Discovery News Release on Richard Dawkins Crashing EXPELLED Screening
| March 21, 2008 | Posted by William Dembski under Expelled |
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS CONTACT: ROBERT CROWTHER
DISCOVERY INSTITUTE
(206) 292-0401 X107
[email protected]
Richard Dawkins, World’s Most Famous Darwinist, Stoops to Gate-crashing Expelled
by Bruce Chapman, www.evolutionnews.org
Like many films im pre-release, Ben Stein’s Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is being selectively screened around the country to develop a buzz.
There is a growing fear by the producers that Darwinists may be trying get into the showings to make bootleg copies (for the Web?), possibly in hopes of damaging the commercial value. Others may be crashing because they want to trash it before it even gets reviewed by the media. P.Z. Myers, who was not let into a showing last night in Minnesota, probably falls in the latter category.
Amazingly, the best selling Oxford scientist/author Richard Dawkins also crashed a showing of Expelled in Minnesota last night and he not only was let in, but introduced at the end of the showing.
Dawkins apparently acknowledged that he had not been invited and did not have a ticket. A sophomoric side to his ideological is thus revealed.
Dawkins, understandably is nervous about this film, among other reasons because Ben Stein has him on camera acknowledging that life on Earth may, indeed, have been intelligently designed, but that it had to have been accomplished by space aliens! This is hilarious, of course, because Dawkins is death on intelligent design. But it turns out that that view applies only if it includes the possibility that the designer might be God.
Myers, of course, relished being expelled from Expelled, but objective observers know that Myers is the most vociferous advocate of expelling Darwin critics from academia. Not from movie pre-screenings where he wasn’t invited, mind you, but from their jobs. Too bad the film doesn’t show (and I wish it had), his promotion of advice to attack teachers and professors who dare question Darwin’s theory. The whole point of Myers is that he is a take-no-prisoners, crusading atheist scientist who has made it his purpose in life to harass people who disagree with him. Dawkins turns out to be his buddy and mutual admirer.
Frankly, I wish the producers would have a special pre-release screening for the Darwinists who are interviewed in the film — and invite some of the rest of us who have seen their depredations up close. We’d be glad to debate right there.
Among other things, I’d like to read some of the Darwinists’ statements and charges back to them and ask them to defend themselves. One of the most preposterous is that the well-funded’ Discovery Institute is funding this film! ( 1-They seem to have far more money available to them than we do, and 2-We are saving our pennies for the upcoming Broadway musical comedy, Darwin’s Folly.)
I have to say something else, personally. I have been sandbagged by one TV and documentary crew after another. So have Discovery-affiliated scientists. The interviewers all say they just want to understand the issue. Going in, they are quite clear about definitions, for example, and only start using Darwinist definitions of our positions when they report. They never provide questions in advance and even if they say they will stick to science questions and public policy, almost all sneak in questions about personal religious beliefs. Then, of all the footage, guess what gets on TV or in the documentary?
So it really is pathetic of Dawkins, et al to complain that when they were interviewed for Expelled they didn’t know that the film was inherently unfriendly. These are interviewees who received pre-agreed questions, signed release forms after the interviews were conducted, and actually got paid for their time.
I am getting more excited about Expelled myself and can’t wait to see the finished version. I suspect I’ll wish that the film was twice as long and had twice as much from Dawkins, P.Z. Myers, et al. From what I already have seen, they really expose themselves as the anti-intellectual, bullying poseurs they are — small men who above all are afraid of a fair contest.
###
129 Responses to Discovery News Release on Richard Dawkins Crashing EXPELLED Screening
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Patrick,
Here’s the first I heard of the movie, and the DI’s trepidation.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....e_abo.html
Jack @ 115 – there’s nothing for Seelke R* in Web of Science for the last 5 years, so that’s a “no”. Of course, it could be that he has something submitted but it hasn’t been published yet.
StephenB @122 –
Where does Allen say this? The only place in this thread I can find “fabricated” is in your post (oh, there’s one more now.
). And looking through Allen’s comments, he has almost nothing to say about the contents of the film, and certainly nothing about the stories.
—–Bob O’H: “Where does Allen say this? The only place in this thread I can find “fabricated” is in your post (oh, there’s one more now.
). And looking through Allen’s comments, he has almost nothing to say about the contents of the film, and certainly nothing about the stories.”
Here is what Dr. MacNeill says at #87.
“The point I have been trying to make since my very first post is precisely the point that the main premise of the film “Expelled” — that ID supporters/evolution critics are unfairly “expelled” from academic discussions — is, in fact, a deliberate falsification.”
That is correct.
I was filmed for the movie as well…
The ID side were given the same line that this was for the documentary “Crossroads”.
I felt uncomfortable with the way they secured the interviews as it did not seem completely forthright and appeared deceptive.
Although, at this point, if there is a question of the ethics of how evidence was gathered, it will probably increase the publc interest to see the movie. Have I ever lost interest in a journalistic piece because the journalist lied in order to acquire facts (like Celeste Biever)? I can’t recall that I ever had less interest as a result…
DLH asked (at #105):
“The contents of these pages do not necessarily reflect the views of UW-Superior and are not officially endorsed by the university.”
That’s a standard boilerplate disclaimer, commonly used when members of a university faculty have a blog that is not officially sponsored by their department. I have essentially the same kind of disclaimer in the masthead for my blog:
http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/
It’s just smart business practice.
OK, thanks StephenB. So he didn’t use the word “fabricate” (so why did you put it in quotation marks?), and he didn’t comment about the stories in Expelled, but rather about the main premise.
scordova @ 126:
“I was filmed for the movie as well…
The ID side were given the same line that this was for the documentary “Crossroads”.
I felt uncomfortable with the way they secured the interviews as it did not seem completely forthright and appeared deceptive.”
Your statements, scordova, completely annihilate the unfounded assertion that the motives of the producers were propagandistic in nature, and at the same time show that ingenious interview techniques were democratically used to get at the bottom of an emotionally-charged amd polarizing issue. These tactics are similar, I guess, to how researchers use placebo pills.
For one thing, the movie is also an examination of the sociological and psychological side to a brewing controversy. It is well known in social science that behavior is best explored when participants are unaware they are being particularly studied.
Allen MacNeill has made the accusation of “dishonesty” against the amkers of “Expelled”.
Has Allen seen “Inherit the Wind”?
That’s was about as dishonest of a representation as one can get.
How about the PBS series “Evolution”?
Again about as dishonest as one can get. The only Creationists they put on was a church service. Not one scientist was allowed to speak on Creation. And not one scientists was allowed to speak on ID.
To larrynormanfan,
What experiments demonstrate that the changes required for universal common descent are even possible?
How about that lowly bacterial flagellum- what experiments demonstrate that it can arise via non-telic processes?
Could it be that the name of the film changed from Crossroads to Expelled because of the research and interviews?
I would say that is a very reasonable possibility.