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.
- Log in to post 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
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.
Premise Media says:
But they are not aware of the definition of a surname, which in this case is Dawkins, not Clinton.
This could be true. If it is, it is a nice display of "Christian" charity to not send advance notice to someone who lives a three hour drive from the theatre.
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!
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.
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?
@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.
"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?
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)
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.
Why did they, of all people, not refer to it as his Christian name?
They are a daft bunch of buggers, aren't they?
PZ,
Maybe you could have sneaked in if you had used your formal surname Paul.
:-D
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???
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?
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? ;} )
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.
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?
To Sastra... wow! Your hypothesis appears to be correct!
EXPELLED so deserves to get the MST3K treatment from Joel and the 'Bots...
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.
Ridicule works!
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.
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...
Tell us again how it is that this torrent of negative press and humiliation is actually good for the creationists, Messers Mooney and Nisbet...
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
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
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?
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.
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?
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
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.
"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.
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
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.
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"?
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.
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!
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.
PZ, check the closing-tag for the image alignment.
"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!"
Where are the grammar police when you need them? The subject of the sentence (and the object of that first horrendous clause) has disappeared into a passive black hole.
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.
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.
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
Im so sick of expelled stories...let it die....for the love of....
we want more science!!!
Glen D #45 wrote:
Perhaps not -- but I still think he was banking on the impotent rage.
Patience, Andrew. That's why we're fighting the fundies.
@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.
impotent rage
Okay, who's been talking to my ex?
No disagreement here.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Sun.
You're dumber than a bag of hammers.
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.
Well, there has been lots of positive feedback from some of the newcomers.
And apparently a troll, since the comment has disappeared into the dungeon.
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.
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...
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.
The producers of Expelled would no doubt love to thank PZ for providing even more publicity for the formally unmentionable movie, Expelled.
Exactly
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.
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'
@ 11:
Because they couldn't bring themselves to admit that there may be anything Christian about a Clinton?
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
the formally unmentionable
Are all you stupid fucking bastards illiterate?
@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.
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.
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!
Little Willie, when was this mockumentary ever unmentionable? No ever tried to ban it. They just wanted to expose it for being intellectually dishonest.
You mean PZ should thank them for the added traffic to his Blog. You're looking at it backwards Wallace
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...
"Something smells fishy," said William Walleye.
I think he meant to say "unspeakable."
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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?
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!
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.
Citizen@76. Reading that made me dizzy.
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...
"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.
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.
Well, the Gospels and Acts are contradictory, too, so the "Expelled" crew are in good company.
"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
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=800c9778c6…
Premise Media is using CRC Public Relations to push this seedy message. I know full well I'm hopelessly naive, but knowing the lies embedded in this release, CRC's tagline ("At CRC Public Relations, we understand that results don't just happen.") takes on a very creepy Big Brother tone, don't you think?
"Little Willie, when was this mockumentary ever unmentionable?"
It was unmentionable as recently as March 19, 2008.
The film makers are loving the free publicity.
Whether or not this will be good for ID, I don't know. I do want to see the film.
The evolanders were certainly writing much about the film long before it was even previewed. So I think the evolanders were afraid, at least for some period of time.
Although I am completely on the side of those, such as PZ, who consider it their duty to shoot down all bad ideas whenever and wherever they rear their ugly head, I just had a thought regarding the old don't-feed-the-troll aspect of Expelled's publicity.
I'm thinking *maybe*, and this is my own tactical assessment, shred it at your leisure, we should refute them as usual (and thoroughly) right up until just before their release, then find something else to write about for that all-important opening weekend. Let it die of disinterest, then come back a week or two later and kick it out the door with whatever we haven't managed to say before.
Oh, and also, and I know I've said this before,if you absolutely must pay to see expelled, please, please buy a ticket to a different movie and sneak in. Will Ferrel, Will Smith, or whoever is peddling light-comedy (or light-sci-fi) that weekend, will certainly be the lesser of the two evils to give our hard-earned dollars to.
Even though PZ asked the question rhetorically, I think the answer is "Yes, it is framing. And spinning."
And while the crew at Premise Media may not be able to make a good movie, they obviously have a skilled copywriter or two who knows how to "frame" and "spin" very well.
The way they lubricate their lies, one might think a former professional, White House lie-maker, 'scuse me, speechwriter, might have been involved.
Like everybody else?
They failed to make the link go to the right comment on pandasthunb.
(http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/001143.html#comments Comment #35130 Posted by PZ Myers, 6/14/05, 07:50)
Or maybe someone is trying to tell us something...
It goes to comment #34984. PZ's comment is #35130.
So, 35130-34984=146. 1+4=5... the number of Jesus' wounds! 6 equals the total days of creation! It's a hidden message! OMG! Jesus is mad at us for fucking with creationism!
[shudder][shudder][shudder]
Is this still ironic at this point? Or is there another word for when it's like this? Like, "I triple-dog-irony you"...
All I know is, I've actually never had an occasion to type this before:
WTF??!!
Ok, I see the CRC Public Relations at the bottome of the press release. Perhaps they used Busines Wire. But, it looks like using a PR firm isn't required for using Business Wire.
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/?epi_menuItemID=f642186dbf…
About "...results don't just happen.", I don't know what to expect from a PR firm but the slogan sounds fine to me. Being right isn't enough; the world isn't going to come running to our door hunting for the truth--we need to go to the world's door. I'm just thinking that a rebuttal via the same connections might help.
"The evolanders were certainly writing much about the film long before it was even previewed. So I think the evolanders were afraid, at least for some period of time."
That also could have had something to do with the fact that they lied to get the interviews and are generally making a dishonest propaganda flick, you stupid fuck.
ROFL! "Outraged", my butt. The movie is an outrage. That so-called Christians would defend such an offensive pack of lies is an outrage. Your getting kicked out was friggin' hilarious. :-D
They were also aware that Dawkins, who oddly used his formal surname "Clinton" instead of Richard to sign up, was in attendance.
That's hilarious. The knee-jerk hatred is spilling out of its compartments. Arrrgh. Evolution. Arrrrgh. Richard Dawkins. AArrrrrgh. CLINTON!!!!!!!!!
It's like someone did a faux news mashup of all the things the conservapundits hate in one go. At least they didn't call him "Hussein" and classify Oxford as a madrassa anywhere in there.
Oy!
OK, I put my thoughts on the Expelled site concerning this "new" development.
http://expelledthemovie.com/blog/2008/03/25/richard-dawkins-aka-%e2%80%…
And William Wallace, the link you posted doesn't indicate the movie being unmentionable - only unmentioned.
JBS
"PZ,
Maybe you could have sneaked in if you had used your formal surname Paul.
:-D"
/thread.
PZ - I think that the Creationists are just mad that their beliefs are causing them to be less wealthy than others:
Full article (FREE!):
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/525506
Abstract:
The association between cultural orientation and material outcomes is fundamental to sociology research. This article contributes to the understanding of this relationship by exploring how religious affiliation affects wealth ownership for conservative Protestants (CPs). The results demonstrate that religion affects wealth indirectly through educational attainment, fertility, and female labor force participation. The results also provide evidence of a direct effect of religion on wealth. Low rates of asset accumulation and unique economic values combine to reduce CP wealth beyond the effects of demographics. The findings improved understanding of the relationship between religious beliefs and inequality.
