Joined: May 2006
I thought it was interesting that Expelled thinks that 30% of the audience at Boston was opposed to ID. Cross-post from Talkorigins:
|It's a truly hideous piece: |
Atheists Infiltrate Events for Intelligent Design Film
On to some specifics:
|Instead of entertaining a debate on the merits of competing theories, |
the scientific establishment has moved to suppress the ID movement in
a "systematic and ruthless" way at odds with America's founding
principles, the film asserts.
This from a bunch who complains that dissenters came to the
discussions (which were held after the movie) when they were trying to
keep them out.
And if pointing out the dishonesty and lack of evidence of the IDiots
is "systematic and ruthless" suppression, then that's the duty of
science. Or to put it in the honest terms that Mathis would never
understand (he seems quite stupid, from his output), science has the
responsibility to keep lies like his from being portrayed as science.
|A computer glitch, however, made it possible for certain individuals |
to RSVP to some screenings when they in fact had not been invited,
Mathis said. The same glitch also occurred on March 19 in Boston where
at least 30 percent of the audience members were antagonistic toward
the film's message, he said.
I hadn't heard about the Boston event having a lot of dissenters, who
they're trying to keep out, of course. I had noticed that it was
labeled "full" a day or two before, so I was hoping that the educated
segment around there had representatives signed up for the film. 30%
sounds quite good.
And they're acting as if somehow people took advantage of their
inability to control their computer system, when the fact is that
there were sites out there inviting anybody who clicked on them to
RSVP and come to the movie. Mathis is scum.
Obvious question, Mathis, what are you trying to hide? The stupidity,
dishonesty, and sheer viciousness of your movie? Thought so.
|Although the filmmakers noticed that Dawkins had arrived at the |
Minneapolis screening uninvited, they decided to let him in anyway
after he signed in as "Clinton Dawkins," Mathis said.
Unlikely story, especially since Myers claims that Dawkins wasn't
signed in at all, but was simply an unnamed guest.
|Although Myers and dozens of blogs have seized on the idea that the |
"Expelled" filmmakers, who complain about scientists being expelled
from academia are now doing the same thing, Mathis said that the real
irony is being missed.
"Myers is free to see the film once it is officially released," said
Mathis. "But those individuals who have devoted their lives to
scientific study might not ever regain their posts after exploring new
avenues of inquiry simply because they do not concur with the
Lying for Jesus isn't a matter of having "devoted their lives to
scientific study," prevaricating fool. It's really all lies from
Mathis, from beginning to end.
|They contend the film is edited and crafted in a duplicitous and |
misleading manner that misrepresents their views, but Mathis denied
that and said the interviews were not set up under false pretenses."
The difference is, Mark, that Dawkins has the evidence (he saw the
movie) to back up his claims. Repeating your lies adds not a whit of
truth to their mendacity.
And that's a good note to end on. They're ramping up the volume of
their dishonest accusations, but they have nothing worthwhile in their
claims, and nothing worthwhile in their movie. They're only angry
that they have had their lies exposed before they were able to take
money off from the curious and the naive, so their audience is likely
to be those as dishonest as the "Expelled" bunch, plus a few who come
to laugh and/or to document the lies put out by Mathis.
Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy