RE: EXPELLED (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:01:15 PM)

quote:

We all know the ID movements dishonest aims from the start, yet you guys continue to trust them... kinda funny.


I have never found any of their presumed 'aims' to be dishonest; and certainly the tenets of ID are either a factual description of reality or not, regardless of one's aims.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:02:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
How is the use of extras in the movie deceptive?


It's only deceptive if the movie opposes that which is consistent with materialism (which was exactly my point. When they find out something/someone opposes that which is consistent with materialism, all of a sudden they find a bunch of stuff wrong with it/him/her).



PromiseLander -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:07:03 PM)

Cow451:
You weren't murdered in the womb, you should appreciate Dr. Dobson.



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:08:28 PM)

Is it possible not to turn this into a Dobson/abortion/etc thread?



DanJames -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:19:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

Is it possible not to turn this into a Dobson/abortion/etc thread?


There are times when it would be nice to have moderator privileges.



PromiseLander -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:23:58 PM)

Sorry about that. I'll stop. (I get sidetracked VERY easily - I forget sometimes that can be offensive, but I meant no ill)

At any rate, regardless of your views on the creation / evolution debate, the movie is sure to be stimulating to both sides - regardless of Dawkins' opinions contrary. I'm sure he's a smart person, but his animosity is extremely clear in any of his writings; he's a VERY angry person.



DanJames -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 1:25:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander

Sorry about that. I'll stop. (I get sidetracked VERY easily - I forget sometimes that can be offensive, but I meant no ill)

At any rate, regardless of your views on the creation / evolution debate, the movie is sure to be stimulating to both sides - regardless of Dawkins' opinions contrary. I'm sure he's a smart person, but his animosity is extremely clear in any of his writings; he's a VERY angry person.


Funny thing is, Ben Stein commented that he didn't find Dawkins to be as smart as he had thought he would be.

Also, just so that nobody responds to it in the future, you might go ahead and delete your comment.



Drekoguk -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 4:28:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
And I think the best way to determine whether the movie is accurate or not is to first see the movie, then decide.


Not in this case.

Just look what they've done so far!

-Scientists PZ Myers, R. Dawkins and Eugenie Scott were interviewed under false pretenses for a film called Crossroads about the controversy between evolution and creationism not for a creationist propaganda flick. The film producers claim that they changed the name of the movie after the interviews but the Expelled website name was bought before the interviews were even conducted. Thou shalt not lie.

-Expelled uses copyrighted Harvard material called Inner Life of the Cell which they are being sued over: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/peter_irons_drafts_a_letter.php#more
Thou shalt not steal.

-One scientist interviewee, PZ Myers, was expelled from a screening of Expelled and Richard Dawkins who was with Myers was let in. This is very hypocritical, because the movie is about the supposed silencing of critics of the ToE and the producers of Expelled are suppressing critics of their film!
Thou shalt not be...HILARIOUS!!


Judging from all this it's a pretty safe assumption that this film will be complete and utter bollocks.

There's also the tired old argument about ID martyrs and Darwin going back in time to write The Jews and Their Lies.

Only felt like responding to this because I've been following the Expelled thing intensely. I'll get back to lurking. [sm=icon_smile_cold.gif]



unclemonkey -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 4:38:33 PM)

ORIGINAL:Jhud
quote:

And I think the best way to determine whether the movie is accurate or not is to first see the movie, then decide.

There you go being all logical again. Isn’t that a TOS violation?



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 4:46:40 PM)

quote:

Not in this case.

Just look what they've done so far!


quote:

-Scientists PZ Myers, R. Dawkins and Eugenie Scott were interviewed under false pretenses for a film called Crossroads about the controversy between evolution and creationism not for a creationist propaganda flick. The film producers claim that they changed the name of the movie after the interviews but the Expelled website name was bought before the interviews were even conducted. Thou shalt not lie.


So let me get this straight; PZ Meyers considers it a 'creationist propoganda flick', the producers of Expelled do not - therefore, the producers are lying. OK.

quote:

-Expelled uses copyrighted Harvard material called Inner Life of the Cell which they are being sued over: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/peter_irons_drafts_a_letter.php#more
Thou shalt not steal.


Actually, the animation in the movie isn't the HArvard produced one, they are similar because, well, they are both animations about the inner workings of the cell.

quote:

-One scientist interviewee, PZ Myers, was expelled from a screening of Expelled and Richard Dawkins who was with Myers was let in. This is very hypocritical, because the movie is about the supposed silencing of critics of the ToE and the producers of Expelled are suppressing critics of their film!
Thou shalt not be...HILARIOUS!!


So Dawkins lies to get into an invitation only pre-screening of the film, and Meyers follows suit, but gets caught, and the producers of the film are the one's being deceptive; this is fairly typical evolutionist double-think.

quote:

Judging from all this it's a pretty safe assumption that this film will be complete and utter bollocks.


Or, we can surmise evolutionists are really scared of this film and are doing everything they can to undermine it; which would cause us to wonder - why is this so? The best way to find out is to see the film.

quote:

There's also the tired old argument about ID martyrs and Darwin going back in time to write The Jews and Their Lies.


Wow, you must really be concerned about this film; that would seem to be an anti-Jewish slur against Ben Stein.



essentialsaltes -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 5:18:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
So Dawkins lies to get into an invitation only pre-screening of the film, and Meyers follows suit, but gets caught, and the producers of the film are the one's being deceptive; this is fairly typical evolutionist double-think.


No one lied. Myers reserved seats for himself and guests (including Dawkins) using his own name. Or as Dawkins explains in his review:

"The way to get into this showing of the film was simply to go on the Internet and apply. This was exactly what PZ did. He went on the Web and put his name down for a place at the showing, just like everybody else, including several others from the American Atheists annual conference in Minneapolis. Not a man to hide behind a false name or false beard, PZ openly sported his own. Like many other people, including his daughter and Kristine Harley (see her Amused Muse website), PZ took advantage of the generous offer to let him book guests in as well, and then kindly invited me to be one of them. There was no request to give the names of guests, and no machinery to do so, which was why my name did not appear on the list. "



cow451 -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 6:29:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Was anything Shermer said about the production inaccurate? The audience of extras, for example?


How is the use of extras in the movie deceptive?

I saw the trailer and had the impression he was lecturing to an audience (presumed to be people coming to hear him speak), not acting. Extras are PAID to behave in a predetermined manner. That alone is deceptive. It strikes me as extremely odd that they would have to pay people to attend, anyway.



1love1God1way -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 6:39:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cow451

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Was anything Shermer said about the production inaccurate? The audience of extras, for example?


How is the use of extras in the movie deceptive?

I saw the trailer and had the impression he was lecturing to an audience (presumed to be people coming to hear him speak), not acting. Extras are PAID to behave in a predetermined manner. That alone is deceptive. It strikes me as extremely odd that they would have to pay people to attend, anyway.


Don't get too worked up. It's still Hollywood.



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 7:25:40 PM)

quote:

No one lied. Myers reserved seats for himself and guests (including Dawkins) using his own name. Or as Dawkins explains in his review:

"The way to get into this showing of the film was simply to go on the Internet and apply. This was exactly what PZ did. He went on the Web and put his name down for a place at the showing, just like everybody else, including several others from the American Atheists annual conference in Minneapolis. Not a man to hide behind a false name or false beard, PZ openly sported his own. Like many other people, including his daughter and Kristine Harley (see her Amused Muse website), PZ took advantage of the generous offer to let him book guests in as well, and then kindly invited me to be one of them. There was no request to give the names of guests, and no machinery to do so, which was why my name did not appear on the list. "


First off Dawkins didn't sign up as 'Richard Dawkins', he used his little known real name 26 March 2008
Clinton Dawkins.

Secondly, it was an invitation only pre-screening; they have such things because producers like to show a selected audience a first cut and get feedback. They limit the screening because movies are expensive to produce and any yahoo who wants to can act as spoiler to future audiences, which was obviously the intent of Dawkins and Meyers. And despite all of this, Dawkins still was politely responded to when he asked a question, even though by all rights he should have been tossed out on his rear. And there are other people who were there that have a different take on the turn of events.


So in my mind, Dawkins and Meyers are at the very least simply attempting to disrupt anything that counters their own fundamentalist brand of atheism, and at the very most are in typical fascistic mode attempting to suppress free speech.



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 7:31:05 PM)

quote:

I saw the trailer and had the impression he was lecturing to an audience (presumed to be people coming to hear him speak), not acting. Extras are PAID to behave in a predetermined manner. That alone is deceptive. It strikes me as extremely odd that they would have to pay people to attend, anyway.


First off, I have no idea what role this image plays in the movie, and neither do you; for all I know it might just be a background image setting the stage for Ben Stein's speaking career, which is completely legit.

