…and this is a 
I'm gonna be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆
Category: Creationism
Posted on: August 22, 2007 4:55 PM, by PZ Myers
Last April, I received this nice letter from Mark Mathis.
Hello Mr. Myers,
My name is Mark Mathis. I am a Producer for Rampant Films. We are currently in production of the documentary film, "Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion."
At your convenience I would like to discuss our project with you and to see if we might be able to schedule an interview with you for the film. The interview would take no more than 90 minutes total, including set up and break down of our equipment.
We are interested in asking you a number of questions about the disconnect/controversy that exists in America between Evolution, Creationism and the Intelligent Design movement.
Please let me know what time would be convenient for me to reach you at your office. Also, could you please let me know if you charge a fee for interviews and if so, what that fee would be for 90 minutes of your time.
I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Sincerely,
Mark Mathis
Rampant Films
4414 Woodman Ave. #203
Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
www.rampantfilms.com
I looked up Rampant Films. Yes, they are doing a movie called Crossroads, and it has perfectly reasonable blurb.
So I said, sure, I'd be happy to talk with you, and as long as any travel expenses are covered, I'm willing to do it gratis (academic, you know…we aren't used to charging big fees to explain things to people). They came out to Morris, set up cameras and gear in my lab, and we did an interview for a few hours. I got paid (woo hoo!). They left. I figured that, as a fairly minor figure in this argument, I might well get cut out altogether — they talked about also interviewing Dawkins and Eugenie Scott and Pennock and various other people — and that was OK.
Now we've got this new ID creationist movie, Expelled, coming out, and there's a press release with this claim:
Unlike some other documentary films, Expelled doesn't just talk to people representing one side of the story. The film confronts scientists such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, influential biologist and atheist blogger PZ Myers and Eugenie Scott, head of the National Center for Science Education. The creators of Expelled crossed the globe over a two-year period, interviewing scores of scientists, doctors, philosophers and public leaders. The result is a startling revelation that freedom of thought and freedom of inquiry have been expelled from publicly-funded high schools, universities and research institutions.
What? I didn't do any interviews for pro-creation films, and I certainly haven't said that "freedom of thought and freedom of inquiry" aren't part of the university. There must be some mistake.
But then I noticed in the credits for the movie that a certain familiar name is the associate producer, or ass-prod, as I'll henceforth consider him.
Denyse O'Leary also ties Mathis of Rampant Films to this movie, and this page from Expelled uses the same graphic that Rampant Films used for Crossroads. The case is closed: Ben Stein's propaganda film for ID is the one I was interviewed for.
Well. I guess I didn't end up on the cutting room floor after all, although I'm sure a select set of my words did. Unless, that is, the whole movie is me sitting in my lab, talking. It's real. I'm going to be featured in a big-time movie with second-tier character actor and game-show host Ben Stein. I bet my whole family is going to go out to the moving-picture theatre to see me on the big screen … and since my family lives near Seattle and the Discovery Institute is so happy about it, they'll probably have the opportunity.
I do have a few questions, though.
I'm wondering why the Discovery Institute would be so enthused about this movie. It lays it's premise on the line: science is flawed because it excludes god and the supernatural. It's one big promo for religion — which means it's going to further undercut Intelligent Design creationism's claims to be a secular idea.
Randy Olson points out that this is clearly a well-funded movie. It's slick, they're paying Ben Stein, they had to have shelled out a good chunk of money for the rights for the "Bad to the Bone" theme. Randy's probably wondering why he couldn't get that kind of money for Flock of Dodos.
So who is funding the movie? Some people with deep pockets are throwing quite a bit of cash at this thing, and I can assure you that it didn't end up in my hands. I think I was paid something like $1200. I should have asked for much more!
Isn't it a little ironic that a fairly expensive production like this is billing itself as representing the ordinary people, and is pretending to be the "rebel"? There's a bit of the no-expenses-will-be-spared (except in the case of their evilutionist dupes!) glitz about it — it really doesn't look like the work of some brave independent film-maker living hand-to-mouth while making his artistic vision manifest.
Why were they so dishonest about it? If Mathis had said outright that he wants to interview an atheist and outspoken critic of Intelligent Design for a film he was making about how ID is unfairly excluded from academe, I would have said, "bring it on!" We would have had a good, pugnacious argument on tape that directly addresses the claims of his movie, and it would have been a better (at least, more honest and more relevant) sequence. He would have also been more likely to get that good ol' wild-haired, bulgy-eyed furious John Brown of the Godless vision than the usual mild-mannered professor that he did tape. And I probably would have been more aggressive with a plainly stated disagreement between us.
I mean, seriously, not telling one of the sides in a debate about what the subject might be and then leading him around randomly to various topics, with the intent of later editing it down to the parts that just make the points you want, is the video version of quote-mining and is fundamentally dishonest.
I don't mind sharing my views with creationists, and do so all the time. By filming under false pretenses, much like the example of the case of Richard Dawkins' infamous "pause", they've undercut their own credibility … not that that will matter. I suspect their audience will not question whatever mangling of the video that they carry out, and the subterfuges used to make it will not be brought up.
Oh, well. I have two warnings for the creationists.
One, I will go see this movie, and I will cheer loudly at my 30 seconds or whatever on the screen, and I will certainly disembowel its arguments here and in any print venue that wants me. That's going to be fun.
Two, next time I'm asked to be recorded for a creationist propaganda film, I will demand more money, and a flight and a limousine to the premiere. They can pay for my tuxedo rental, too. And my hotel room will have a jacuzzi and a bowl of M&Ms — green ones only.
Comments
Cheeky fuckers!
Posted by: SBF | August 22, 2007 5:05 PM
May I add that scientists are not taking this crap lying down! I'd like to take the opportunity to plug my new book "Evolution and Religious Creation Myths: How Scientists Respond." Authors are Paul Lurquin and Linda Stone (Oxford University Press, 2007).
I know it's shameful to be so self-promoting. On the other hand, the bad guys have no such shame. Why, then, should I feel ashamed?
Thanks for your attention.
Posted by: Paul Lurquin | August 22, 2007 5:09 PM
Wow PZ, in a movie with Ben Stein -- I wonder how many degrees from Kevin Bacon that makes you?
Posted by: Tulse | August 22, 2007 5:10 PM
Are they trying to be the Michael Moore for Caucasian Jesus?
Posted by: Tom @Thoughtsic.com | August 22, 2007 5:10 PM
What sort of questions did they ask you, PZ?
Posted by: Stephen | August 22, 2007 5:10 PM
PZ has really, seriously lost it now. The stress must be getting to him. Everyone knows that red M&Ms are the best by far.
I could have figured out it was a setup from the beginning. Always check out near anonymous offers like this one. The question isn't whether they quote mined and miscut to misrepresent. The question is how much.
Ben Stein is a moron. The first piece I ever read from him was so notably dumb that I had to look at the author and memorize the name. He's been dumb ever since.
Posted by: raven | August 22, 2007 5:10 PM
Hmm, I think I will still stick to buying only Flock of Dodos, when it comes out. Not being narrow minded, just careful who I give my money to.
On other hand, if this is distributed like so much of the other monotheist religious media, I'm sure we can order it for free for a promise of a 'donation'.
Posted by: daenku32 | August 22, 2007 5:12 PM
Turns out I can answer my own question -- PZ now has a Bacon Number of 2 (Stein was in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles with Bacon).
And yes, this is a profoundly sleazy way for the filmmakers to act. Then again, given their usual tactic of quotemining, this isn't that surprising.
Posted by: Tulse | August 22, 2007 5:13 PM
Jebus, PZ, I'm sitting here muttering to myself, "Must control fist of death." Aarrgghh.
You're going to be quote-mined, but really, you and Randi and Phil and PT and a bunch of others are going to have a BALL skewering this "documentary." The sad part is, a LOT more people are going to hear about Michael Behe now. That's a crying shame.
I heard Stein doing an interview with NPR some time ago, and even then, he made my head hurt. This doesn't help.
Posted by: MikeM | August 22, 2007 5:14 PM
raven wrote:
Yeah, but the green ones make you horny*. And that's all that matters for an evolutionary biologist.*Yeah, it's an urban legend, but go with me here...
Posted by: Tom @Thoughtsic.com | August 22, 2007 5:15 PM
I don't suppose you got an unedited, uncut copy of your interview, did you? Might want to include that in your list of future demands, along with the green M & Ms. For that matter you might want to ask for it now, though I'm sure you'll be told it no longer exists in that form.
Posted by: Dan | August 22, 2007 5:18 PM
Oh my. Maybe they didn't want you to be overly defensive or strident. Big wusses.
They'll look a bit hypocritical if they don't allow comments from Pharyngulites on that blog.
Who's suppressing whom?
Posted by: Steve_C | August 22, 2007 5:18 PM
"...next time I'm asked to be recorded for a creationist propaganda film, I will demand more money, and a flight and a limousine to the premiere."
The problem with that is you weren't asked to be recorded for a creationist propaganda film. Leave it to fundamentalist Christians to lie and act like jackasses.
Posted by: Alex | August 22, 2007 5:20 PM
Question: Why does no-one involved with this movie, or indeed with the ID movement in general, realise that if they have to employ deceit of any variety to make their argument, there is a major problem with a) their morals and b) their argument?
Seriously. How, unless you are a lawyer, a politician, or a writer, can you decide that lies are the way to advance truth? And don't get me wrong, I like being lied to by talented writers - as long as they clearly label what they are writing as fiction. I hate to be so pessimistic, but really, I suspect it might be a good time to put a good libel lawyer on retainer...
I do mean Libel, right? Slander is spoken, but a film counts as a published work from the law's perspective, doesn't it? Oh, hell; get one of each...
Posted by: Matt A | August 22, 2007 5:21 PM
So, PZ...it looks like you're aware of the "special properties" of green M&Ms.
On a slightly more serious note, I have to wonder if the DI's irony meter is so far gone that they can't see the humor and contradiction in pushing their "science" (read: PR) by selective quote mining and editing, deception of intent, distortion and omission of relevant and cogent counterarguments, and other such dishonest techniques; rather than just trying to publish a d*mn rigorous and replicable peer-reviewed paper or three.
On second thought, I don't really have to wonder at all. They probably never had the meter in the first place.
Posted by: Captain C | August 22, 2007 5:21 PM
PZ, if we had known that you were being so solicited, I would have issued you something like the following warning:
"BEWARE of doing business with Hollywood types! The incidence of deceitfulness amongst them is exceptional."
Welcome to the Shafted Club.
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | August 22, 2007 5:22 PM
The guy with deep pockets appears to be the co-founder of Premise, Walt Ruloff, who "found himself rich and idle in the early 1990s at the age of 32 after he sold his software to Microsoft."
Posted by: plunge | August 22, 2007 5:23 PM
All those stars look good in the Recent Comments side-bar. :-D
I don't suppose you thought to have your own tape-recorder running during the interview, PZ, so that you could check (and, perhaps more crucially, prove) how they edited you.
Posted by: SEF | August 22, 2007 5:28 PM
"[this] is the video version of quote-mining and is fundamentally dishonest."
And this surprises you because...?
Obviously, they thought they could get jucier, edited, misrepresented quotes if your guard wasn't up. Although I suppose there's an outside chance they really did mean your interview only for Crossroads, however honest that movie might have been itself, and later decided to recycle it for the Stein film. But given the timeframes involved ("two years"), it seems likely they knew at the time.
Posted by: rrt | August 22, 2007 5:29 PM
The level of fairness to be expected from these yahoos can be seen in the above quote. They're not going to carefully consider what PZ says, they're going to confront those evil atheists.
By the way, Eugenie typically has played down her atheism and talked up the science, which makes such a portrayal yet another deceitful tactic. Her point isn't atheism, it's good science (not that good science isn't PZ's point as well, but you know...). Then again, what would these idiots know about good science.
Well, it's just more of the rampant religiosity running through ID, which of course was always concerned primarily about confronting atheists and any science they do that conflicts with their precious religious beliefs.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 22, 2007 5:29 PM
All in the same paragraph as well.Posted by: CJ | August 22, 2007 5:31 PM
Wait a second. So Robert Pennock, Eugenie Scott and Atheist Pope Richard I were also interviewed under false pretenses?
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 22, 2007 5:32 PM
Just remember: If you're really religious, God will forgive you for misleading the unchurched. That's because the ends justify the means. Of course, you really have to read between the lines to find that in the New Testament, but Christian leaders have been doing it for decades (if not centuries or even millennia), so it must be implied in there somehow.
