…and this is a 
Lying by press release
Category: Creationism
Posted on: March 25, 2008 5:09 PM, by PZ Myers
The producers of Expelled have spent a couple of days sweating over damage control, I guess. They've shut down or delayed all the pending screenings of their movie, and now they've issued a remarkably dishonest press release. The mendacity is astonishing in its scope; somebody tell me, is this "framing"?
Something amazing happened yesterday. The controversy around Premise Media's upcoming movie Ben Stein's EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed became the hottest topic in the blogosphere. According to BlogPulse, a service of Nielsen Buzzmetrics, the issue held the number one slot throughout the day on Monday, March 24th (http://www.blogpulse.com). There were also over 800 results on Technorati (www.technorati.com).
Well, yes, it was HUGE. I know, because I was the recipient of much of the buzz. Most of those links were not congratulating Expelled on their success, they were laughing at their hypocrisy and incompetence, they were linking to me, and they were spreading the news that this was a creationist propaganda film run by particularly clumsy ideologues. It was a hot topic, all right.
Mathis continued, "I hope PZ's experience has helped him see the light. He is distraught because he could not see a movie. What if he wasn't allowed to teach on a college campus or was denied tenure? Maybe he will think twice before he starts demanding more professors be blacklisted and expelled simply because they question the adequacy of Darwin's theory."
I wasn't distraught. At worst, I felt a little guilty that I'd escaped a bad movie while my friends and family were stuck with watching it.
I haven't demanded expulsions or blacklists — I will proudly continue to demand competence. Unlike watching a movie, being awarded a professorship should require some substantial understanding of a discipline; does Mathis really think that the position of teacher and researcher ought to be simply handed to people for showing up, no matter what their qualifications?
They were also aware that Dawkins, who oddly used his formal surname "Clinton" instead of Richard to sign up, was in attendance.
No, this is not at all true. Richard Dawkins was in attendance as my unnamed guest; the reservation form had asked for my name and affiliation, and only asked how many (up to three) guests I would be bringing with me. There was no public announcement anywhere that he would be attending. Also, although he was prepared to show his passport, he wasn't asked for it at the door.
Also, what kind of illiterate is writing this press release? Dawkins surname is Dawkins. Slow down, bozos, you're in such a frantic hurry you haven't even bothered to proofread.
Recognizing the opportunity to make a point of the inconvenience and pain that they, and others like them, have caused to numerous scientists and educators, the decision was made beforehand to deny Myers access to the film if he actually showed up.
Yet another revision of their story…if this were true, why not ban every evolutionary biologist? Their rationale applies just as well to Dawkins as it does to me. Also note that Mathis previously admitted to banning me on a whim: "You should know that I invited Michael shermer to a screening at NRB in Nashville. He came and is writing a review for scientific American. I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more."
Someday, they'll settle on one story, but it won't matter — they've left too long a trail of revisionist excuse-making.
Executive Producer Logan Craft noted: "EXPELLED makes it clear that academic freedom is at stake. Yet Dawkins and his friends continue to misrepresent the film and slander the producers. It is obvious that they do not want to debate the real issues raised in the movie."
What misrepresentations? It's a movie that blames the Holocaust on Darwin — it's stupid and foolish. How have the producers been slandered? They're the ones lying at every step. This is their movie, in one perfect picture:
Myers has apparently been asking supporters to sneak into the different private screenings for many weeks. After being denied his chance to see the movie, Myers blogged about his experience and expressed his outrage.
Errm, what? I haven't asked anyone to sneak into screenings. I haven't even asked them to sign up for them, as I did. This claim is as complete a fabrication as anything else in this press release.
As for "expressing [my] outrage", that's absurd. I laughed and laughed, and had trouble maintaining my normally sober decorum in a public place as I left the theater. Outrage? Judge for yourself.
The only other thing remarkable about their collection of lies is how desperate they sound — you can practically smell the flop sweat.
Comments
Competence? How dare you demand competence from the educating elite!
The recent decision in CA about homeschooling* warmed the cockles of my heart.
