SHEER IDIOCY

Okay, I have to talk about another film. I'll actually READ something one of these days, I promise, but I have to explain why this documentary my friend made me watch is so idiotic and misleading. Expelled is a "satirical" documentary claiming that the Intelligent Design theory has been unfairly suppressed in academics and that it should be given its proper place in science. The film tries to present proponents of intelligent design as genuine scientists who are curious enough about the world to question the "dogmatic" theory of evolution. They claim that the argument of intelligent design doesn't have anything to do with religion, thus that teaching it in schools would not violate the secular nature of government (which as we all know is a myth any way). Finally, the claim that Darwinism leads to fascism. Yes, that's right.

Let me take you through the various forms of sophistry this film uses:

1) The presenter (let us call him "the Visine Tears man," for that is who he is) completely misrepresents various theories on the origin of life that are presented by evolutionary biologists. When one scientists tells him the theory that the first biological molecules "formed on crystals," the documentary shows a black-and-white image of a man looking at a crystal ball and Visine tears man incredulously goes "crystals? That doesn't sound very likely to me." Essentially, the film is relying upon the fact that most viewers will know NOTHING about chemistry and will assume that a crystal is something shiny. At another point, he criticizes the concept of "directed panspermia" as ridiculous, dismissing it as the claim that "aliens did it." And yet, at another point he shows Dawkins saying that alien beings might have planned life on earth and proclaims, "AH HAH! Dawkins thinks intelligent design might be plausible!" Well DUH, but didn't you just ridicule the idea that "aliens did it" earlier in the film? And how did these aliens arise themselves, eh?
2) The documentary fails to provide ANY scientific evidence for intelligent design or ANY examples of research that takes intelligent design as an assumption to accomplish its ends. It is a bit unfair to accuse evolutionary biologists of anti-intellectualism if you fail to defend your own intellectual position or even point out the holes in that of the other party. In fact, the film doesn't go beyond claiming that there ARE holes in evolutionary theory.
3) After the confusing jumble of scientists refusing to elaborate on their science that makes up the first part of the film, we are presented of images of Visine tears man walking through a Nazi scientist laboratory and going on about how "Darwinism was an essential condition for Nazi-ism." Yes, because science informed the world view that certain people are inferior. The idea that scientific ideas can be perverted to extend certain points of view is utterly preposterous, isn't it? Oh wait, what's that? You claim that the other side distorts science to perpetuate their own atheistic world view! Aaah, so Darwinism causes fascism...no, wait, racism causes Darwinism which then causes fascism... let's just agree that everything collides in a swirling stream of atheism, racism, fascism, and worst of all, Darwinism.

Maybe I should stop trying to analyze their arguments here. I mean, wouldn't that make me a NAZI?
4) They show the Berlin wall throughout the film. So Evolutionary biologists are COMMIES! And Nazis! Wait...that doesn't even make sense...

Not only is this film quite patently propaganda, it's badly-made propaganda. If the intention of the filmmakers was to confuse people, well done to them. All I can say is that I am sure there are some proponents of intelligent design theory out there who are hanging their heads in shame that this film was ever made.

Powerful Films

Recently in my Gender and Women's Studies class we watched a film entitled Ma Vie En Rose. It centers around the reactions of acquaintances, neighbors, and family members to a little boy who is convinced that he should really be a little girl and loves to dress up in girl's clothes. I actually found this movie quite affecting, because the reactions of those around the little boy were so powerfully fearful. Why be afraid of such a young child wanting to explore his gender identity? The fact is, even if you think homosexuality is wrong (which some of the people in the film brought up), the child is far too young to have sexual thoughts at all; his actions are limited to dressing in a certain way and not liking sports much. And the fact that the family was not at all supportive was discouraging. What is more important: the well-being of your child, or the opinion of your donkeyish neighbors? I really hope the film reached a wide audience (it's quite a few years old now) and made people think a little. I hope it encouraged people not to be silly.

Bioethics Shmetchics

Saturday was the day of presentations by the various people in my BIO 425 class. It seems I was the unlucky one whose presentation couldn't be half taken-up by explanations of technological procedures; rather than presenting on a particular technology, I had to present on "Medical Biotechnology and World Religions." But in any case, many of the presentations were interesting and well-done. You could most certainly tell that the class tended to be divided in terms of those who believed that ethical considerations should almost be eliminated entirely and those who were more cautious about what should and shouldn't be allowed. One of the things that was brought up again and again was the fact that people seeking to curb biotechnology were usually not very well-informed of how the technologies worked.

One of the presentations was on an interesting topic, but I feel the presenter made it boring. He had clearly worked extremely hard on his research- too hard. He spent FAR TOO LONG on discussing each and every single aspect of his technology, then he'd take two extra minutes to sum up the last twenty points he made. We never even got to the discussion part because his presentation was so detailed and wordy. I really think there are some instances in life where you are better off not presenting what you think is your best work. Set out to do your best, then pare out the boring bits so that people don't have to suffer through your best.