Funny how it's the other guy whom they call the "Father of Lies."
Posted by: Zeno | August 22, 2007 5:38 PM
All I can say is Dammit! On the one hope that I am ever in the position to produce a documentary on Evo/Devo, Atheism, or Cephalapods, it would turn out to be 6 hour drive for a lost cause. Damn those creationists! How can I afford the appropriate number of green candies only making an honest undergrad living. It's a sad state of affairs I must say.
-Freelancer
Posted by: freelancer | August 22, 2007 5:41 PM
Yes. And Dawkins isn't happy about it. I expect something on his site sometime soon about this affair.
Posted by: PZ Myers | August 22, 2007 5:43 PM
Now I have a dilemma, I was going to ignore the movie, but now I want to get a bunch of science and rhetoric literate bloggers to go to the opening and review it, but i don't want to give those dishonest wankers any of my money... What to do, what to do.
I suppose we could get Bora to buy one ticket and then open the fire door so we can all sneak in and watch it.
Will there be a black tie premier somewhere? I own a black tie. We could all go to the premier and throw fruit. I also own fruit. It would go down in theater history like the riot at the premier of The Rite of Spring, only fruitier.
Posted by: John McKay | August 22, 2007 5:45 PM
I live in L.A. and have known a number of people in "the industry," consequently I'm always a tad suspicious. If you Google "rampant films" plus the names of any of the "properties" on their website, the only hit you get is -- their website. "Rampant Films" does not appear in IMDB, nor do any of the "property" titles.
Here's the Big Red Flag -- although the production company's address is in Sherman Oaks, California, the phone number's area code is the state of New Mexico. I will take a drive by their address on my way home and see what it looks like, but I'm pretty sure you've been scammed, PZ.
Posted by: Pieter B | August 22, 2007 5:50 PM
[quote]Everyone knows that red M&Ms are the best by far.[/quote]
Stone the heretic! Brown M&Ms are the one true messiah.
On-topic, and echoing #1: "cheeky fuckers". Also, if their god valued honesty and integrity, wouldn't these jokers be heading to hell in a burning coal bucket? Ah well, the hypocrisy of the religious is truly a wonder to behold.
Posted by: Mono Ape | August 22, 2007 5:50 PM
John McKay (#26):
Ha!
Forget the fruit. I'll bring meat. The kind of meat unknown outside Chinatown. It will be epic.
PZ Myers (#25):
It does seem awfully stupid of the movie's producers to let that bit of information slip this early.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 22, 2007 5:53 PM
This whole thing is rotten to the core.
What a bunch of amoral creeps.
phat
Posted by: phat | August 22, 2007 5:56 PM
I thought the intersection between science and religion was abnormal psychology.
Posted by: Rose Colored Glasses | August 22, 2007 5:56 PM
Daenku32,
I should have mentioned that my book is anti-creationism and anti-ID. You will not get it for free from AiG, ARN, the Disco Inst, or your local monotheistic church.
Posted by: Paul Lurquin | August 22, 2007 5:57 PM
Wow PZ, in a movie with Ben Stein -- I wonder how many degrees from Kevin Bacon that makes you?
Only two if you can believe it.
Kevin Bacon was in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles with Ben Stein.
Posted by: Nullifidian | August 22, 2007 5:58 PM
There is a blog where you can supply comments to Ben about his movie. Let's ask some questions.
http://expelledthemovie.com/blog/2007/08/21/bens-blog/#more-4
Posted by: Dan | August 22, 2007 5:58 PM
Did you sign something that said specifically that it would only be used in the one movie? Is there any way to, dare I say, sue over the false representation this "producer" provided to you?
Posted by: Carlie | August 22, 2007 6:01 PM
You could sue them...oh, wait, that's what crackpots do.
Posted by: PalMD | August 22, 2007 6:04 PM
So if PZ has a Bacon number is two what's his Erdos number?
Posted by: Dave Godfrey | August 22, 2007 6:10 PM
Hey!
Posted by: Carlie | August 22, 2007 6:10 PM
Pieter B says, "I will take a drive by their address on my way home and see what it looks like, but I'm pretty sure you've been scammed, PZ."
