RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (121) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... >   
  Topic: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed., Sternberg, Gonzalez, Crocker - A film< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Steverino



Posts: 407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,11:15   

I don't recall the circumstances of Sternberg not being kept by the Smithsonian, but didn't it turn out to be for something other than him being an IDiot?

Can anyone provide me with the Reader's Digest version?

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,11:31   

Quote (Steverino @ Mar. 20 2008,11:15)
I don't recall the circumstances of Sternberg not being kept by the Smithsonian, but didn't it turn out to be for something other than him being an IDiot?

Can anyone provide me with the Reader's Digest version?

Try Wiki, better than Readers Digest and you get to read the arguments on the talk page :-)

Chris!

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
blader



Posts: 5
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,11:42   

Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 20 2008,11:34)
Quote (blader @ Mar. 20 2008,09:47)
Nomad, perhaps I missed it, but can you please describe how one can go about getting a pass to see a screening?

I see they have one planned at a theater near me, and I'd like to see it for myself (I think).  I mean, it sounds so bad it might actually be funny..or not.

In case Nomad is still recovering his recently assaulted brain cells, here is a link so that you can book your screening:

http://rsvp.getexpelled.com/events/special/expelled

BTW - What city are you in?

Unless you want to get bombarded with Marketing junk, I would suggest setting  up a special email account.  They also ask for a Title when you sign up - Pastor, or Youth Group Leader would get you instant credibility.

I'm in Atlanta

thanks

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,11:56   

Wikipedia article link

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,12:55   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Mar. 20 2008,12:31)
Quote (Steverino @ Mar. 20 2008,11:15)
I don't recall the circumstances of Sternberg not being kept by the Smithsonian, but didn't it turn out to be for something other than him being an IDiot?

Can anyone provide me with the Reader's Digest version?

Try Wiki, better than Readers Digest and you get to read the arguments on the talk page :-)

I checked out the discussion page just for kicks.

Wow.
Quote
Reputable? I do not normally deem reputable any published article that relies on either USENET, TalkOrigins, Art Bell or Panda's thumb. The AAAS link you posted does one of them. The link they provide ends up at the main page (stale link in AAAS article). Calling Panda's thumb polemic blog entries and their associated comments "scientific", as does the AAAS article you refer to, stretches credibility beyond belief. I am starting to suspect that the AAAS is funded by George Soros or Michael Moore:) Also, based on a quick search of google, it looks like the AAAS and Pandas thumb have engage in a form of mutual accredidation, quoting each other as convienent when discussing threats to evolutionary theory. Also, the AAAS article seems to be the basis of the peer review allegation on the reference (which is incorrect/broken). I'll reread yet again to see where you're coming from. Sometimes I miss things. ImprobabilityDrive 17:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,16:56   

I am astonished that person would speak of Art Bell in such a derogatory fashion!  Shocked I am!

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
bystander



Posts: 301
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,18:50   

Quote (ndt @ Mar. 21 2008,03:28)
Regarding Stein's motivation, I'd like to offer an additional possibility besides True Believer and In It For The Money. I think it's possible that he sees the religious right as a useful, easily manipulated voting bloc, much the way Nixon regarded southern racists. This whole exercise could be an attempt to keep them voting for the Nixon-style "conservatives" whose views Stein agrees with.

Looking at Stein's financial writings, I think that he enjoys going against the crowd and this is probably what attracted him in the first place. The idea that he thinks that people are generally sheep and being different marks him as being an independent thinker. Also the DI guys can present their ideas quite seductively if you have not been exposed to the other side.

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,19:25   

[quote=J-Dog,Mar. 20 2008,08:34]
Quote

In case Nomad is still recovering his recently assaulted brain cells, here is a link so that you can book your screening:

http://rsvp.getexpelled.com/events/special/expelled

Dammit. There is a northern California one I could go to but it is already "full."

Nomad, do you think someone would succeed in getting in if they didn't have a pre-arranged "visa," or security check, or whatever it is they do? Are there scalpers at these showings? Scalpers for Jesus?

I should probably be preparing for my rotiserrie auction anyway.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10112
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:00   

Incase Kevin Miller has a "server glitch":

http://kevinwrites.typepad.com/otherwi....hi.html

Quote
OH NO. "Darwinism = Hitler", the old creationist canard.

(1) It’s an argument to (perceived) consequences.

The fact of evolution is real regardless of if you like the (perceived) consequences or not. I don’t like that donuts make me fat, but they do. Reality is not contingent on me approving its output.

(2) Hitler was a theist, and talked about god wanting him to do things.