*qualified instructors
Posted by: True Bob | March 25, 2008 5:14 PM
If anybody is surprised that the Expelled people are lying their asses off, they haven't been keeping up with Expelled lately or they're a creationist.
Posted by: King of Ferrets | March 25, 2008 5:18 PM
Premise Media says:
But they are not aware of the definition of a surname, which in this case is Dawkins, not Clinton.
Posted by: Ray S. | March 25, 2008 5:20 PM
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | March 25, 2008 5:23 PM
Damn! I was just writting this up for my blog. Oh, well, there's Dembski whining about tenure denials at Baylor ... Opps! I've said too much!
Posted by: John Pieret | March 25, 2008 5:23 PM
These people are lying for Jeezus, big time. They live a lie. They couldn't recognize Truth if it bit them on the ass. The rest of the goddam followers of the same religion are just as bad, so they'll believe the lies. There's no winning with these goobers, when evidence, logic, & being rational are called for.
They give me the creeps.
Posted by: Richard Harris | March 25, 2008 5:24 PM
Oh my is my mother the most dishonest person. She signs everything with her first name while she is known to everyone else by her middle name, which she likes better. No wonder I ended up being a vile atheist. Why was not my mom honest with me?
Posted by: Janine, ID | March 25, 2008 5:24 PM
@Ray (#2)
I believe you are confused. Obviously the formal surname goes beFORE the rest of the name. You're probably thinking of the afterical, or posterioid surname.
Posted by: K. Signal Eingang | March 25, 2008 5:24 PM
"It is obvious that they do not want to debate the real issues raised in the movie."
Ha! Comedy Central HAS to put together a creationist comedy tour. What would make it hilarious is the fact that they are unintentionally funny, and would be bewildered by the uproarious laughter their statements and illustrations would cause. How can inventing a creator and not having evidence to back it up be considered a 'real' issue? How can 'scientists' with no real credentials expect to remain employed?
Posted by: Mike | March 25, 2008 5:26 PM
I really think my earlier guess was right then -- Mathis had you kicked out of the showing to get back at you and make a point about "ha, now you know how it feels when you get unfairly EXPELLED" -- but he made a serious blunder by misgauging your reaction. He expected you to slink away, abashed and humiliated, ready to lick your wounds and rage impotently about how unfair it all was. Instead, you thought it was freakin' hilarious.
After spending months surrounded by a bunch of professorial whiners playing victim, Mathis was completely unprepared for UNHOLY GLEE. The best glee of all the glees...
He also failed to expect the whole angle with Richard Dawkins being there, and getting in, and asking questions. That just made it funnier to the evolutionists, and more embarrassing for him and his film. When it got right down to it, you defeated him with your laughter.
One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms.(HL Menken)
Posted by: Sastra | March 25, 2008 5:27 PM
Well, it's an attempt at spinning it in their favor. Not a very good one, I'm afraid. See, if you had just SHUT UP as Nisbet had demanded, this would be over by now. Ha ha.
Posted by: Mark B | March 25, 2008 5:28 PM
Why did they, of all people, not refer to it as his Christian name?
They are a daft bunch of buggers, aren't they?
Posted by: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood | March 25, 2008 5:28 PM
PZ,
Maybe you could have sneaked in if you had used your formal surname Paul.
:-D
Posted by: The Science Pundit | March 25, 2008 5:29 PM
It is time to go point by point through the claims made by Mathis, as well as the "Movie" expelled.
Can we give a base line trace of anti-semitism in germany that predates Darwin for starters?
Can we show how many religious (Including occultism) motivations were used by the Nazis?
How about simply reminding everyone what the motto of the party was? What was it again, "God is on our side?" or something like that?
Can we get a general pole of the population asking who has anti-Semitic feeling, and use people that believe in evolution verses people that do not? I personally have never met an "evolutionist" that was anti-semitic, but have met numerous deeply religious people that were.
Can we get a poll showing how many in prison are religious verses the general population?
How many admitted racists believe in Darwinism?
Can we add to this list and get on it???
Posted by: Lago | March 25, 2008 5:29 PM
Mike, all you need to do is read aloud the comments at UD. Kind of like how Lenny Bruce would read newspaper articles during his act. After all, did you know that people like PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins were 60's radicals?
Posted by: Janine, ID | March 25, 2008 5:29 PM
Didn't you know? Clinton is *always* a surname, even if there is already one surname there.
Richard, er, sorry, Dawkins Richard Clinton just happens to have two of them. It's sort of double-barrelled only with the barrels at opposite ends. Really honestly.
(I wonder how many of these creos are so dim that they think that Dawkins's first name has something to do with the 42nd President of the United States? ;} )
Posted by: Nix | March 25, 2008 5:31 PM
Amazing! More differing versions of why you were expelled!
In other news, the new showings are back up in the Expelled RSVP site, but the dates and times are TBD.
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | March 25, 2008 5:32 PM
How odd that he should use his actual name on a piece of documentation. Everyone knows me as Mick, but get this... my passport says my name is Michael!
These guys aren't just liars. They're weird liars. What the hell kind of weird lie is that?
Posted by: Mick | March 25, 2008 5:32 PM
To Sastra... wow! Your hypothesis appears to be correct!
Posted by: knightwhosaysni | March 25, 2008 5:33 PM
EXPELLED so deserves to get the MST3K treatment from Joel and the 'Bots...
Posted by: JJR | March 25, 2008 5:33 PM
True, but as the whole Christian name/surname thing shows, we are dealing with your basic incompetents here, the kind of people who couldn't organise a bum-rape in a barracks.
Posted by: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood | March 25, 2008 5:33 PM
Ridicule works!
Posted by: DiscoveredJoys | March 25, 2008 5:34 PM
So what is going to be done about this?
Will someone PLEASE issue a press release to the same newspapers pointing out all of these very obvious inconsistencies and outright lies?
We all know they are lies, sure -- but to the rest of the world? We're getting our asses handed to us in a hat. They're filling the information vacuum, just like the Scientologists do, just like the Neo-Cons do -- and we offer nothing in return aside from bitching about it amongst ourselves.
All due respect to PZ and everyone else -- I think you guys are awesome and I really appreciate being informed about this bullshit via the blag-o-blags; I also realize you have a full time job, are probably quite busy, and may not be able to handle all the PR stuff yourself.
So who will? They've probably got a dozen lackeys working 12-hour shifts coming up with ways to spin anything; They present a house of cards, built on lies and deception, but go completely unchallenged. We all know they lie -- but we also all know Intelligent Design is bullshit and wouldn't see the movie anyways except perhaps for those of us with masochistic tendencies. This is one of those times when Mooney and Nizbet are *WRONG* -- fuck framing and unification; This is a time to take them head on and show everyone else that all they have is 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound bag.
Posted by: Aaron | March 25, 2008 5:35 PM
So if looking hypocritical is good press, why not up the effort and have ben stein piss on Darwin's grave in order to show his contempt for "Big Science" and evolution. I'm sure that'll make HUGE news. And hey, you know what they say about publicity...
Posted by: Michael X | March 25, 2008 5:35 PM
Tell us again how it is that this torrent of negative press and humiliation is actually good for the creationists, Messers Mooney and Nisbet...
Posted by: gustav | March 25, 2008 5:36 PM
Weird.
The film's story is that scientists won't deal with ID, when of course it is they who are doing their best to keep scientists from seeing their easily-fisked junk.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | March 25, 2008 5:37 PM
That's "Hillary Dick Dawkins Rodham Goddamn Commie Clinton" Can't you people read?
I can just see them slapping pitty-pat Evangelical high-fives over working in the name "clinton". I imagine their publicist thought that was a master-race. I mean stroke. Sorry, my Tourette's Darwinism keeps getting the better of me.
The other night I spent some time concocting fake press releases over the Myers/Dawkins/Clinton fiscasco. Seems like it would be fairly easy to circulate something. Sadly, my attempts were pathetic and unfunny beside the original. If these people didn't exist, we'd have to invent them just for laughs.
ice
Posted by: ice9 | March 25, 2008 5:38 PM
You know what this story needs? It needs a good Roy Zimmerman treatment to go onto youtube. That would be great...
