In Expelled: No Intelligence Guaranteed (2008), Ben Stein travels the world to expose incarceration in the realm of science. Stein's goal is to irritate the public to arouse the desire and motivation of people's voice to break down the unjust wall in scientific academia. Ben Stein fails to convince his active audience that universities have used unfair practices to exclude research and believers in intelligent design from the scientific community, but he succeeds in persuading the unassuming and inactive audience. Ben Stein loses his credibility and ultimately his persuasive power through the use of misrepresentations of messages and facts, errors of ethics, pathos and logos, and digression from the main point of the documentary. The unpretentious audience overlooks these errors and is convinced through the visual tools of the documentary. The documentary begins with Stein speaking before an audience, addressing the principle of freedom in America. He then moves on to discuss the loss of academic freedom in the scientific community through interviews with scientific figures such as Richard Sternberg, Caroline Crocker, Michael Ignore, Robert Marks, and Guillermo Gonzalez. These interviews are contrasted with clips of scientists refuting the idea and validity of intelligent design. To gain perspective on the credibility and thoughts of Darwinism and intelligent design in the scientific community, Stein is invited to speak with other science figures such as Bruce Chapman, Paul Nelson, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer, and Jonathan Wells. Stein then begins his in-depth investigation by interviewing Richard Dawkins, David Berlinski, and Michael Ruse, seeking to determine how Darwin's theory applies to cr...... middle of paper ...... a possible and probable theory for explain the creation of life. Upon further analysis of Expelled: No Intelligence aware, we can see that the documentary is related to errors of ethos, pathos and logos, misrepresentation of facts and deviation from the main theme of the documentary. With this in mind, Ben Stein fails to persuade the active viewing audience, but succeeds in persuading the inactive viewing audience. Idle audiences will be convinced by Stein's use of appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos, and will overlook the documentary's mistakes. Stein uses appeals rooted in error, incredible information, and misleading reasons to persuade us of this. Stein wants us to raise our voices to break down the wall between academic freedom, but we must look at his motivations and the reasons he gives for instilling these notions in us.