Ben Steins Movie - EXPELLED

[SLAG]

Looks interesting I thought

[irishjayhawk]

I always aim to misbehave

Some of you know that the producers of Expelled had a conference call this afternoon…a carefully controlled, closed environment in which they would spout their nonsense and only take questions by email. I listened to it for a while, and yeah, it was the usual run-around. However, I dialed in a few minutes early, and got to listen to a tiresome five minutes of Leslie and Paul chatting away, during which time they mentioned the secret code (DUNH DUNH DUNNNNH!) for the two way calls. I know. Sloppy, unprofessional, and stupid, but that's the way they work.


So … I redialed. (DUNH DUNH DUNNNNH!)


Then I listened along quietly until I could take no more.


They repeated the usual lies (the Minneapolis event was a private screening [which was publicly linked on the web, where any idiot could get to it]; their blog was #1 on blogpulse [near as I can tell, it wasn't—it was my exposure of their hypocrisy that was #1]; they didn't lie to get interviews [totally bogus], etc.). They made amusing contradictions. Walt Ruloff first claims that the genesis of the movie was in 2006, when he claims to have started investigating biotechnology and discovered that there are "questions that can't be asked" and that people were suppressing information that called Darwinism into doubt — note, though, that he never stated what those unnameable questions are. A moment later Mark Mathis comes on to say that the subject of the film was a work in progress, that they hadn't settled anything, and that the name wasn't even decided upon.


Come on, they registered expelledthemovie.com in early 2007, well before they asked us to be interviewed.


They threw out a bunch of softball questions to Ben Stein: "How can you be so intelligent and question Darwinism", I kid you not.


One good question got through on email: KMOX radio contested the claim that there was no distortion of the interviews of Dawkins and Myers because they surrounded the interviews with film clips of Nazis — I think it's obvious how they were trying to bias the discussion, and I was floored by Stein's reply. He wanted more goose-stepping Nazis all over the place.
This was all a great deal to stomach, but I restrained myself. Then Mathis really started to lie: he said that all anybody ever blogged about was distractions, and several times he claimed that we never addressed the content of the movie. Let's set aside the rank hypocrisy of expelling the people interviewed in the movie from screenings so we couldn't see it; it's simply not true. We have blogged extensively on the ridiculous premise at the heart of the movie, that the Holocaust was a consequence of evolutionary theory.


Here's one of my entries in this subject.


Here's Richard Dawkins' review, which discusses the bogus Nazi connection quite a bit.


John Wilkins has an excellent post on Darwinism and racism.


The Panda's Thumb has discussed the false connection several times.


So I interrupted. I said, in essence, hang on -- you guys are spinning out a lot of lies here, you should be called on it. I gave a quick gloss on it, and said that, for instance, anti-semitism has a long history in Germany that preceded Darwin, and that they ought to look up the word "pogrom". There was some mad rustling and flustering about on the other side of the phone some complaints, etc., and then one of them asked me to do the honorable thing and hang up…so I said yes, I would do the honorable thing and hang up while they continued the dishonorable thing and continued to lie.


Then I announced that if any reporters were listening in, they could contact me at pzmyers@gmail.com and I'd be happy to talk to them.


So excuse me, I've got a few dozen emails in my inbox right now.

Not that much on Expelled per se rather than one of the interviewee's speaking out against the film. And it does provide some new links for anyone paying attention.

Also, if anyone is actually interested in seeing this *cough*film*cough, it opens April 28th.

[irishjayhawk]

Not to beat a dead horse, but since I've kept tabs on the developments through this thread, I thought I'd pass this along:

http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfrui...e_expected.php

Expelled in Tempe: The Expected Happens
Category: Anti-evolution • In Their Own Words • Intelligent Design
Posted on: April 3, 2008 9:50 PM, by John Lynch

Remember the e-mail I received stating that tonight’s Expelled screening in Tempe was canceled? The e-mail simply stated:

The Tempe, AZ Screening has been canceled.