How about that PZ?? You could be honored for all eternity both in the "heavens" and in verse... all in one week!
Someone know Roy and want to drop him a suggestion?
Posted by: rjb | March 25, 2008 5:40 PM
Isn't this pretty much evidence marked 2,000 or so to use in our FRAUD trial of "Rational People vs Liars for Jesus"?
The funny thing is, I was curious about more reaction to this situation, so I went to news.google.com and searched for "Myers Expelled", and found this press release. I then came back here, thinking, "Wow, PZ has to see this!", and your item was already up (with one reply already).
So, go to news.google.com and search for "Myers Expelled", and one of the first things you'll notice is that Christianity Today has several articles about this. To which I say, "It figures."
This is the state of Christianity Today, folks. Spin, spin, spin. I'm not surprised.
PZ, you now have to see the movie. And rip it limb-from-limb. Publicly. Loudly.
What choice do you have? Ignoring it is no longer an option. They'd just ask why you're hiding under a rock.
Posted by: MikeM | March 25, 2008 5:44 PM
I'm confused as to how academic freedom is in any danger... the only cases I've heard of IDiots being "expelled" were folks whose scholarship or teaching weren't up to par to receive tenure. Are there cases I missed where it hasn't been the Disco Tute crying wolf?
Posted by: Bouncing Bosons | March 25, 2008 5:45 PM
Yeah. I'm a big liar too, since I never use my middle initial in common use. I only use it on the web to make it easier to differentiate me from Jack Welch, former head of GE.
fundie=dumb
Posted by: John C. Welch | March 25, 2008 5:46 PM
Aaron @ 22.
Ditto. This needs to be splashed all over print and web, where ever these kinds of stories are read. They need to be exposed as the bald-faced liars that they are, and as a bonus, that realization will cause all kinds of tail-tucked-embarrassment for the movie and its ignorant, misleading, message.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 5:48 PM
"Recognizing the opportunity to make a point of the inconvenience and pain that they, and others like them, have caused to numerous scientists and educators, the decision was made beforehand to deny Myers access to the film if he actually showed up."
Interesting version of Christianity Mathis has were vengeance is his.
Posted by: Bob L | March 25, 2008 5:48 PM
On a slightly more serious note, how much has your blog traffic increased since this fiasco, PZ? I've read more than a few comments over the last few days by commenters who'd never read your blog before but came here after being linked from some news piece about Expelled and liked it so much they've decided to stay?
I don't think it's a case of no publicity is bad publicity, since few if any non-Liars for Jesus think you've done anything wrong, but I wonder if Stein, Mathis, and Miller* appreciate how much they've increased your popularity?
*poor sweet bastard, he seems more genuinely stupid than malicious
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 5:48 PM
you can hear the fundies: Dawkins 'lied' about his name and theres all that PZ 'controversy' over the movie, do we need any more proof that evolution didnt happen and god exists.
Posted by: extatyzoma | March 25, 2008 5:53 PM
So, Dawkins snuck in using his "surname" of Clinton, but of course they recognized him and let him in while barring you because you were hassling people while trying to sneak into the movie.
Do these guys have any sense?
Alonzo Fyfe has a rather disturbing take on this and the reaction to it. I fear he may be right. This is a blip on the radar for Mathis, and may do nothing to affect his film or the popularity of it. Many of the people who watch the movie may never hear of this incident, or may only hear Mathis' side(s) of it.
Fyfe's critique of Dawkins' review was even more depressing. Dawkins says it's a bad documentary -- which Fyfe agrees with (potentially) -- but it's not a documentary to begin with. It's a propaganda film. It may be that we dislike it because it's a propaganda film, but it still may be effective as one.
The most depressing info I've seen, however, is from the Expelled website. After saying quite specifically the movie doesn't "bash" evolutionary theory, it gives away the "spoiler" of the plot as "Evolution leads to atheism, which leads to eugenics, which leads to genocide". THAT's not "bashing"?