Hitler talks about god a lot, Darwin not at all. Check “Mein Kampf” if you don’t believe me. German Soldiers had “gott mit uns” as part of their regalia. Don’t get me wrong, he was an odious, evil man, but he’s not getting his worldview from “Darwinism”

(3) Genocide is artificial, not natural selection

And it predates both Darwin and Hitler. The Spartans used to practice it. Modern pets and livestock are a product of it.

Shame on those who continue to perpetuate this nonsense. I’m talking to you, Kevin Miller.


Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 09:04 AM

Have you seen the film yet, Rich? If not, perhaps you should suspend judgment.

Posted by: Kevin Miller | March 20, 2008 at 09:24 AM

"I've always questioned Darwinism, because Darwinism leads to social Darwinism..." from the Godtube video you posted, about half way through.

"See the film" does not address my issues, Kevin.

Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 09:50 AM

Rich: All you're doing here is attempting to erect a straw man. But just to satisfy you, here are some responses to your points.

1) At no point does "Expelled" argue that Darwinism is wrong because it leads to dire social consequences. As I said, see the film before you pass judgment.

2) I don't disagree that Hitler was a theist. But to try and argue that he developed his programs completely independent of Darwin is ludicrous. As I said, see the film before you pass judgment. We present ample evidence of Darwin's influence upon the Third Reich.

3) Obviously, genocide predates Hitler and Darwin. But the science of eugenics does not. It was developed by Darwin's cousin Francis Galton in an effort to apply Darwinian principals to social change. Once again, the connection between Darwinism and eugenics is crystal clear.

Do I have to say it again? See the film before passing judgment.

Posted by: Kevin Miller | March 20, 2008 at 02:45 PM

Thanks at least for answering.

1) But Ben Stein does, in a clip you link to, talking about “expelled” and he is the star of your film. Is that *really* a straw man?

2) If you agree that arguing to consequences is wrong, why do you then try and link Hitler and Darwin? Again, Darwin’s theory is natural selection and eugenics is artificial selection.

3) Eugenics predates both Hitler and Darwin. The fact that Galton coined the name is trivial. Gravity existed before someone formalized it as a theory. I mentioned ancient Sparta, but they clearly aren’t the only ancient society to practice eugenics.

Try :
Ancient Eugenics
The Arnold Prize Essay for 1913 by Allen G. Roper, B.A.
Late Scholar of Keble College
Originally Published By B.H. Blackwell, Broad Street, Oxford (1913)
Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 7514891


I can find this. I'm surprised a big budget film crew can’t.


Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 05:32 PM


http://kevinwrites.typepad.com/otherwi....-b.html

Quote
Hey Rich: Advertise Glen D. on your own blog. If you want to offer a summary of his response here, that's cool. But no promoting.

Posted by: Kevin Miller | March 18, 2008 at 11:49 PM

I felt the comments were well crafted and wholly relevant, and better than I could have crafted. Have you "EXPELLED" his comments? Oh dear. What's the material difference between me posting them here and him posting them here? Are you a hypocrite?

Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 09:08 AM

Rich: I expelled your misuse of the comments section of my blog, not Glen D. The function of the comments is to COMMENT on something posted on the blog, not re-direct readers to another blog. So like I said, if you have something relevant to say, go for it. If you're just stopping by to snipe, I think we can probably do without you.

Posted by: Kevin Miller | March 20, 2008 at 09:23 AM

It would seem we're both very interested in intelligent design, and that you purport that censorship is going on with regard to that. But then you censor. How is a reader to be informed and make up their own mind? Aren't your actions defeating your argument?

Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 09:46 AM

Not at all, Rich. This is my blog. I'm free to run it according to my own editorial principles. I've told you the rules by which you may post things. If you don't want to abide by them, that's your problem. But it certainly isn't censorship.

Posted by: Kevin Miller | March 20, 2008 at 02:47 PM

Aren't there rules and demarcation for science and academia? Or do you advocate a double standard?

Posted by: Rich | March 20, 2008 at 05:12 PM


http://kevinwrites.typepad.com/otherwi....-t.html

Quote
"unscrupulous Orlando Sentinel film critic" - please substantiate and wallow in hypocrisy, or retract.

Posted by: Rich | March 13, 2008 at 12:27 PM

Yeah, I'm curious as to why you guys want clergy to see the film but not actual film critics.

Posted by: mike | March 14, 2008 at 06:22 AM


--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:09   

PZ Myers expelled from line to see "Expelled"

They let PZ's family and guest in to see it, though.

Go read PZ's blog post now for the name of the guest.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:29   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 20 2008,20:09)
PZ Myers expelled from line to see "Expelled"

They let PZ's family and guest in to see it, though.

Go read PZ's blog post now for the name of the guest.

BwaHaHa!  

They "expelled" PZ from Expelled The Bad Movie" and let in PZ's guest!

Every Irony Meter in the Twin Cities Area is now totally busted.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
stevestory



Posts: 8895
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:34   

OMG that is hilarious

   
Mister DNA



Posts: 466
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:39   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 20 2008,20:09)
PZ Myers expelled from line to see "Expelled"

They let PZ's family and guest in to see it, though.

Go read PZ's blog post now for the name of the guest.

Oh man, that's just beautiful.

--------------
CBEB's: The Church Burnin' Ebola Blog
Thank you, Dr. Dembski. You are without peer when it comes to The Argument Regarding Design. - vesf

    
stevestory



Posts: 8895
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,20:39   


   
Annyday



Posts: 583
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,21:03   



--------------
"ALL eight of the "nature" miracles of Jesus could have been accomplished via the electroweak quantum tunneling mechanism. For example, walking on water could be accomplished by directing a neutrino beam created just below Jesus' feet downward." - Frank Tipler, ISCID fellow

  
Reed



Posts: 274
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,21:43   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 20 2008,18:09)
PZ Myers expelled from line to see "Expelled"

They let PZ's family and guest in to see it, though.

Go read PZ's blog post now for the name of the guest.

Wow. Not letting someone who is featured in the movie into a screening ?

That's low, even by IDiot standards. On the plus side, there's even more comedy gold to come when they try to spin this one. Especially given who they did let in ;)

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1005
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,21:46   

I'm doing one of those cartoon head shake things.

Let me get this straight.

PZ, family and a guest went to see Expelled.  PZ and guest are actually IN Expelled.

PZ is singled out and expelled from seeing Expelled, but guest and family are admitted.

The guest is Richard Effing Dawkins.

Richard Effing Dawkins!

Sort of the Alpha Male PZ.  He's let in while the lemur-like beta male PZ is constrained to munching popcorn in the lobby.

Makes no sense to me.  Except....

Creatoonists!  Yes, makes perfect sense!

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,21:57   

Im sitting here, eating a piece of pineapple upside-down cheesecake with Arnie.  Friend IMs me on gmail "OMFG GO TO PHARYNGULA GO TO PHARYNGULA!"

Best day ever.

Seriously.

Shit.

ROFL!!!!!

  
Nerull



Posts: 317
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,21:58   

Okay,  PZ probably already had the idea...

But since I did tell Skatje to crash Expelled at the MoA, I'm taking credit.  :p

--------------
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1481
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,22:09   

Countdown to Casey Luskin the attack gerbil's spin

" We did that on purpose so PZ would know what Sternberg and Gonzalez felt!!!!"

....5....4....3...2....1

:D  :D  :D  :D  :D

--------------
JoeG: And by eating the cake you are consuming the information- some stays with you and the rest is waste.

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,22:49   

THOSE FASCIST FUCKS THREW PZ OUT OF THE THEATRE RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME! The only reason that they didn't throw Dawkins out is that they were apparently too fucking stupid to recognize him! They didn't even recognize him when he sat through the film - not until he rose to speak, after being called on - by said producer, MARK MATHIS - at the Q&A. Holy shit, the blood drained from his face then! :angry:

"Free speech" eh? Un-fucking-believable.

This is what I overheard from a theatre employee named "Jared" to PZ: "The producer said that you are not allowed to attend the screening, because you don't have a ticket, and you were not invited. This is a private screening." Nomad, did you have a ticket? Were you invited? Didn't you click on that "please fill the theatre, please, please," link and subsequently get, as I did, an e-mail that said, "TICKET NOT REQUIRED"?

Dawkins stands up and asks MARK MATHIS why PZ was expelled. As Rev. Barky said to me later, it was a magic moment. Mathis repeates the same bullshit above. Nazis, eh?

And that beefy, ugly cop [*edit- cop, not copy, but what the hay, "copy" fits too*], after completing his rounds of the audience during the film, hovered just behind Dawkins (who was about 30 rows away from Mathis) every time that Dawkins spoke. Stalin, eh? Police state?

I asked Mathis to give (as his film does not) a concise definition of intelligent design and to tell us about some little film called "Crossroads." Mathis did finally get ID right (irreducible complexity, Dembki's improbabilities, blah, blah) and then launches in with "And if you know anything about filmmaking, there's something called a working title..." Yeah, I do know, thanks. I've been in films. One of them even won an award (ifilm.com) and filled a few theatres. Without your police state shenanigans I might add, Mark Mathis.

