…and this is a 
Media alert!
Category: Kooks
Posted on: February 27, 2008 8:59 AM, by PZ Myers
The makers of Expelled have just issued an "online media alert" in response to a critical review of their movie, as some readers have forwarded to me. It's hysterical.
We already had our first security breech [sic] and are asking YOU now for your support to stand up for EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed. Hosted by Ben Stein, EXPELLED contains a critical message at a critical time. As an underdog in Hollywood right now, we need your support.
Recently Robert Moore, a film critic from The Orlando Sentinel pretending to be a minister, snuck into a private screening, did not sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement, and criticized the film the next day in his article.
Moore compared Stein, who is Jewish, to Holocaust Deniers and charge that Stein's linking of Darwinism to the Holocaust was "despicable." Stein states, "The only thing I find despicable is when reporters sneak into screenings by pretending to be ministers. This is a new low even for liberal reporters."
That someone who saw their movie and panned it is now a "security breach"? That's funny. That they set up a private screening for the religiously devout in expectation that they would receive their seal of approval is just plain pathetic. At least they aren't pretending that their movie is anything but a desperate pander to the religious right.
If you read the review, you'll see that Moore received an email invitation that was sent to the Orlando Sentinel, and took advantage of it. If they allowed someone to see their movie without signing an NDA, that's their problem. They don't get to complain and call it a security breach, especially when they built their movie around interviews obtained from me, Eugenie Scott, and Richard Dawkins, and others under entirely false pretenses. After all, if they can disguise themselves as serious documentarians to land an interview, what's wrong with a critic attending a screening tailored for conservative ministers?
I do note Stein's hypocrisy and lack of proportion. Joining a group of ministers to watch a movie: very despicable. Implying that Darwin and the scientists who recognize the value of his theory are responsible for the murder of millions of people and the instigation of a war that shook the whole world: not despicable. I'm probably going to go see their dreadful bit of dreck when it comes out, but now I'm tempted to commit a crime against humanity by putting on a fake clerical collar when I do so.
Comments
It contains "a critical message at a critical time," and it's "despicable" to go and watch it and write about it. Nice.
Posted by: mona | February 27, 2008 9:07 AM
OH NOES!! Movie reviews for a .... movie. What will they think of next. Hilarious that they are so secretive of a movie. Movies are made for people to see, at least that seems to be the trend since movie have been made. I mean it's not like this is Cloverfield, the "plot" is out there for everyone already.
Sheesh.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 27, 2008 9:09 AM
The Expelled people sent out an e-mail to educators last week to encourage us to take student groups to pack early showings of the movie, thereby goosing the first-week attendance. The message, written by a PR hireling, is supposed to impress teachers by (a) including a bogus Lincoln quote (good research, guys!) and (b) appending a list of celebrity endorsers of the movie. The endorsers include James Dobson and Michael Medved, but not a single scientist. Somehow, I'm not impressed.
Posted by: Zeno | February 27, 2008 9:18 AM
Sort of like Dick Cheney's "Treated as Secret" stamp for press releases. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cheney/chapters/chapter_1/
Posted by: mona | February 27, 2008 9:18 AM
If it weren't for the particularly gross level of hypocrisy, I'd be able to find that extra-extra funny. OH NOES! Someone used false pretenses to spread the unvarnished truth while we were busy carefully trying to control the media to prevent this sort of thing from getting out!
Since I didn't see PZ post a video of his interview, I'm guessing the Expelled crew is still wussing out on the offer to have it displayed in its entirety.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | February 27, 2008 9:19 AM
Hang on...they're reacting to a Feb. 1 "security breech" by someone who "snuck" into a private screening now?
Posted by: J | February 27, 2008 9:21 AM
I strongly recomend pirating the movie, its probably already available somewhere online. normally I don't condone that sorta crime, but these guys shouldn't make money off of this mess...
An orgy of propaganda and academic dishonesty shouldn't be a profitable idea...
