In one case some mean-meaning people clearly appropriated Darwinism to ‘dilute’ inferior races. In another case some so-called scientists made brutal experiences on people in the name of science, Nazi Germany being a quite clear example.
If the first chapter of ‘The Shock Doctrine’ you can read about experiments being made by psychologists on brain washing. Though later disavowed by the scientific community, initially at least it was all considered mainstream.

My point here is that there is a huge difference between what Science is and what some people make of it, or in its name. *Exactly* the same thing happens with religion: religion is one thing, and another is what some mad quacks make of it.

If the argument that religion is stupid *because* some people use it for the wrong ends (terrorism, despotism, people control, etc.), so you must argue that Science is also stupid because of somewhat similar misuses.

(Note that I’m an atheist. Religion, Creationism, etc. *are* stupid. But they are stupid in its essence and not at all because of their unintended results).

A few days ago, Dawkins, perhaps secretly relishing his traditional Hollywood role as a British cinematic villain, did get to see the film, in a rollicking night that mixed farce with irony. He went along to a public screening in Minneapolis with a friend, Professor Paul Myers of the University of Minnesota Morris, who not only appears in the film, albeit briefly, but is also thanked in the credits.

A producer of the film, however, spotted the American biology prof in the queue and got security guards to escort him from the cinema because he was “not welcome”.

Dawkins, meanwhile, strolled in and, when the “shoddy and boring” film ended, stirred up the absurdity of the expulsion at Expelled’s question-and-answer session with the producers.

It was, said one blogger, as if Beelzebub himself had arisen in a puff of smoke in the temple. People left the film crossing themselves. “And that was a lot more fun than the film itself.”

Many atrocities have been commited in the name of Christianity, only to prove that those committing them were not followers of Christ at all, for He taught clearly - “Love your enemies!”

I haven’t seen the move but just from the reviews it seems as if this movie will ultimately hurt the intellectual design movement due to the holes in their argument.

Mr. Berry is obviously unfamiliar with Michael Dentons’ current thinking on the subject of the theory of evolution. Based on an interview he gave to the Un. of California Extension Service in 2002, Prof. Denton has backed away from almost all the claims made in the book cited by Mr. Berry. He currently accepts virtually all of the neo-Darwinian theory, with the proviso that he does not think that natural selection provides a complete mechanism for driving evolution, although he admits that he has nothing better to offer and that it is at least a partial mechanism.

Re RMcCreight

Mr. McCreights’ version of academic freedom would allow instructors to advocate a flat earch, a geocentric solar system, deny the bacterial theory of disease causation, deny the link between HIV and AIDS, etc. Not freedom, chaos.

for me, i want to know a few things of the process of evolution:

do the most mixed varieties of living things contain the most genetic
diversity?

do the most specialized varieties of species have the least genetic diversity?

If yes, this means they are usually successful in a specific environment, and then would only survive in that environment?

does evolution weaken a species when it becomes specialized?

does evolution, like inbreeding, pass on weakness?
in specific environments? (sure those too weak die.)

do the mutations in the pesticides and medicines mentioned above
do a lot of killing of unwanted living things?

i am most interested in the conversation about the things we can
understand. i am not offended to think God could have created
life, but i think it is most important that we think as best we can
about what we observe.

the whales and snakes with legs and bird reptile fossils may need to be
discussed further, whales sometimes use these legs in mating, and
belugas come to shore… there are some distinct differences in the
nature of birds and reptiles that may be unlinkable with survival, have
to revisit that to get the facts correct though. point here is there is
alot to think about, and best not to be hasty.

i believe there has been a lot of fast science to support evolution as
explanation for origin and even for origin of species…it certainly is true
that what reproduces viably is what survives, but more than that,
i think it is most safe to remain critical. the mecahnics of mutation
is fascinating, and worth study. also the question of the information and
mechanics and working of the dna strand in the cell… now there is where
there is room for good science and answer seeking and conversation.

as to the nazi talk and debate…it seems best we avoid any repeating of it, and we treat humans with respect, and care. i have heard alot of hate in
the responses here, that is sad. religious people have committed this
sort of killing too. that is sad, and a weight on the shoulders of honest
believers. similarly those who may have used darwinian thought to
support such death. also there has been good done by people

there is no law against doing good.

i believe best to keep a conversation and listen to all and take what you
can to build your beliefs on. if there is God in person he is part of this
conversation. we are people and part of this conversation and for
the consequences of the acts we make because of our beliefs, lets
all be patient with each other, even with Mr. Stein, and Darwinian scientists… more than that hurts us all.