Secondly, Shermers point is based on an assumption, namely that "The biology professors at Pepperdine assure me that their mostly Christian students fully accept the theory of evolution.". I have no idea how they would know that.



DanJames -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 7:57:24 PM)

This makes for an interesting psychology experiment. All of the OECs believe that Ben Stein et al are of ignoble character and Dick Dawkins is trying to shed light on his evil deeds through virtuous acts; and all the YECs believe that Ben Stein is being mischaracterized and DD is the ignoble one who was treated better than he should have been. Are there any exceptions?



essentialsaltes -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 11:35:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

No one lied. Myers reserved seats for himself and guests (including Dawkins) using his own name. Or as Dawkins explains in his review:

"The way to get into this showing of the film was simply to go on the Internet and apply. This was exactly what PZ did. He went on the Web and put his name down for a place at the showing, just like everybody else, including several others from the American Atheists annual conference in Minneapolis. Not a man to hide behind a false name or false beard, PZ openly sported his own. Like many other people, including his daughter and Kristine Harley (see her Amused Muse website), PZ took advantage of the generous offer to let him book guests in as well, and then kindly invited me to be one of them. There was no request to give the names of guests, and no machinery to do so, which was why my name did not appear on the list. "


First off Dawkins didn't sign up as 'Richard Dawkins', he used his little known real name 26 March 2008
Clinton Dawkins.


Dawkins didn't sign up as anything: "There was no request to give the names of guests, and no machinery to do so, which was why my name did not appear on the list."

The NYT notes "Dawkins, who like everyone was asked to present identification, said he offered his British passport, which lists him as Clinton Richard Dawkins."

Besides, Mathis has claimed that he recognized Dawkins and graciously allowed him to attend.

quote:

Secondly, it was an invitation only pre-screening


"The way to get into this showing of the film was simply to go on the Internet and apply."

quote:

So in my mind, Dawkins and Meyers are at the very least simply attempting to disrupt anything that counters their own fundamentalist brand of atheism, and at the very most are in typical fascistic mode attempting to suppress free speech.


What did they disrupt? The film ran. What suppression? What fascism? No one has called for the film to be banned.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 11:40:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DanJames

This makes for an interesting psychology experiment. All of the OECs believe that Ben Stein et al are of ignoble character and Dick Dawkins is trying to shed light on his evil deeds through virtuous acts; and all the YECs believe that Ben Stein is being mischaracterized and DD is the ignoble one who was treated better than he should have been. Are there any exceptions?


OEC = old earth creationist (a bible believer that believes the earth is old). YEC = Young earth creationist (a bible believer that believes the earth is young). I think you meant to say OET which means old earth theorist (anyone who believes in an old earth, be it an OEC or not). What you should have probably said is ID/creationist opponent which means anyone who opposes ID or creationism. We have an entire thread on acronyms you should probably see.

http://forums.christianity.com/m_2846281/mpage_1/key_acronyms/tm.htm#2942402

All these acronyms can get quite confusing for those who are new (often times if someone "new" comes to these forums already knowing the acronyms, I suspect they have already been here under another name and they just changed their nick. Then again, sometimes other forums use the same or similar acronyms so it's sometimes difficult to tell. I know that you probably haven't used another nick here based on the fact that you seem unfamiliar with the acronyms).



Drekoguk -> RE: EXPELLED (4/10/2008 11:49:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
So let me get this straight; PZ Meyers considers it a 'creationist propoganda flick'


And he's spot on!
quote:


the producers of Expelled do not


That's a surprise..

quote:

- therefore, the producers are lying. OK.


Let me get this straight; do you think if you were interviewed for a film about the controversy between ID and science and then learn later that the film is a complete pro-evolution movies that gives no credence to ID, wouldn't you be a little peeved? That is what happened to all those scientists.

quote:

Actually, the animation in the movie isn't the HArvard produced one, they are similar because, well, they are both animations about the inner workings of the cell.


Darn, Juhd's opinion trumps David Bolinsky's, the creator of Harvard animation. Apparently, by Juhd's reasoning, Bolinsky can't recognize his own work.

quote:

So Dawkins lies to get into an invitation only pre-screening of the film,


He did?! That's news to me, please, substantiate this assertion.

quote:

and Meyers follows suit, but gets caught,


Tell me where you get this fabrication, Juhd. Because I keep hearing, (mind you it's coming from the Evil Atheist Conspiracy so the source is wholly unreliable), that PZ signed up with his family through the internet then invited Dawkins. So Dawkins never even signed up.

quote:

and the producers of the film are the one's being deceptive;


No! Booting a person that is featured in the film and thanked in the credits from seeing the film certainly isn't being deceptive or hypocritical. Thanks for correcting me Juhd!

quote:

this is fairly typical evolutionist double-think.