I get the feeling its never actually going to be released to the public, they don't seem to want anyone who isn't a religious nut to see it, they'll just keep doing these private screenings untill the whole country has seen it...except us.
Posted by: Al | February 27, 2008 9:22 AM
I'm curious, did Robert Moore don a dog collar, or did he just present his invitation with a straight face and not jump up and down and shout "I'm a Reporter" "I'm a reporter."
Posted by: Figment | February 27, 2008 9:24 AM
Also, note this litle bit: "Moore compared Stein, who is Jewish, to Holocaust Deniers...". As though Stein's jewishness insulates him from the charge; well, I'm jewish (yes, I'm an atheist, but I'm still jewish) and nothing about being jewish prevents one from being an idiot, I'll tell you. As though that isn't readily apparent in Stein's case.
And yes, his comparison is despicable, and yes, he (and Denise O'Leary et al.) ARE Holocaust deniers of a most subtle sort; they may not deny it happened but in attempting to apostrophize its many causes into a simpleton's argument (all for the sake of scoring a PR point against Darwin) is perhaps even worse, and should their simpleton's thesis take root, very dangerous. "See, I can't be an antisemite, I'm Jewish!" is just as illogically insidious a non sequitur as, "See, we're not Nazis, we're good bible-folk! We're not evil Darwinists! Everything we do is sweetness and light! Only atheists can be evil! They are the source of evil!".
It's as much to pardon their own sins as to impute to us our own they equivocate so. It's an old religious formula.
Posted by: Geoffrey Alexander | February 27, 2008 9:26 AM
putting on a fake clerical collar
The full archbishop rig, surely!
Posted by: Mrs Tilton | February 27, 2008 9:26 AM
Pet peeve...."sneaked" not "snuck."
Posted by: Grammar Police | February 27, 2008 9:30 AM
A security "breech"?! What's that, a diaper with locks on the pins? Sounds like a perfect garment for that whiny-ass titty-baby Stein... (Usually one has security breaches, unless one is particularly kinky...)
Posted by: Interrobang | February 27, 2008 9:36 AM
Liberal.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | February 27, 2008 9:38 AM
No, 'snuck' is a perfectly acceptable past participle form of 'sneak'. Although less excepted in formal writing.
Posted by: maxi | February 27, 2008 9:38 AM
Presumably this film is so bad that it will generate a 'cult' following?
Or have I confused cause and effect?
Posted by: DiscoveredJoys | February 27, 2008 9:44 AM
And then, they are caught quote-raping again :
this is what Moore wrote :
"Most despicably, Stein, a Jew, invokes the Holocaust, making the Hitler-was-a-Darwinist argument, this AFTER he's used the Holocaust denier's favorite trick, probabilities, "math," to show how remote the chances are that life was created by natural, not supernatural processes. There were plenty of reasons eugenics caught on as an idea among certain nationalist-conservative and even scientific circles in the early 20th century, and most of them have nothing to do with Darwin."
please note how this gets qutote-raped into :
"Moore compared Stein, who is Jewish, to Holocaust Deniers and charge that Stein's linking of Darwinism to the Holocaust was "despicable."
Now, an appropriate translation could have been
"Moore noted that Stein is a Jew and uses similar despicable tricks as holocaust deniers in order to link Hitler to Darwinism"
But no, that's not ok for them, so they have to change the meaning.
What dishonest liars !
Posted by: negentropyeater | February 27, 2008 9:45 AM
Accepted, not excepted. :)
Posted by: Alexandra | February 27, 2008 9:48 AM
This whole "issue" is being blown up beyond proportion by the Expelled people. It's like they think they are in Stalinist Russia, screening anti-establishment propaganda that was sneaked into their theaters, only to be found out (horror of horrors) by "the establishment"! Oh, NO! What are these underground patriots going to do?!? They're going to be dragged before the thought police and brain-washed! Their families will be taken to gulags in the bitter tundra of Alaska to work in oil excavation until they die! Oh, wait... No.
Yes, they are truly "Expelled" - from rational thought. (Well, duh.)