"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 "
Yeah, I'll be popping here very frequently in the future. I'm your new fan! :)
There's a new post at the Dawkins site by Josh providing a rather detailed rundown of the movie: http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,2400,Expelled-Overview,Josh-Timon…
Josh points to a new NCSE site for countering EXPELLED: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
What I find most bizarre about this press release is that even if (in pretendoland) the movie were awesome and the messages were dead on. The makers of the film, in THEIR own words, compared not being able to see a movie with academic oppression.
It's fantastic! I mean when the only real people you have defending you compare your occupational dismissal to being ejected from a movie, how good could have possibly been in the first place. dig dig dig, hole hole hole.
"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 "
I was just starting to lurk around a few days before this 'Expelled' event started, having followed a link from Ben Goldacre's Bad Science, and I've been returning regularly for updates. I'm very impressed by PZ's writing and the quality of comments here. I'll be a daily reader from now on.
Keep fighting the good fight... and more exploding frogs, please.
Ok, so I'm not Roy Zimmerman. But I do make it by deadline.
Come gather round people, I'll sing you the tale
It's bigger by far than a land-dwelling whale
Compared to it, stories from Shakespeare will pale
It's glitter, and glamour, and glory,
More drama than all the last season of Maury
It all started out with a promising plan
With two different views of the journey of Man
And so nice and friendly was how it began
At the Crossroads with Dawkins and Myers
But the movie crew all were creationist liars
They enlisted the help of the actor Ben Stein
Who showed he could toe the creationist line
In a droning, annoying, monotonous whine
He ridicules notions of fitness
Ignoring the ban against bearing false witness
Now nobody knew what the final cut held
Though various leaks gave a hint that it smelled
Like someone's abdominal gas was expelled
A film that was fighting for freedom
Apparently only the freedom to be dumb
For instance one segment that somebody saw
Molecular momement that just drops your jaw
Especially if you know your copyright law
Those molecules just kept on rollin'
Not caring if anyone knew they were stolen
So PZ decided to give it a view
To spare the annoyance for me and for you
And he signed up online like they asked him to do
With family and friend, he awaited
But his efforts to see it would end up frustrated
The producer saw Myers, and told him to stop
(Well, not by himself--through a theatre cop)
PZ acquiesced, and he went to a shop
Where he put the adventure to writing
And the people who read it all found it exciting
"But the funniest thing of the evening" he said
"Was that I had to leave, but my friend went ahead
This mild-mannered Englishman, calls me P-Zed
Despite all their squeakins and squawkins
The fools threw me out, but let in Richard Dawkins!"
The movie reviews are predictably bad
And Myers, who missed it, is secretly glad
And trust the producers to put out an ad
Defiantly claiming they're winning
But nothing is heard but the sound of their spinning
http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/2008/03/expelled-ballad.html
"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."
Yes, but atheists catch on fire if they go into churches, so PZ will have to watch through a window.
Oh, I'm sorry, you've got it backwards. I'm such a ferocious atheist that the church erupts in flame and collapses in a cataclysmic implosion, leaving me standing with a smirk amidst the rubble.Not being one who wants to be responsible for loss of life and property damage, I shun the churches as a favor to their owners.
When is Mathis going to learn the moral lesson that most of us learn at a young age:
that a chain of lies only leads to more and bigger lies. And before long, nobody believes a word you say.
Very sad Mathis has not obtained these moral lessons.
Cuttlefish, I think you left off the last line of each verse:
"For Expelled's makers are whinging!"
There, now you can sing it to Dylan's most famous tune.
Sad silly Little Willie, that is your proof? That PZ Myers had a post in which he does not call this mockumentary by name? He was able to do that joke because the regulars at this blogs would be able to understand what he means. This would not have been possible if this mockumentary was "unmentionable".
Feel free to ask if you need any more jokes explained.
YES! YOU FUCKING TWIT! How many times must this be pointed out. I think the only reason you cannot accept this is because you do not want to. Alas, sad silly Little Willie.
OK, let's all go apply to teach theology and see how many of us are hired and how many are expelled...
HA! No press is bad press: Expelled marches on! Hallelujah!
Nibset is correct!
No matter how dim you accuse us of being. Simplicity is virtue, virtue is strength, and strength is simplicity! This logic is inescapable.
The Lord of the Hosts is invincible, timeless and omnipresent! The price of Darwinist sin is separation from the Lord - be aware of the price of vain pretenses to intelligence and hold to the one true faith!
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is gaining momentum! It is a veritable steaming juggernaut careening towards its charming, faithful audience and towards a profane COVEN of neo-Darwinian atheists.
PZ Myers - Expelled!
Clinton R. Dawkins - Withered!
In the end, Ben Stein is Victorious!
I took a look at Mr. Mathis, this incident and his communication company at my blog.
I also took a quick look at his book: Feeding the Beast: A Great Recipe for Easy Publicity.
Mark Mathis is following his 16 rules. He gets his paycheck whether or not the company covers 3.5 million dollar production costs.
Mr. Mathis rules in his book: rule of difference, emotion, simplicity, preparation, easy, repetition, resource, invention, timing, ego, balance, ambush
I don't think Mr. Mathis was counting on honest mirth.
His decision to be petty with Dr. Myers would have been free publicity (even bad publicity is publicity) in a smaller community.
Enter the nature of blogging, as the events at the screening spread past a few blog communities, into the UK and Canada, other blog communities, and became a human story, control was lost.
"Warning - some language may not be suitable for children."
This parenthetical caution after the link to Dawkins' blog is hilarious, especially if you go and search the page for "naughty" words - there are none, not even in the reader-posted comments!
Someone should tell this guy that if you're going to play the "holier than thou" game, you need to at least make sure that the silly issue you choose to obsess over actually exists.
Mark Witt, I know you had to have heard this before but it has to be repeated. Your name is a misnomer.
The only thing that could make this better would be if Michael Shermer now refused his invitation from Mathis and cited PZ being expelled as his reason. However that's not something he's likely to do. He's a bit of an appeaser.
(re #113) (...great steaming elephant turds...)
I'd like to ammend my last post (#104) to now read:
"I'm very impressed by PZ's writing and the quality of most of the comments here"
Not to drag you out of character Mark, but your website is hilarious. Keep up the good work.
Unbelievable. It took this long for the Expelled Machine to really kick into spin cycle and WHAT a lousy job they made of it. They seem to be trying the same approach Bushcorps took with their ever-circling "justifications" for the Iraq invasion: shove a few hastily-assembled and ill-considered excuses and lies out there and then keep trotting them out in the hope that unwavering repetition of bullshit will persuade.
What worries me is it worked for Bushcorps. Mind you, I don't think this sorry shower of unchristian liars has anyone with a tenth of the smarts of Rove.
Expelling crackpots is a virtue, not a vice. I hate to see a 'fairness' ploy being used to block justice.
"Mark Witt, I know you had to have heard this before but it has to be repeated. Your name is a misnomer.
Posted by: Janine, ID | March 25, 2008 8:47 PM"
No it isn't. He merely left off the super-suffixed-Christian-Uber-Surname of "less"
Oh yeah... and for Mathis to claim PZ was distraught? DISTRAUGHT? Jesus, Mathis, read the post PZ made immediately after you had him thrown out. Does "Distraught" mean "Cackling and rubbing his hands with glee" in your fucked-up, mendacious, thoroughly unchristian world? I guess it must. What a thoroughly dishonest scumbag this creep is.
Wikipedia says that Clinton is his formal first name, not his surname. Do they not know the difference?
Cursing won't change the facts: Others were actually invited to the Mall of America screening.
