Joined: Mar. 2008
I haven't seen the film. (I RSVPd for a viewing and received an e-mail confirmation, but had to cancel the day before.)
Nevertheless, Dawkins's review made me think we should revive this thread because it describes the evolution/Nazism theme the movie apparently tries to push. It also suggests the idea (which is purely my own deduction) that the filmakers wanted a Jewish spokesperson (Ben Stein) for "cover" because of how flimsy that connection is.
"He visits Dachau and, when informed by the guide that lots of Jews had been killed there, he buries his face in his hands as though this is the first time he has heard of it. Obviously it was not his intention, but I thought his rotten acting was an insult to the memory of the victims."
I was raised Jewish (although I'm now an open atheist), but I find the evolution/Holocaust conflation extraordinarily offensive for all the obvious reasons, including (1) the Reich clearly relied more on religious rhetoric than scientific, (2) whatever scientific grounds it relied on were wrong, and (3) even if those scientific grounds were not wrong, the fact that scientific knowledge is put to an immoral end has no bearing on its truth value.
ERV blogged previously on a potential ADL (Anti-Defamation League) response (which I'm not yet computer-savvy enough to link to). I hope such a response will be forthcoming (probably not until after the release).
It seems to me that even non-scientists (like me) from a Jewish heritage would see through this movie insofar as it misrepresents the forces that drove the Holocaust. It's not quite Holocaust-denial, but it smells similar.
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most well documented events of antiquity. Barry Arrington, Jan 17, 2012.