Well, Ken McKnight called the theater today two or so hours before the screening. Ken says:

I just called the Arizona Mills Harkins theater and said that I had heard that the private screening of Expelled had been moved from 7:00 to 6:00 (I didn’t mention that I had been emailed that the showing was canceled). The person I spoke to confirmed that the movie is showing today at 6:00. Clearly the promoters are somehow screening the attendees and then sending out cancellation notices to the "undesirables."

There you go. Lying. Plain and simple and there is no way they can spin that.

Update: Brad was there and offers this report. The show indeed went on, despite being "canceled".

And the comment he references:

I just posted this in the last thread before I noticed this one.

I just got back from the theater and yes there was indeed a screening. I wasn't on the list, but managed to get in anyway. After getting interrogated as to which church I was with and finally approval from the man behind the curtain whom I never saw, I was admitted into the theater just as the movie was starting.

I told them I was not associated with a church here, that I am from Ohio and a friend sent me a link to the RSVP page. While that's all true (assuming I can consider the fine folks here at scienceblogs friends) and I didn't explicitly lie, I certainly represented it in such a way that would make them reach an erroneous conclusion.

The movie itself is exactly what I expected after reading various reviews online; a mismatch of lies and propaganda. I leave the descriptions to more adept writers. I was ridiculous to hear the gasps of horror at some of the pieced together "quotes" from Dawkins, PZ et al. The audience seemed especially offended with PZ's "religion should be like knitting" description.

I couldn't stay for the Q&A however, as I have some deliverables due next week that I need to work on. I'd be interested to read any accounts of that if anyone else managed to get in.

I'm almost certain the change to 6pm was a filter mechanism after the PZ/Dawkins debacle. When the attendant couldn't find my name on the list I mentioned that I had RSVP'd online, at which point he asked me "6 or 7?" I said that I received an email about the time change last week which seemed to satisfy him. I however didn't mention that I got the screening has been canceled email.

[Chiefs_5627]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

Not to beat a dead horse, but since I've kept tabs on the developments through this thread, I thought I'd pass this along:

http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfrui...e_expected.php




And the comment he references:

Ben Stein tap your old lady or something?!? Damn.

[irishjayhawk]

There are two reasons I'm posting in this thread today. First, the movie comes out this Friday. Second, I have two bits of new information to pass along.

The first is that www.expelledexposed.com went live. It's now a resource that debunks every claim made by Stein and his henchmen instead of a compilation of links to other reviews and news. It's a pretty good read for a lot of it.

The second is just plain funny:

THEY PLAGIARIZED AGAIN!

http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot...ets-angry.html

Make that 2 videos that are straight copies of other pre-existing videos. One from Harvard and one from, none other than, PBS.

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

There are two reasons I'm posting in this thread today. First, the movie comes out this Friday. Second, I have two bits of new information to pass along.

The first is that www.expelledexposed.com went live. It's now a resource that debunks every claim made by Stein and his henchmen instead of a compilation of links to other reviews and news. It's a pretty good read for a lot of it.

The second is just plain funny:

THEY PLAGIARIZED AGAIN!

http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot...ets-angry.html

Make that 2 videos that are straight copies of other pre-existing videos. One from Harvard and one from, none other than, PBS.

I personally don't care much about this movie one way or the other (I am an atheist, btw), but if nothing in this movie is true, why the incredibly violent reaction by those accused of blackballing and censorship?

Sorry, but innocent people just don't react this way...

[tiptap]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

I personally don't care much about this movie one way or the other (I am an atheist, btw), but if nothing in this movie is true, why the incredibly violent reaction by those accused of blackballing and censorship?

Sorry, but innocent people just don't react this way...

The debate is not simply a philosophical one. There are real consequences, say treating disease for example. (Cancer is usually used in this regard.) Determining pathogens depends upon markers that are related to phylogenetic trees. So to introduce evolution as wrong is to remove the uniting piece of thought that helps direct research. This practical aspect is upheld by creationists in their acceptance of Microevolution. (It doesn't go far enough to account for the fusion of Chromosome 2 of humans from two separate chromosomes in other apes. It doesn't go far enough to explain viruses fused in our chromosomes as being the same as apes.) And there are real consequences to our understanding to discredit evolution.