Mark Mathis made a big spiel about "let's be open to new ideas and have a debate." So Dawkins stands up, and these open-minded people laugh at him.

These bloodsuckers went after him and PZ just to ride their coattails to attain some kind of fame, any kind of fame.

I'll write about the movie tomorrow. Right now, I feel as if I've escaped Nazi Germany myself. I need a beer. Prohibition is over! :p

I wouldn't treat Ftk or DaveScot the way that Mathis treated Dawkins tonight. (Mathis even accused Dawkins of lying, and Dawkins apologized for being wrong. Can't win for losing.)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,22:56   

Im glad you were there, Kristine.  At first I was worried Richard was in with those people by himself...

*hug*

  
Gary Bohn



Posts: 10
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,23:15   

I don't normally post here but this information is a bit to difficult to take.

That the producers of this bull shit had the gaul to set Dawkins up for derision after forcing PZ out of the theatre goes way beyond irony. These hypocrites should be dragged naked through the stench and poisons of their own making.

I have always felt that PZ and Dawkins have been a bit over zealous in their treatment of religion, but after seeing the events tonight, all I can say is its time to take it to the religionists. They apparently believe their absolute morals don't apply to them when fighting against the relativist Darwinists.

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,23:18   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Mar. 20 2008,23:09)
Countdown to Casey Luskin the attack gerbil's spin

" We did that on purpose so PZ would know what Sternberg and Gonzalez felt!!!!"

....5....4....3...2....1

:D  :D  :D  :D  :D

This is more like what Luskin is doing.



"They did WHAT??!!?!?

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,23:44   

Genie Scott pointed out to me that I should check the date that they bought their domain name:

 
Quote

% whois expelledthemovie.com

  Domain Name: EXPELLEDTHEMOVIE.COM
  Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
  Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
  Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net
  Name Server: NS1.FILMPR.COM
  Name Server: NS2.FILMPR.COM
  Status: ok
  Updated Date: 16-feb-2008
  Creation Date: 01-mar-2007
  Expiration Date: 01-mar-2009


February 28, 2007 is the very latest they could claim "working title" as an excuse for their ruse.

When did Scott, Dawkins, and Myers get interviewed? April, 2007 for Scott and summer, 2007 for Dawkins. Does someone have Myers' interview date handy? Was it before February 28th? I somehow doubt it.

Now, what about the idea that maybe they changed things around late? That would mean that there should be a domain registration for "crossroadsthemovie.com", wouldn't you think?

 
Quote

%whois crossroadsthemovie.com

Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

No match for "CROSSROADSTHEMOVIE.COM".
>>> Last update of whois database: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:38:49 UTC <<<


Isn't that ... special?

[From PZ's blog post:

Quote

Last April, I received this nice letter from Mark Mathis.


So there you have it... even after buying the "Expelled" domain, and never having bought a domain for "Crossroads", Mathis was using "Crossroads" and its innocuous overtones to invite interviewees for the film.

Busted.]

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Mar. 20 2008,23:50

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2008,23:56   

Awesome, Wes!

Blog about that so I can link to you :P

  
Badidea



Posts: 7
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2008,00:04   

I've been trying to shout out about the domain inconsistency for quite some time.  Glad it's getting some notice.

There are other signs that this story is full of holes though.

More important than asking about Crossroads is asking: whatever happened to Rampant Films?  You know, the inconspicuous little production company with the website listing several blase films, about scuba diving and such, and which had a street address that turned out to be an unoccupied apartment building?

And how exactly does one claim that the Expelled concept evolved after the interviews anyway when your own star, selected early in the project, characterized his take on the film as "From Darwin to Hitler"?

And so on.

I do feel that we're still not hitting our stride in rebutting this stuff.  For all the things WE think are big goofs and obvious on their side, very little of that is really making an impression on people outside the scienceblog circle.  They are very tightly controlling their message, and it is a savvy one: hard to rebut as quickly and as clearly as it can be spun.  Free expression and free inquiry is a compelling rallying cry.  The problem is simply that freedom of inquiry does not overrule the unavoidable need to make judgments of scientific merit in academia, and the stalwart refusal of the ID camp to accept, even hypothetically, the possibility that their ideas have no merit, just as countless unsung scientists have seen happen to their ideas, only without a tremendous PR campaign to keep the idea alive regardless.

But see, even that took too long to blather on about...