And it's not double think to expel critics from a film about expelling so called critics? Wait don't answer that!

quote:

Or, we can surmise evolutionists are really scared of this film


Yes, I'm quivering in my boots.

quote:

and are doing everything they can to undermine it; which would cause us to wonder - why is this so?


Yes why is this? I bet it's cause they're scared. Big Science has had a long enough ride of Godless materialism and it must come to an end! We must bring the true science of Intelligent Design into the labs. Scientists must not be afraid to think that some unknown designer, who could be God, but we're not telling, at some unknown time(s) created through an unknown mechanism whole organisms, or maybe just cells, or maybe just certain parts of cells. This is the new true undogmatic science people!

quote:

The best way to find out is to see the film.


I can't see the film sadly, for some strange reason they are only showing in the US, mostly in the Red states too. At least the producers know their audience.

quote:

Wow, you must really be concerned about this film; that would seem to be an anti-Jewish slur against Ben Stein.


I'm not anti-Jewish, I'm anti Ben Stein, who ludicrously posits that Darwin was a necessary component of the Holocaust while completely ignoring the history of anti-semitics in Europe caused by Christians. All this movie does is cheapen the memory of the Holocaust victims and stigmatize biological evolution as being evil.



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 12:31:50 AM)

quote:

And he's spot on!


He’s a spinmeister.

quote:

Let me get this straight; do you think if you were interviewed for a film about the controversy between ID and science and then learn later that the film is a complete pro-evolution movies that gives no credence to ID, wouldn't you be a little peeved?


Only if I responded as foolishly as Dawkins did.

But actually the point of the movie was to show that Dawkins and Meyers et. el. are fascists who want to suppress free speech; they were unlikely to get the honest responses they did by saying, “We just want to prove you are fascists who want to suppress free speech”.

quote:

Darn, Juhd's opinion trumps David Bolinsky's, the creator of Harvard animation. Apparently, by Juhd's reasoning, Bolinsky can't recognize his own work.


Actually, he isn’t claiming it’s his ‘own work’, and I know a little bit about the law, as well interestingly as 3D animation.

He did?! That's news to me, please, substantiate this assertion.

Sure

Tell me where you get this fabrication, Juhd. Because I keep hearing, (mind you it's coming from the Evil Atheist Conspiracy so the source is wholly unreliable), that PZ signed up with his family through the internet then invited Dawkins. So Dawkins never even signed up.

Wrong.

quote:

No! Booting a person that is featured in the film and thanked in the credits from seeing the film certainly isn't being deceptive or hypocritical. Thanks for correcting me Juhd!


It is when they weren’t invited to the screening and attempted to sneak in.

quote:

And it's not double think to expel critics from a film about expelling so called critics? Wait don't answer that!


And it’s not double think to advocate expelling critics and then complain about beig expelled for being a critic?

quote:

Yes, I'm quivering in my boots.


Obviously Dawkins and Meyers are.

quote:

Yes why is this? I bet it's cause they're scared. Big Science has had a long enough ride of Godless materialism and it must come to an end! We must bring the true science of Intelligent Design into the labs. Scientists must not be afraid to think that some unknown designer, who could be God, but we're not telling, at some unknown time(s) created through an unknown mechanism whole organisms, or maybe just cells, or maybe just certain parts of cells. This is the new true undogmatic science people!


Well, if it is so obviously unconvincing, then one wonders why Dawkins and Meyers even care?

quote:

I can't see the film sadly, for some strange reason they are only showing in the US, mostly in the Red states too. At least the producers know their audience.


I live in the bluest state in the union; I’ll be seeing it next week – it’s obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

quote:

I'm not anti-Jewish, I'm anti Ben Stein, who ludicrously posits that Darwin was a necessary component of the Holocaust while completely ignoring the history of anti-semitics in Europe caused by Christians. All this movie does is cheapen the memory of the Holocaust victims and stigmatize biological evolution as being evil.


Feel free keep your head in the sand and ignore the origin of eugenics.



Jhud -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 12:34:14 AM)

quote:

What did they disrupt? The film ran. What suppression? What fascism? No one has called for the film to be banned.


Richard 'Clinton' Dawkins was there to try to pre-empt the opening by poisoning the well; that is simply a fact.