And the way the ID people have decided to do that (as revealed in the Dover trial) is to argue that ID is being attacked unfairly. That it should be given equal footing intellectually based upon fairness. This film is of that ilk. What it fails to talk about is that ID doesn't have any value in investigating biological systems. It is by its nature not looking to understand how things occurred. Because by understanding the process then that removes the argument that it is making to state that there is some intelligent intervention.

If there were not real consequences there would not be real commitment to festoon the notion.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

I personally don't care much about this movie one way or the other (I am an atheist, btw), but if nothing in this movie is true, why the incredibly violent reaction by those accused of blackballing and censorship?

Sorry, but innocent people just don't react this way...

It's propaganda. I don't think you'd argue that Nazi propaganda would be a bad thing and the Jews reacting against it were innocent.

That's a pretty weak argument.

Just look at our country and see the unreason, failing logic, ignorant masses that happen to be comfortable in their ignorance. And see why science has to fight back.

Also, there is nothing violent. Just persistent. You don't see the scientists shooting, bombing, etc. Hell I doubt you'll see them protest it in person. And further, in a court of law, are you suggesting that when someone is accused of something they go quietly otherwise they are guilty.....

[Adept Havelock]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

I personally don't care much about this movie one way or the other (I am an atheist, btw), but if nothing in this movie is true, why the incredibly violent reaction by those accused of blackballing and censorship?

Sorry, but innocent people just don't react this way...

Why the reaction? Violent reaction? Have there been incidents of assault and battery or murder? Rioting at the theaters? I don't think so. Let me put it this way...it's as if a new expansion team tries to join the NFL (Scientific Community), but due to the way they are built they can't compete according to the basic rules of the NFL (or, the Scientific Method). So they insist (and file lawsuits, and put out BS propaganda) in an attempt to force the NFL to change their rules so they can play too. I think the NFL wouldn't respond favorably, nor should the Scientific Community.

ID is based on Irreducible Complexity. Irreducible Complexity is not falsifiable, and thus not subject to the Scientific Method. If it's not subject to the Scientific Method, guess what? It's not part of Science. That's a simple fact, no matter how much Ben Stein kvetches and derides the Scientific Method as mere "dogma".

Why should Scientists heed people who have the goal of changing the definition and fundamental basis of Science (the search for natural explanations) just so ID can be taught in Science classes? That's akin to insisting we teach Astrology in Astronomy class, Phrenology in Psychology class, or Leeching in Medical School, in order to "teach the controversy".

Teach ID in schools for all I care, but teach it as what it is...Philosophy.

This doesn't deserve "hate" from the Scientific Community. It deserves laughter at it's utter absurdity.

JMO.

[markk]

hadn't heard much about this but i just checked and it is showing in my town. i'll go see it on friday.

i didnt even know what this was about really until i heard of people complaining and making websites about it and such. the negative publicity is probably the best promotion that the film makers could ask for.

[Adept Havelock]

Originally Posted by markk

hadn't heard much about this but i just checked and it is showing in my town. i'll go see it on friday.

i didnt even know what this was about really until i heard of people complaining and making websites about it and such. the negative publicity is probably the best promotion that the film makers could ask for.

I'm sure that was part of the thought process when it was put together. By getting the Scientific Community and it's supporters to address the absurdity, whether positively or negatively, one gives some measure of credence to that absurdity. That is the essence of propaganda.

As for my moviegoing dollars, I'll be spending them this weekend on "The Forbidden Kingdom". It probably won't make me laugh as much as "Expelled" would, but the money won't support the ID movement, so it's a win/win.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by Adept Havelock

I'm sure that was part of the thought process when it was put together. By getting the Scientific Community and it's supporters to address the absurdity, whether positively or negatively, one gives some measure of credence to that absurdity. That is the essence of propaganda.

As for my moviegoing dollars, I'll be spending them this weekend on "The Forbidden Kingdom". It probably won't make me laugh as much as "Expelled" would, but the money won't support the ID movement, so it's a win/win.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall gets mine.