Grammar Police: http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/usage/snuck
I really liked how the author of this entry made his little pun about how 'snuck' "crept" into usage.
Posted by: Umlud | February 27, 2008 9:49 AM
I'm with #7. Is this movie ever going to come out in theatres for the general public? If it does I am fully planning on sneaking in.
Posted by: LisaJ | February 27, 2008 9:54 AM
What exactly does Stein want his army of loyal followers to do? Barricade the doors? Against who? He even invited the Orlando Sentinel to the screening of his movie. Does he want mobs to toss onto the street anyone who won't sign the confidentiality agreement?
I know this has been noted before, but if you speak in a public forum, your ideas are going to get criticized. I suppose that it's only ok to criticize evidence-based beliefs, but if you say one bad thing about my logical fallacies, it's A BREECH!! A BREECH I TELL YOU!!
Geez.
Posted by: Muse142 | February 27, 2008 9:58 AM
Damn my stupid formatting. Oh well. You all know what I meant. ;)
Posted by: Muse142 | February 27, 2008 10:00 AM
They require a non-disclosure agreement for a movie screening? Isn't this slightly... odd?
PZ is right: They are not trying to make a mainstream movie. Instead, they are covering it with a mainstream veneer, in order to avoid the stale-air and mothball scent of the Christian bookshops in which it would otherwise be sold.
Posted by: hyperdeath | February 27, 2008 10:02 AM
From what I understand 'snuck' is the proper form used in Canada, 'sneaked' sounds ridiculous to me. just like spelling colour without the 'u'.
Posted by: Al | February 27, 2008 10:04 AM
Well I will have to go check out the paper this morning to see if Moore wrote anything about this. I'm sure it will be interesting to see if there is a libel suit against the producers of expelled after this false accusation.
Oh and You know why you keep talking bad about this movie? (from the expelled blog)
"Paul is one of the stars in the film EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed. He's probably remembering all of the things that he said on camera, when we interviewed him and faithfully recorded it all. That couldn't be making him feel very good
When the film comes out in April - we think that he's going to have some explaining to do - and his handlers at Big Science aren't going to be very happy with what they see and hear him say. The same goes for fellow-traveler professor Richard Dawkins, the atheist author of "The God Delusion." He's definitely going to be in trouble with Big Science too, once the film comes out. The truth sometimes hurts.
Big Science doesn't like it when they can't control the message: it's why we made EXPELLED"
Posted by: Chris | February 27, 2008 10:04 AM
Wouldn't it be great if we could somehow splice the opening
of "Looney Tunes" in at the beginning, and then somehow sneak
frames of Bugs, Yosemite Sam, Foghorn Cleghorn and all the
other animation characters voicing the most outrageous
comments and snide remarks! Bugs could let out "Boy what
a Maroon!" when Stein appears on screen! What fun we could have with this comic film with comics of our own. Nothing
would be too harsh and depictive to make jackasses out of
Stein and his cronies!
Posted by: Holbach | February 27, 2008 10:04 AM
This Expelled debacle gets funnier ever week. Are we sure that the producers of the film are not on 'our side'?
Posted by: MH | February 27, 2008 10:13 AM
Was this an email sent out to people? I can't seem to find it online, and was wanting to send it to roger moore if noone else had done so.
Posted by: Chris | February 27, 2008 10:14 AM
Um, PZ, as one of your handlers from Big Science, we need to speak, asap. Use public key Tangled Bank, standard protocols.
(there may be a serious breech)
Posted by: BruceA | February 27, 2008 10:15 AM
NVM he knows. from his blog
"Right now I couldn't care less about the ID/evolution debate. What I think is appauling is that Robert Moore would use unethical tacticts to pose as a pastor, sneak into a private screening and purposely not sign an NDA just to air his own personal opinions. This isn't a movie review, it's another example of a jerk journalist who just wants attention. No matter what the content, a movie review is well balanced and objective. This is anything but. All Robert Moore has done is show his sheer ignorance as a journalist. What a waste of HTML! He's a loser in my book.
