Blake Stacey compiles examples of people being penalized for being truthful about evolutionary biology.
Controversy surrounds this film. Reviews tend to be extremely positive or extremely negative. Who likes it? People who think God may have had something to do with our being here and therefore find it reasonable that God may have left tangible evidence of His involvement in creation. Who hates it? A science, education and media elite who prefer that God had nothing to do with it and think that nature must do all its own creating.
Dembski knows that biologists include believers in divine creation who see Expelled as dishonest propaganda.
Also, Dembski writes:
Will the movie succeed in opening up discussion about evolution and Intelligent Design? Here we need to be realistic. As Thomas Kuhn, in his “Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” has clearly documented, those who support the status quo rarely change their views (and Darwinism is the status quo). Or, as Kuhn puts it, a new scientific paradigm (in this case Intelligent Design) succeeds on the graves of the old guard. Don’t expect the scientific community and intellectual elites to turn to Intelligent Design in response to this film. If anything, expect a backlash.
But Expelled never purports to represent an alternative natural science paradigm, as an alternative to evolutionary biology. At best, it appeals to an argument for rejecting natural science as such, in favor of some kind of non-natural “science.” This is not what Kuhn meant by “scientific revolution.”
(I’m pretty confident of my understanding of Kuhn, following my direct in-person discussions with him in the summer of 1971.)