Posted by: CrypticLife | March 25, 2008 5:54 PM
Yup. That is "framing." Well, framing combined with the "Big Lie" theory of propaganda--as used by the Nazis, go figure (and no, Goodwin's Law does not apply to a thread about a movie which invokes Nazis). And it is clever, but desperately reaching framing. If the media actually did real reporting rather than transcription, then they'd instantly see the same flaws as you did with it.
On the other hand, it is another written example of their proven lies. So, it is useful to us as well. As usual, PZ shows them for what they are in a simple and well written post.
Posted by: Scote | March 25, 2008 5:56 PM
Further evidence to support Sastra's hypothesis (so, is there a Mr. Sastra?) is the number of IDiots berating PZ for 'whining' when even a cursory read through of his posts display nothing but UNHOLY GLEE!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 5:56 PM
Someone know Roy (Zimmerman) and want to drop him a suggestion?
I know him-- but anyone can send him a suggestion. Roy is playing all over the country over the next several months. Here's his schedule:
http://royzimmerman.com/schedule.html
Roy made a "campaign promise" on YouTube to play in all 50 states before the election:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prBcBDc9qUk
Like all campaign promises, he may not be able to keep it, but he is trying mightily.
So, if anyone has any song requests, or ideas about where Roy can play, you can post your suggestions to his YouTube video. Or check his "Schedule" page to see if
he'll be playing near you.
Posted by: Susan | March 25, 2008 5:57 PM
PZ, check the closing-tag for the image alignment.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 5:59 PM
"Recognizing the opportunity to make a point of the inconvenience and pain that they, and others like them, have caused to numerous scientists and educators, the decision was made beforehand to refuse to send any research papers to peer review biology journals on the subject of Intelligent Design, even if they actually requested any. Now the evolutionists can really understand how it feels to be snubbed!"
Posted by: Sastra | March 25, 2008 6:00 PM
Posted by: idahogie | March 25, 2008 6:03 PM
Traffic has basically doubled since the event. I don't expect the surge to last too much longer, but I suspect there will be some net gain.
Posted by: PZ Myers | March 25, 2008 6:04 PM
Funny, if it was me, i'd have blamed the whole thing on internal rivalry between PZ and Mathis and played it out that Mathis wanted to see how PZ felt about being excluded. Then that would have been that with no-one else really involved.
I think the fact that all these guys are spin doctors works against them in this case since they MUST
"Win the Spin" as some kind of manly contest.
It must be horrible being stuck in a situation where there is no evidence to back you up, but you can't let go of your position for what it would mean....pitiful really.
Posted by: Richard Eis | March 25, 2008 6:05 PM
With all respect to those who say otherwise, I doubt that Mathis expected PZ to slink away and act humiliated. PZ has never acted like that, and, dull as Mathis seems to be, he doesn't appear to be quite that dimwitted. He seems to know very well that PZ attacks, and seems in some of the spin to have indicated that was the reason PZ wasn't allowed in (with other stories at different times, of course).
The guy seems to be driven by his emotions, particularly his resentments--how else to explain a Godwin's law invoking horror like Expelled?
Beyond his emotional reaction to PZ, there's the simple fact that he wants to be seen by the most ignorant sheep as standing up to PZ (indeed, if he really did know that Dawkins was there (instead of almost certainly lying and saying he knew), he'd almost certainly have been thrilled to kick him out). It's the old us vs. them persecution complex, the fundies have to be told that they're fighting devils like Myers and Dawkins, who must be expelled like any vile demon (fairness is not supposed to be reciprocal for the most rabid fundies).
Then there's also the controversy angle, which Mathis probably did not mind playing up. He's too biased and stupid to recognize that controversy won't work to his favor when he's looking like the most ridiculous hypocrite by Expelling the very scientists who are supposed to be scared of the movie, when he's too incompetent to keep Dawkins out (not even a skilled thug, then), and when the facts of the movie indicate it to be a pile of manure.