Mark Witt,
Consider for a moment that you are suffering from a mental illness. That for your entire life, you have been lied to and manipulated by a communicable disease. This disease is specifically designed to prevent you from thinking clearly by actively discouraging rational thought, the understanding of logic, and questioning the structure of the illness. A structure that over millennia has itself evolved further structures to close loops in logic, redirect and distract from certain lines of questioning, and outright threaten you into acceptance and silence. In addition this illness has created structures that will drive you to anger, hate, and even violence in order to defend itself from doubt.
The worst part is that this illness can only control you as long as you let it. It feeds on your fear, your ignorance, and your loneliness. It gives you comforts and false answers. It allows you to live your life with false confidence and hope.
Know this, Mark. It is OK to be afraid. It is OK to say "I don't know". You can free yourself. Ask "Why?" of all things and find the answers for yourself. Don't hide under your blanket holding God's hand. Stand up and face the universe head on and declare for yourself "I AM".
Cuttlefish - that was effin marvelous.
I've just noticed that if you take Roy Zimmerman's song "Sadam Shame" and leave out the choruses, the metre fits perfectly 8D.
Lee Harrison
Don't pay the Coulter-worshiping lil Willie any mind, Janine. He can't differentiate between a public invitation on a website and a personal invitation.
Wallace - you're a goddamned fool at best and a disingenous liar at worst. Firstly, it has been shown over and over again that PZ obtained access to the movie in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY most of the other attendees did: there was nothing underhand. He used his real name and he used a publicly accessible website to register his interest. Secondly, even if it is true that certain other attendees were specifically and personally invited (and I note that you have not provided evidence of that), so what? It is a perfectly common practice for the organisers of concerts, art shows, plays, whatever to extend personal invitations to a select few whilst offering a more general means of access to the masses.
Again: PZ gained access to the movie in exactly the same way most of the other attendees did. Either you're just trolling or you are as shameless a liar as Mathis is. Either way, you're a very, very poor Christian. You think Jesus would be proud of what you're doing here? Really?
1) Name them, and give proof of their invitation.
And remember, the number better be high enough to fill a movie theater.
Name them, and give proof of their lack of invitation. And remember, the number better be high enough to fill a movie theater.
William, that was not an answer, you're evading my question of your positive assertion.
Answer my question.
Well, at least you have a sense of perspective about this. What kept me from rating a "Hitler"? Lack of a curse word, perhaps?
I do really get sick of people thinking that Hitler and the Nazi movement were atheists. Hitler was a catholic, though not a practicing catholic. The great majority of his followers were protestant christians. The folks that guarded the camps, stole from those starving people, shot them after making them dig their own mass graves, were christians. They went to church, they read the bible and they prayed. I am sick of this idea being spread that they were not christians. It is not supportable.
Unfortunately many will never do any research on the subject. Many will still go to the movie. Many will cheer for this backwards view of the world, and be happy for the lies they are told. I can only hope that the IDiots will continue to shoot themselves in the foot and chase the marginally sane away from them.
When are we going to see the sequel?
Ridiculed: No IDiots left behind.
Michael X,
Remember, we went from PZ's "just about everybody" was a gate crasher to the even more incredible "PZ show up uninvited to the screening. Like everyone else."
I refuted that last claim simply by pointing out that "others" were invited.
The extraordinary claim is not mine, credulous one.
Oh Little Willie, you sad little motherfucker. Do you realize using baseless Nazi comparisons is much worse then swearing? The reason why I called you a FUCKING TWIT is because you cannot accept that PZ Myers got his invite the same way many other attendees received their reserved invite.
Wildlifer, I know about Little Willie. I have read his blog and seen him pop up at other sites. I abuse him so that others may be free to commit.
No, William, this is what you're still in the process of doing. Bald assertion is not refutation. What you must show to "refute", is that others were invited by other means than the website.
(I would also encourage you to not take every colloquial phrase to its extreme. To say "like everyone else" in everyday speech doesn't rule out the possibility of a few guests of the producers were invited personally. It means for all practical purposes, everyone who came used the website and that was the only known mechanism for getting into the movie. Otherwise, only the producers friends are "invited" and everyone else should be kicked out.)
Now, answer my question.
Cowardheart's gonna cling to this idiocy until his last breath. He's really THAT stupid and credulous, he actually believes that a website accessible from every computer on the planet is some sort of top-secret private club.
A person with a functioning brain might consider the fact that the IDiots behind this propaganda keep changing these stories might just suggest they were lying (gatecrashing that didn't happen, harassing patrons later revealed not to be there, having no ticket when no tickets were even required, etc). Such a person might also find it odd that a person actually featured in the film is not allowed to see it, for any reason. But Cowardheart isn't such a person.
Even after dutifully parroting the absurd claim that Ass. Prod. Mathis was afraid PZ would disrupt the screening, after changing his spin with every breeze, Cowardheart still hasn't realized he's being lied to.
But then, this is the nutcase who hallucinates mafia organizations in science blogs. You can't really expect him to do any thinking.
P-Zed's Golden Ticket and its message, revealed at last:
Please don't defend me. The Allies have advanced on Berlin. All is lost. It is certainly possible that not everyone was invited. What an extraordinary claim! Plus, Russia, what were we thinking? I will follow mein Fuhrer's example. Excuse me, I have to give the children their cyanide pills.
@127 Lee Harrison--
Exactly! The call was for R.Z., so that was my model!
A gold star for your forehead!
"Ass. Prod. Mathis"
This is the now the third phrase I've laughed at in the last 10 minutes since getting home. I'm also stealing it by the way, just as I am all the the others. (you'll get credit of course!) And, for what it's worth, associate producers can be ass prods a good deal of the time.
Michael X,
Suppose I had the list of invitations, and the list of those who RSVP'd.
Why do you think the onus is on me to correlate these lists to show that a "theater full" (your words #130) of individuals responded to the RSVP page in response to the invitations?*
You should challenge the incredible claim.
PZ's claim is akin to a 10-year-old claiming "just about everybody sneaked in through the theater's back door. Really, dad."
My claim is not all that hard to believe. The Expelled blog has described the event as invitation only, and I know that others who were invited attended.
I know evolanders don't much like Popper's concept of falsifiability, but I have falsified incredible claims Citizen Z (#77) by and Janine (#111).
You restating my reasonable assertions and challenging me to back up your exaggeration (#130) is deceitful. Is that how evolanders do evolander-science?
You made the exaggeration "theater full", you back it up.
* Besides, that would be an invasion of privacy. On the other hand, the expelled blog described the Bloomington screening as "invitation only".
Mark Witt wrote:
Be gone, foul demon!
Be gone, in the name of the great Pasta Premavera!
In the Name of the Meatballs, and of the Noodles, defend us in our battle against the rulers of this world of darkness and ignorance. Send this demon of delusional arrogance back to his bottomless pit of bloggy obscurity!
WW #144: Pathetic pompous snide indignancy personified.
I state this because the website PZ used is the only known mechanism for getting into the screening, on top of this not Mathis, nor anyone else, has pointed to another actually legitimate way that should have been used in opposition to using the website.
In case you forget, you've been contending that this isn't the way the vast majority (if not everyone, as you've yet to provide any evidence to the contrary) of attendees got into the movie. You continue to ask "like everyone else?" as if the relevant way people got into the theater was somehow different.
This is not PZ's claim at all. His claim is that he gained entrance the way everyone else did. No sneaking is required. It is still upon you to even show that anyone did otherwise as you claim. And even if you had such evidence, it would still not invalidate PZ's legitimacy in attending.