Posted by: TRAT Media | February 26, 2008 at 09:57 PM
TRAT Media? Might this be the incompetent boob who "invited" me to the screening? Yes, I was invited. They tried to uninvite me. I didn't POSE as anything. Showed up, walked in, notebook in hand, and watched. Didn't sign the secret convenant, either. And the name is ROGER Moore.
Posted by: roger | February 27, 2008 at 09:37 AM"
Posted by: Chris | February 27, 2008 10:18 AM
More likely they'll release it direct to video and claim that the evil darwinists suppressed it.
Posted by: Bobby | February 27, 2008 10:21 AM
The only thing? Wow. So theres nothing else Mr. Stein finds despicable?
Posted by: Ian | February 27, 2008 10:27 AM
How ironic that the intent of making the movie was to change minds, yet they expect to preach to their flock at every turn. It's also worth mentioning the rather stark victimhood-driven "criminalization" of reviewing a f***ing movie. Oh no! Someone broke in just to give us a bad review! Have such things ever happened, let alone someone complain about it as if vandals came along and heckled them?
And as usual, there's a trail of proof that tells a story entirely different than the one they're selling. At this point it simply looks as if they invited the guy expecting to get a good review, and when they didn't they had a Plan B story to fall back on to shift attention. Oh the tangled web they weave...
Posted by: BlueIndependent | February 27, 2008 10:32 AM
Alexandra @17
Argh! What a complete fool I've made of myself. I knew it didn't look right. But couldn't quite work out what was wrong. I'm blaming Microsoft Excel for frying my brain.
That is the last time I mock someone for misusing except vs accept...
Back to snuck vs sneak. The American Heritage Dictionary tells me 'snuck' snuck into American English in the early 20th century and is now widely ACCEPTED as the informal past participle form of 'sneak'. Though literary snobs do still tend to look down upon it.
And back on topic, we still haven't heard a peep about EXPELLED over here in Blighty.
Posted by: maxi | February 27, 2008 10:34 AM
PZ can wear his collar, as he is already a pope, according to Malaclypse the Younger.
Posted by: bill r | February 27, 2008 10:34 AM
Perhaps Expelled will singlehandedly bring back Mystery Science Theatre 3000. It's the only justifiable treatment.
Posted by: Ray S. | February 27, 2008 10:36 AM
I agree... I would say I can't understand why they aren't more self-conscious about the whiny, nerdy, asking-to-get-an-ass-beating persona they're giving to their entire operation, but then I realize -- their higher ups know that that could just bring in more money. Fortunately I know a lot of people will either pirate the film or sneak in to see it.
I just wish they'd man up and quit bellyachin' so damn much. It's grating.
Posted by: Holydust | February 27, 2008 10:42 AM
I'm shocked...shocked, that a movie reviewer should be allowed to print movie reviews.
This just reinforced how intolerant religious folks can be. I wonder why, if their faith is so strong, they feel so threatened. I mean, has anyone told them to close their churches? Has anyone told the ministers to turn in their Lexuses (Lexi?)?
Posted by: PalMD | February 27, 2008 10:43 AM
Roger Moore wrote this recently on his blog, in response to the TRAT Media boob:
So it appears that they're lying even in their whine that someone other than those predisposed to favor lies managed to see their dreck.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | February 27, 2008 10:44 AM
Somebody ought to give Stein and Co. a swift kick in the BREECHES.
Posted by: Donnie B. | February 27, 2008 10:45 AM
Dammit, Ray S., you beat me to it.
I do like the use of "breech" in context of "expel." This film was having a difficult birth, and now seems abortive. It would seem that the preview version was "untimely ripp'd" by Moore. :-P
Posted by: Kristine | February 27, 2008 10:50 AM
"From what I understand 'snuck' is the proper form used in Canada, 'sneaked' sounds ridiculous to me. just like spelling colour without the 'u'."
Yeah but you guys eat ketchup flavored potato chips. Who the hell knows what you'll do next?
Posted by: Craig | February 27, 2008 10:51 AM
Right, like journalists have never pretended to be someone else to get at a story.
/yawnsville
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 27, 2008 10:51 AM
I understand that one can achieve markedly better results by donning the real thing.
Stein & Co. are fascists. Who's inhibiting the free flow of information? Who's inhibiting open, unscripted discussion? Who's afraid of intellectual openess?
File under: "Irony, Oh The".
Posted by: Kseniya | February 27, 2008 10:53 AM
Whine of Expelled:
"Why doesn't the evil atheist conspiracy listen to what we say, and give us a fair hearing?"
Whine of Expelled when they accidentally allow someone honest to see the movie:
"Why does the evil atheist conspiracy use devious (which is disputed by Moore) methods to see our movie, and actually critique the movie?"
Yes, running dogs, you can try to keep any honest evaluations from appearing. That's your right, and nobody is taking away your rights, no matter how many times you say that they are.
But you can't reasonably claim that you're not being allowed to present your lies to the evil atheist conspiracy while you're doing your utmost to prevent the media from viewing your BS.
And by the way, it's pretty clear why you don't want movie critics seeing your horrible propaganda. They know how to fisk your lies, and you want only the stupid, the naive, and the dishonest to see what a load of manure your movie is, before you've suckered as many of those people as you can to give you their money.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | February 27, 2008 10:54 AM
Wouldn't it be great if we could somehow splice the opening of "Looney Tunes" in at the beginning, and then somehow sneak frames of Bugs, Yosemite Sam, Foghorn Cleghorn and all the other animation characters voicing the most outrageous comments and snide remarks!
That's a great idea - but it's Foghorn Leghorn! That's a joke, son! 'Cause he's, I say, he's a Leghorn! [/Foghorn Leghorn voice] I imagine this happened to a lot of people: I grew up on Looney Tunes, and then much later I learned that a) there was this loud-voiced radio guy "Senator Claghorn", and b) a Leghorn was a kind of chicken, and I finally got it. What a maroon!
Posted by: Dave M | February 27, 2008 11:12 AM
I think that we all should go in the finest frocks and fake priest collars we can find at the local costume shop. (Homemade ones are fine as well).
Posted by: Woden | February 27, 2008 11:14 AM
Ketchup flavoured crisps are amazing! Ideally one should mix one bag of ketchup flavour and one bag of prawn cocktail flavour in a bowl for the best afternoon snack.
Posted by: maxi | February 27, 2008 11:18 AM
Posted by: Pablo | February 27, 2008 11:27 AM
Security Breech! Isn't that some kind of chastity belt?
Posted by: Sceptical Chymist | February 27, 2008 11:31 AM
This steaming puddle of celluloid vomit is rapidly becoming the biggest non-event in the history of cinema. It's obvious from the tenor of the producers' screeds that they already know they have a howler on their hands, and are trying to identify and edit out its more egregious flaws.
The problem is that they only want to screen this drivel before sympathetic audiences who have already bought into the message, and therefore are poorly-equipped in the critical evaluation department. You can't lobotomize a target group and then expect them to perform brain surgery.
Someone with a nice covert streak and an excellent memory needs to infiltrate several of these screenings, look for their versions of cdesign proponentsists, and report back before "opening night," if there ever is one.
Right now, they may be pulling in the friendliest audiences they'll ever see, by sending the message out to select groups that their movie is an example of their message. To achieve this, they're trying to prevent access to any and all whose opinions they can not manage.
Posted by: Farb | February 27, 2008 11:32 AM
I see this movie as a successor to The Rocky Horror Picture Show in that, as #15 suggested, it becomes a cult movie with midnight showings on Fridays where people come dressed up as their favorite characters and proceed stand in front of the screen and recite the dialog along with the movie. I sure hope they have some memorable songs we can sing.
In any case, I'm going to start working on my Ben Stein outfit.
Posted by: Larry | February 27, 2008 11:33 AM
Stay tuned for the Expelled blog post screeching about PZ Myers crowing in triumph over his double agent infiltrating Expelled HQ! Stay tuned for the losers who click through to Pharyngula to piss and moan about how mean we are and throw out creationist falsehoods. And around and around it goes...
