus is waving to Homo habilis, Darwin has some explaining to do.
Seth Borenstein reported that scientists didn’t feel that the discovery repudiated evolutionary theory; it just showed the complexity of “good science.” Susan Anton, anthropologist at New York University, commented: “This is not questioning the idea at all of evolution; it is refining some of the specific points. This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn’t do. It’s a continuing self-testing process.”
Bernard Wood, a surgeon-turned-professor of human origins at George Washington University, added: “This is only a skirmish in the protracted ‘war’ between the people who like a bushy interpretation and those who like a more ladder-like interpretation of early human evolution.”
Many scientists seem to only welcome “skirmishes” with colleagues who support their orthodoxy—whether that’s Darwinian evolutionary theory or man-made global warming. Do you hear the sound of one hand clapping?
As Ben Stein suggests, there’s a wall imposed in the world of science that destroys freedom of inquiry. If you don’t play on the right side of the wall, you’re not science! It’s time to resurrect Reagan’s classic challenge, “Tear down this wall!”
Byline: Dr. Terry Paulson is a psychologist, speaker, author and host to the politicaltalk.org blog. Contact him at terry@terrypaulson.com. This column first appeared in the Ventura County Star on April 14, 2008, p. B-6.
Recent Comments