Exactly, one must sign up for such screenings, in order to be given an invitation. This is what PZ did, which remember, is also how Mathis knew that he would be there so that he could, ahem, Expel him.
Yes, but you haven't actually demonstrated that they got their invitation in any different manner than PZ did.
I love popper by the way. But stating that something can be falsified is not to falsify it. If the claim is "absolutely everyone, excluding no one, got into the theater with out signing up online" we could falsify it by giving one name and the mechanism of how they got in. Ignoring the fact that no one has made such a stark, rigid, claim, you still have yet to even falsify that.
The theater was full by every report. How did they get in? The only known way for the populace to get in was by website. The producers have described no other way to attend as well. If you wish to decry PZ for using unauthorized ways of getting in, you must provide another mechanism for the theater to be full.
Again, an invitation one would have gotten by signing up on the website.
I'll also remind you that you have yet to provide any evidence to your claim that you know people who were "invited." If I simply asserted that PZ got just such an invitation, would you believe me without my backing it up? No, of course not. If I waffled on being pressed to back up my claim, you would rightly call me out on it, and lambast me for making it in the first place if I knew I couldn't back it up when pressed. You may even count this as just another strike against evo-somethings.
Consider the same treatment being given to you.
I don't know what you're complaining about, CJO, I certainly wouldn't mention Expelled in polite company.
Merde! Is that lying, deaf, vain troll posting here again? Isn't his bullshit yet deserving of the Dungeon?
What a scumbag fuckwit asshole Mr. #144 has been condemned by fate to be! That is his right in our free society, but let him do it at Uncommon Dissent with the other religious crackheads and Jesus whores.
HAHAHA.
Mark Witt! He has a blog that no one reads! No one comments on. An institute of one. Hysterical.
He has JAD syndrome. Except he's managed more than one post.
William Wallace (#125):
Cursing won't change the facts: Others were actually invited to the Mall of America screening.
True. I believe Dawkins was invited... by PZ, who booked online the same way everyone else did. <\snark>
Janine (116),
The truth is that, to his friends and family, Mark's middle name was declared as "Half-" with the hyphen included.
A person who RSVPs on the RSVP page is sent an automated confirmation, not an invitation.
I think you've confused automated confirmation (a receipt of for the RSVP) with invitation.
An invitation would be the thing you received before you RSVP'd.
Everyone is giving Mathis and his fellow travelers too much credit. Expelled will have a very hard time landing any billings in a commercial theater. In fact, I'd be surprised if they land one. Their only viewers, commercial or free, will be fundamentalist churches who will buy the DVD and show it in church. And that's it. It won't make it to cable except on a paid broadcast or on one of the christian cable channels. I won't be shown in off beat art houses. And I doubt it will even find its way into Netflix or Bockbusters. In short, the entire adventure is an exercise in navel gazing and making the films promoters feel good about themselves. After all, if they really wanted to do something substanttive, they could have hired a real screen writer and a real actor, not a hack has been.
The Expelled blog has described the event as invitation only, and I know that others who were invited attended.
I've asked at least four times now, and no one has answered - who was invited, how were they invited, and what did they do different from what PZ did?
"PZ's claim is akin to a 10-year-old claiming "just about everybody sneaked in through the theater's back door. Really, dad.""
Er ... so how DID Messrs Dawkins and Myers find out about the screening, if not via public website? Why was a form publicly available for filling in, if not for members of the public? Why was the form not rejected if found to be not from a properly-invited guest? Why was an email sent confirming attendance, if that was not the appropriate way to request attendance at that screening?
I suppose we could add "satanic cr4ck3rs" to their list of accomplishments on that day ...
#150 Steve_C:
HEY!! I have a blog no one reads - watch what you say about us not so popular folks!! ;-)
I'll also point out that his blog might also be a great way to archive posts he's made elsewhere, it's brand new and not many may have found it yet, and well, I'm in the same boat (except I don't cross-blog every post I make on mine). I also probably don't come across as quite so erudite.
;)
JBS
No. If PZ were invited by the promoters of Expelled, PZ's behavior is such that he would have posted the email on day one or two, with a snarky something like ~"I wasn't even planning on attending, but hey, they invited me, so I said sure, why not, and RSVP'd. I got an email confirmation, showed up with my guests, but then they kicked me out after I drove x hundred miles, only to be stranded at an atheist convention on Easter weekend. But at least they had indoor plumbing at the hotel--a nice break from the cold outhouses of Morris."
If PZ had initially asserted that he received an email invitation to which he RSVP'd, and that upon RSVPing, that he then received email confirmation, I would have probably believed it, as this is how it worked for the legitimate cases I know about.
But he has been very, very, very careful not to make this claim, as far as I can tell.
Please provide evidence that such an equivocation of the colloquial use of the word "invite" has any merit. Either, all legitimate attendees received "invites" as you define them, or it is irrelevant in the case of PZ's attendance, and thus, your argument as a whole.
You have yet to show any evidence that anyone received such a thing.
Most likely in my estimation, PZ read a post by Glen Davidson on this blog or at Panda's Thumb, pointing PZ to an RSVP page. Myers told Dawkins.
PZ is free to correct me if I am wrong.
You gotta love this snippet from the DI "blog":
"The misreporting of the evolution issue is one key reason for this site. Unfortunately, much of the news coverage has been sloppy, inaccurate, and in some cases, overtly biased."
You don't say? Whoever is to blame for that, I wonder?
Just like I don't yet believe you have any evidence that anyone got an "invitation" as you describe it.
Prove it or be branded a liar.
William Wallace, as much as we love to hate him, is probably correct. But the web site referenced essentially invites the community - which is a way to say, bring your friends. Someone let PZ know, directly or otherwise, about the invitation - so he was invited by proxy.
This isn't the same as an official invitation, and I'm am quite ready to accept that such things were sent. I just think the web site left open the opportunity for everyone to consider themselves invited if they found their way to the web page.
That's my take anyway.
JBS
Wow, Mathis and his mendacious colleagues are positively squirming!
Checkmate, PZ!
William Wallace: You're wrong. You're also a tedious, boring twit.
You have not been invited to post on this site. Since you're so obsessively concerned about the importance of invitations, you should now go away until I formally invite you.
Anything else would be "gatecrashing" or "sneaking", especially since you haven't even bothered to sign in with your real name.
Goodbye.
John, the invitation was through the website alone. No other prescreening was needed. No "official invitation" was needed to get on the list.
Still no answer to who, how, and what. Am I talking to myself here? Is this thing on? *tap tap*
Willy, I'm really trying to understand, but I just don't get it: what are actually hoping to accomplish here?
PZ doesn't need to correct you. He already wrote and spoke about how he signed up for the flick. You're obviously fond of repetition, but that doesn't mean anyone needs to indulge you.
Not directly related, but I thought interesting nonetheless:
Our friend Dr. Nisbet suggested that the "PZ Myers Affair is Really Really Bad for Science", and that he should "lay low" and "let others play the role of communicator, most importantly the National Center for Science Education". Presumably these experts of communication, who have received the imprimatur of Nisbet, would know how to downplay this incident, no?
So why, on Expelled Exposed, the NCSE's official response to the film, which has only three major sections, is one of those entitled "Biologist PZ Myers expelled from Expelled screening"? Of the 13 substantive links on the site, why do 4 of them go to articles directly about the screening, including Dawkin's own review of the film called "Lying for Jesus", a provocative title that the NCSE happily reproduces in their link to the piece? Why do several of the remaining 9 links point to articles where Myers and Dawkins objections to the films are noted?
Just to repeat that: one third of the topics and over 30% of the links on the NCSE's site are about this specific incident.
I can't wait for Nisbet to tell them to shut up, too.
Steve_C (#150)
Be fair, Steve. Mark's blog at the Intelligent Design, Institute of Theory may be new but there are a couple of good comments from successfully trolled Pharyngula readers. The blog has the relevant links to all the Pro-IDIoT and Anti-IDIoT sites on the right there. The IDIoT itself sounds like a fun group, I'd like to hear more about their Caligula-themed Good Friday toga party.
Wow Tulse,
So basically, NCSE's spokesmanship that Nisbet pushes so strongly for, is basically: "What PZ and Dawkins said." Well, then in that case, viva la Nisbet!
WOW.
Someone pushed obsession with a minor point too far ... come to think of it, an not-unfamiliar theme with this whole debacle.
I wonder if this "film" is coming to Australia? And if it were, whether anyone outside of Hillsong Church (I'm not linking to their site; I don't support fundies even to direct clicks their way) would watch it??
The equivalent would be to have Robyn Williams (science broadcaster, author of "Unintelligent Design": http://shop.abc.net.au/browse/product.asp?productid=520653) booted out of a similar premiere. Can't WAIT ...
Real name?? Eep. *frantically considers a name less pseudonymic* (if that's not a word, I just invented it. So there).
Apropos of nothing, but do you think Egnor is feeling miffed that his latest antibiotic nonsense hasn't been mocked or ridiculed yet because of all the Expelled shenanigans?
RE #161
Huh. Kinda refreshing to see them being so honest.
OT Whatever happened to Truth Machine? A bunch of commenters nominated him for a molly award in February and then he was gone.
Tulse said:
Unfortunately, you still don't seem to understand this framing issue.
PZ and Dawkins are to keep hush, say nothing, keep their heads down, and allow any media or persons interested in this story to be handled by the NCSE. Clearly, as you have just pointed out, they will then linked back to PZ and Dawkins who are to say nothing, and.....
Right, let me start that again. I must have gone wrong somewhere while explaining this elegantly simple and effective frame.
(I think it sounds quite good if you imagine Jon Stewart saying it while doing his Bush impression, personally. Quite apt, I say)
You gotta love this snippet from the DI "blog":
"The misreporting of the evolution issue is one key reason for this site."
What the hell - that's the *whole* reason for their site! :-D
For the sake of CJO's blood pressure, focus on the "formally," sci-atheist guys and gals, not on the "unmentionable." I know you've caught it, but we've got to mention it at least once.
I formerly taught 8th graders, and experience tells me that stupid fucking illiterate bastards can send the systolic through the roof.
Yes but, you see, the NCSE didn't use the word "fuck" or make fun of people's cherished and absurd beliefs. Also, Eugenie Scott doesn't have a grotesque beard.
Actually, in all fairness to Nisbet, I believe* his criticisms were directed at Pizzy's comments in the movie, not at the Great Sabot Affair. He doesn't object to someone trying to see the movie, he objects to someone giving honest opinions to a movie crew posing as objective documentarians (what an asshole!).
*I haven't actually read his post...I'm not reading that shoite
you say
They've shut down or delayed all the pending screenings of their movie.
where did you see this.
They've come back with "TBD." They're rescheduling now, and probably refining the process of who can get in.
Go here:
http://rsvp.getexpelled.com/events/special/expelled
I'd give 2-to-1 odds that even this won't make you stop your lying, but I'll give you exactly what you ask for.
1. Go to http://www.getexpelled.com, a public and official website used to promote the movie.
2. Click on the button (on the left side of the screen) marked 'Events'. This will take you to http://www.getexpelled.com/events.php.
3. Look at the text right under the heading: "Motive Entertainment is proud to present THE EXPELLED TOUR which launches on November 26th to promote the upcoming release of EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed. Tour locations are being added every day! You and your community are invited to attend FREE of charge! CLICK HERE to RSVP now at a location near you!" (emphasis added)
There it is, one public invitation, to anyone who happens to come across the page (and even though you might not like it, that includes PZ Myers), with a link to the RSVP page, just as you've been asking for. Any other questions, or can you please crawl back into your hole now?
Cuttlefish: I enjoyed (as I always do) your verse. This time, the RZ premise and the tailor-made protest-song meter and rhyme scheme had me humming along and writing chord progressions in my head as I went along, and by the end of the third verse I had a fully performable Folk Song Army repertoire entry. LMAO.
But because we're in a text-based medium here, you'll just have to imagine how perfect it is. ;-)
Now, about Mark Witt (whose middle name, I happen to know, is Knitt.) His Intelligent Design Institute Of Theory is a very, very special place.
Cheezits at 155:
Since that little shithead Wallace can't tell the difference between facts and the voices in his head, I'll add a few details that might serve to both answer your question and perhaps begin to explain (if that's ever possible) the bogus, absurd, and largely irrational expectations being expressed by some in the "Expelled" camp.
But first, I'll point out the obvious, that negates the bellyaching of various wingnuts that this was some kind of exclusively invite-only showing: putting a completely public web page up for people to sign up for something, without any form of authentication or even hint of private invitation by other means, completely wipes out any realistic claim to, or expectation of, privacy or exclusivity.
The day after PZ's expulsion, I received an e-mail from Expelled's producers that started as follows:
This message contained date, time, and location to a since-cancelled showing and a link to the "RSVP" website (the one with the URL starting with those four letters). At no point does anything on the "rsvp" website even suggest that to get to the sign up form, you should have previously received an e-mail.
Since according to the heading at the top of the signup form at the time I first saw it suggested that each person attending sign up through the website, I think it's even implied that news of the showing would be spread by word of mouth, passed around in forwarded e-mails to those who hadn't directly received the bulk e-mailed notice.
I should also point out that clearly I'd received their e-mail because with that particular address I had signed up, for research purposes, to receive information from them about their earlier snuff film, "Passion of the Christ."
As I think has been mentioned, the list of upcoming showings now shows them all as "TBD" and you can sign up to be put on some kind of "waitlist." The signup form now seems quite insistent that you provide an "Organization" and "Title" for yourself - things that seem trivial and unnecessary to outsiders, but inside the evangelical subculture these can be used as a filtering mechanism, to confirm church membership.
I'd go even further, thoughtcriminal. The whole notion of "invitation" is ridiculous on its face because these internet marketing campaigns are entirely predicated on the idea that people will do the work of disseminating information far and wide for you. No one relying on this style of marketing can (or rather, should) be ignorant of the fact this necessarily entails a loss of control over who ends up receiving that information. Unfortunately for these jackasses, that also means that you will inevitably attract the attention of people who are interested in your "product" for reasons entirely other than those you would prefer. Even if they had come up with some goof-ass codes to enter at the website, it's not like those wouldn't have been plastered all over the place and forwarded left and right. Even if each one was a one shot deal, anyone could get the email for the asking anyway. But that's all hypothetical. They didn't bother with any sort of precautions at all, weak or not. At best, they just naively assumed only the believers would bother to sign up. Ipso facto, too fucking bad.
The parsing of words (what exactly does "invited" mean?), the careful eliding of the inconsistencies of Mathis's stories, and the old lawyers' trick beloved of creationists: 'deny, traverse and counterclaim'. Such Jesuitical thinking from Mister Wallace.
Only not Jesuitical because Jesuits, though an obtuse species of scum, are usually much sharper than this. And they rarely bluff on an empty hand. I doubt they would let such a leadfoot troll in to their club.