Posted by: Rey Fox | February 27, 2008 11:35 AM
Gobdammit PZ! There goes yet another irony-meter.
*sigh*
Posted by: demallien | February 27, 2008 11:37 AM
Well, I think it's obvious why the tagline is "no intelligence allowed". No one of any intelligence is allowed to review the movie!
Posted by: Don K | February 27, 2008 11:37 AM
Aside from Moore's denial that he even did this, Ben's moral compass is about as defective as is his understanding of science.
His "movie" is a deliberate slander against millions of people, most of whom are better than he. And it, plus the promotional materials, have been dishonest through and through since we first heard about the film.
The only thing Stein finds despicable, however, is someone sneaking in to expose their lies (the "sneaking in" seems not to be the truth, anyhow).
That's the height of amorality.
I guess the next film will have to be about how "Darwinism" creates nihilism and amorality--no, not in the "Darwinists," rather in the anti-evolutionists. They've had their moral bearing reft from them by animal-to-man ideas existing in society, thus they can't help their indifference to truth and to gross violations of decency, and so, you guessed it, evolution has to be destroyed.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | February 27, 2008 11:40 AM
At some point, this mockumentary will be released to the public and the public will have a chance to review it. I am sure this will be rated at the low end at Rotten Tomatoes. So an early review comes out two months early. So the question is this, is there time sensitive material in this work? How is one bad review going to hurt them when they know that bad reviews are going to shower upon them.
Oh. Wait! This is their way of posing as the persecuted truth carriers. Right! Carry on.
Posted by: Janine | February 27, 2008 11:54 AM
When people make this infuriating, bogus Darwin-Hitler comparison, I'm tempted to vomit up a load of Hitler's Christian rhetoric. As with evolution by random mutation and natural selection, we have piles of evidence against their loopy assertions and none in favor. But I refuse to wrestle in the mud with them, so I won't blame Hitler on the Christians.
Posted by: Wicked Lad | February 27, 2008 12:00 PM
Boy,what a maroon I am! Also an imBIcel, for getting
Foghorn's last name wrong!. Anyway, we could also get
Yosemite Sam to proclaim that freaking ben stein "An
ornery varmint" and then start blasting him! Heck, I would
prefer watching Looney Tunes than that freaking insane
bunch of "critters"!
Posted by: Holbach | February 27, 2008 12:04 PM
Wouldn't it be great if the information leakage forces them to delay in order to do damage control?
Posted by: Bronze Dog | February 27, 2008 12:05 PM
Trained lawyer/framer, peeyar whore, & Bollywood celebrity; Ben Stein, is creating "BUZZ."
Nisbet & Mooney told us all about buzz.
Frame the debate!
Moore is worse than an "unethical lurking journalista
Moore is a pervert/prevert who "likes to watch."
Posted by: gerald spezio | February 27, 2008 12:07 PM
Man, someone calling themselves Almost Expelled Student is waging a blistering attack on Big Science over at the Expelled blog. He/she has even revealed a devastating new scientific theory that Big Science Dogma has been keeping bottled up, Intelligent Messaging (IM) - says that "electromagnetic theory" is a hoax.
I sure am glad I'm not defending Big Science today.
Posted by: jimmiraybob | February 27, 2008 12:10 PM
Expelled is bribing schools to send students to this fundiefest. I guess that's one way to call the faithful.
Each school/home group that registers through the link below and submits their ticket stubs will be eligible for a donation as funds permit, but the school that submits the most ticket stubs will win a donation of $10,000!
I liked the endorsements, they set the tone nicely and unequivocally identify the real message of the movie:
http://www.getexpelled.com/quotes.php
So it's all about the science is it? ID has "nothing to do with religion"?
Posted by: Quidam | February 27, 2008 12:25 PM
This is usually MAJeff's job but he has not said this yet. So I will say it for him. Gerry, you fucking twit.