He got the controversy that I believe he wanted. He's just too dumb to realize that not all controversy is helpful, particularly for their reputations and hopes for subsequent projects (IOW, I realize that sales of movie tickets might not be hurt by this (I doubt they'll be much helped, perhaps will be hurt), but they'll not look good after all is said and done). They never looked good, and they're looking increasingly hypocritical, desperate, and out to milk any opportunity by any dishonest means they have at their disposal.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | March 25, 2008 6:08 PM
Im so sick of expelled stories...let it die....for the love of....
we want more science!!!
Posted by: Andrew | March 25, 2008 6:11 PM
Glen D #45 wrote:
Perhaps not -- but I still think he was banking on the impotent rage.
Posted by: Sastra | March 25, 2008 6:13 PM
Patience, Andrew. That's why we're fighting the fundies.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 6:13 PM
@42
"You should have stayed home and not written a single word about it."
I think it can be easily shown that disengagement does not work with dishonest marketers in general, but especially with these liars who want more than to just peddle their snake-oils and pixie-dust. They want to control everything and are attempting to start with education. It's a great place to indoctrinate since young minds are so pliable.
It's a damned-if-you-do/don't situation. I am glad that there is finally engagement from passionate, well-educated, and well-spoken voices from the scientific community.
I am one to think that there needs to be MORE railing and snarling. More in-your-face "look everyone how they lie" commentary. Not less. IMO.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 6:14 PM
impotent rage
Okay, who's been talking to my ex?
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 6:15 PM
No disagreement here.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | March 25, 2008 6:15 PM
Sun.
You're dumber than a bag of hammers.
Posted by: Steve_C | March 25, 2008 6:15 PM
Yeah, it makes ton of sense, unless you believe Mathis's other explanation. It's becoming (?) impossible to pin these guys down.
What we're hearing now is straight outta spin city. Mathis may or may not have decided to ban PZ out of spite and "nothing more," but we all know that spitefulness doesn't play well in the public arena, so the PR (sorry, "peeyar") department has fluffed up the action into an elegant statement of purposeful irony and a valuable lesson learned by one slightly-too-comfortable member of the Evolutionist Educational Elite Korps (EEEK).
As insightful as Sastra's take on the poor-pitiful-persecuted-me mindset of the IDer clearly is, methinks she's giving Mr. Mathis a little too much credit. OWO.
Posted by: Kseniya | March 25, 2008 6:19 PM
Well, there has been lots of positive feedback from some of the newcomers.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 6:20 PM
And apparently a troll, since the comment has disappeared into the dungeon.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | March 25, 2008 6:22 PM
PZ,
Why don't you pursue a libel claim against them? You have more than enough evidence of false statements from them that can be shown to be damaging, and that were made with malice, to move a case forward.
Posted by: semiloon | March 25, 2008 6:28 PM
We must avoid the god-botherers becoming aware of our agent Mathis's scheme. His mission, to discredit creationism via the world's most outrageous invoking of Godwin, must never be revealed. The Godly know not what mockery and scorn Agent Mathis has caused to be heaped upon them.
Shhh. And applaud him for his work for the cause...
Posted by: Lee Brimmicombe-Wood | March 25, 2008 6:28 PM
The picture you show with Stein and the German Army belt buckle was perfect. What really makes it delicious is that it's from the movie website. What a bunch of really stupid clowns.
One could easily replace the incompetent actor with the frauds who roam the hall of Discovery Institute and get more or less the same meaning.
I really, really have a hard time understanding how these clowns can think that they can get away with constant lying over and over. I guess they subscribe to the Josef Goebbels school of mass communication: If you're going to lie, tell a big lie, and tell it often.
Posted by: waldteufel | March 25, 2008 6:31 PM
The producers of Expelled would no doubt love to thank PZ for providing even more publicity for the formally unmentionable movie, Expelled.
Exactly
Posted by: William Wallace | March 25, 2008 6:33 PM
Somehow I missed the picture you included in your post.
Those dirty m-fers. That's what they are. If Ben Stein is proud of this moment, his mama needs to wash his dirty mouth out with soap.
I have never more sincerely felt that these people truly are liars for Jesus. I hope they're proud of themselves.
Posted by: MikeM | March 25, 2008 6:33 PM
That graphic of Ben Stein is....well...so comedic.. and clownish...kinda like Pat Robertson-like....
That alone would exclude me from taking this movie seriously..I mean..just sayin'
Posted by: dale | March 25, 2008 6:36 PM
@ 11:
Because they couldn't bring themselves to admit that there may be anything Christian about a Clinton?
Posted by: Moggie | March 25, 2008 6:38 PM
Love the photoshop of Stein and the belt buckle. The saying there is "God is with us." This should say it all regarding their assertion that the theories of Darwin and atheism are to blame for the Holocaust - it isn't so.
Whatever we do, we cannot let this press release go unchallenged, or at least we cannot let it go without ridicule.
JBS
Posted by: John B. Sandlin | March 25, 2008 6:39 PM
the formally unmentionable
Are all you stupid fucking bastards illiterate?
Posted by: CJO | March 25, 2008 6:40 PM
@59
"I have never more sincerely felt that these people truly are liars for Jesus."
I agree with your disdain. It's obviously expressed many times on this thread alone. It's the reaction of surprise I see so many times, that, well, surprises me. Dogmatic thinking causes people to strap bombs to their bodies and blow themselves up to kill others who don't share their views. Certainly it can cause people to lie. They'll break every single one of their precious 10 commandments in the name of their deity and consider themselves righteous for it.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 6:40 PM
with tongue firmly in cheek...
Be fair Professor Myers! They warned you on the posters: "Expelled: no intelligence allowed". Clearly, you're intelligent, you're not allowed, you were expelled.
They advertise it clearly: this is a film for teh stoopids.
Posted by: Sam C | March 25, 2008 6:40 PM
If only Darwin had never come along to advance our understanding of life on earth, Hilter would have transformed himself from struggling art student into respected and admired figure in the German art world.
Damn you, Darwin! Why did you hate the arts so!
Posted by: CalGeorge | March 25, 2008 6:40 PM
Little Willie, when was this mockumentary ever unmentionable? No ever tried to ban it. They just wanted to expose it for being intellectually dishonest.
Posted by: Janine, ID | March 25, 2008 6:40 PM
You mean PZ should thank them for the added traffic to his Blog. You're looking at it backwards Wallace
Posted by: Steve_C | March 25, 2008 6:43 PM
Actually, from a PR perspective, what happened is very good for you PZ. Not only it increases your traffic, but it also shows that you are not, that "fundamentalist atheist" that many of your opponents would like to portray you.
Indeed, a true fundamentalist would never have showed up to this screening. That you did is a good point in your favour.
As far as the movie is concerned, I'm not certain that the financial interests of the producers correlate exactly with the ID cause. It could be that this kind of story helps to get more people to see the movie as contoversy is publicity, but that it also drives more people in opposition to ID.
I'm against the notion that ID is Science, but afterall these "Expelled" stories I must admit that I do want to see the movie. Even if it is bad, at least for a good laugh, and a dose of masochism...
Posted by: negentropyeater | March 25, 2008 6:43 PM
"Something smells fishy," said William Walleye.
Posted by: Kseniya | March 25, 2008 6:44 PM
I think he meant to say "unspeakable."
Posted by: Sastra | March 25, 2008 6:46 PM
I believe what they are referring to when they say
is where in what I recall as being the video of you and Dawkins discussing what had happened (though I'm not 100% certain if this is where I saw it), you joked about having people all over the country register on the web for tickets as PZ Meyers.Apparently they don't understand what joking is.
Posted by: C. Anderton | March 25, 2008 6:47 PM
They are definitely deluded about the impact that this movie will have on the public in general. I propose defining a base unit of measure that describes the degree to which a story or controversy pervades our cultural consciousness: the "Britney" [as in Spears].
Expelled the Movie will rate about 0.05 to 0.10 Britneys by my estimation. This value will peak around April 18 and decrease dramatically thereafter.
Of course if the movie motivates some nutcase to firebomb a biology building, then it may rank higher.
Posted by: jeh | March 25, 2008 6:47 PM
The same type of lying and spin I see in every evo/creo debate I participate in. They will never stop lying. Ever. That's OK by me... they've pretty much destroyed all their credibility except within the ranks of the fundie lemmings. As long as they keep spouting their laughable untruths, the more evidence we have on them.
