Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 13 (click to see context) from:
* BigBad: UsefulNotes/RichardDawkins. Ben Stein thinks Dawkins is ''the'' [[UsefulNotes/{{Atheism}} atheist]] to beat if atheism is indeed correct. He treats his confrontation with Dawkins as the FinalBoss of the movie. (See [[Funny/{{Expelled}} the Funny page for this work]] for an incident that's doubly amusing in light of this.)
to:
* BigBad: UsefulNotes/RichardDawkins. Ben Stein thinks Dawkins is ''the'' [[UsefulNotes/{{Atheism}} atheist]] to beat if atheism is indeed correct. He treats his confrontation with Dawkins as the FinalBoss of the movie. (See [[Funny/{{Expelled}} [[Trivia/{{Expelled}} the Funny Trivia page for this work]] for an incident that's doubly amusing in light of this.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5,6 (click to see context) from:
''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' is a documentary film conducted by Ben Stein [[InTheStyleOf in the style of]] documentaries of the 2000s.
to:
''Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed'' is a documentary film conducted by Ben Stein Creator/BenStein [[InTheStyleOf in the style of]] documentaries of the 2000s.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* FalseDichotomy: The film presents the issue as wholly a matter of unguided and naturalistic evolution vs intelligent design (which has obvious religious implications, despite ID advocates claims otherwise). The fact that many churches support evolution is dismissed with the claim they simply do this in siding against conservative Christians (no mention of t how one such group is the Catholics, with a doctrine that's hardly liberal Christian). So all of the evolutionary biologists in the film are atheists, and this was surely no coincidence given how Stein frames things here (again, despite claiming that ID's not a religious movement).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
* PlayingTheVictimCard: The main thrust of the film is portraying Intelligent Design proponents as an abused minority that is being unfairly silenced by a tyrannical "Darwinist" conspiracy. Whether you buy that argument is up to you.
to:
* PlayingTheVictimCard: The main thrust of the film is portraying Intelligent Design proponents as an abused minority that is being unfairly silenced by a tyrannical "Darwinist" conspiracy. Whether you buy that argument is up to you.
Added DiffLines:
* TheyCalledMeMad: The film claims that proponents of intelligent design regularly receive this treatment at the hands of the scientific community, which supports Darwinian evolution.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* {{Panspermia}}: Richard Dawkins concedes it is theoretically possible that life on Earth could have originated by being seeded from life on other planets. The film treats this as a coup of some sort for Intelligent Design, but a moment's reflection would clarify that this doesn't have any bearing on the question of how life ''itself'' first developed.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[quoteright:250:https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed.jpg]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Cut trope.
Deleted line(s) 13 (click to see context) :
* BiggerBad: Charles Darwin, whom the filmmakers hold responsible for genocides like the Nazi Holocaust.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 19 (click to see context) from:
* HitlerAteSugar: The documentary goes some ways to tie [[UsefulNotes/CharlesDarwin Darwin]] and his work to eugenics and, ultimately, to the Nazis. It becomes all the more obvious as it progresses. Note that Darwin's ''The Descent of Man'' explicitly repudiated the concept of SocialDarwinism (in a passage which Stein {{Quote Mine}}d).
to:
* HitlerAteSugar: The documentary goes some ways to tie [[UsefulNotes/CharlesDarwin Darwin]] and his work to eugenics and, ultimately, to the Nazis. It becomes all the more obvious as it progresses. Note that Darwin's ''The Descent of Man'' in fact explicitly repudiated the concept of SocialDarwinism (in (with a passage which Stein {{Quote Mine}}d).{{quote mine}}d to claim the opposite).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
* QuoteMine: The film is infamous for its deliberate twisting of quotes to suit the agenda of its creators. For instance, Richard Dawkins' interview is cut to grossly misrepresent what he actually said, as well as make him seem slightly insane.
to:
* QuoteMine: The film is infamous for its deliberate twisting of quotes to suit the agenda of its creators. For instance, Richard Dawkins' interview is cut to grossly misrepresent what he actually said, as well as make him seem slightly insane. This is also done every time Darwin is quoted, presenting the stances he was arguing ''against'' as if they were his conclusions.