Posted by: Janine | February 27, 2008 12:48 PM
I love the idea of the makers of a movie supposedly about the suppression of debate making viewers sign a non-disclosure agreement.
Posted by: Ginger Yellow | February 27, 2008 12:54 PM
I'll add that review as a link on my new blog post:
Ben Stein: Crouching theocon, hidden nit-wit
Posted by: Norman Doering | February 27, 2008 1:02 PM
This is usually MAJeff's job but he has not said this yet. So I will say it for him. Gerry, you fucking twit.
I started a meme!
Posted by: MAJeff | February 27, 2008 1:07 PM
#64: I love the idea of the makers of a movie supposedly about the suppression of debate making viewers sign a non-disclosure agreement.
But it does go a long way to demonstrate that "teach the controversy" really means "teach only my side of the controversy that I imagine is there (so I can sell my stuff to gullible rabbits)."
For yet another example, consult the Peoples' Republic of Texas Department of Education, Gulag of Science Education Suppression Department.
Posted by: Farb | February 27, 2008 1:10 PM
"After all, if they can disguise themselves as serious documentarians to land an interview, what's wrong with a critic attending a screening tailored for conservative ministers?"
Its clear what happened, Robert Moore was originally a Minister and wanted to see the movie, but then his title was changed during the production of his review to something else.
It's not his fault and no deception was intended.
Sound familiar?
Posted by: Anonomouse | February 27, 2008 1:11 PM
Glen D (#55):
I don't think Ben Stein ever had a moral compass - he did write speeches for Nixon, after all. I think Stein's moral direction-finding is akin to the direction-finding capacity of a child after six hours on a Sit-n-Spin and at least two hits of LSD.
I think they've probably heard the "those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it" quote - the problem with them is that they very much would like to repeat it, particularly the Inquisition, with the ID flock and their enablers holding the garrotes in their bloodied hands. They seem to think that the sleep of reason will bring angels rather than monsters (or at least they hope that those who listen to them will believe it), and that no one looks too closely at them while they speak.
Posted by: Hap | February 27, 2008 1:12 PM
Just in case Stein & Co. decide, or have already decided, not to release the movie, and scream persecution by BIG SCIENCE as the reason, we should get a petition drive together to beg them to pretty pretty please, with sugar on top, please release this movie as soon as possible. The release of this movie is likely to prove quite useful in the battle against fundie stupidity, hypocrisy, dishonesty, and ignorance.
I have no clue how likely it might be that they NOT release the movie, but it would be nice to take that card away from them so that they have no chance to play it, or if they try anyway, are more clearly exposed as dishonest fools.
Posted by: Darrell E | February 27, 2008 1:12 PM
Off topic but here is a message for Norman Doering. When I hit your link, I got this message.
You naughty, naughty boy. You made some people upset. I hit the link that said that I felt I was mature enough to deal with potentially objectionable content.
Also off topic, MAJeff, you mean that is how a meme works?
Posted by: Janine | February 27, 2008 1:18 PM
I've heard that everyone who buys a ticket to the movie will be asked to sign a non-disclosure statement, to prevent ornery folk frm running home and panning the movie on the interweb.
(OK, OK, I really didn't hear this. But it's a great rumor to start, no?)
Posted by: Art | February 27, 2008 1:27 PM
Does Stein et al. have any evidence that Moore pretended to be a minister? I'm having a lot of trouble believing a claim on their say so...
Posted by: Joshua Zelinsky | February 27, 2008 2:13 PM
Posted by: Bobby | February 27, 2008 2:22 PM
"- Peter Furler, Lead singer, The Newsboys"
They're mobilizing the stars of Christian Rock! Oh NO! They'll LAME us to death!
Ah, I knew I'd get over my funk and be able to laugh at these people again. His mention of "eternal consequences" just reminds me of the Calvin & Hobbes "What if God is a big chicken?" comic.
(Note: That's chicken in the literal sense of a domestic gallinacious bird raised for food.)