Liars, liars, pants in the lake of fire.
Posted by: GumbyTheCat | March 25, 2008 6:48 PM
Distraught.
Distraught.
Well, they're not too good with the definition of science, either. It's only to be expected. (That being said, somebody needs to be introduced to the concept of a dictionary. Preferably at speed.)
Posted by: Kyra | March 25, 2008 6:48 PM
So the basic timeline is something like this:
PZ show up uninvited to the screening. Like everyone else.
He's forced to leave because he's "not invited". Everyone else "not invited" gets in.
Including Richard Dawkins.
He's let in because Mathis believes Dawkins would behave fairly honorably.
Also Mathis denied PZ entry because he wants PZ to pay money, though technically he could've asked PZ to pay at the door.
Mathis wanted PZ to experience pain, but not Dawkins, because being honorable is important, and Mathis and Dawkins are honorable men.
Also, Dawkins snuck in uninvited by sneakily trying to use an alias.
But he's honorable.
Also Mathis banned PZ because he wanted PZ to pay to see it, "nothing more", so I guess forget that part about causing him pain after they found out PZ and the honorable Dawkins were underhandedly trying to sneak in.
And they obviously "do not want to debate the real issues raised in the movie" they keep trying to sneak into to be able to see.
Did Mathis mention that PZ is a jerk for criticizing a movie he hasn't even seen? Oh, yes. That criticism is still at the top of Expelled's blog.
Did I miss anything?
Posted by: Citizen Z | March 25, 2008 6:54 PM
I think PZ's next move SHOULD be to show up uninvited and unexpected to some illustrious ID event with the intent of getting ejected.
Keep that pot stirring!
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 6:55 PM
I have a dumb question, shouldn't PZ be getting a copy of the movie on DVD or something anyway (tickets to the premier?), since he was in it? That seems like the sort of courteous thing one would do to thank a speaker, especially after lying to him.
Posted by: thadd | March 25, 2008 6:55 PM
Citizen@76. Reading that made me dizzy.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 6:58 PM
So, has anyone considered putting together a website which simply lists the major players of the ID movement and systematically discredits them with the truth of their educations, experience, and scientific certifications (if any) along with certifiable examples of their inconsistency and lies? As long as you only display publically available (personal) information and references to other publications and present it as unbiased fact then there is nothing legal that they could do about it.
Hmmm... perhaps the same website could profile the most vocal opponents to ID as well, you know, for an unbiased contrast...
Damn... I wish I had more time...
Posted by: Bill | March 25, 2008 6:59 PM
"That seems like the sort of courteous thing one would do to thank a speaker, especially after lying to him."
Who taught you xtian manners?
You're supposed to threaten them with eternal suffering after you lie to them.
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 7:01 PM
Newsflash
PZ will never have to pay a cent to see the movie.
They'll be giving it away in an effort for anyone to see it... most likely in churches.
Posted by: Steve_C | March 25, 2008 7:03 PM
Well, the Gospels and Acts are contradictory, too, so the "Expelled" crew are in good company.
Posted by: CortxVortx | March 25, 2008 7:03 PM
"They'll be giving it away in an effort for anyone to see it... most likely in churches."
But isn't that a movie about ID? I thought ID wasn't espousing any particular religious view or deity (as the designer).
Gosh. It just doesn't make sense to me that any church would be interested in that movie.
/sarcasm
Posted by: Alex | March 25, 2008 7:08 PM
I don't know anything about Business Wire (where the press release was issued) but I wonder if a rebuttal shoved right back out on Business Wire would help diminish the impact of the EXPELLED press release? I can't find the cost but it looks like an interesting way to get atheist news out and around. I see also that there's a "Public Policy Wire".
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/?epi_menuItemID=800c9778c65e40c6efaaa9e27a808a0c&epi_menuID=384979e8cc48c441ef0130f5c6908a0c&epi_baseMenuID=384979e8cc48c441ef0130f5c6908a0c
Posted by: MelM |