--------------
The Bad Idea Blog - Science, Skepticism, Silly

   
Badidea



Posts: 7
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2008,00:44   

I forgot to highlight my favorite part about the "Rampant Films" angle: producer Ruloff later told the NYT that Rampant was actually a "subsidiary" of the far more obviously evangelical company Premise Media.

The odd thing here, though is that Premise Media was founded explicitly to create the film that would become Expelled.  It's two original main producers, Craft and Rullof, even speak about how it all came together for that purpose.

So tell me folks: why exactly does a media company that just got founded, explicitly with the idea of creating a specific film (and they even, no joke, basically said "hmmm, we need to find a Jew to star in it!"), and has yet to produce anything else so far, need a subsidiary?  Don't you normally form subsidiary companies when you have, well, like, more than one project or division to juggle?  Or after you've been in business a very long time and need to spin off some operations?

I mean, getting together trademarks and company names and domain registrations costs money.  You don't just invent extra companies for the hell of it without a good reason.

But then, we all know the reason, don't we?

--------------
The Bad Idea Blog - Science, Skepticism, Silly

   
Annyday



Posts: 583
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2008,00:49   

Quote (Badidea @ Mar. 21 2008,00:04)
I do feel that we're still not hitting our stride in rebutting this stuff.  For all the things WE think are big goofs and obvious on their side, very little of that is really making an impression on people outside the scienceblog circle.  They are very tightly controlling their message, and it is a savvy one: hard to rebut as quickly and as clearly as it can be spun.  Free expression and free inquiry is a compelling rallying cry.  The problem is simply that freedom of inquiry does not overrule the unavoidable need to make judgments of scientific merit in academia, and the stalwart refusal of the ID camp to accept, even hypothetically, the possibility that their ideas have no merit, just as countless unsung scientists have seen happen to their ideas, only without a tremendous PR campaign to keep the idea alive regardless.

But see, even that took too long to blather on about...

I'll say. I read two sentences into that paragraph, then decided to skip it. Mark Twain was right, and a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.

Therefore, one should probably go shoeless. Mention directly and bluntly that the other guy is lying. You can say that academic freedom is technically an admirable goal and you agree with it, but the Discovery Institute isn't really appealing to academic freedom. It won't catch on, is the problem. I think you should instead say the other guy is lying, you've kicked nobody out and censored no one, and you have a right to your opinion and to freedom of association because this is a free country.

Scientists don't like doing this kind of thing, though. Generally speaking, the art of rhetoric is lost on them, and rolling out buzzwords like "free country" is a kind of horrific crime. They'd rather explain how stuff works and why X or Y is true, which is why they're good as scientists and teachers but kind of crappy at PR.

--------------
"ALL eight of the "nature" miracles of Jesus could have been accomplished via the electroweak quantum tunneling mechanism. For example, walking on water could be accomplished by directing a neutrino beam created just below Jesus' feet downward." - Frank Tipler, ISCID fellow

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2008,00:57   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 20 2008,22:44)
Genie Scott pointed out to me that I should check the date that they bought their domain name:

   
Quote

% whois expelledthemovie.com

  Domain Name: EXPELLEDTHEMOVIE.COM
  Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
  Whois Server: whois.tucows.com
  Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net
  Name Server: NS1.FILMPR.COM
  Name Server: NS2.FILMPR.COM
  Status: ok
  Updated Date: 16-feb-2008
  Creation Date: 01-mar-2007
  Expiration Date: 01-mar-2009


February 28, 2007 is the very latest they could claim "working title" as an excuse for their ruse.

When did Scott, Dawkins, and Myers get interviewed? April, 2007 for Scott and summer, 2007 for Dawkins. Does someone have Myers' interview date handy? Was it before February 28th? I somehow doubt it.

Now, what about the idea that maybe they changed things around late? That would mean that there should be a domain registration for "crossroadsthemovie.com", wouldn't you think?

   
Quote

%whois crossroadsthemovie.com

Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

No match for "CROSSROADSTHEMOVIE.COM".
>>> Last update of whois database: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:38:49 UTC <<<


Isn't that ... special?

[From PZ's blog post:

 
Quote

Last April, I received this nice letter from Mark Mathis.


So there you have it... even after buying the "Expelled" domain, and never having bought a domain for "Crossroads", Mathis was using "Crossroads" and its innocuous overtones to invite interviewees for the film.

Busted.]

:O  Wesley you are AWESOME!

That little piss-ant Mathis! "If you know anything about how films are made..." Oh, man, he'd better not run into me again.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
  3600 replies since Aug. 12 2007,07:23 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (121) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]