It seems that Mister Wallace is drawn to defend church authority by any means, fair or foul. Thus the mangling of reality and Carrollesque twittering about the meaning of words. "They mean what *I* mean, and no more," sayeth the Blue Meanie in his curious exegesis of a secular text.
Here is the Christer stripped bare: willing to cast all enemies as malignant liars and all Godly as virtuous. He will ignore sins done in the name of Jesus.
Mark him well, for this is their way.
PZ I've been reading this blog, Dawkins site and many others for years now and I must say this whole affair has put the biggest smile on my face yet. Keep on doing what you're doing, ignore the 'framing' rubbish - you're an inspiration to many.
Wallace's incredible stupidity is annoying me. Can we have him disemvowelled on the grounds of lack of brain cells and thus inability to contribute?
Wow, they've altered their story so many times they should base a religion on it!
If we're lucky the "Expelledians" will split themselves into rival warring sects based on which press release/statement they consider 'canonical' and which 'apocryphal'.
Of course we "Myersites" have the one true divine revelation of these events thanks to our lord PZ and his angelic army of bloggers.
ALL BOW DOWN TO THE CEPHALOPOD THRONE!!!
Do you even know what the decision was about and what it said? Probably not. But I bet you're more than happy to repeat the BS.
And, for the record, homeschoolers average test scores hover around the 80th percentile. Whereas the base, public school students, set the mean which (obviously) falls at the 50th percentile.
We're not all a bunch of creationist fucktards. Or granola-eating hippies. We just make different choices because the choices of people like you generally suck and we want no part of them.
Man, what a bunch of losers. This is a pretty immature sentiment, but true none the less - every time I see BS in that little school boy outfit I just want to kick him over. What a littlt turd.
Man, what a bunch of losers. This is a pretty immature sentiment, but true none the less - every time I see BS in that little school boy outfit I just want to kick him over. What a little turd.
New Scientist blog has a perceptive post about a screening of Expelled, and the post film Q&A, up at:
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortsharpscience/2008/03/are-id-propo…
Ian
Little Willie is another incorrigible liar from the mouth-breathing part of the populace. Give him a minute and he'll invent a cousin who had his gun taken away then was gang raped by Darwinists and a third who was denied tenure to prove his point about how evil the Darwinists are...
Man, what a bunch of losers. This is a pretty immature sentiment, but true none the less - every time I see BS in that little school boy outfit I just want to kick him over. What a little turd.
Stop, LisaJ. One time's the charm.
Dear Friend of Motive Entertainment,
AHA! There it is!! Only friends of Motive Entertainment were supposed to be invited! :-D PZ just took advantage of an innocent screw-up, that's all.
Or maybe you were supposed to take a hint from the title of the movie. *smirk* "You are invited (if you're a scientifically illiterate fundy and won't ask any embarassing questions)."
Obviously the geniuses that ran this ad campaign have learned from their mistake, and will be sure to only let in people who know the Sooper Secret Jesus handshake from now on.
#88: "evolanders"?
What is that? Can there be only one?
#191: I think this can be explained simply: Homeschoolers did the percentile calculations themselves.
In the interest of achieving greater accuracy, let's rename their movie for them.
My entry - Expelled, No Integrity Required.
Can we have a separate blog entry delineating all the different stories that have come out of the EXPELLED truth machine so far? I think it would be illuminating and amusing.
It might even prompt them into further damage control by changing their story yet again. Every further change in their story only prompts further derision.
An Episcopalian priest I know once told me that schadenfreude is inherently a guilty pleasure, but almost irresistible, given the nature of those who tend to inspire it.
"Schadenfreude" sounds like a dessert.
ID motto: When life hands you lemons, issue a press release about lemonade.
Is that image of Ben Stein and the nazis medal used in the movie? For Pete's sake, the metal says "God's with us" in German.
@#194, that New Scientist link is illuminating. So, Mathis and company have been packing their preview audiences with (presumably paid) plants, to ensure friendly questioning? Says a lot for their confidence, doesn't it?
Tracy P. Hamilton said:
Nice one! What do you think of:
"When life hands you lemons, issue a press release screaming about censorship by evil Big Coke Drinkers"?
Farb said:
Amusing sure, but the story has changed so often I think you'd need a dedicated blog just to keep track of all of them!
BTW is anyone else wondering if this constant story change might be their last ditch attempt at damage control? You know the kind of thing - keep changing the story and moving the goalposts until the story is so convoluted and self-contradictory that everyone gets bored with it and it dies?
Or am I just being cynical?
I'm sure it has been said, but if you must see the film then find some downloadable copy, some piracy. Don't put more money in their hands, or let them claim a supportive large audience.
#199
Uncalled for, re: homeschoolers. Not all of us are fundies are weirdoes. Some of us have little choice about abandoning the public school system. I mean, would you send your child to a school that proclaimed him a terrorist--in writing--for getting in a fight with another child? Did you have your child's school send cops to your house when that other child planted a fake bomb by your child's locker, and the school blamed your child for it, when he wasn't even in school that day, thanks to being suspended? And maybe you have all the money in the world to send your children to private school, but I didn't. But I couldn't--and wouldn't--send my child back to that place. Not ever. Not in a million years. Homeschooling was the only option left.
So don't assume that all home-schoolers have become that simply because they're flakes. Things aren't always as black-and-white as some people think they are.
So, Mathis and company have been packing their preview audiences with (presumably paid) plants, to ensure friendly questioning?
It doesn't seem like anyone has tried to deny this allegation. It wouldn't do any good anyway; I mean really, "How can we pray for you and the movie?" Who else would ask such a stupid question? The whole point to the super secret private screening was to create a movement. Kinda backfired I think. :-D
@113
It's certainly a pile of steaming something...
Can anybody confirm whether or not Expelled's Mark Mathis is the same guy that appears as the whacky, demented weather man of Youtube fame? If so it explains a lot. Whatching any of those videos always reminds me of the daydream scene from Dumb & Dumber where Jim Carrey is imagining himself as the life of the party (igniting farts and so on).
Even if it isn't the same Mark Mathis I think he and Ben Stein are a lot like Lloyd & Harry (there's a Photoshop project for somebody).
I can't believe the Expelled folks are now saying that they purposely kept you from coming in so that they could give you a taste of what it's like to be expelled. In otherwords, they did the exact thing that their movie says is wrong, and they are proud of it! Do we need any further evidence that the ID folks put means before ends, contrary to the core values of the Christian faith they profess? Thank God they weren't promoting a movie that actually attacked what the Nazis did. One shudders to think what they would have done to you to show how bad those Nazis were.
""Schadenfreude" sounds like a dessert."
Best served cold.
#211, you got there ahead of me!
Oh, it's a movement, all right: a great big steaming movement.
Can you image fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking into a screening of Expelled, saying "you can get anything you want, at PZ's restaurant", and walking out? Friends, they may thinks it's a movement.
Thanks to pee wee myers (alias the unpublished, tundra frozen, 5th rate associate prof in minn u outback training camp for ice fishing enthusiasts), the public drunk doggins, and the butt kissing hordes of evo illiterates herein and elsewhere on the net for assuring the movie will surpass all documentaries for first week box office and probably gross 750 million or more worldwide.
Without your free publicity via your stupidity and arrogance this might have been less successful...but now its assured to be off the charts in money and influence.
I just wish there was some way we could give all you goons an island off the coast of South America with a million rabid iguana for pets and let you study, intermarry, hybridize, and observe your evolution for say a decade.