DanJames -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 12:36:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize

quote:

ORIGINAL: DanJames

This makes for an interesting psychology experiment. All of the OECs believe that Ben Stein et al are of ignoble character and Dick Dawkins is trying to shed light on his evil deeds through virtuous acts; and all the YECs believe that Ben Stein is being mischaracterized and DD is the ignoble one who was treated better than he should have been. Are there any exceptions?


OEC = old earth creationist (a bible believer that believes the earth is old). YEC = Young earth creationist (a bible believer that believes the earth is young). I think you meant to say OET which means old earth theorist (anyone who believes in an old earth, be it an OEC or not). What you should have probably said is ID/creationist opponent which means anyone who opposes ID or creationism. We have an entire thread on acronyms you should probably see.

http://forums.christianity.com/m_2846281/mpage_1/key_acronyms/tm.htm#2942402

All these acronyms can get quite confusing for those who are new (often times if someone "new" comes to these forums already knowing the acronyms, I suspect they have already been here under another name and they just changed their nick. Then again, sometimes other forums use the same or similar acronyms so it's sometimes difficult to tell. I know that you probably haven't used another nick here based on the fact that you seem unfamiliar with the acronyms).


Well, I appreciate the link, I assumed that UCD had something to do with GTE because people that hated AiG and disagreed with IC and ID agreed with UCD so I assumed that they were OEC, or as you prefer, OET. But now I understand completely.



drj11 -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 12:46:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

So in my mind, Dawkins and Meyers are at the very least simply attempting to disrupt anything that counters their own fundamentalist brand of atheism, and at the very most are in typical fascistic mode attempting to suppress free speech.


I dunno about you, but if I were featured in a film, under false pretenses, I might be a little anxious to see how I ended up on film. Generally AFIAK, guys like Dawkins and PZ make it a point not to take part in such films because they don't want to create the illusion of controversy over these issues. So I don't doubt for a second the Expelled team deceived them about the films intentions. The funny thing is, Mathis has been trying to say it was an honest mix up and the title of the film got changed later, but the domain name for expelled got registered prior to all the interviews. Oops!

From what I've heard (we'll have to wait till its out to find out) but it doesn't look like this film does much for presenting a case for ID, or getting into its details.. its a conspiracy flick about a few people who got fired... and of course the film leaves out important details such as one of the featured 'victims' had a contract that ended and was never actually an employee of the place he claims fired him.



drj11 -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 1:18:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
Well, if it is so obviously unconvincing, then one wonders why Dawkins and Meyers even care?


They were probably interested because they were featured in the film.

quote:


Feel free keep your head in the sand and ignore the origin of eugenics.


Would that be Sparta? Or can we think of anything prior? We probably can. Maybe Hitler had some perverse and twisted view of Darwinism and natural selection, who knows? If he did, it is clear he didn't understand it. From Mein Kampf:

"Even the most superficial observation shows that Nature's restricted form of propagation and increase is an almost rigid basic law of all the innumerable forms of expression of her vital urge. Every animal mates only with a member of the same species. The titmouse seeks the titmouse, the finch the finch, the stork the stork, the field mouse the field mouse, the dormouse the dormouse, the wolf the she-wolf, etc.

Only unusual circumstances can change this, primarily the compulsion of captivity or any other cause that makes it impossible to mate within the same species. But then Nature begins to resist this with all possible means, and her most visible protest consists either in refusing further capacity for propagation to ****s or in limiting the fertility of later offspring; in most cases, however, she takes away the power of resistance to disease or hostile attacks."

There are several quotes in Mein Kampf where he talks about species, and sounds a lot like an anti-evolutionist. Quite a few of Darwin's writings and Haeckel's writings were on the Nazi banned book list, and burned. Hitler also warped and misused and abused Christianity to drive anti-semitism in the German population. You could consider Christianity just as significant a justifier for the Holocaust and Nazi eugenics. Christianity was one of their primary tools used to herd the German population like a pack of sheep.

But the truth is, Hitler's beliefs as far as we can tell, are a hodge-podge of random things picked from here, taken from there and twisted into a warped evil convoluted mess, but none of it had anything to do with the original subject matter.



Bettawrekonize -> RE: EXPELLED (4/11/2008 1:29:56 AM)

They had another discussion on the whole Clinton Dawkins thing here too
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/clinton-dawkins-guilty-as-charged/

It's long, boring, and seems mostly irrelevant, so I don't want to get into it. Just thought people might be interested.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI