The list of species that global warming zealots claim will be wiped out by climate change is long: Antarctic penguins; Arctic polar bears; Australia’s koalas; British dragonflies …   

But in what could be a case of Darwinian evolution in action, the BBC reports that “great tits cope well with warming.” Presumably, great tits won’t do as well – at least in the short term – when the pendulum shifts towards global cooling and there’s a pronounced nip in the air. 

Or, maybe not. The Stiletto highly recommends Ben Stein’s documentary, “Expelled,” about how evolutionary biologists who worship at the altar of Darwinism have thuggishly barred all dissenting opinions – particularly, intelligent design – from the marketplace of ideas and expelled (fired, denied tenure, blacklisted) apostates from universities, scientific journals and research facilities. They include biologist Richard Sternberg, who was fired by the Smithsonian Institution after publishing a peer-reviewed article that mentioned intelligent design; astrobiologist Guillermo Gonzalez, who was denied tenure at Iowa State University – despite having discovered several planets; and Caroline Crocker, who lost her professorship at George Mason University for showing students a PowerPoint presentation that mentioned intelligent design on two slides.  

Dinesh D’Souza and other conservatives zero in on this scene:  

Richard Dawkins is going on about how evolution explains everything. This is part of Dawkins’ grand claim, which echoes through several of his books, that evolution by itself has refuted the argument from design. The argument from design hold that the design of the universe and of life are most likely the product of an intelligent designer. Dawkins thinks that Darwin has disproven this argument.  

So Stein puts to Dawkins a simple question, “How did life begin?” … One might expect Dawkins to invoke evolution as the all-purpose explanation. Evolution, however, only explains transitions from one life form to another. Evolution has no explanation for how life got started in the first place. Darwin was very clear about this.  

In order for evolution to take place, there had to be a living cell. The difficulty for atheists is that even this original cell is a work of labyrinthine complexity. Franklin Harold writes in “The Way of the Cell” that even the simplest cells are more ingeniously complicated than man’s most elaborate inventions: the factory system or the computer. … 

Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix … is a committed atheist. Unwilling to consider the possibility of divine or supernatural creation, Crick suggested that maybe aliens brought life to earth from another planet.

And this is precisely the suggestion that  Richard Dawkins makes in his response to Ben Stein. Perhaps, he notes, life was delivered to our planet by highly-evolved aliens.  

Even Dawkins admits that his “X-Files” explanation just kicks the can down the street a ways, because it doesn’t answer the question of how these aliens came into being. 

Aside from the sheer delight of seeing Dawkins – author of “The God Delusion” – hoist on his own petard, Stein also explores the association between Darwinism and atheism (you can’t have one without the other); explains how Darwinism was used to justify the eugenics movement in the U.S., during which tens of thousands of Americans were sterilized against their will because they were deemed too physically or mentally flawed to breed; and – most chilling – reminds us that Adolph Hitler combined Darwinism and eugenics to rid the Third Reich of  “inferior” races and human specimens. 

At its heart, “Expelled” is about scientific, academic and MSM censorship. Whatever your position on intelligent design, there is no denying that the stifling of scientific inquiry is spreading.  Global warming skeptics, for instance, are called “deniers” and the media gives their research short shift – or ignores evidence suggesting that global warming could be a cyclical phenomenon related to solar flare activity, for example – to create the false impression that the science is settled. It is not. And neither is the science settled on Darwinian evolution.  

Scientific inquiry depends upon continually challenging hypotheses – no scientific finding is supposed to be considered “fact.” Stop people from asking the questions or dismiss research that doesn’t fit into the consensus, and you stop scientific progress and go down blind alleys.  

Note: The Stiletto writes about politics and other stuff at The Stiletto Blog, chosen an Official Honoree in the Political Blogs category by the judges of the 12th Annual Webby Awards (the Oscars of the online universe) along with CNN Political Ticker, Swampland (Time magazine) and The Caucus (The New York Times). 

Be Sociable, Share!