Let the games begin!!
@#214
yawn
good luck with that.
And I thought you wanted to run us down with hunting dogs.(Cue Monty Burns. "Release the hounds.) You like to talk about your stupidity yet you have no idea about how evolution works. It would take much longer then ten years you give.
So, tell me about the butt kissing hordes of evo illiterates herein. How are we able to make use of this thing we call the computer. Wait! Wait! I know that answer. We evo illiterates have servants who read these screens to us and take dictation of our answer.
Keith, I am so happy I do not live in your fantasy. What a grim place it is.
Friends, they may thinks it's a movement.
Or they'll think you may not be moral enough to join their army.
Eaton reminds me why for the most part we don't have to worry TOO much. They're too fucking stupid. And very very funny.
I just feel sorry for his mother having to clean all that phlegm and saliva off her computer monitor following his allotted 1 hour of computer time before his nap.
A word on Free Screenings - I've been to several free screenings of various movies. The way it works is exactly as PZ has described - you sign up on their website, give your name and the number of guests you may be bringing, when you get to the ticket window they have your name on a list, you give your name, show your ID, any guests you have in tow also show their ID, and everybody gets in to the movie.
Is that so hard for you ID-iots to understand?
#212:
"It is very cold... in spaaaace..."
"KHAAAAAAAANN!!!!"
(sorry, it had to be done...)
I'm thinkin'... it's time to ignore Overheatin' Keaton. I have an ethical problem with taunting the mentally ill.
Mark, in the context of desserts, I think the line should be...
"It is very cold... in spaaaace..."
"FLAAAAAAAANN!!!!"
Brownian, yours is the... superior... intellect...
Also: http://www.khaaan.com
in re the departed WW's obsession with invitation, I'm speculating that there probably were two different invitation paths that both threaded through the same RSVP site. There was the public invitation path, which PZ used, and the personal contact path, which is apparently how Stu Blessman got his invite (handed down from a church elder). We know the public path exists. All we need is for Blessman or someone else with a direct invite to step forward with some evidence. Not that this would make WW's denial of the existence of the public path any less idiotic.
Another strain on the irony meter is that some commenters seem to think there is an is/ought distinction to be made vis-a-vis the public RSVP site. The fact that it IS public doesn't mean you OUGHT to use it, unless you are friendly to the movie. A small own goal compared to refusing entry to PZ in the first place.
(but the real reason for my comment is so that I could use my newly minted FCD!)
Some of us appreciated your efforts, Mark Witt. Well argued, sir.
Yeah... that comment stunk.
Posted by: Keith Eaton | March 26, 2008 1:50 PM
I suspect Keith is the kind of person who would shit in his mother's mouth, and then denounce her in a fit of rage when she failed to thank him for the honor.
Speaking of rabid commenters, demented Denyse pored through PZ's blog posts of the previous year to find one where he suggested taking the rhetorical jackboots to incompetent teachers -- and used that to suggest that he attended the movie to inflict violence. As we all know, his stated threat if he saw the movie was to laugh.
I second the motion to get rid of William Wallace; he never adds anything constructive to a discussion and is just an irritation and distraction.
we are still a free country and people are allowed to voice politically incorrect views specially when they upset communists and godless academics. PhD still means pile it higher and deeper....
Hey, if you can be appointed head of FEMA with no qualifications, what's a mere teaching or research position?
@226: in re the departed WW's obsession with invitation, I'm speculating that there probably were two different invitation paths that both threaded through the same RSVP site. There was the public invitation path, which PZ used, and the personal contact path, which is apparently how Stu Blessman got his invite (handed down from a church elder). We know the public path exists.
There's no good reason to think there was some separate "invitation path". The church elder could have easily gotten the tickets the same way PZ did. That's assuming that Stu Blessman's account is accurate, which is highly doubtful:
Note that Stu's account is contradicted by everyone else involved. Even in the multitude of different accounts by the producer, none state PZ had been bothering anyone.
A polite plea to you and the other bloggers discussing "Expelled":
Please reconsider the urge to keep illustrating your articles with full-body pictures of Ben Stein operating under the delusion that he is Angus Young. There are some knees that do not need to be seen that often. I usually have a strong stomach for the visually grotesque but this is putting me off my feed. More squid pics less Stein pics, please. Thank-you.
I second the motion to get rid of William Wallace; he never adds anything constructive to a discussion and is just an irritation and distraction.
Posted by: Monado, FCD
Please do not do that. I rather enjoy knocking Little Willie around.
Janine: "Please do not do that. I rather enjoy knocking Little Willie around."
Oh, the quote-mining possibilities of that!
From what I can piece together the people that Stu saw being disrupted were probably PZ's family and friends including Richard Dawkins. They would have looked "hustled and bothered" but for a completely different reason.
No need to piece it together. It's all been explained by PZ himself. He was indeed talking to the group he came with to explain that he had been asked to go f^H^H^H, uh, leave. Blessman had few facts and much supposition. ID loyalists ran with it from there.
Keith,
Iguanas are not susceptible to the rabies virus. Only mammals can be infected by rabies.
Beyond that, the rest of your post is a poor attempt at dull humor, and indicates your personal perversions as a furry, voyeur, and god buggerer.
-----------
fred,
we are still a free country and people are allowed to voice politically incorrect views specially when they upset communists and godless academics. PhD still means pile it higher and deeper....
Yes, despite all the attempts of the Christianists, we are still a free country. It is exactly because of this that we have freedom of speech. Within the same amendment guarantying freedom of speech is a statement that the government will neither establish religion, nor prohibit it.
Within a PUBLIC school, as the Constitution is currently interpreted, this means that PUBLIC employees cannot promote a religion. Creationism and ID are religious concepts, and hence, the teaching of them in a school as fact and not cultural phenomenon is unconstitutional.
If you want that, go to a PRIVATE school, where PRIVATE employees are free to teach whatever the school wants them to.
BTW, Jesus's teachings are communist...
My vote for dumbest comment of the month.
Jumping into the game a bit late here, just wanted to address a point brought up way back in comment #14.
The belt buckle shown next to our friend Mr. Stein was used by enlisted ranks in the German Army, 1933-1945. "Gott Mit Uns" translates as something like "God is with us." The same motto was used on WWI German Army belt buckles with an imperial crown instead of the eagle & swastika.
I believe the same motto was also used on Police belt buckles with a large swastika replacing the eagle clutching a swastika.
The motto of the SS was "Meine Ehre Heisst Treue", which is "My Honor Is Loyalty."
To my knowledge there was no official NSDAP motto, but it is certainly true that many Party & political awards such as medals & badges used the likeness of the Christian cross, one of the most well-known probably being the Mother's Cross, which was awarded for producing babies for the Reich.
Even the swastika itself is a type of cross - the German word is "Hakenkreuz", which means "hooked cross."
Whether or not they considered themselves to be traditional Christians, they hijacked Christian imagery to give themselves the appearance of spiritual authority. It is the trappings of religion in which the Nazis cloaked themselves, not science.
So they let Dawkins in because they didn't recognize his name? He slipped in like James Bond with that tricky alternate moniker. You'd think that wouldn't be much of an obstacle, being that HE'S IN THE FREAKIN' MOVIE! Did he use his formal surFACE as well?
It's important to note that Master Blessman changed his tune after several other eyewitnesses pointed out that his ludicrous "hustling and bothering" lie was exactly that - a lie. He amended his story to say that PZ "He didn't cause a disruption per se; he was kindly escorted out."
"Per se?"