I would definitely bet on it.
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | August 22, 2007 6:12 PM
No one knows for sure at this point whether they'll edit the interview to undermine what you actually said, though it would be surprising if that were not their intentions.
How are the lawsuits against "Borat" going? There were a lot of suits filed by people stating that they wouldn't have signed releases if the true purpose of the project were known to them at the time. I don't know if any have been successful. You should sue. $15,000,000 sounds good for some reason.
Posted by: Mike | August 22, 2007 6:16 PM
Hmm... Apparently I know someone who was part of this. I thought that might be the case, but I wasn't sure. Now I see his picture on the Rampant Films website. I haven't seen him since he went to go help with the filming of a pro-ID film, but if I run into him I could ask him some questions.
Posted by: pough | August 22, 2007 6:19 PM
Sounds to me like a fraudulent contract. Didn't I tell you before that you might need an agent?
Posted by: Elizabeth | August 22, 2007 6:20 PM
That's how Borat got most of his interviews too. I congratulate you on your 15 minutes of fame, even if the movie is a farce. I just hope there is no equivalent of the hotel scene...
Posted by: Scholar | August 22, 2007 6:21 PM
PZ,...
I have no idea when this interview took place, but as soon as I saw the "pause" bit that happened to Dawkin's, I wrote to you and asked you if you'd seen it. I did this because I knew that they would try things like this with people like you, and I thought you should be aware...
I do not like to call you naive, but I really think you should have suspected this at the time when they came to you, and had asked for good evidence as to who was backing the film.
I know you are quite the bright guy and all that, but please use some street smarts...
Posted by: Lago | August 22, 2007 6:25 PM
Good call on the green M&Ms.
Posted by: Jody | August 22, 2007 6:30 PM
Pooor PZ. One day he's getting sued by an author with a bad book, the other day he's been quote mined for an ID conspiracy movie.
Posted by: Geral | August 22, 2007 6:36 PM
AVOID THE BLUE M&M's. They are satanic, like the Smurfs. The Smurfs are satanic because they are blue. Blue is the color of dead people who are possessed. My younger son's second grade church school teacher tried to explain this to him and he said "That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard." He walked out and never went back to church school. Just to be sure I avoid anything blue. (My high school football team was called the Blue Devils. They never won a single game. Satan sucks at sports.)
Posted by: wrpd | August 22, 2007 6:37 PM
A clue may be the salutation he used in his letter.
He can't have much respect for a person if he won't use Dr. rather than Mr.
Pet peeve of mine.
Posted by: Vern In Bama | August 22, 2007 6:38 PM
"Wow PZ, in a movie with Ben Stein -- I wonder how many degrees from Kevin Bacon that makes you?
Only two if you can believe it.
Kevin Bacon was in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles with Ben Stein."
I believe it is only one degree of separation, isn't it?
Posted by: Lago | August 22, 2007 6:38 PM
wait--you let yourself be interviewed for a movie, and there was no waiver? nothing legal signed?
You need to be a little more....skeptical...when working with the media.
Posted by: bug_girl | August 22, 2007 6:38 PM
Yeah PZ, you need an agent. You're actually famous now.
Also if you made $1200, imagine what they had to pay Dawkins? I know he charges tens of thousands just for normal appearances.
Posted by: Andrew | August 22, 2007 6:39 PM
Although, I guess, big fat guy penis wrestling isn't for everyone.
Posted by: Stogoe | August 22, 2007 6:43 PM
Here's a trivia question: how has the lowest combined Bacon and Erdos number? There must be someone with connections to both - maybe PZ? I know there are evolutionary biologists such as Gould and Lewontin that can be traced back via their collaborators to collaborators with Erdos, so I bet PZ can too - maybe he has the lowest combined number...
Posted by: Chris S | August 22, 2007 6:45 PM
pough: Please do! And while you're at it, ask him if the producers' dishonesty is in accordance with his beliefs (but only after you've pumped him for info...)
Posted by: rrt | August 22, 2007 6:46 PM
well, if you were ever looking for an excuse to download a movie and avoid giving the producers the ticket money, this is probably it...
Posted by: peter | August 22, 2007 6:49 PM
Actually, I have emailed Mathis. We'll see if he replies.
Posted by: PZ Myers | August 22, 2007 6:49 PM
I get the feeling they are going to quote mine this interview so severely that it will look like the visual representation of a ransom note cobbled together with words and letters from newspaper clippings.
And, those pricks probably didn't even film your good side, either.
On the other hand, it's kind of sad that Ben Stein would sign on to such a dishonest project. Poor man must not be selling many eye drops, I figure.
Posted by: Dan | August 22, 2007 6:50 PM
I can't help thinking of the "Gummi Venus de Milo" episode of the Simpsons. Kent Brockman interviewing Homer, with the obvious quote mining (complete with a clock in the background jumping around between times) to make Homer appear evil.
Wait, was there a clock in the background of the interview?
Was there a "true Scotsman" filming you from the bushes outside?
Posted by: markmier | August 22, 2007 6:52 PM
Stein is a multi-millionaire. He doesn't need any of the jobs he takes. He does them out of vanity.
phat
Posted by: phat | August 22, 2007 6:55 PM
Hey PZ,
Long time reader, first time commenter.
Anyways, one has to admit that Rampant Films looks completely fake. The website is nice and flashy, but screams bullshit. Plus you do other searches on other sites, imdb, etc... and there is NO record of a Rampant Films other than a listed of a Rampant Films Limited in the UK. There's also a Myspace URL with that title...which is based out of hong kong. www.myspace.com/rampantfilms
As far as Premise Media Corp is concerned... aside from their flashy website, which screams of bullshit, again nothing except the one press release and one job listing saying they're out of Bowen Island, British Columbia.
hmm... is it just me or does all of this just seem fishy???
Posted by: Carl | August 22, 2007 6:55 PM
Perhaps one should request an unedited copy of all interviews (in its entirety) as a standard portion of your interview 'fee'? This documentation would most certainly provide a context sensitive reference in case you choose to argue points, demonstrate any intentional deception or just to relive your 15min of fame in the comfort of your home.
Posted by: gbusch | August 22, 2007 7:01 PM
also, if you look up ben stein on imdb.com. this project is not currently listed anywhere...
or mathis, or rampant films or the title... may not mean much, but imdb usually seems to get a lot of info.
Posted by: peter | August 22, 2007 7:01 PM
wow!! i'm totally stoked about the erdos number / kevin bacon number thing. as far as i knew there were only like, what, a handful of people who had both? we talked about it in discrete structures last semester. i think the math dept is going to have to change the syllabus to mention pz by name now! wow!!
...okay, back to my pcr.
Posted by: kansas_lib | August 22, 2007 7:07 PM
24 hours. You get sued for 15 million dollars, comment on a Ben Stein movie and then you find out you are in said movie by trickery. Once perhaps bad luck, twice a coincidence, third enemy action. Smells of a twisted and evil viral marketing campaign and you are it. Everything is real and nothing is real and they are out to get you. The only thing to do is attack! By the way, try using an oblique approach.
Posted by: C W Lucas | August 22, 2007 7:07 PM
Maybe they're just so used to lying that it didn't even occur to them that they could get an interview any other way?
Posted by: Will | August 22, 2007 7:11 PM
Apparently, that gives you a Bacon number of 2.
Posted by: L33tminion | August 22, 2007 7:11 PM
If the green M&Ms work as advertised I'm sure seeing Ben Stein will pretty much kill these feelings. It seems like par for the course that ID will misrepresent itself and then quotemine to get what they want.
PZ is going to be famous. First, a lawsuit and now a moviestar!
Posted by: Unstable Isotope | August 22, 2007 7:15 PM
"I will take a drive by their address on my way home and see what it looks like, but I'm pretty sure you've been scammed, PZ."
If google maps is correct, it's an apartment building. I live down the street from it.
I haven't rung the bell on that apartment number, however. It might be fun to do it with a video camera rolling, and ask for Mr. Mathis.
Posted by: Siamang | August 22, 2007 7:16 PM
So Ben Stein is totally cool with expediting the new dark ages for the christofascists. No concern for truth or enlightenment, nor, apparently, for the probable negative outcome of institutional Christianity for other Jewish people.
Posted by: jeff | August 22, 2007 7:24 PM
So, what questions were asked in this interview for "Crossroads"?
Posted by: Stanton | August 22, 2007 7:28 PM
Is deviousness and dishonesty an integral part of the Abrahamic religions? So it would seem. Is this how Jebus would make a documentary?
Posted by: Richard | August 22, 2007 7:36 PM
Blake Stacey (#29)
Forget the fruit. I'll bring meat.
The only meat I can think of that would be appropriate for a Creationist movie would be eyeballs, in memory of Rev. Paley. Well, the exhaust from living meat, especially cows, would also be appropriate.
Posted by: John McKay | August 22, 2007 7:43 PM
Did they make you sign a very lengthy release form prior to filming by any chance?
Posted by: Ben D | August 22, 2007 7:44 PM
Some handy household hints for the interviewed...
1. Check up on the company and people behind it. In particular, ask what they've done in the past that you might have heard of, or you might be able to see. Many companies are set up for particular projects, so won't have any track record - in which case, ask about the director, producer or funding. A bona fide operation will ALWAYS be able to answer these questions to your satisfaction - indeed, will be only too happy to produce their credentials. "Can you send me a tape/DVD of some stuff you've done already?".
2. Ask to see the script or a copy of the proposal to the backers. By the time someone's pointing a camera at you, there will be a lot of paper somewhere describing the structure and intent of the project. Even just asking for an email or letter confirming their verbal description of what they're doing, on company paper, can be a most interesting exercise. Again, if this is a legitimate exercise, you can expect a positive reaction to such requests (hell, they've been shopping this around for ages!).
3. "Is it OK if I tape this too?" Your own camera, or even just a dictaphone, set up nearby and recording throughout the interview, works wonders.
R
Posted by: Rupert | August 22, 2007 7:50 PM
Wait a minute, mate. Are you saying the Christians lied to you to get an interview? Isn't that a sin?
Surely the good Lord cannot bless this film when it was steeped in falsehoods.
Posted by: Robert S. | August 22, 2007 7:50 PM
I do not see any deceit in the letter or published blurb about Crossroads. If anything, only the title changed. There is nothing to indicate that the original (or even the new one) was in favor of either side of the argument. They both purport to cover the disconnect between the sides, to expose the suppression of freedom of thought in public schools. Only one's personal convictions and background cloud one's perceptions of and probable intent of these printings.
Secondly, we have to take PZ's word regarding the veracity of the two printings, as well as the time spent with the interviewer, to be true and accurate. Until you have talked with the other side, don't be so quick to judge.
As a professor of documentary film, the filmmakers' methods, even as directly reported by PZ, are not illegal, immoral, or unethical. Whether or not they are malicious or otherwise is a matter of intent, which we cannot judge by actions alone.
If PZ answered their questions honestly, then there is nothing about which he should be ashamed or upset. They weren't there to argue, only to ask questions, regardless of their intent or pretenses.
The thing I find most troubling is the lack of tolerance on the part of several posters with regards to faiths who believe in ID or Creationism. Were this any group of people (race, gender, nationality, etc.) other than religious-based ones, they would display more tolerance and less prejudice.
I also think the hypocrisy is stifling. Michael Moore commits these kind of professional faux-pas and atrocities in all of his work, but I don't hear any complaining...only raucous "hurrah's" and applause. And he isn't the only one.
And before you continue condemning or accusing "religion" of shady and nefarious plots, perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word. Evolution meets every criteria of a religion, yet it is sanctioned and supported by the government.
"Truth is not a democracy."
Posted by: Ecrivan | August 22, 2007 7:52 PM
Hey, PZ, have you warned / notified Robert Pennock and Eugene Scott? I guess Dawkins probably knows by now or will very soon, but I don't think Robert is quite so plugged in.
Anyway, seems like a neighborly thing to do, and your email has a higher chance of getting through than mine would...
Posted by: travc | August 22, 2007 7:53 PM
They wanted to come off as rebels, so they chose Ben Stein? What, wasn't Kirk Cameron available.
Also, when Stein passes someone on the way to a pulpit at one point, isn't that "disgraced evangelical" Ted Haggard?
Posted by: Robert S. | August 22, 2007 7:55 PM
Did you give them that line about needing more abortions?
Posted by: sailor | August 22, 2007 7:56 PM
I have been a scientist for close to 40 years and I have just one problem for you, the atheistic intelligentsia (or, superpseudos as we used to call you): Take a Mercedes Benz apart and reduce it to a pile of all of its smallest elements. Then, using any probabilistic model you choose, after placing all of these parts in a big bag and hanging the bag only 20 feet from the ground, how many millions of years of dropping all of the parts to the ground would it take before the parts came together to form the original automobile? (Process: Drop the parts, put all the parts back in the bag after they've hit the ground, hoist the bag again to 20 feet and drop again.) My model, results in infinity, an incalculable number of years. But what you jerks are asking people like me to believe is that somehow over a 200 million years or so, accidental collisions created DNA, the basic molecule fundamental to all life, and that this DNA mutated over time, by accidental collisions, to create all of the different kinds of life we have on earth and, more than that, because you believe our ancestors were fish, somehow DNA mutations caused us to evolve to the very complex human species we are today. To this, I answer Crap! Listen jerks, do a little DNA bench research sometime, then you will see how truly tough that molecule is and how resistant it is to change. There is only one way to explain the beauty and simplicity of our universe and that is through the synthesis of science and religion postulated by Intelligent Design Creationism.
Posted by: Mojotycoon | August 22, 2007 7:57 PM
Yikes. #75 is gon' be clobbered.
"If PZ answered their questions honestly, then there is nothing about which he should be ashamed or upset. They weren't there to argue, only to ask questions, regardless of their intent or pretenses."
That is exactly why PZ has reason to be angry. They were there to ask him questions so that they could take what he said and use it against the scientific community. They should have been upfront so he could consciously respond to what he suspected would be taken out of context and, at the least, prevent himself from saying anything that /would/ be taken out of context.
"And before you continue condemning or accusing "religion" of shady and nefarious plots, perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word. Evolution meets every criteria of a religion, yet it is sanctioned and supported by the government."
Oh, ouch. Mincemeat.
Posted by: Collin | August 22, 2007 7:57 PM
I doubt that it will come to Australia, so I won't have the opportunity to participate in my suggestion. But feel free the rest of you.
Why don't you get into audience participation at the movie, like people do for the Rocky Horror Picture Show? Dress up in lab coats (with suspenders and fishnet stockings), boo at the evil atheists, cheer the defenders of the faith, throw fruit (a la John McKay #26) or dodgy meat (a la Blake, OM, #29)etc.
It could become a cult classic for us science nerds.
Posted by: KiwiInOz | August 22, 2007 7:58 PM
Re: Ecrivan
Uh oh.
This should be entertaining.
So Ecriva, can you point out what these requirements are, you know, these ones religion and evolution both meet.
(this is just the beginning)
phat
Posted by: phat | August 22, 2007 7:58 PM
Were this any group of people (race, gender, nationality, etc.) other than religious-based ones, they would display more tolerance and less prejudice.
Really, Ecrivan? How do you feel about Scientology?
Criticizing irrational belief systems is not the same as demeaning people for their race. Do not try to conflate the two.
Which isn't to say that the criticism can't be leveled in a civil tone. The criticism itself, however, is not only legitimate, warranted, it's increasingly, direly necessary.
Posted by: Robert S. | August 22, 2007 7:59 PM
#79...
I (not to mention this entire group of blog readers) highly doubt you are a "scientist". What kind of scientist? Who are you? Why not supply that information to begin with?
You're recitation of a Point Refuted A Thousand Times is even more indicative of your dishonesty.
Posted by: Collin | August 22, 2007 8:01 PM
I very much look forward to your evisceration of this terrible movie. What a bunch of dishonest hacks.
As for PZ's Bacon Number, it is indeed down to 2. However, if you expand Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon outside of films (Transcendental Bacon Numbers), the game has gotten substantially easier thanks to the crazy guy who filed a lawsuit with 56 pages of defendants, including Mein Kampf (yes, the book), the Great Wall of China, the Nordic Gods, the entire Ming Dynasty, almost any celebrity you can think of... and Kevin Bacon.
Posted by: Micah | August 22, 2007 8:03 PM
"I have been a scientist for close to 40 years"
No you're not.
phat
Posted by: phat | August 22, 2007 8:04 PM