Even in a Moore movie one can find a few points of actual reason. Mostly unintended, some intended, but mostly mishandled in the execution or resolution.

__________________
I am more concerned with the intellectual environment

'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'

~ Thomas Jefferson

64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

Thanks. I had known about Faye and, of course, Cecile. Just not about the woman who started it before Margaret.

__________________

I haven't seen it but as I understand it the main premise of the movie isn't evolution and creation but the fact that many scientific institutions "crucify" anyone who thinks there is a creator. This happens all the time with various fields of study...if the people funding a project don't like what you are doing you are denied funding which is basically the worst thing that can happen to a scientist.

The means and method he gets to that point you may disagree with but the premise is true.

I wouldn't compare cutting funding to crucification. At any rate religion simply isn't science. There's nothing wrong with a scientist having a religious point of view so long as it is not part of their funded scientific studies as many aspects of religion are not measurable and just act as filler for what cannot yet be explained.

The thing is if Ben Stein thinks science is so horrible then why would he want to mesh it with religion? Intelligent design at it's very core is an attempt to try to pass Creationism off as a credible science.

Go to Expelled Exposed

The people who they had say they were "crucified" for their beliefs were telling half-truths. The film is a crock. Plain and simple. From what I have heard it isn't even done well. Every review I have read has said essentially the same thing; Don't spend money to see this film.

__________________

Well do you really expect liberal media Hollywood outlets, to give a thumbs up to the other side of the story? I mean come on throw me a bone here. THe media fell all over themselves with Micheal Moore's propaganda films, and they were horrible. But of course, a non-liberal creates a show and people expect the same kind of praise from the Hollywood elites?

Do people really pay attention to movie critics and what they think? I have never not gone to see a movie because some half-wit movie critic said not to.

No, but when the mass influx of reviewers are saying the film is a piece of shit, it's got to be a hint. For example, most reviewers almost unanimously conceded that Catwoman was shit, and it did indeed turn out to be shit. Most reviewers conceded that Battlefield Earth was shit, and it also turned out to be shit.

If a film is divided by critics, I’ll obviously still go check it out if it is something that interests me. But when they are pretty much unanimous in their derision, then I figure they're probably onto something.

Scientists don't have a very fond view of the documentary either.

The group the film is criticizing does not like the film? How surprising.

__________________
I am more concerned with the intellectual environment

'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'

~ Thomas Jefferson

64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

Well then that dismisses any claims it has to scientific accuracy on part of the creator now doesn't it. Doesn't really leave this film with much in the way of redeeming qualities now does it.