I guess that what passes for a retraction and apology in the Creationist Culture Club. Blessman's a cowardly little cur. Something like this would have been more appropriate and honorable:
Heh.
This is a copy of a post I have just left at RichardDawkins.net:-
May I just add one more thing to the indictment of hypocrisy against Mark Mathis, something that had not occurred to me before, or at least not quite so clearly?
1. Mathis tries to claim that he did not deceive PZ, me, Eugenie Scott and the rest of us into taking part in his film in the first place. He tries to claim that we were invited in good faith, and that we accepted in good faith.
2. If that were really true, wouldn't it be natural to invite PZ and the rest of us to attend pre-screenings, as honoured guests? The fact that he threw PZ out of the theatre in Minneapolis, and goes to strenuous lengths to keep all of us out of advance screenings (Eugenie has documented her positive exclusion) amounts to a damning admission that we are perceived as enemies, and therefore that his claim to have invited us to take part in an objective discussion of the issues, without deceiving us, is a lie.
Mathis cannot have it both ways. Either he was telling us the truth in the first place, when he invited us to participate in the film, in which case we should be invited to see it as an extension of the good faith with which he originally invited us to participate. Or he is right to treat us as enemies, to be excluded from advance showings, in which case he is lying when he claims to have invited us in good faith originally.
Well, it is obvious to any objective observer that Mark Mathis is a serial liar, frantically trying to spin his way out of the hole he has dug for himself. But I have not seen this particular contradiction spelled out before, in quite these stark terms.
Am I right?
Richard
Prof. Dawkins,
You are right of course. That's what is truly hilarious - they don't dare let the interviewees -- or a qualified science observer -- see what was done with interviews of scientists whose views are known.
P.S. I loved The Ancestor's Tale. That's a book that bears re-reading.
Well, Rev, it's been a competitive month in that category, and Eaton's fans are counting on the fact that March isn't over yet. Wallace's supporters were disappointed at his inability to go the distance, but the field is still anyone's to surge ahead in.
I do agree with you that this one is a real contender with its fine combination of ressentiment over his own dullness with humorlessness, heavy-handedness, and self-congratulation. It will be a tough one for Eaton to beat.
Besides, the dumbass ought to get with the program--everyone knows PhD means "phoney doctor", anyway.
thalarctos, PH(oney) D(octor) since 2006
I don't get it. What's a Honey Doctor?
What's a Honey Doctor?
A doctor is a person who helps you get better when you're sick or injured, Sweetie.
That reminds me: we really should see one about your dyslexia.
Well, it is obvious to any objective observer that Mark Mathis is a serial liar, frantically trying to spin his way out of the hole he has dug for himself.
Then he makes a point of saying, oh by the way, I'm inviting Michael Shermer, neener neener. To try to make it look like he's not afraid of the opposition, I guess. Or maybe you all are supposed to be jealous. :-D
Regarding Prof. Dawkins' comment:
I think that's the key. I can understand Mr. Mathis having a less than fully charitable disposition towards PZ, who's been harshly critical of the *cough* Assistant Producer ever since he learned just what his interview was going to be used for. However, a strained relationship between those two men shouldn't have any bearing on how Drs. Dawkins and Scott are treated.
And if their being treated as enemies during this post-production, pre-release phase isn't enough to demonstrate Dr. D's point, the ominous music set behind the interview segments clinches it. ;-)
And if that's not enough, the disgraceful tactics employed in the film for the purpose of presenting the Theory of Evolution as a root cause of The Holocaust surely is. :-|
The bottom line? The entire enterprise is dishonest in concept and in execution. It's a shameless hit-piece aimed at a well-established branch of science and, even more contemptibly, at the people who actually understand and advance it to the benefit - and not, as Mathis, Stein et al would have the world believe, to the detriment - of humanity.
Geez. I'm feeling angry about it now. Holy crumbling shortcake! I might even curse!
Let me add my voice to the those who've called Godwin on Expelled!
Borwnain: LOL!
Oh, Keith.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! *gasp* Haaaa...
Now really. "Worldwide"? Do you know anything about what the rest of the world thinks of creationists? Sorry, but if this thing gets an international release, it'll be lucky if it makes more than 7.50 $. Nah, let's be generous and say 7.50 €.
Even the US market isn't as full of supporters as you apparently think.
Otherwise: I find that the oddest thing about this press relase apart from the really obvious distortions and frantic circle-pedalling is the mention of RD's surname first name, Clinton... what's next? Will that be used as a springboard to connect the evil, evil scientists with the evil, evil liberals? Come on, it's obvious! It's as obvious as the Obama/Osama connection! =P
I suspect this movie will take in UNDER $500,000. Just a rough guess. And I doubt it'll open in 1000 theaters.
It's like I've been saying, Dr. Dawkins. They're wankers. :)
Ass Prod Mathis knows his film is a piece of dreck. How amateurish and slovenly of the producers to use images of The Holocaust to demonize a group of people. If they have
any brains left after the Hitler Zombie burps, they should hope this movie dies on opening day.
Exactly, Prof. Dawkins. Besides that, they've given it away in the movie itself. Unless they are frantically revising the credits, don't you and PZ both have a big "thank you" in print at the end of the movie? One normally doesn't thank adversaries. Therefore, either the credits were being sarcastic, which is really unbecoming in a documentary that claims moral high ground, or it makes no sense that you were not both invited to a special pre-screening with accolades (and swag).
"If they have any brains left after the Hitler Zombie burps, they should hope this movie dies on opening day."
You don't suppose they mistook The Producers for a working business plan do you?
Maybe someone should look into the financing?
So I see Keith Eaton is back (#215).
Off topic, but Keith has some unanswered questions from our discussion a few weeks ago on "The Questionable Authority."
So Keith, in case you need reminding, here goes:
1. What is the theory of intelligent design and how can it be tested using the scientific method?
2. Name one example where appeals to the supernatural have lead to fruitful scientific inquiry where methodological materialism has failed.
3. Who died and left you arbiter of the true faith?
"Stick it in your ear" does not qualify as a meaningful response.
The last time I checked bearing false witness was in the top ten list of Christian sins. Hustling, bothering or even being obnoxious and rude aren't.
If you are going to have the arrogance to claim to have a monopoly on morality you should at least abide by your own rules.
All this blather about "invitations" is, to a great extent, beside the point. Even if we concede all of the Expelled apologists' spurious, hair-splitting definitions of "invited," we're left with these questions:
-Why would you not invite a fairly well-known figure, prominently featured in your movie and thanked in the closing credits, to a preview happening only three hours from where he lives and works?
-Even if you neglected to do so, and he showed up anyway, why would you have a guard throw him out instead of saying, "Hi, welcome, have a seat"? Even if you disliked him, or he disagreed with your movie? It's just common courtesy and good PR, and intellectually honest to boot. If I made a documentary about, say, skinheads, and one of the featured skinheads showed up to watch it, I might not be glad to see him, but I'd give him a seat, unless I had solid reason to suspect he might be disruptive.
In this case, of course, the answer to both of the above questions is "Because I'm a petty, intellectually dishonest jackass with a tribal mentality and a strong fear of being shown up in public."
You spelled "LOL" backwards, silly!
All this fuss makes me want to sing to an old TV theme :
There's a man we know as PZ Myers
Everywhere he's feared by cranks and liars
If you put him on the screen
And try to distort what he means
Chances are you won't live to see tomorrow.
Evo-devo man!
Evo-devo man!
If you EXPELL this fellow,
He won't forget your name...
(and PF Sloan is a genius)