Posted by: Rey Fox | February 27, 2008 2:31 PM
You forget, these guys aren't in the "evidence" business.
That just proves you're part of the "reality-based community", and therefore their mortal enemy.
Remember kids, it's not really lying if you're Lying for Jesus™!
Posted by: phantomreader42 | February 27, 2008 2:34 PM
Leave it to the amoral creationists who balance extermination and gas chambers as being on the same level as not getting published in a scientific journal.
Posted by: Doug | February 27, 2008 2:49 PM
"Perhaps Expelled will singlehandedly bring back Mystery Science Theatre 3000. It's the only justifiable treatment."
Have you heard of Rifftrax? Mike Nelson, et al, releasing MST-style audio tracks to listen to along with current movies! That might be the only way I could watch it, b/c I do feel the need to arm myself against such crap. Either that or with the whole Integrated Bio dept and LOTS of alcohol.
Posted by: MrSquid | February 27, 2008 2:52 PM
The important question would be what body part would you be planning to wear that collar on? They can range anywhere from something to make a statement with, like on your middle finger, to the very rude. Wanna clarify? ;^)
Posted by: Mena | February 27, 2008 2:55 PM
I think it would be really fun to get a large group together and dress up as bishops, nuns, priests, the pope, monks, etc. Then go and sit way up at the back of the theater and laugh at the insanity.
This could be bigger than Rocky Horror!
Posted by: Blondin | February 27, 2008 3:02 PM
I hate to give undue intelligence to these guys, but what if not showing the movie is part of their plan B.
1) They show the movie to the loyal at pre-screenings
2) The movie gets cancelled by the theatres early or before launch because it won't make any money.
3) All our snide comments (fully justified) are used as an excuse for why the movie is pulled.
4) Everyone knows about the controversy, no-one has seen the film, they hype up the censorship. They aren't doing this film for the money are they...
Honestly...I think they will try to pull the film before mass release...blaming censorship. Whereas it's in our best interests if the film does come out and everyone can see what they are really up to.
Posted by: Richard Eis | February 27, 2008 3:03 PM
NOW I read the other posts and realize my big idea was already proposed.
I second the motion...
Posted by: Blondin | February 27, 2008 3:08 PM
Are the explanatory memes commensurable or incommensurable, as in post modern sociology?
Only a prevert would deny his preversion when he clearly likes to watch and then type terrible falsehoods in falsetto.
Moore has exposed both his homosexuality, misogyny, and revealed his penchant for abusing children just like aged Islamo-preverts who marry nubile young girls.
I'll bet that Moore is a crypto anti-creationist, homophobic, child abuser, suicide bomber, & lurker who denies that he hates the Lawhd Gawd.
The Lawhd God created the world, including perceptive sociologists who can find the explanatory memes and "incommensurables."
Moore is clearly an anti- Semite too because he typed negative words about peeyar person Stein, who is Jewish & only means to help us understand how that prevert Darwin poisoned Hitler's brain, but not Ariel Sharon's brain, with Social Darwinist hooplah.
Darwin is also the source and cause of the demented Armenian peeyar framers misusing the broad framing device - Holocaust.
You can read in just about anything, if you are well versed in post modern sociology - Moore is so preverted that he even hates post modern sociology.
Only a trained feminist/sociologist who perceives, measures, and disseminates the incommensurables knows for sure.
Posted by: gerald spezio | February 27, 2008 3:09 PM
I suspect that "Expelled" will be pulled by its producers instead (But it already "pulls!"), under the guise of having been expelled.
Good afternoon. You've reached the corporate headquarters for the National Martyr Complex. How may I route your call?
Posted by: Farb | February 27, 2008 3:13 PM
I see I goofed up the link to the e-mail that the Expelled PR guy sent to educators last week. Here it is: [Link]
Posted by: Zeno | February 27, 2008 3:23 PM
Gerald, please open the window and allow the crack fumes to disperse before posting again.
Posted by: Stephen Wells | February 27, 2008 3:41 PM
More Expelled news, and PZ ("Paul Zachary") mentioned again: