There is a rich, deep kind of irony that must be shared. I’m blogging this from the Apple store in the Mall of America, because I’m too amused to want to wait until I get back to my hotel room.
I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was Expelled! It was kind of weird — I was standing in line, hadn’t even gotten to the point where I had to sign in and show ID, and a policeman pulled me out of line and told me I could not go in. I asked why, of course, and he said that a producer of the film had specifically instructed him that I was not to be allowed to attend. The officer also told me that if I tried to go in, I would be arrested. I assured him that I wasn’t going to cause any trouble.
I went back to my family and talked with them for a while, and then the officer came back with a theater manager, and I was told that not only wasn’t I allowed in, but I had to leave the premises immediately. Like right that instant.
I complied.
I’m still laughing though. You don’t know how hilarious this is. Not only is it the extreme hypocrisy of being expelled from their Expelled movie, but there’s another layer of amusement. Deep, belly laugh funny. Yeah, I’d be rolling around on the floor right now, if I weren’t so dang dignified.
You see … well, have you ever heard of a sabot? It’s a kind of sleeve or lightweight carrier used to surround a piece of munition fired from a gun. It isn’t the actually load intended to strike the target, but may even be discarded as it leaves the barrel.
I’m a kind of sabot right now.
They singled me out and evicted me, but they didn’t notice my guest. They let him go in escorted by my wife and daughter. I guess they didn’t recognize him. My guest was …
Richard Dawkins.
He’s in the theater right now, watching their movie.
Tell me, are you laughing as hard as I am?
Will someone please “expel” Danny and the other concern trolls? They’re undermining perfect hilarity with their machosturbation.
Posted about here and I must say this was a lovely anniversary present. :3
I can’t wait to hear how the fundies spin this to not be their fault. Oh my!
Oh, and I nominate cuttlefish to write any non-holy Atheist texts!
Cuttlefish, that was magnificent; I had a smile the whole time while reading that to one of my room mates.
I can’t recall. Has any previous Pharyngula post hit the 500 mark in comments before? Certainly not in one short evening.
We have been virtually present at a historic event.
… so judge his objectivity accordingly.
how do we judge:
This is also not a movie that bashes Evolutional Theory
other than what it is?
Most evil-doers get put on a watch list. PZ gets put on a do not watch list.
I can’t recall. Has any previous Pharyngula post hit the 500 mark in comments before? Certainly not in one short evening.
oh yes, many times.
not this fast, maybe.
#489 We don’t say this nearly enough, but.. but.. we love you, Cuttlefish. We honestly love you.
As hilarious as this story is, I think it just goes to show the power that bloggers can have, even over a 1,000,000+ copy bestselling author!
That is hilarious and amazing. I keep reading this post over and over to keep appreciating how great that is.
btw, since Scott’s link to the pictures doesn’t seem to work, here it is again:
That’s what I like about this place. Quality control. Thanks, Icthyic!
Cuttlefish, that is beautiful! Trojan Eohippus – brilliant!
H-O-L-Y S-H-I-T! That’s funny. Great read.
Re: Enlisting the police to try to evict you from the premises when you did not intend to challenge their stupid ban–now that’s really over the top.
—we’re still not clear that actual, on duty, police were involved.
Granted, maybe it was one of those fake “policeman,” sometimes hard to tell with the costumes the security people wear.
I’ll rephrase my statement: “Enlisting some thug to try to evict you from the premises when you did not intend to challenge their stupid ban–now that’s really over the top.”
I’m sure they would have no trouble getting one of their own to play this role. Some of them would have willingly taken PZ outside and given him a wicked beating as well, if they thought they could get away with it.
Re: #485
Note that his review allows no comments. Cowardly fuckwit.
In other news, water is wet to humans in ordinary baths.
Wow. Stupid doesn’t even begin to describe these people.
Quite funny indeed!
510 comments, that doesn’t happen that often either,
A.
Well played, PZ!!
I sent a note and link to Al Franken’s Minnesota senate campaign email. I hope he gets it soon. He interviewed Prof. Dawkins once on his Air America radio show. I’d like to hear a comment from him. Hmmm… maybe I should send it to Sen. Coleman too just to be fair.
This is the funniest thing I’ve seen all day. They are so incredibly stupid to be even trying to control who sees this junk. Assuming it is junk, no one until tonight with any credibility has seen it…
:-))) and they let RD walk right in! Ha ha ha ha! ( Thought I was done giggling… I guess not!)
Proof #947 that Theists are idiots:
They expel PZ Myers at the Expelled premiere, yet let Richard Dawkins slide right on by.
No wonder why they think the world is 6000 years old :)
Thanks for sharing that … it’s so absurd and hilarious that it makes me dizzy.
With all due respect, that’s like politely kicking a nun out of an anti-catholic movie showing BUT LETTING THE POPE IN!
I hope Richard enjoyed the movie. Or at least the popcorn.
O hai!
PZ n Dawkins can haz cookies uf teh Ceiling Cat, who NO WANTS bad moovie.
kthxbai!
To #503, I would add.
We’re not trying to make you feel uncomfortable.
We’re not trying to make you anything at all.
But these feeling doesn’t come along every day.
Time for Ben Stein to hit that blackboard again:
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
I will not expel PZ from Expelled.
Dear M (#511),
I disagree, since I believe “stupid” IS where one should “begin to describe these people” although I would stop there for only a small, misinformed – big-ass lied to, actually – fraction of them.
I’m sure they would have no trouble getting one of their own to play this role. Some of them would have willingly taken PZ outside and given him a wicked beating as well, if they thought they could get away with it.
ahh, memories.
:p
Way to go PZ! Way to have a more recognizable face than one of the “horsemen”!
I was searching to see if Richard Dawkins had posted any sort of reply yet, and I stumbled upon an account by one of the attendees of that screening (http://lookingcloser.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/richard-dawkins-crashes-the-party-at-a-screening-of-expelled/). While he admits that “[Expelled] is the Best Documentary of 2008,” he accounts:
“I just happened to be standing directly in line behind Dawkins’ academic colleague. Management of the movie theatre saw a man apparently hustling and bothering several invited attendees, apparently trying to disrupt the viewing or sneak in. Management then approached the man, asked him if he had a ticket, and when he confirmed that he didn’t, they then escorted him off the premises. Nowhere was one of the film’s producers to be found, and the man certainly didn’t identify himself.”
Is this true? Still, kudos to you, Dr. Myers.
Is this true?
would you take a serious the word of someone who called ‘expelled’ the “best documentary of 2008”?
well?
@524
It’s not what PZ himself said. And if he didn’t have a ticket, how’d his family get in?
so, i looked up “irony” in the OED, and found a link to this blog post.
********************************************
MTran –
Danny continues to delude himself into believing he can think cogently and says: “Anything that is “technically” a crime, is, in fact, a crime” If that were actually true, we would never have been able to found the United States of America.
WTF? The colonists who initiated and fought in the American Revolution were criminals under British law. They were traitors to the crown. The US was able to continue as a separate sovereign entity because it won the war, not because the actions leading to it were not criminal under British law. Have you heard about “hanging together or all hanging separately?”
Danny then tries to make sense, but cannot, saying: “Based on your statement, it is like you don’t know how to stand up for own convictions.”
Are you really an idiot or did you just have an idiot do your writing? You clearly don’t understand what a “conviction” is and the difference between deliberately standing up for one’s own moral convictions and insisting that others act like idiots in order to satisfy your own dimwitted world view.
Danny claims: “I served two tours in the Persian Gulf on the USS AMERICA in Desert Storm and the following patrols so as far as I’m concerned I have some license in discussing these matters.”
Why do you think that? What sort of license? Serving as part of an authorized military in support of a governmental action is the opposite of challenging that same authority in the capacity of a mere individual citizen.
You may have been exposed to some brain damaging chemicals or head trauma during your tour of duty. Try to get some help before the damage becomes untreatable. Though given the way the VA “treats” veteran’s physical and mental health problems, you may be better off in a private facility.
Finally Danny said: “Thank you.”
Hey, don’t mention it.
***********
“WTF? The colonists who initiated and fought in the American Revolution were criminals under British law. They were traitors to the crown. The US was able to continue as a separate sovereign entity because it won the war, not because the actions leading to it were not criminal under British law.”
Well then, I suppose they shouldn’t have broken the law – is that what you are suggesting? Perhaps the ‘traitors to the crown’ should NOT have stood up for their convictions, or so it seems to you. You really are out of your tree.
The only people that PZ could have been bothering in that line were his friends and family. The UMN-TC student didn’t think that PZ may have been in a group and interpreted the cops removal of him as evidence that PZ was disruptive. The removal of PZ is what disrupted his friends and family, not his presence.
How could that be accurate if the movie’s own RSVP page does not mention anything about tickets, and in fact, apparently, the email you get when you RSVP says that tickets are not required? In other words, the claim about not having a ticket is bogus.
I do find it an amusing image that PZ was supposedly “hustling.” What, was he trying to pawn off zebrafish on unsuspecting theatergoers to make a quick buck? Was he dressed up in a purple zoot suit with dark sunglasses?
I’m dying for more news.
PZ wouldn’t leave us hanging for hours like this, would he?
Gosh, is this more fun than Haggard’s Gay Meth Scandal or what??
What a glorious day for smart people every where.
If only PZ would have gotten arrested… documentation or something that he was “forbidden” from seeing the movie…
Don’t worry, PZ, I’m sure a bootleg copy will find you.
There’s a limit to how many faces they could have asked an off duty cop to memorize – so its worth asking why do this. They’ve got to be a little irony impaired in the first place to stop anyone from reviewing a movie that is supposedly about suppressing free expression.
I think Elmo Zoneball of Darwin Central got it right
So PZ, you were either brilliant or lucky or both to bring such good backup.
#496 Azkyroth;
I don’t know about that. I totally disagree with Danny on the point of Myers being a coward; I know it would have taken me a lot of restraint to stop from displaying frustration at the guard, so I think Myers was being calm, rational and yes, somewhat brave in a sense to walk away and report on this.
But I don’t think Danny is wrong to post his opinion on PZ’s behaviour. Or at any rate, he is not so wrong he should be banned. His view seems to be at the extreme end of defending civil liberties using only the avenue of defiance when there were other options.
Now, maybe being banned for spelling “trilobite” incorrectly (#451, spelled “trylobite”)is something that should be discussed…
From the link that John Pieret provided. This seems to be how they are going to spin it:
Evidently, even the trained monkeys know how to lie through their teeth.
“Is this true?
would you take a serious the word of someone who called ‘expelled’ the “best documentary of 2008″?”
It would certainly be so unlike creationists, I mean Intelligent design proponent to lie or generally be dishonest.
Funniest thing I’ve read in a long time – I’m really looking forward to some reviews of the “movie” from the attendees.
I hope to God that PZ, his lovely Trophy Wife, and Professor Dawkins are enjoying a refreshing adult beverage right now, while Skatje has a nice fruit juice and prepares a post detailing the victory.
Days this delicious come but seldom and should be celebrated.
PS Cuttlefish, you have outdone yourself!
Considering that identification was required, and considering that Richard Dawkins was admitted, one wonders if PZ Myers did something to get Expelled as an NCSE architected publicity stunt.
Clever!
But the film is still coming out, oh no.
Hmm… spend Friday night posting to the blog or hanging out with Dawkins? I know what I’d be doing.
I don’t know what I should feel about this.
On the one hand, the colossal hypocrisy of the producers of Expelled now borders on lethally stupid, given as how they have made a big song and dance number out of how Intelligent Design proponents are allegedly unfairly barred from mainstream science, but, have also been caught giving written instructions to their trained flunkeys to bar one of their allegedly disgruntled interviewees from watching a screening.
On the other hand, I’m unsure whether I feel apathetic about their colossal pathetic-ness, or whether I am in so much shock to be bordering on numb.
Too bad Dawkins didn’t do the obvious thing, which would be to tell the officer, “This one is okay, he’s with me.”
Officer: “And you are…”
“Reverend Dawkins.”
Jedi mind tricks work on the weak minded.
Thanks PZ, you just made my day!
Already Friday here in Thailand, and you did indeed make it a ‘good Friday’ with this wondrous tale. Can hardly wait for Prof. Dawkin’s reaction.
Gosh, is this more fun than Haggard’s Gay Meth Scandal or what??
toss up.
I mean, Haggard was the leader of the largest evangelical community in the US. that whole debacle was pretty sweet.
Expelled is just a lame-ass mockumentary.
still, the irony is just so perfect here, it makes it a toss up in my mind.
I think the mileage that will be gained from this for good science education will be far more valuable than Haggard’s hypocrisy ever will be, though.
But the film is still coming out, oh no.
But when? The film is still currently “in the closet?” It should be honest about its Christian orientation.
Well. That makes me angry. I would have asked them how much it would cost, per chance, if they had to replace all of their windows.
But, you know, maybe it was Richard Dawkins they intended to evict, but had trouble telling left from right or something.
OMFSM!! I don’t really have anything to add to the discussion, but when I scrolled down and read “Richard Dawkins”…Hahahahaha! Simply classic.
I can’t wait to read the story
Of the battle and the glory–
Hooray for the Myers/Dawkins advanced infiltration team. May we all use this fine example to inspire our own infiltration and confrontation of the IDiot-inspired showings.
Then, later…
Changing your tune? Glad I could help.
The original meaning of “sabot”, iirc, is a wooden shoe worn by peasants in the general area of northern France and the Netherlands up until the early industrial age.
One method of expressing factory labor dissatisfaction in that era was to toss a shoe into the gears of the biggest machinery accessible: hence the term “sabotage“.
Tonight Myers was not just a discarded cartridge shell: the more appropriate metaphor would be the modern saboteur’s preferred instrument, the monkey wrench.
That allegedly unbiased review of the movie, posted on on Looking Closer?
It’s got a spoiler alert at the end, with some text that you have to highlight.
Here’s the “spoiler” text:
And the reviewer can’t see how this contradicts his earlier claims about this movie not being about bashing evolution?
Amazing.
It’s weird. I’ve only been blogging online and relatively active making comments twice that long, and I’ve never felt more like there was an online festival or celebration than this one. It’s too good.
It’s like an unforeseen comet streaking by. Fun times everyone, thanks from this atheistic-gothy-paleonerd-oil painter.
“How could that be accurate if the movie’s own RSVP page does not mention anything about tickets, and in fact, apparently, the email you get when you RSVP says that tickets are not required? In other words, the claim about not having a ticket is bogus.
I do find it an amusing image that PZ was supposedly “hustling.” What, was he trying to pawn off zebrafish on unsuspecting theatergoers to make a quick buck? Was he dressed up in a purple zoot suit with dark sunglasses?”
Well, but… there WAS NO REASON he could not attend. Some fools here act as if I am some kind of freak but in reality – yeah, reality! he should have stood his ground and dealt it.
“Considering that identification was required, and considering that Richard Dawkins was admitted, one wonders if PZ Myers did something to get Expelled as an NCSE architected publicity stunt.”
Or perhaps, knowing that PZ lived nearby, they circulated a picture among the guards since they had a reasonable expectation that he might show up, while the same was not necessarily true of Richard Dawkins.
William loses again.
That’s one of the funniest blogs I’ve ever read!
not at all, the problem is that you can’t read.
I wasn’t clear then if these were on duty police officers, and I’m still not. Nobody else is either.
If they were on duty, then the question has to be asked if the city supports its personnel being used in this fashion.
It’s a perfectly legitimate question.
Yeah, I know you wouldn’t know what “legitimate” means if it bit you on the ass, but try to pretend I’m not actually responding to you.
are you ready to admit you were wrong about PZ needing a ticket to get in yet, given that the producers sent out public requests for this screening, as documented by Kristine?
I know you’ll never admit to being the idiot you are, but seriously, unless you want to become as big a joke as the subject of the thread itself, you should really learn when to quit while you’re behind.
Q: WWBSD?
A: See above.
The more I think about this, the more I realize this will be impossible to keep out of the newspaper. As many have pointed out, you were in the movie. Just, wow. They accuse us of censorship? (Yes, I include me in “us” here, because I’m with you all the way.) How about, “You can’t come to see the movie we tricked you into being in?”. They’re not ashamed of this?
I am laughing, and calling them “stupid” is barely a starting point. How about, “Actionable”, “Lame”, “Unreasonable”? I really want this to be in the news.
What Would Ben Stein Do? We now have an answer. I can’t wait to see the reponse when he figured out he then let Dawkins in. That is sweet.
Danny, apparently imbibing of his own woo says, regarding the American Revolution: ” Well then, I suppose they shouldn’t have broken the law – is that what you are suggesting? Perhaps the ‘traitors to the crown’ should NOT have stood up for their convictions, or so it seems to you. You really are out of your tree.
Danny, you need to go to a reading comprehension course, followed by a rigorous course in reasoning skills and critical thinking.
I haven’t suggested anything that any literate, rational person could interpret as saying that the American colonists “should not have broken the law.”
You were the fool who said that the US could not have been formed if the acts of the rebelling American colonists were criminal acts. I pointed out to you that their acts were, in fact, criminal under British law. The colonists knew full well that they would likely be hanged for treason if they failed in their rebellion. They succeeded.
Rebels who lose are traitors. Rebels who win are founding heros.
No one is required to meet your expectations of dumbassed ideological purity through some sort of legal “martyrdom” in the form of precipitating an arrest for a trivial matter.
Besides, martyrdom is a theistic value, so encouraging an atheist to satisfy some religious aspiration is pretty counterproductive.
And… I’m glad you are no longer in the active service, I do not want arrogant fools like yourself wielding weapons.
You should sue.
Nobody thinks you’re a freak, Danny. Now wash your flippers and get some sleep.
I know that I’m late to the discussion, but the ideas that P-Zed would have any grounds to sue, or that he should have protested his exclusion, are ludicrous and juvenile. The proprietor of any establishment is well within his or her rights to call the police to remove a person that they just don’t like. You do not have any right to partake of a public performance simply because you are a member of the public. Many are the times that I have called the police to remove an individual who had commited no crime, but whose presence annoyed me. It is perfectly legal to expel someone from your property for no reason other than “I don’t want (or have been told not to want) to have that person here.”
That said, the topic at hand is freaking hilarious.
Little Willy, no one is trying to stop the film from being released. By tomorrow night, there will be at least a couple of reviews ripping up this film. Most of us will be laughing. We are laughing now.
When the film comes out, it will have a short run in the theaters and within the month, will be available on DVD to church groups. But here is some good news for you Little Willy, you can package Expelled with your NPR report. Sadly for you, we will still dismiss you. Have fun.
The cat in wondering why I’m laughing so hard.
Amazing.
You see it enough times, it just begins to numb you. There are a LOT of complete morons in this country.
“William Wallace” is in fact, representin’ in this very thread.
oh, the irony.
It’s just too much; I can’t even manage to squeeze yet more irony out of his usage of the handle “William Wallace”.
time for beer.
Next stop: Dawkins and Myers attend a London screening. You can each dress as the other. That would require a shave and some colored contact lenses, PZ. Fortunately, though, no trips to the tanning booth.
Great story. Cried tears–both kinds.
Too damned funny. I was laughing, hooting, and generally confusing the other people in the room.
Not all Creationists agree to how things came about. In my theory, the only thing that I disagree with science is that birds came on the scene before land creatures.
I believe and I’m backed up scripturally that the days of Creation are not 24 hour periods, but undefined lengths of time that could be hundreds of million or billions of years in length. I feel that Evolution is real and that death was in the world before Adam’s sin.
I didn’t discuss the issue in full because there isn’t space for it here. If you think you have an issue or question with this reconciliation between Creationism and Science, feel free to email me: [email protected]
Considering that identification was required, and considering that Richard Dawkins was admitted, one wonders if PZ Myers did something to get Expelled as an NCSE architected publicity stunt.
Hmmm. PZ Myers does “something” to get himself expelled while accompanying his family and Richard Dawkins
or…
the Expelled gang are clueless wankers.
I know where I’d put my money.
BTW William Wallace, what “something” do you think Dr. Myers did?
it will have a short run in the theaters and within the month, will be available on DVD to church groups.
save those church groups some money; post the inevitable torrent liberally.
seriously, if this flick makes no money, we won’t see its like again soon.
Time for the torrentsphere to contribute something positive!
The proprietor of any establishment is well within his or her rights to call the police to remove a person that they just don’t like.
Oh, I understand now. If a business owner just does not like some person because of their race, he can just call the police to evict them.
Wow, it’s like the last 40 years never happened.
Many are the times that I have called the police to remove an individual who had commited no crime, but whose presence annoyed me.
And then did this for you, Sparky? Would they do this for you if their presence simply made you feel sad?
Stuart Blessman, the student at UM who made that claim at the lookingcloser blog, is a liar.
A shameful liar and a disgrace to the university.
No, I was not bothering anyone. I went forward and got copies of the form we had to sign to get in, brought them back to my group, and the people in front of us asked me if they could have some, too. That was my only interaction with other people in line.
Nobody had a ticket. You reserved a seat online, and they checked your name off their list at the front of the line.
I was not trying to sneak in. I reserved my seats under my own name.
I was called aside by a security guard, who asked if my name was PZ Myers, and who said that the producer had specifically asked that I be removed.
We do have some idiots who get enrolled at this university. I like to think that they’re a minority, but I’m rather surprised that someone so ethically challenged is a student here.
Perhaps by expelling PZ, they are creating the premise for their next movie, Expelled 2: Expelled from ‘Expelled’. They will interview themselves under the guise of a completely different documentary ploy, blatantly distort and quotemine their own interviews and expel Ben Stein – making way for Expelled 3…
Best laugh I’ve had in ages. I do believe I must have finally reached the end of the internet.
Many are the times that I have called the police to remove an individual who had commited no crime, but whose presence annoyed me.
you mean they were loitering? If so, that’s legit.
do you have on duty cops hanging around outside your store to prevent the entrance of undesirables?
that’s not legit.
“Danny, apparently imbibing of his own woo says, regarding the American Revolution: ” Well then, I suppose they shouldn’t have broken the law – is that what you are suggesting? Perhaps the ‘traitors to the crown’ should NOT have stood up for their convictions, or so it seems to you. You really are out of your tree.
Danny, you need to go to a reading comprehension course, followed by a rigorous course in reasoning skills and critical thinking.
I haven’t suggested anything that any literate, rational person could interpret as saying that the American colonists “should not have broken the law.”
You were the fool who said that the US could not have been formed if the acts of the rebelling American colonists were criminal acts. I pointed out to you that their acts were, in fact, criminal under British law. The colonists knew full well that they would likely be hanged for treason if they failed in their rebellion. They succeeded.
Rebels who lose are traitors. Rebels who win are founding heros.
No one is required to meet your expectations of dumbassed ideological purity through some sort of legal “martyrdom” in the form of precipitating an arrest for a trivial matter.
Besides, martyrdom is a theistic value, so encouraging an atheist to satisfy some religious aspiration is pretty counterproductive.
And… I’m glad you are no longer in the active service, I do not want arrogant fools like yourself wielding weapons.”
I understand and appreciate your point of view. I wish all the best to you and ours. Good luck.
Danny
What a way to waste an evening, reading comments on Pharyngula. This whole event was truly epic.
…son of a bitch, it worked!
Dawkins Crashes ‘Expelled’ Party
Noted Darwinist shows up uninvited at private screening of Intelligent Design documentary.
Expelled, a new documentary that argues the case for Intelligent Design from a Judeo-Christian perspective, has been in the headlines lately, prior to its April 18 theatrical release.
The film, hosted and narrated by Ben Stein, has been screened to invitation-only audiences at churches and for various Christian groups. But several critics have worked their way in to some of the screenings, most notably Roger Moore of The Orlando Sentinel, who recently trashed the movie in his blog.
A critic of another kind “crashed” a screening in Minnesota on Thursday night–Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and arguably the most outspoken critic of Intelligent Design and Creationism. Dawkins himself appears in the documentary–but claims he was duped into believing it was going to be an objective account of Darwinism vs. ID.
Jeffrey Overstreet, a film critic for CT Movies, broke the news on his own blog Thursday night after receiving an e-mail from a college student who was at the screening.
Stuart Blessman, the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities student, told Overstreet in the e-mail that Dawkins’ appearance “was quite a surprise” to both the audience and associate producer Mark Mathis, who fielded questions afterward.
Some schools have an honor code that would Expell!! the dishonorable Mr. Blessman.
“Clever”
Wallace has exceeded the self-parody threshold.
No wonder the lights dimmed for moment.
Ok. Back to reality.
PZ unquestionably did the right thing by declining to make a scene. Doing so would have played right into their greasy little atheist-smearing hands. I also believe that taking any sort of legal action would be not only fruitless, but more importantly, a missed opportunity to take the high road.
Would they do this for you if their presence simply made you feel sad?
no, then it’s time to call Homeland Security.
:p
Nice work, Doctor.
Maybe you can get on Leno or Letterman with this story (or at least Conan O’Brien).
photos or it didn’t happen.
Jeh, what the Expelled producers did was a Hilarious case of clueless and public hypocrisy but it was not illegal in the way you are thinking. Trying to make that point is the wrong one because business are free to discriminate against individuals as long as it is not on the basis of being a member of a “protected” class, such as gender, race, national origin or religion. The producers did not discriminate against PZ based on religion but on the fact that he is an outspoken critic who shines the spotlight of fact-based reason on their alternative reality-based propaganda movie, so it isn’t religious discrimination. The movie was a private screening–since, like vampires, Expelled producers are harmed by the light of day.
The correct point about the expulsion is the one PZ is making, which is the parody-proof level of hypocrisy, hubris and Keystone Kops cluelessness exhibited by the Producers in their efforts to save their film from being seen by anyone but an equally clueless audience.
…son of a bitch, it worked!
were you using “The Secret”?
Calgon?
Damn, but I wish I could stay awake for the denouement of this little saga. I guess I’ll have to wait until morning. Great job, PZ!
photos or it didn’t happen.
http://amused-muse.blogspot.com/2008/03/expelled-from-expelled.html
there ya go; close as you’re gonna get, anyway.
You were the victim of a crime, PZ. To quote the relevant law:
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 2000a
§ 2000a. Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation
(a) Equal access
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
…
Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this subchapter if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by State action:
…
(3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; and …blah blah you get the point. The officer that told you to leave had no legal means to do so.
The producers did not discriminate against PZ based on religion but on the fact that he is an outspoken critic who shines the spotlight of fact-based reason on their alternative reality-based propaganda movie, so it isn’t religious discrimination.
you must have missed the tens of thousands of times these folks have called atheism and “darwinism” religions.
so many and so consistently, that one could actually make the argument this WAS religious discrimination, using their own definitions.
The police listening to a loony church sect. Only in America or soon coming to a theatre near you?
Not a laughing matter.
@jeh and Ichthyic,
I am only stating that as the owner of a business I have the right to refuse service to individuals for little or no reason. I am well within my rights to exclude a customer only because I rolled a die, and his number came up. As long as one is not excluded because of a specific class association articulated in statutes, one is only an individual, and it is well within the rights of a manager to say “I don’t like his haircut, please send a cruiser to take him away.”
I make no judgement as to the morality of this action, but conflating what I said with Jim Crow laws is a low blow.
And as has been noted in many posts, police officers are very often hired to enforce the whims of particular business owners.
PZ was causing no disturbance, and neither “Jared” nor Mark Mathis made reference to such. Both said that PZ needed a ticket and had to leave because this was a private screening to which he was not invited. I had no ticket, and I was not invited, unless you call posting a link on a “please fill our theatre, tell your friends, da da” website an invitation. In which case, it’s the same “invitation” PZ got.
At any rate, Mark Mathis lied to me, too. He told me that “Crossroads” was a “working title” for the film. Wesley Elsberry has shown that the domain for Expelled was purchased before all or most of the interviews were done.
This is just disgraceful.
Calgon?
oh, man, are you telling me you missed some good woo?
http://www.thesecret.tv/
it was all the rage (read: laughter generating) just last year.
PZ posted about it on several occasions.
This is just disgraceful.
she said with an evil grin and a shimmy.
:P
From that blog post that John Pieret linked to earlier, Stuart puts this at the bottom with a spoiler alert:
Okay, already new that they try this poisoning the well tactic. Never mind that their “atheism leads to eugenics” is the most flawed of all of these syllogisms.
Shouts out: <3 to PZ for posting this ASAP and giving me a genuine LOL experience, to Richard for scaring the shit out of Mathis with his mere presence, to Kristine for posting about what went on inside, to Cuttlefish for yet another fantastic topical poem (rhyming Eohippus = brilliant!), and to the people to decided PZ needed removing for breaking my collection of irony detectors.
Whom the gods will destroy, they first make mad. And how!
I never use this, but what else can be said? – ROFLMBFPAO!
Epic, PZ. PLEASE post about whatever comes of this, I can’t wait to hear Dr. Dawkins’ reaction.
These people are brain-damaged.
http://amused-muse.blogspot.com/2008/03/expelled-from-expelled.html
there ya go; close as you’re gonna get, anyway.”
No, no. That won’t do. Where are all the missing transitional photos?
And as has been noted in many posts, police officers are very often hired to enforce the whims of particular business owners.
OFF DUTY
why is it that this is not sinking in?
Unbelievable, PZ. Just incredible. I laughed, I cried, I’m waiting for the full recap tomorrow.
Funny, but in a disturbing sort of way. What defense is reason against such ignorance?
If UM Student Stuart Blessman isn’t a lie himself then he will probably become a bit more notorious.
The only other place HisFlyness has been seen before is also on lookingcloser and a U2 fan site.
“I don’t like his haircut, please send a cruiser to take him away.”
now try doing that every day, and see what kind of official response you get.
do you think it a good idea to defend the notion that one can abuse tax-paid officials for personal whims?
just curious.
Trying to make that point is the wrong one because business are free to discriminate against individuals as long as it is not on the basis of being a member of a “protected” class, such as gender, race, national origin or religion.
Hmm, you say it’s OK as long as it is not on the basis of religion? So therefore, technically, PZ’s lack of religion is a legit reason? And if they kicked him out because he was Jewish that would not be OK? Puh-lease.
So imagine they decided to make a movie based on one of Jack Chick’s vehemently anti-Catholic tracts. Could they legitimately exclude Catholics from a screening that was publicly announced?
PZ unquestionably did the right thing by declining to make a scene. Doing so would have played right into their greasy little atheist-smearing hands. I also believe that taking any sort of legal action would be not only fruitless, but more importantly, a missed opportunity to take the high road.
Something I often see missing in discussions of tactic and strategy–in a number of movement forums–is a failure to understand issues of proportionality. PZ getting his ass arrested would have been counterproductive. It was a private screening in that the theater was rented out and people had to sign up in advance in order to get in. They would seem to be legally within their rights to exclude him (anyone ever see those signs that say “We reserve the right to refuse service….” before?). He wasn’t expelled explicitly because of his atheism, (the civil rights issue some might want to raise) but because of his online presence. He would blow their ability to control the message by putting everything out there in a critical, factual review. This just keeps them able to say, “see, he’s complaining about a movie he hasn’t seen” but they didn’t count on Richard Dawkins or PZ’s family or some of the other science blogging folks to get in. The ability to control message is slipping away. Getting arrested would have made PZ look foolish. Instead the whole instance demonstrates the Expelled folks’ ridiculousness (I still think there need to be *jazz hands* in use when ever one says EXPELLED!…I’m imagining a “Just Jack” situation.)
I see this with certain student–and other–activists as well. Everything requires a protest. Why, they never know, but protest has to happen. Tactics should be proportional to the goal. With Dawkins getting in but PZ left out, while his family and other science bloggers get in(!), really does make them look ridiculous. Getting arrested would have made PZ look ridiculous.
Now, if RD is going to be on Maher tomorrow (probably by remote?) the story becomes even more widespread, and these idiots look even more ridiculous.
Dammit! I’ve told myself I’m going to withdraw from so much online time, but this just sucked me back in. Gonna be a weaning process, I can tell.
I might not be laughing as hard as you PZ, but I am having a good chortle.
Has anyone left a scathing comment here yet? Five-to-one sez they’;; never actually appear
#559 The proprietor of any establishment is well within his or her rights to call the police to remove a person that they just don’t like.
Not if the reason they “just don’t like” them is gender, race, color, religion, or national origin. See for example USC Title 42 sec 200
Now that doesn’t necessarily apply to this incident for several reasons (they could have excluded PZ for other reasons than his [lack of] religion, and this was a vaguely “private” screening despite being open to anyone on the internet), but the general statement that you can exclude anyone from a public establishment (as defined in the link above this includes theaters) for any reason is incorrect.
Again, I am NOT saying PZ could or should sue. IMO, that would be silly and a waste of effort even if he did have a legal ground.
The simple fact that the makers of expelled chose to prevent someone who was featured in their movie from viewing a screening is more damaging than any legal action would be.
I have a theory about why you were expelled and Richard Dawkins wasn’t.
Somebody DID recognize Dawkins, and pointed him out to the guards before going on about some other business. But the guard thought they were pointing at you. The guard thought YOU were Dawkins and kept you out of the film.
Then, I imagine, the guard was told that Dawkins had to leave immediately. So he found “Dawkins” (you) and booted you out.
Any number of people may have seen Dawkins and wanted him out–but word spread that he had been dealt with, and by some luck, he made it to his seat without being noticed again. Maybe the reason he wasn’t noticed again is BECAUSE the people who had been waiting for him and worrying believed he was gone–so they stopped looking!
Funny story either way.
Again, I am NOT saying PZ could or should sue. IMO, that would be silly and a waste of effort even if he did have a legal ground.
just to be clear, I’m not either.
I just want a public issue to be made of the usage of official personnel in this capacity, if indeed ON DUTY cops were used in this case.
It sounds like it was not the case, however, from witness reports. sounds more like mall guards, which is entirely appropriate:
private thugs to protect a “private” venue.
The first e-mail:
“Dear [I used my real name],
This is a confirmation of your RSVP for the free “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” movie screening. Venue information is below.
Theater: AMC Mall of America 14
4th Level, Center of South Ave.
Bloomington, MN 55425
Date: March 20
Time: 7:00 PM
Number of seats reserved: 2
YOUR NAME WILL BE ON A LIST AT THE DOOR. NO TICKET IS NEEDED.
More information about “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” can be found at *link blah blah*
Sincerely,
Motive Entertainement
If you need to cancel or make an important change to an existing RSVP, please email *snip.* Be sure to reference the screening city, date, and time in your email.”
I received a second e-mail reminder again stating that no ticket was required.
Well, you see Professor PZ Myers has this nice American name and they were obviously confused by the Professor Richard Dawkins with that unintelligible English name.
Someone rented the theater for a private party, just as you or I might do. No tickets were sold for money to the general public.
The people renting the theater can legally exclude anyone they please.
“I don’t like his haircut, please send a cruiser to take him away.”
Wow, you must live in a different part of American than I do. And if the business owner asks the police to kick the sh*t out of them–for good measure–will they do that too?
PZ,
Thank you for this. Westborough Baptist is visiting my University this week. (Or to be more accurate, they’ve invaded.) your story restores my faith in reason.
Cheers
~A,
“Something I often see missing in discussions of tactic and strategy–in a number of movement forums–is a failure to understand issues of proportionality.”
Abso-damnwell-lutely. And does anyone who so cavalierly suggests protest or legal action know what a pain in the ass getting arrested and/or suing would be? For a stupid movie? PZ will get to see this movie eventually (unless Mathis distributes his picture to every theater in Minnesota, and that would just be ever the more god damned hilarious).
Dammit! I’ve told myself I’m going to withdraw from so much online time,
ahh, that explains why I haven’t seen your posts of late.
good man.
psst:
thesis
:p
This is why most super heroes have a sidekick
That was unbelievable PZ. Congrats for becoming the number 1 public enemy.
Completely made my day.
“Has any previous Pharyngula post hit the 500 mark in comments before? Certainly not in one short evening.”
This is probably the fastest I’ve ever seen, but oh yes, threads have gone over 500 numerous times. Any time Myers invokes Scott Adams, for example. And the time he deliberately baited the global warming deniers, we got over 1300 comments on that one. And the “Ahistorical Garbage” thread might just top that record if we get any more goofballs trickling in.
Hi , This is very nice and superb…
Someone rented the theater for a private party
A “private party,” posted on a public website with a link to click for free admission to these screenings, at which DVDs are distributed with film clips, so that “you can spread the word to the general public”? A “private party,” in which the producer exhorts you to rat on your neighbors and mentions that “we are working with the FBI” to identify “the enemies of this film”?
Oh, did I mention that they brought up the FBI?
Heh. Yeah.
I miss you, Jeff, but… what Icky said. ;-)
Jeh, this moment is a great one that exposes the Expelled producers for the irrational screaming hypocrites that they are. Enjoy it! I know I am.
But you continue to make the wrong point and one not supported by facts or law. For purposes of being in the audience the producers couldn’t care less if PZ is religious or not, they only care if he has credulously swallowed their “freedom to teach the controversy” codswalop. While religious people are far, far more likely to do so than secular people clulessness is not exclusive to creed. This was not a case of religious discrimination and your analogy fails to be analogous. You are overstating your case and, thus, loosing the argument.
You know those signs that say “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?” Well, they are **legal** when used in the context of booting PZed. The Epic Fail is the public exposure of they hypocrisy, not the breaking of any law. As to the laws people have cited, those do not apply the same way to “invitation only” private events–and PZed was not discriminated on the basis of being a member of a protected class. While you could argue that the self-selection process of signing up on line functionally made the event public, you still won’t be able to prove that PZed’s **religion** got him booted rather than his outspoken, science-based criticism of the film. Were he credulously supportive of the film, I have no doubt that he would have been allowed in, atheist or no.
If you are going to argue against irrationality please do so using reason rather than emotion.
ahh, that explains why I haven’t seen your posts of late.
And even when I did, I stayed within my field of study….not going too far astray any more (my mind wanders easy)
Hi , This is very nice and superb…
Not that I want to speak in their defense, but I’ll go out on a limb an be fair…
Perhaps the guest list got loaded by practical jokers? It was a web sign-up after all. What sort of verification was put into this? Check on a throw-away email address?
I could easily see the guy vetting the list …
“We’ve got 21 ‘Charles Darwins’ and 15 ‘Thomas Huxleys’. And look, 5 ‘Richard Dawkins’. I removed all I found – I just hope one didn’t slip by.”
“Oh, look, just one PZ Myers! THIS must be for real, after all, the professor lives nearby! Let’s keep a lookout for him!”
tsk
Fucking. Priceless.
Wow, PZ…ould you spell out specifically the ideological test you would recommend for admission to the U. of M.?
Our own Dr. Michael Dini at UofM-Morris.
I’m not dead! Just posting a lot less. Can’t spend quite so much time doing this shit, when I should be writing about state regulation of marriage and the integration of gay lifestyles into the relations of production and consumption :)~
This just means you have to show up at the drinking festivities, like this Monday’s Skeptics in the Pub with Mike the Mad Biologist (see skepchick.org for details!)
Liar Stuart Blessman has a blog. http://stu2.blogspot.com/
It’s just what you’d expect from an ID believer.
To jeh, Ichthyic, and Reed,
I am not endorsing the action taken in this case, I am, however, respecting the right of individual business owners to prohibit entry onto their premises of whoever they deem undesirable.
Yes, this means that I support the right of a business owner to not serve me because of my long hair (gone now, but I’ve been refused things because of it in the past). Government services should absoloutly be available to everyone, but if I own a business and decide to not allow men with sideburns into my store, that is wholly legal. It will likely cut into my bottom line, but it is the right of the owner, renter, or manager, to kick out whomever the hell they want to.
“Well, you see Professor PZ Myers has this nice American name and they were obviously confused by the Professor Richard Dawkins with that unintelligible English name.”
I’m guessing they let him in because Dawkins looks like a respectable, mild-mannered Episcopalian minister rather than Satan’s Evolutionist. They probably had a Be On the Look Out photo of someone with horns and a pointy tail and a bearded guy with tentacles below the waist. Guess they only spotted the later.
Wow. I wrote PT-mafia in the sense of an ideological clique. But based on Kristine’s reporting, maybe the term PT-mafia represents something even more sinister than I had recognized.
Talk about getting the last laugh…
Damn. Even I’ll delurk for this…
Where are all the folks who attacked PZ for talking about the movie he hadn’t seen yet? I’d like to hear their reactions.
Must be way past your bedtime, “William Wallace,” given your inability to comprehend straightforward English words. Since when does basic ethics — like not telling lies in public — constitute an ideology?
Willy Wally:
Wow, Willy boy – you are a real arse.
“Wow, PZ…ould you spell out specifically the ideological test you would recommend for admission to the U. of M.?
Our own Dr. Michael Dini at UofM-Morris.
Posted by: William Wallace”
Let’s see. How about people who don’t knowingly make false and defamatory statements about other UofMers?
Not really and ideological test in the sense you are trying to imply, though, more of an ethical one. You know, the kind that University Codes of Ethics deal with?
I couldn’t go off-line until I read and laughed some more.
My guess on why PZ was bounced but not RD is that PZ made the reservation under his own name, and including unnamed “guests”. Identifications requested to match against the reservation list. They knew PZ was coming, but RD wasn’t anticipated, so he got in under their radar.
Good work!
CLASSIC!!!! Not to shoot down your ego, but…how could they possibly recognize YOU and not DAWKINS!?! Was HE not on “the list”? This is just too priceless.
These people are complete and total hypocrites! How can they sit there with a straight face and argue that secular science is censoring, and “expelling”, an opposing viewpoint, while at the same time censoring and expelling vocal atheists and scientists?
It will likely cut into my bottom line, but it is the right of the owner, renter, or manager, to kick out whomever the hell they want to.
and it’s my right as a taxpayer to say that frivolous usage of police services, if used to obtain your “rights” in this fashion, can and should be frowned upon.
If actual on-duty police officers were used to guard entrance into a fucking FILM, then I call that frivolous usage of a public service, and I want to know how the city that employs such officers feels about it.
clearer?
He said ethically, not ideologically challenged, WW. Another idiot-admit for UM, I see. Get to class much?
Is Mr. Wallace actually suggesting that the existence of a policy on academic integrity, academic honesty, and student conduct is some sort of oppressive requirement? Are Christians really that morally stunted?.
You want to clarify that statement regaring me, William Wallace?
Wallace again exceeds the self-parody threshold! He’s going for the record tonight.
Kristine: “…the producer exhorts you to rat on your neighbors…”
Are you serious?
Wow, Willy boy – you are a real arse.
I warned him, but like all creobots, they just can’t help but shoot themselves in the head.
It’s just making this whole thing all the sweeter, to see the irony that is “expelled” being accurately reflected in the posts of the very people who support it.
It’s like when you look at two mirrors, held up to each other, and you see endless reflections….
If I were in this situation I would never consider suing the producers of Expelled, but I would think about suing Stuart Blessman for his “a man apparently hustling and bothering several invited attendees, apparently trying to disrupt the viewing or sneak in.” As I read his words, they come pretty close to be libelous, if “a man” is legally sufficient to connect his statement to an individual.
Stuart Blessman, the lying, backtracking troll says (on “looking closer”):
The baby Jesus is in floods of tears, the poor little guy.
Too funny. This is an anecdote to keep for the ages.
Note that I agree wholeheartedly with laws defining discrimination against various classes of folks illegal.
All I am saying is that “undesireable” is subjective, and thus open to exclusion.
Trying to prove that one has been excluded for a particular reason is damn-near impossible.
I am in no way endorsing such behavior, I am merely reminding you that the waitress who keeps the local asshole from coming back to the bar is relying on the generous interpretation of exclusion to keep an undesireable out.
I may be wholly missing what I am trying to say, and if that is the case, I apologise.
I seem to be misconstrued more often than not, but I’m married, so its become old-hat.
An enemies list!?! This just gets better and better. It should not come as any surprise, given Ben Stein’s past employment, that their is a list of “enemies of the film”. How Nixonian.
Could you put this to rest. At worst, this was a moonlighting police officer whose wages were paid by a private party. At best, it was just a security guard.
According to this website
(http://lookingcloser.wordpress.com
/2008/03/20/richard-dawkins-crashes-the-party-at-a-screening-of-expelled),
PZ was removed for being disruptive and not having a ticket. It also states none of the producers were there. I’d seriously like to know what happened.
Before I head, I just have to mention that I love the sight of William Wallace acting as the sole defender of the ID crowd after this massive Leroy Jenkins moment. He kind of reminds me of the last Japanese soldier, fighting on even though the war is over. Or in this case, even though the huge, irreversible public humiliation of his confreres has already taken place.
…
Tell me if this statement is troublesome – “What do atheists and the Grinch have in common?”
This is what we wrote on the whiteboard at the contact table today, including a very well drawn picture of the Grinch. Yesterday we had “Communists and the Grinch.” (I think we should go for broke and write “Atheists, the Grinch, and hundreds of millions dead”) This seemingly innocent question seems to pack a lot of heat. Grant, a former atheist, came up with it.
“That statement is horrible! It really offends me! I’m gonna go report you to the campus union, you shouldn’t be saying such things on public property! Your grammar is incorrect (we had “does” originally). You are turning away people with statements like that; they can’t find Christ because of you! You should change it to “Jews and the Grinch”, that would make more sense. It’s an unfair comparison that presupposes things. You aren’t Christian, you aren’t showing Christ’s love!” Etc etc, just a handful of the things I heard at the table during 45 minutes.
Is that statement really that troublesome? Or do most atheists have such shaky convictions that the littlest thing offends them? We had one guy stop to argue the question (he acknowledged it was a question!), and I asked him if atheism was a religion. To his credit and to my surprise, he answered “yes.” It took me back. We then asked if he was an atheist, and he stormed off after telling us it was none of our business. Still, I’m proud of the guy, and I told him so.
…. More at Lying Student Stuart Blessman’s Blog http://stu2.blogspot.com/
Feel free to document this claim any time you like, jackass.
@autumn
I am in no way endorsing such behavior
fair enough.
@wally gator:
At worst, this was a moonlighting police officer whose wages were paid by a private party. At best, it was just a security guard.
and you know this… how?
the same way you KNEW PZ had “done something wrong”?
how you can keep going when everyone is laughing at your idiocy is just remarkable.
Are you serious?
Yes, I am serious. After telling us that “some group” was trying to video the entire film (which I might add is not on 35mm film but is a crappy laptop feed) to post on torrent, he told us to look around at our neighbors to see that no illegal activity was going on.
Nomad also went a day or so ago – read his account at the “Expelled” thread at After the Bar Closes.
Well, the name of the movie says “no intelligence allowed”, so PZ shouldn’t have expected to be allowed in.
-jcr
Or do most atheists have such shaky convictions that the littlest thing offends them?
says the person who supposedly watched PZ get physically removed from a screening of the movie…
oh fuck, what’s the point.
It’s just to funny. My irony meter is beyond busted, and the overflow is starting to hurt.
Stuart Blessman is on the “Looking Closer” blog right now, digging himself deeper into a pit of lies.
http://tiny.cc/FKr8K
LOL, PZ Myers denied entry on the basis of (lack of) religion.
Funny, funny, fundies.
#630, what on earth does the quoted post have to do with your reply to it?
PZM: “Boy, I sure think our students are largely a bright and ethical bunch! I suppose there are always a few dim ones, but I haven’t met any real scumbags. Go figure.”
WW: “Ideological purity test, you say? Tell me more!”
Also, wasn’t the Dini thing about him not wanting to write recommendations for students who totally failed to grasp the point of his class? Why on earth did a creationist ask an evolutionary biology prof for letters of recommendation, anyhow? Isn’t that kinda like a flat-earther asking a geophysics professor for a recommendation?
I’ve read but never commented before. This warrants a change. I laughed pretty hard. I shared it with my girlfriend and she laughed too. After reading some of the comments on here about them trying to remove Dawkins, I wonder if it might be funnier if they let him stay. I’d love to see the looks on everyone’s faces once the lights come on and they see him standing there. Now THAT could be priceless.
Oh yes, and the, “That’s not what I meant!!” could be funny too. Maybe just a, “Wrong!” here and there plus the above idea I had. Sorry, now I’m rambling. So funny I can’t think straight.
I hope someone is preserving screencaps or PDF versions or something of the Looking Closer post(s)…
You know IDiots and their memory holes.
Yes, I am serious. After telling us that “some group” was trying to video the entire film (which I might add is not on 35mm film but is a crappy laptop feed) to post on torrent, he told us to look around at our neighbors to see that no illegal activity was going on.
it must have been the overwhelming paranoia that attracted Stein to these folks to begin with, just like it attracted him to Nixon.
OK, so let’s recap what we know of the Designer:
Likes: Atheist Biologists, Beetles, Hydrogen
Dislikes: Erstwhile Nixon staffers, Discovery Institute, Hypocrisy
Wow, just wow.
I cannot wait to see how they spin this one.
One string of invective, please.
Willy Wallace – you are a humorless, smugly stupid shit and fully deserve to be a coward Xian fuckwit you are, you soul-less shit of a trolling ass.
I pity to the bottom of my heart whatever family is connected to you, in any way,and anyone who has the misfortune to work with or near you shape or form.
Enjoy that parody you call your life, even if it isn’t amusing, except in the sickest, saddest way.
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/03/dawkins_crashes.html
March 20, 2008 11:42PM
Dawkins Crashes ‘Expelled’ Party
Mark Moring
Noted Darwinist shows up uninvited at private screening of Intelligent Design documentary.
Expelled, a new documentary that argues the case for Intelligent Design from a Judeo-Christian perspective, has been in the headlines lately, prior to its April 18 theatrical release.
The film, hosted and narrated by Ben Stein, has been screened to invitation-only audiences at churches and for various Christian groups. But several critics have worked their way in to some of the screenings, most notably Roger Moore of The Orlando Sentinel, who recently trashed the movie in his blog.
A critic of another kind “crashed” a screening in Minnesota on Thursday night–Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and arguably the most outspoken critic of Intelligent Design and Creationism. Dawkins himself appears in the documentary–but claims he was duped into believing it was going to be an objective account of Darwinism vs. ID.
Jeffrey Overstreet, a film critic for CT Movies, broke the news on his own blog Thursday night after receiving an e-mail from a college student who was at the screening.
Stuart Blessman, the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities student, told Overstreet in the e-mail that Dawkins’ appearance “was quite a surprise” to both the audience and associate producer Mark Mathis, who fielded questions afterward.
Blessman reported that Dawkins asked several questions, and complained that “any statement he made in the film was in fact under the assumption that he was being interviewed . . . for a film that was to take an even-handed look at the Intelligent Design/Evolution controversy.”
It’s not the first time Dawkins and other Darwinian experts say they were duped by the filmmakers. The Guardian reported last fall that Dawkins said, “At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front,” he said. And The New York Times quotes Dawkins and other atheists who appeared in the film under a “deceptive invitation.”
Blessman also wrote that “the Q&A then proceeded pretty uneventfully, with several of the questions addressed to Dawkins himself. Mathis and Dawkins also clearly had spoken on numerous occasions and appeared to continue an argument that they had started previously.”
Read more about Expelled in earlier editions of Reel News at CT Movies.
Well. Time for bed. Kristine, thanks for sharing all this interesting information. This really puts the “qzzyx” in “surreal”.
Brilliant! Fecking brilliant!
One possibility (of several) I don’t recall seeing mentioned about asking Pee Zed to leave and not Dawkins: Dawkins was also on (completely legal) banned list, perhaps even had his picture circulated as well, and the staff simply failed to recognise him.
The alleged Q&A session afterwards doesn’t prove “they” knew beforehand that Dawkins was present. Given how fast this aim-at-both-feet, shoot-the-full-clip has spread on the interwoos, a reasonable hypothesis is someone(s?) spotted the story and made a few calls. Just like people tried to contact the media. (B.t.w., did any media types show up?)
And, as I think it was Martin who said (paraphrasing), would the people yapping about suits et al. get a fecking clew!
You should have allowed yourself to be arrested. You were to commit no crime at all. Please don’t show courage on the web only to show cowardice in real life. Is this how you stand up for what you believe?
This is the most ignorant, dick-waving bullshit I’ve seen in an age. I have been arrested before, and it’s not a lot of fun, particularly when being warehoused in a toxic environment like Pier 57 in New York City during the 2004 RNC protests. There is absolutely no reason on this earth why PZ should have let himself be arrested over a stupid creationist movie. Leaving himself free to post about their refusal to admit him, with the cherry on top being that Dawkins was allowed in, is the exact right way to handle it.
If I didn’t think it was utterly pointless to try this strategy, I would think you’re an agent provocateur, because it would play right into the hands of the creationists if they were to be able to report that a Darwinist was so intent on crashing (and, it would be inferred, disrupting) the movie that he had to be hauled off in handcuffs. There is a time and a place for that kind of thing, and this was not it.
I recently went to one of the screenings as well, perhaps I can add a clarification. In my case we had a hired thug wearing a police uniform present as well. Despite the fact that the cop left his police cruiser parked immediately outside the entrance to the theater, instead of in the parking lot like a normal person might, and also despite the fact that he was wearing his full police uniform, he was described to us as being an off duty officer.
I expect that the officer who showed PZ out was also off duty. I was not aware that they get to use their cruisers and full uniforms and are allowed to park in no parking zones when doing mercenary work, but apparently they do.
The problem I have with this is that PZ was forced out of the entire theater, not simply denied access to the screen that was rented out for Expelled. I assume that they would have had to have the operator of the theater ask the cop to do that, the Expelled people have no right dictating who may or mat not be present in the entire theater. Unless I’m mistaken and they actually did rent out the entire theater building and every screen within.
And I’d expect that the theater operator would prefer not to do that, I’d expect bad it to be bad publicity if they’re shown strong arming people out of their business as a result of pressure from religiously motivated individuals.
I think I know how Dawkins got in without setting off alarms in advance, but just in case I’m right and the same concept may be employed again I’ll refrain from blowing it (although it’s easy enough to figure out). If those involved wish to spill the beans, though, I’d like to know if I’m right.
Holy shit, are the Looking Closer and Christianity Today blogs really using THE EXACT SAME TITLE?
lol…
PS: take a look at the comments policy on Jeffrey Overstreet’s site for extra humor.
I think it is great…Why would any “Rational” person want to see our “creationist propaganda” anyway…it’s funny. You won’t let us teach it in school’s, so we finally get to Kick you out.
As for Dawkins, who refuses to take part in any debate or think using his own individual thoughts, or answer any tough questions regarding his obvious religion, Were delighted that he finally took the time to challenge his faith.
Nice turn of events and we get some amazing publicity. The “Producer” knows what he is doing…
+1 Creationist.
PS: take a look at the comments policy on Jeffrey Overstreet’s site for extra humor.
sorry, already on irony overload.
must – drink – beer…
LOLDawkins
LOLDawkins
The problem I have with this is that PZ was forced out of the entire theater, not simply denied access to the screen that was rented out for Expelled
Good point. I’m sure 10,000BC was playing.
My mouth literally just gaped open when I read Richard’s name.
Well played P.Z. Well played.
Positively Illuminating PZ– so much so that I up and
Illuminated it for the benefit of posterity– the producer’s conduct is so epically stupid that this episode deserves a mosaic in the Cathedral Of Dumb:
http://adamant.typepad.com/seitz/2008/03/the-bayeaux-tra.html
Never mind my last comment. I came across new information claiming that Blessman lied.
“Is that statement really that troublesome? Or do most atheists have such shaky convictions that the littlest thing offends them?”
The problem isn’t that they attacked someone’s views, but rather that they endorsed a baseless stereotype. Besides, your whole story sounds made up and calling atheism a “religion” is just playing word games. Call atheism whatever you like, but know that when religion is criticized, the critics are referring either to a belief system taken on faith or a belief (or beliefs, more precisely)in supernatural ontological claims.
Regardless of how you define “religion,” or any other word for that matter, you still need to address the arguments themselves. If there was evidence for the existence of god(s), that would justify theism. If there was evidence against it, that would justify weak or strong atheism, depending on the strength of the evidence. If evidence was absent either way, then atheism, defined simply as an absence of belief, would be justified. Redefining words cannot change the evidence nor how it is evaluated for any proposition.
My arguments do not unfairly attack religion, but instead treats its claims as you would any other for the sake of logical consistency.
Nice turn of events and we get some amazing publicity. The “Producer” knows what he is doing…
yeah, if he running a “twit of the year” contest is what he was after.
here, this is last year’s:
you might want to participate in the next one yourself!
oh wait…
perfect!!!
and, did Richard enjoy it?
Ichthyic, that is the film we use for Jerry. I do not thing I have to finish the rest of that statement.
I say we all chip in for PZ’s $10 ticket to watch the movie when it comes out!
That is hilarious! If this doesn’t prove how dimwitted these creationist are, I don’t know what will!
That is hilarious! If this doesn’t prove how dimwitted these creationist are, I don’t know what will!
atheism cured my ADD!!, i just read every comment.
@Marcus Pittman(#667):
“I think it is great…Why would any “Rational” person want to see our “creationist propaganda” anyway…it’s funny. You won’t let us teach it in school’s, so we finally get to Kick you out.”
Dude! What’s with the random capitalization, grotesque misspelling, and (ahem) idiosyncratic punctuation? In our “school’s”, indeed!
We won’t let you and your ilk teach biology for the same reason we won’t let you teach English. You know nothing, and your ignorance would be contagious.
But what’s even worse is what you *think* you know, because it’s all wrong. That’s not just clueless — it’s dangerous.
I do not thing I have to finish the rest of that statement.
heh.
nope.
It just had to be put somewhere in this thread, for posterity’s sake.
I mean, what the Expelled folks pulled off would most surely win them that contest, hands down.
I have to admit, even though Dawkins feels much more famous than Myers to me (duh), I don’t know what he looks like (at least until I saw the loldawkins above), and I would recognize ol’ PZ. Go figure.
I am amazed about the lightheartedness with which you tell us that for absolutely no reason you are refused entrance to a cinema, enforced by a police officer.
Am I reading this correctly? You have to sign in and show I.D to go and watch a movie? F*** me, and I thought Europe was already bad..
Do the Darwin Awards have some category for stuff like this besides “Honorable Mention”? Like “Special Achievement in Abject, Humiliating Stupidity without Loss of Life or Injury”, say? ‘Cause they should, at least this once.
Damn it, I think I need a new name to post under, I’m not the paul that was cured of ADD by atheism. Funny comment though.
It’s like the old adage – ‘They came for the Jews/Xians/Zoasters and I did nothing…’ They came for the Atheist and he did nothing.
Danny, Danny, Danny, Danny….
That is not just an old adage; it is a poem from Martin Niemöller. It is written in response to a historical incident you might have heard of called the Holocaust. By referencing it to use against Dr. Myers, you are inverting the sense of the poem from a cry of regret of a not-so-innocent bystander to use it against the victim. If they came for the Atheist and he did nothing, then it is appropriate to say, mutatis mutandis, of the Holocaust that they came for the Jews, the Roma/Sinti, the anarchists, the communists, etc. and they did nothing. This is the most disgusting and distasteful way of registering your disagreement with Dr. Myers that I can think of.
So my advice to you would be just go fuck off before you make an even bigger arse of yourself than you have done already.
Do the Darwin Awards have some category for stuff like this besides “Honorable Mention”?
you’re right, it does belong there, and they do have categories that would fit:
http://www.darwinawards.com/
I highly suggest, if you have the energy, that you get cracking and submit it!
I’m done in.
too much irony for one night.
Re: #610
Instead the whole instance demonstrates the Expelled folks’ ridiculousness (I still think there need to be *jazz hands* in use when ever one says EXPELLED!…I’m imagining a “Just Jack” situation.)
OMFSM!!!! LMAO! STOP it! I have been laughing so hard through the last few hours I just got my sides to stop hurting! The Just Jack and Jazz Hands reference was entirely TOO IMMEDIATELY VISUALIZED!! ROFLMAO while reaching again for my Albuterol.
Posting in an epic thread…
lulz were had by all
@CS #671
That was linked earlier in the comments. I posted a comment there, but unsurprisingly, it has yet to show up.
@Autumn
I agree that you have to be able to throw out undesirables. All I was trying to do is point out that there are limits as to what criteria you can use to decide someone is undesirable. Unless the expelled people had a policy of excluding people based on their religious views, they are well within their rights. Even if that was their policy, they might be OK due to the supposed “invite only” nature of the event.
@madwack
It was a “private” event (read up for details, that’s debatable but it wasn’t your regular buy a ticket and watch showing), and even regular theaters have the right to refuse service to anyone (as long as it isn’t based on race, religion etc.) Same reason a bouncer can throw you out of a bar.
Well, I am not laughing as hard you are and all these stupid fans that are laughing hard…. just coz YOU had some special guest to watch the movie for you??
And then you are HAPPY … ??
Lets not talk about ur guest now… or your family… .. .. its not cool that they kicked you out.. of a public theatre??
Did this happen in America or some Hindi movie??? and then this stupid professor is all smiling that he had some dude watch movie with his family??
Co-coincidentally he had this popular guy… watch movie with his family…. and he was out typing a blog… while .. according to the constitution….. there was no reason to kick him out of the hall…
and being an american…. he did not ask to the COPS why.. coz ofcourse .. it was an illegal threat… that he was given… sad…
That was linked earlier in the comments. I posted a comment there, but unsurprisingly, it has yet to show up.
there is a two link max limit if you want to avoid the comment being held for examination.
helps eliminate spam.
you can spread more than two links across multiple posts, however.
That’s so good it almost makes me believe there IS a god!
Stuart Blessman:
Well, that’s the good news. No science minded person is likely to ever again be interviewed by Ben Stein under the assumption that it will be even handed.
Mrs. Garrison will have more credibility going forward than Stein.
Worst. South. Park. Ever.
I didn’t realise you lived in Nazi Germany
Soapy Sam: “That’s so good it almost makes me believe there IS a god!”
Well, I’m starting to think there may well be a Loki!
Great Story! ILMAO :-)
“You won’t let us teach it in school’s, so we finally get to Kick you out.”
—Let’s stipulate that you idiot god-botherers are actually much better, nobler, and more honest people than we evil science types, and also that we are determined to not let you teach your creationist silliness in “school’s.” The problem you face is that YOU are the ones that say that educators should “teach the (manufactured) controversy.”
If that is the case, then why don’t you sort of, uh, practice what you preach, and let us come into your churches and teach science. After all, it’s the only way to teach that controversy since we already stipulated that we won’t let you do it in schools. Yet, I have yet to hear of any churches that teach real science classes. Why, pray tell, is that? Could it be because you are actually, you know, hypocrites and liars?
By the way, many, if not most of us, are more than willing to let your nonsense be discussed in religion classes, philosophy classes, in mythology, anthropology and sociology classes, it’s just that we are not willing to permit you to parade your superstition as scientific data that is supported by any evidence.
And you obviously don’t know very much about what goes on inside of a real school anyway, based upon your abysmal lack of literacy.
Worst South Park ever has to go the Virgin Mary episode although most recent Britney Spears episode may well have been the least funny.
Dawkins’ response to the episode shows he has real sense of humor and is a good sport.
@Milo (#715)
And by the way, Marcus, there IS no controversy — at least among those of us in the reality-based community. We’ve actually studied the scientific evidence (at least some of it . . . there are so many thousands of peer-reviewed papers that no one could read them all), and we don’t embrace willful ignorance.
@Ichthyic
I meant my comment on the Christianity Today blog had not appeared. What I was trying to say is that blog was linked here earlier (back at comment 580), and I attempted to comment on it.
Should my comment be Expelled from there, I’ll CC it over on ATBC.
Aw, Marcus. Really? That kind of reasoning makes me think you arn’t even trying. At least put some effort into handwaving.
So, yes, why should we want to watch, and then dissect and demolish a propaganda movie that attempts to disable science and do massive educational damage by purporting that evolutionary theory is false? Boy, I just can’t figure out why anyone would want to waste the effort. So, I guess it isn’t true that you’ve shown abundant arrogance propped up by impressive ignorance. Well done.
EPIC FAIL Creationist. You’re so wrong, you’re not even playing.
Very interesting, my comment has not appeared, but the post at http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/03/dawkins_crashes.html
has
mutatedbeen intelligently modified to include links to this post and PZs most recent one.Yesterday my job came to an end and I became freshly unemployed…
…Today I couldn’t give a shit about employment – this is bloody hilarious!!!!!!!!!
Thanks Richard and PZ (and the numbskulls at “Expelled”) you’ve made my day.
Also posting in an Epic thread.
Shorter PZ Myers (winner of an internet): “I got kicked out for the lulz.”
*laughs and laughs*
Well done, sir.
Probably too late now, but, from my own experience, I suspect you have to spoonfeed the media. However smart and clever the journalists you know personally, you have to sell the story to a system.
Which means you need to throw in lines such as “Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, England”. It means you should consider the structure of an AP story, which puts the core in the first paragraph (for several reasons).
Amd, yes, the key point is that you’re not being allowed to see the film you were interviewed for. Letting Richard Dawkins in just adds to the win, but it could distort the story. It would be easy to muddy the waters with academic status issues.
Funny, my comment hasn’t appeared on CT either, even though the post has been updated since my post :-)
However, the article still claims that “Jeffrey Overstreet, a film critic for CT Movies, broke the news on his own blog Thursday night after receiving an e-mail from a college student who was at the screening” Even though Overstreet wasn’t informed of the event until **after the screening**. Whereas PZed “insta-blogged” about it during the screening. But then why should facts get in the way of a Christianity Today story…
BTW, I think one of the reasons that blowhard Stuart Blessman tried to claim that PZed was bothering “invited” attendees standing in line was that it didn’t occur to Blessman that PZed was chatting with a **group** of friends and family he came with in line. Blessman seems to have assumed that PZed appeared lone-gunman style and that Blessman could get away with claiming that PZed was harassing people near him in line based on the false belief that they were ID True Believers. Wrong. More Epic Fail on the part of the ID crowd.
It seems science is not the only thing the films’ supporters are deluded about.
Amongst the other silly comment by Stuart Blessman is this…
“…the second question was asked by a surprise member of the audience: Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” and arguably the biggest name in the movie other than Mr. Ben Stein himself.”
Does this guy seriously think an idiot like Ben Stein is comparable to an eminent scientist like Richard Dawkins?
I can see the humour in the situation, but I also see a serious breach of Human Rights. Pulled from the queue to see a movie? I assume the movie is on ‘general release’ (ie, you pay your money, you get in)? This in the ‘Land of the Free’?
Yeah, right, the same kind of freedom that theocrats want – you’re free to do as you’re told.
What a disgrace, to the shame of all America.
Um, no. You really should read the OP or the comment thread. The film is still pre-release. Hopefully, it will stay that way :-)
As to “Human Rights,” if anything having to watch this drivel is the human rights violation, not the other way around.
ROTFL! They let the bad wolf in! :D
I’d say that only this vignette was worth much more than the whole movie itself. :D
Cracking! Another own goal by the religiously deluded.
That is the funniest thing I have read all week. How can they not have recognised Dawkins? His face is synonymous with the “New Atheist Movement” that currently has so many Christians up in arms!
The only thing funnier would have been if you were accompanied by Satan, complete with the pitchfork, pointy ears and tail.
I have nothing to say that hasn’t already been said. I just wanted to join the party.
Thanks for the laughs, PZ, and everyone else who posted here.
1. Make propaganda film.
2. Lie to obtain interviews.
3. Reverse sense of movie’s title to prevent interviewees from attending pre-screening.
EPIC FAIL.
<Mortal Kombat>MYERS WIN</Mortal Kombat>
This is fantastically funny, a perfect start to the Chocolate Festival.
This is full of win. I don’t know how you could be more awesome than sneaking Dawkins into the theatre! (disclaimer: yes, we know no actual sneaking was involved)
P.S. Three cheers for Cuttlefish!
Good catch. I think I can speak for all of us non-US readers, when I say that none of us had heard about Ben Stein before this movie. Yes, I know he had some other other role in a different movie, but who really remembered his name?
Dawkins on the other hand has been translated into numerous languages, and was a big name even before his latest book.
Has anybody told Marcus Pittman that some semi-literate teenager is posing as him on the internets?
I was just about to go to bed when I saw this. Now its almost seven oclock in the morning!
Wow.
This is dangerous. Dawkins might leave the theater as a reborn Christian.
Maybe it wasn’t you in particular, PZ. It may be they were kicking out everyone with steel toed boots and brass knuckles. HAR HAR HAR
The funniest thing about all of this is that if there really WERE a God, he’s clearly not on the side of the Expelled morons.
LOL!!!
OK Wallace, here’s how it works in the real world: you cobble up a piece of tripe as a movie with third-rate intellect behind it, then make it possible for people who are libeled in the movie to attend a showing, and then throw one of them out, you will come out looking like a total doofus. This is what has happened to the producers. And they can’t contest professor Myers’ version of events because no video.
/late to the Wallace-kicking party
I would like to add my vote to the request for a Dawkins guest-post.
Wow!! Take it as a victory – now you’re famous!!
I hope Richard tells us about his movie experience too :)
PZ: I suspect you were spotted because the organizers recruited members of the Twin Cities Creation Science Association to watch for you.
Was there a lady wearing a funny hat standing nearby?
The pwnage! ROTFL! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
——————–
Comment 138 deserve attention. I don’t have time now to read any farther, though. 734 comments… man…
The pwnage! ROTFL! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
——————–
Comment 138 deserve attention. I don’t have time now to read any farther, though. 734 comments… man…
Like, others, I prolly dont have anything new to say but wtf!!! 734 comments!!…wtf again!
PZ MYERS FOR PREZ!!!
Come-on why didn’t you record this on you camera phone and release it on bit torrent -can’t you sneak you daughter or Richard in or something to record it again ? I refuse to pay any money to watch this garbage-i will rip off the producers as much as possible though!!!
im in ur teatr watchn ur flmz!
How ironic and funny this whole thing is. Expelled from expelled, truly a made for the headlines situation.
Maybe the IDers need to make one of those packs of playing cards with Dawkins and PZs faces on it, maybe Hitchens as well. But what can be on the rest of the pack?
hehe, I live in Iran and I thought these things only happen over here. So much for the land of the free!
heather: the rest of the deck *must* be made of jokers!
Wow, I wish I would have seen this last night. The mall is 5 minutes from my house. What a great story.
Wonderful and funny as hell.
An unwelcome prostate check for fundies.
Seems like a waste of blogging time. The subject is boring.
That is AMAZING! I’m still giggling over it. This one will keep me smiling for hours. I can’t wait to hear Prof. Dawkins on the subject.
PZ:
Had to drop a comment on this. I was getting ready to go to work this morning when I was read your article over the phone.
Thanks for the laugh. It’s a STEALTH DAWKINS.
Hee hee. Hee hee hee. Hee hee ha HAHAHAHAH.
Cough. :D
Dee
PZ,
The Dawkins part is funny, but I don’t think the rest of the story is funny at all.
A police officer denied you access to a movie anybody else is allowed to see, for no good reason, a movie in which you yourself appear for goodness’ sake.
This is OUTRAGEOUS. It’s a violation of your civil rights. You should file a complaint against the policeman and sue the movie theatre.
I can only hope that the media pick up the story, and show the whole country that creationism is not interested in truth or justice at all, only in thought control.
Wow! Look what I’ve missed while sleeping!
This is perhaps the funniest thing I’ve hear in ages. Unbelievable! hahahahahahaha
I will be laughing all day on my drive to Toronto, this is just awesome.
So you’re telling me, PZ, that you had to reserve seats under your own name. Did Richard Dawkins also supply his name before the event, and they still didn’t realize?! Wow, what a bunch of idiots!
hahaha, this is fantastic.
can’t wait to hear what Richard Dawkins have to say.
it was great to start this friday laughing out loud!
This remarkable turn of events deserves a celebration. I’m popping the cork off a bottle of wine right now. But first, won’t everyone join me in a toast? To PZ and Professor Dawkins. May all of your victories be so sweet. Cheers!
Say, PZ? You were in an Apple Store. You could have called the media from one of their sample iPhones. (I can understand why you were too distracted to think of it though — that’s absolutely hilarious!)
It was probably a policeman on detail. Paid for by the theater, and yes the theater can kick people out for any reason they see fit and it would be trespassing to refuse.
People seriously need to do some thinking before they start yelling about police acting outside the law.
Epic win. :D Oh, how I wish that someone with a camera phone has filmed this…
Adding to the “who is this Ben Stein anyway?” sentiment — nobody in Europe has a clue who this guy is (all I knew was that he hosted some sort of TV show a few years ago; and I knew this only because I’m a little more involved with US culture than normal). The movie wouldn’t make it to a screening here. If they tried, I’m pretty sure they’d be hard pressed to find an actual movie theatre to rent. Er, because we’re all raging anti-semites and Nazis over here, of course, not because creationists are widely considered part of the lunatic fringe.
*Sigh*
And it’s exactly this kind of “Haw, haw, stupid morons, they’re so dumb” attitude that stirs up so much anti-science sentiment among Christians in the first place. If you’d stop treating them like idiots, maybe some of them would actually listen to what you have to say. Oddly enough, people tend to not listen to what you have to say when you’re an ass. Weird I know.
Of course that’s not really what it’s about, is it? It’s not really about the sharing of knowledge anymore, it’s about being right. How’s that working for you? Enjoy the smug satisfaction in knowing that you’re pretty much behaving exactly like the fundamentalists that got you so angry in the first place. But it’s different for you, of course. Because you’re right. Right?
*Sigh*
“Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult; whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse. Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you; rebuke a wise man and he will love you. Instruct a wise man and he will be wiser still; teach a righteous man and he will add to his learning. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” Proverbs 9:7-10
PLEASE get this to the press! The Orlando Sentinel might be interested in your story. It is important that the public, and the FL Legislature realize how prejudicial these neocreos are becoming. If you don’t believe what they do, you will be “cast out.” Sounds real Christian of them, eh?
Please get this to some reporters.
The fact is, you liberals know this movie has the facts, and try to argue, but you have no recent discourse, so you do illegal things, and whine. Here in the heartland, we have the right to kick you out, especially since you kicked us out, and God out, of the classrooms and our nation. We are fighting back. God is with us.
C’mon everybody, sing it with me…
“Academic FreeDUMB!!!”
Dude! I know I’m late in the commenting here, but I just read this and now all of my coworkers are staring at me from the loud yelling of “OWNED!” That is some of the best news I’ve read all week.
Wow…this is just too good. I agree with the commenter who said this would make great Daily Show fodder (I fear the topic, and certainly the delicious double irony, is too “inside” for the mainstream media to make too big a deal of it). Too bad they’re off until Monday.
Perhaps Dawkins will bring it up on Maher’s show, but has anyone forwarded the story to Keith Olbermann? It seems like a good candidate for “Worst Persons” honors.
I wish there were some way to notify Bill Maher. This is just the kind of thing he would love to put in his monologue tonight on HBO.
No, he’s really not. PZ hasn’t lied to anyone or pretended to be persecuted. That you ignore the lies and hypocrisy of the ID crowd is your problem, because it destroys your credibility.
Do you really think you’re being clever Stuey?
grow up
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s AWESOME!
That’s so funny I almost spewed coffee out my nose :D
Very amusing. More evidence that these IDiots haven’t graduated from Middle School yet, the pettiness.
I’m appalled.
I’m appalled that someone can be chucked out of a cinema queue by the police on the whim of the cinema owner.
I’m appalled that (according to the comments here) police in the US can moonlight as security guards WHILE WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS. Bloody hell. Does noone else see the massive potential for abuse of power there?
(I used to be appalled by the strength of the Creationist movement in America, but I’ve kind of got used to that idea by now.)
PZ, that is BEAUTIFUL.
just BEAUTIFUL.
Despite the police interference, which is questionable, you have no doubt pulled the most ridiculously AWESOME fastball on them EVAR.
Kudos.
Disturbing with a funny twist!
Yes I am.
Oh, that’s too beautiful. I hope RD finds time to write about this and to trash that pathetic movie.
What is the concern about the off-duty cop? That is very routine. Ever see a funeral procession, with police? Those guys are off duty. Like the ones who direct traffic at the end of church services. And yes, they can arrest you if they are off duty, if you break the law (like trespassing, eh).
“763: “The fact is, you liberals know this movie has the facts, and try to argue, but you have no recent discourse, so you do illegal things, and whine. Here in the heartland, we have the right to kick you out, especially since you kicked us out, and God out, of the classrooms and our nation. We are fighting back. God is with us.”
Out on his sorry ass!
You can have your imaginary pals, God and Jesus – just don’t expect undeluded people to think very highly of you or your little fantasy friends, especially when you force your unenlightened religious puke on kids who should be learning how the world operates, not what goes on in your narrow-minded, god-intoxicated head.
Oh the irony, it almost hurts. Or is that my sides splitting?
@ #750: Seems like a waste of blogging time. The subject is boring.
Thanks for taking your time to post that valuable insight. Have an owl.
@ #779: Thanks for that. I was having a hard time articulating scathing contempt. Little Gary does love to show his ignorance in forums.
Damn, but you couldn’t make this stuff up. Congratulations on your Total Win, PZ!
This may be the first time I’ve actually laughed out loud from reading a blog post. Bloody brilliant.
See, God does have a sense of humor!
It’s worthy of further media, television appears so mundane in contrast! – Most Excellent :-)
I’m appalled that (according to the comments here) police in the US can moonlight as security guards WHILE WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS.
This is common practice, Police at road construction sites are off duty and paid by the DPW not the Police dept. When the phone company needs to block traffic to replace a telephone pole, they have to hire off duty police to direct traffic. Police at rock concerts, or directing traffic after football games, are off duty police hired by the promoters, etc.
Does noone else see the massive potential for abuse of power there?
No. They are not being hired to be thugs, they are still acting as police officers and bound by the same rules of conduct. They are still police, it is just that for that time their salary is being paid by a private party, but that does not make that officer a “henchman”. If the policeman wasn’t hired by the producers for the screening, the producers could have still called the (on-duty) police and had PZ (or anyone else they want) removed from their private screening. Just as anyone throwing a party could call the police and have a “party-crasher” removed.
Geeze, I don’t know why everyone is so upset about the whole off-duty cop thing. Imagine you rent the theatre for a wedding reception and someone uninvited wanders in refuses to leave. Don’t you think you should be able to call the police and have him removed? Now suppose your wedding involves a famous person that will incite a lot of gate crashing. Rather than have you calling every five minutes to have someone removed, the police require you to hire some off duty police so the rest of the force can do their regular jobs and not be tied up at your event. I do not see the “abuse of power” potential. They are being hired to be police, not leg-breakers.
The officer is not to blame here, the producers are. Not because they didn’t have the right to exclude PZ (they did), but because it was just so stupid to do so.
It’s odd to me that they expelled you but let your guest & family go in. I don’t see what good that does them. Nothing they do makes sense.
As someone who used to be a manager at a theater, many of them hire off-duty cops as security. Nothing weird at all about it being a cop – and once they’re hired by the company, they’re effectively private security in terms of what you can get them to do. They just, you know, can arrest someone if they have to.
And it makes the poor theater staff’s lives so much easier. Just like it would yours if you needed to have someone removed for being a nuisance – which is your right on your property. It is, of course, important here that PZ wasn’t actively trying to protest or any such protected thing. Because he was actually trying to be a customer, the rules are different.
Only in the ID movement do they have to shield the tender minds of their bleevers so assiduously from the assault of reason, personified by Big Bad PZ Myers!
Jumpin’ Jehosefat! Nice work,PZ Myers. And thanks to the blogosphere for spreading it around. Meantime, I’m off to celebrate Flat Earth Friday, where the masses celebrate spring by sacrificing reason on the altar of faith. (In my case, it means having the first barbecue of the season.)
Yowza. This is nuts. Of course, I expect no end of misrepresentations from the godbotherers and fundies …
loldawkins http://i29.tinypic.com/x4r81z.jpg
At any rate, Mark Mathis lied to me, too. He told me that “Crossroads” was a “working title” for the film.
It was a working title – it worked to snooker people into the interviews.
And then they accuse of Dawkins of “crashing” the screening and “working his way in”. Sheesh!
Funny, but also a bit concerning. And mister Meyers seemed to be a decoy for Dawkins!
I’d take it as a compliment: You’re a bigger threat to the ID crowd than even Richard Dawkins!
Re documentary subterfuge, it’s not as though Dr Dawkins hasn’t done it himself:
Richard Dawkins Comes to Call
http://www.dailygrail.com/node/5817
Saw this quote on the Dawkins site, used by a poster named Corylus:
Just so fitting. Not just for the IDiots running the screening, but for all their sycophants who can’t bring themselves to see any problem with the massive, obvious hypocrisy of this whole debacle.
These people don’t show the slightest hint of remorse for making wild, false accusations against innocent people. Isn’t their imaginary god supposed to have some sort of problem with bearing false witness? Or do they just think it’s not really lying if you’re Lying For Jesus™?
Excellent job! Keep up the good work PZ.
Perfect! Great story that saved my rainy Karfreitag afternoon, PZ.
All the best from old europe ;))
Perfect. You made my day. Irony meters planet wide have maxed out.
So now you know what students and educators who are targeted because of their belief in open discussion of ID feel like. How appropriate.
As a big proponent of the film EXPELLED, I don’t see any irony here at all. Irony is when the expected is the opposite of the actual event.
If anyone wants to see real irony and you want to watch the Myers and Dawkins clips that badly, you can just go to my blog.
http://forerunner.com/blog
I saw the movie on Tuesday and was given a DVD with over 30 minutes of raw clips. We were told as teachers to show it in class and use it as a debate opportunity for our students to discuss the issue of censorship, and so on. Of course, they want it to go to people who will promote it and get our friends to come out to see the movie. (Yes, it’s a vast right wing conspiracy!)
The DVD has the infamous PZ Myers interview in which you say your goal is to destroy or marginalize religion. (If I was really smart I should have bought up 100 of these and sold them to evolutionists on EBay as “contraband.”)
Movie producers often do promotional test screenings before the release. Certain types of people are invited and some are not.
It would be no different if you tried to crash an advance test screening of Indiana Jones or Star Trek except the security would have been tighter. And yes, you should have been arrested if you trespassed in any private function.
On the other hand, you are making a mountain out of a molehill, the clip you wanted to see is already on my website.
What is ironic is that you can see the parts you really want to see the most — there are numerous clips out there already — and you are making it sound as though it’s a huge conspiracy to bar you from the debate.
What is happening with EXPELLED though is that some movie reviewers want to crash the gates early so they can pan the film and pronounce it DOA — as did Roger Moore (no, not 007 — he would have gotten in) the Orlando Sentinel reviewer.
Most reviewers who are allowed into advance screenings have the professional courtesy not to publish their reviews until the week the movie premieres. No such courtesy here. The political stakes are too high.
The MAIN reason the media is not invited to these screenings is because the film is in raw form and is not ready for the general public yet. We saw a high-res DVD version that was not quite cinema quality.
All the secrecy and the buzz is working toward a big box office. I know all you anti-ID-ers are warming your insides over this imagined “incident,” but how does it really work in your favor?
Controversy sells. More people are going to see the movie as a result. That’s what you want?
If I didn’t believe in a higher intelligent design, I’d see it as a great cosmic irony.
oh.. this is so classic.. It amazes me what people will do in the name of fear……….. I will be giggling at the absurdity of this for along time. Oh and to be in the company of such a great man.. one would envy you….. if it wern’t a sin….;)
It is snowing here at the moment, but I’m as warm as toast after reading this.
Check this out. They say PZ had no ticket and Dawkins was crashing the party.
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/chronicle.php?article=11
I must not be up on who these people are… but sure seems to be a popular topic and funny to most. Can anyone clue me in on what I’m missing?
I love how a hypocritical piece of trash like Jay Rogers tries to spin this as a victory. And, DSM, when ID proponents who are merely advicating for “an open discussion” are escorted off of school grounds by law enforcement you MIGHT have a point.
Who is Richard Dawkins?
Oh, what I wouldn’t give to see the security camera footage of this.
Most reviewers who are allowed into advance screenings have the professional courtesy not to publish their reviews until the week the movie premieres.
PZ is a professional movie reviewer?
Oh my gosh!
I actually snorted some water out of my nose when I read that!
That’s rich! Serves them right. Are their arguments so weak that they can’t afford to let anybody who hasn’t drunk their kool-aid see the movie?
What are you five years old? Grow up you have a daughter
Richard Dawkins crashes the party at a screening of “Expelled”
By JEFFREY OVERSTREET
Published: March 20, 2008
I just received this email report from Looking Closer reader Stuart Blessman. He thought I’d find it interesting, and I certainly do. He also gave me permission to share it with you. So, here’s Stuart’s account:
My name is Stuart Blessman and I’m a student at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities involved with a campus outreach ministry that’s associated with an on campus church, Maranatha Christian Fellowship. Our head pastor was recently offered two pairs of tickets to go see an advanced screening of Ben Stein’s “Expelled”, but had to instead pass the tickets to an associate pastor, who then offered one of them to me. So at 7:00 pm on Thursday my friend Grant and I got to go see the movie. Right away, let me just say that this is the Best Documentary of 2008…if it will get played. The basic premise of the movie is that Intelligent Design should be allowed equal footing as a teachable theory within academia. This movie is not an apology for Creation; pains are taken to distinguish Creation from Intelligent Design. This is also not a movie that bashes Evolutional Theory, although many rational arguments are brought up as to the validity of Evolutionary thought as well as the long-term consequences of an Evolutionary Worldview.
The Associate Producer of the film, Mark Mathis, introduced the film as well as moderated for the quick Q&A following the film. The movie we saw was a rough Director’s Cut; at several moments things appeared to be out of sync, and occasionally archival historical footage appeared to “jump” on the screen. Mathis also mentioned that several music cues might change before the final cut, which is understandable since several high profile songs and artists are used in the film.
The film can best be described as subtly clever and occasionally funny. Emotions are stirred up especially built around the movies overall theme*, and many scenes especially later in the movie might be difficult to watch based on one’s ethnic and religious background.
But enough about the film – the real highlight of the evening occurred after the showing, during the Q&A. Mathis led this discussion, and the second question was asked by a surprise member of the audience: Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” and arguably the biggest name in the movie other than Mr. Ben Stein himself. As this screening was by invitation only, Dawkins appearance was quite a surprise to both the audience and Mathis.
Dawkins asked a simple question: Why was one of his colleagues interviewed in the movie denied a chance to come see this movie and protest it and in fact was escorted out by security prior to admittance to the theatre? The irony apparently escaped Mr. Dawkins that he himself was a gatecrasher to the movie and was uninvited; nevertheless, he wanted to know why his colleague was turned away even though he himself was admitted as were his colleague’s family.
I just happened to be standing directly in line behind Dawkins’ academic colleague. Management of the movie theatre saw a man apparently hustling and bothering several invited attendees, apparently trying to disrupt the viewing or sneak in. Management then approached the man, asked him if he had a ticket, and when he confirmed that he didn’t, they then escorted him off the premises. Nowhere was one of the film’s producers to be found, and the man certainly didn’t identify himself. If a producer had been nearby, it’s possible that he would have been admitted, but the theatre’s management didn’t want to take any chances.
So ultimately Dawkins’ first complaint was irrelevant. His second complaint was that any statement he made in the film was in fact under the assumption that he was being interviewed by Ben Stein (and by Mark Mathis) for a film that was to take an even-handed look at the Intelligent Design/Evolution controversy. Unfortunately, the entire audience, minus Dawkins’ posse, agreed that that the film’s main point was that Intelligent Design should be taught in conjunction with Evolution.
The Q&A then proceeded pretty uneventfully, with several of the questions addressed to Dawkins himself. Mathis and Dawkins also clearly had spoken on numerous occasions and appeared to continue an argument that they had started previously. The evening however was cut short by theatre management and an imminent showing of another movie in the same room.
Ben Stein’s “Expelled” is one of the more evenhanded, clever, and well-produced documentaries currently on the market. While the Evolution/Intelligent Design debate can spark much emotion, anyone walking away from this film will be convinced that the merits of Intelligent Design should be on the same level playing field as Evolutionary Theory. This film is about the freedom of speech, the freedom of ideas and ability to express those ideas…not about whether God created the heavens and the earth.
*SPOILER!! Proceed and highlight text below only if you want to know more about the film’s specific content.
wheatdogg,
It looks like they just copied and pasted the blog post that was discussed earlier (http://lookingcloser.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/richard-dawkins-crashes-the-party-at-a-screening-of-expelled/)
Christianity Today has an article about Dawkin’s attendance, but no mention of PZ’s expulsion. See http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/03/dawkins_crashes.html
Shoulda shot that popo in the face, knowwhat I’m sayin?
Yes, Adam, they did, and worse Troll JR did that in the comments here.
My name is Stuart Blessman:
“Our head pastor was recently offered two pairs of tickets to go see an advanced screening of Ben Stein’s “Expelled”, but had to instead pass the tickets to an associate pastor, who then offered one of them to me. ”
Oh, well, that clears it up then. except…
“So at 7:00 pm on Thursday my boyfriend Grant and I got to go see the movie.” so… one ticket is good for 2 people? or are you saying one ticket is good for a couple?
or that you made up the part about tickets?
Cheezits: PZ is a professional movie reviewer?
**********
The preceding paragraph said Roger Moore the Orlando Sentinel movie reviewer.
Oh my goodness!! I laughed so hard when I read this kim chi came flying out of my nose, and into the future.
There was no attempt to “crash” anything. Dr. Myers signed up on the Expelled website, using his real name. He explicitly stated that he would be bringing guests. He did not trespass, he was threatened with arrest for trying to attend a screening of a movie he was interviewed for under false pretenses, a screening for which he had registered using the website offered by the people who made the movie.
You’re just making shit up. Isn’t your imaginary god supposed to have some sort of problem with bearing false witness?
No tickets were required. No “crashing” occurred. This has already been pointed out. The fact that no tickets are required was explicitly stated in the confirmation email PZ got when he signed up for the screening, using his real name, and making it clear he would be bringing guests. Can’t these creationist nutcases even keep their lies straight?
I hypothesize: We will see a Paul Allen funded rebuttal to Expelled, which cannot be done if Expelled flops.
Which might explain why PZ and the PTN-syndicate (PT-TO-NCSE) is giving so much free publicity to the film.
Fun story, PZ, thanks for sharing it. And keep up the good work.
Grover- what is wrong with pointing at idiots and laughing? Then explaining in mind numbing detail why they are idiots?
After that little fix, I think that I can agree with that.
Only that they obtained the tickets in the same way that everyone else did. They followed procedure, so you really don’t have an argument. Of course, few people would disagree with the fact that the producers were within their right to do what they did. It is simply deliciously ironic, that’s all. Don’t worry yourself with such details, though.
Ah, the old professional courtesy trick. So soon? An amateur, I tells ya!
How secure are you in your beliefs that you need to shelter them from those who don’t believe?
Discuss at Atheist Revolution Forum.
Hmm, does the fact that PZ signed up with is actual name initially explain why they were looking for him and not Dawkins since Dawkins was just listed as a guest? Very likely if Dawkins had been separately registered they would have tried to kick him out as well.
Over 800 comments in and not a single “don’t tase me, bro”? For shame!
This made my morning. Good Friday indeed.
That is bloody brilliant. Way to take one for the team.
Jay Rogers, just to clear this up for you: the “expected is the opposite of the actual event” when people who have registered to view a movie screening upon public invitation by the movie makers are expelled for the reason that they might dissent — when the producers are supposedly promoting the idea that nobody should be removed from a discussion on grounds of their views. You would expect that if they were serious about this idea, they’d go through with it escpecially where discussion about their own views is concerned. The opposite happened. This fits your definition of irony perfectly. The key here is that the screening was far removed from your usual test audience screening in that there was an open invitation, and both PZ and Dawkins complied with all requirements stated. If you think there are exceptions to the “all viewpoints allowed” rule, forget about ID being taught in public schools. If you think there should be no exceptions, protest the exclusion of people with dissenting views from open-invitation screenings by your heroes. You can’t have it both ways.
Then Dicky Dawkins shoulda jumped up and did a ninja karate backflip and gone so gangsta on they asses they woulda been eating lead enchiladas from he sawed off when they jawed off.
Whatchoo think I be sayin all these years? Only hot lead sandwiches make these home slices bow down. Word.
Funny– I got to see Lord of the Rings, Phantom Menace, etc weeks before everyone else, and I never needed to sign a nondisclosure agreement or had to hire police officers? Prescreenings are to test for editing mistakes and to pump up opening weekend numbers.
Lie much, Creationist rat?
You retards, Dawkins was in the movie, they probably didnt know who this ass clown blogger dickhead is.
This IS priceless!
Christianity Today:
A critic of another kind “crashed” a screening in Minnesota on Thursday night–Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and arguably the most outspoken critic of Intelligent Design and Creationism. Dawkins himself appears in the documentary–but claims he was duped into believing it was going to be an objective account of Darwinism vs. ID.
Jeffrey Overstreet, a film critic for CT Movies, broke the news on his own blog Thursday night after receiving an e-mail from a college student who was at the screening.
WTF? They are claiming that Overstreet posted on this before PZ?
Yet another screw-up by a fact-challenged Christian outfit.
So, now the vast criminal conspiracy that exists only in your hollow head has new members! Does it have any new evidence? Which is to say, any evidence at all?
More questions you haven’t answered, and will most likely flee in terror from:
1) Is it your claim that the NPR story you linked to (or at least your spin on it) is absolute truth, despite all evidence to the contrary, unless NPR retracts it?
2) Does that apply to every NPR story, or only the ones that feed your persecution complex?
3) Where’s your evidence that this “PT-mafia” you speak of actually exists outside your own delusional paranoid fantasies?
4) Is the “PTN-syndicate” a new form of this delusion, or a separate fantasy, and do you have the slightest shred of evidence to support it?
5) What do you think Dr. Myers “did” to get himself kicked out of the screening of your propaganda film (given that every rationale you gave for his removal has been shown to be laughably false), and where is your evidence in support of this?
6) Since when do “don’t be stupid” and “don’t lie through your teeth” constitute an “ideological test”?
7) Isn’t your imaginary god supposed to have some sort of problem with bearing false witness?
Cheezits: PZ is a professional movie reviewer?
**********
The preceding paragraph said Roger Moore the Orlando Sentinel movie reviewer.
That’s all very nice, but what does that have to do with PZ? Why was he kicked out?
Hate to break to ya, EC, but PZ was in the movie as well.
And finally at comment #760, the whingers come in!
“So now you know what students and educators who are targeted because of their belief in open discussion of ID feel like. ”
You mean all those poor persecuted IDers actually laugh their heads off when we criticize their uninformed beliefs? Well, we better keep at it then! The world needs laughter!
To clarify really quickly for the assorted gawpers, the issue is not one of legality, since they are, as far as I can tell, within their rights to refuse to let people in, and PZ was well within his rights to try to get in in the first place. The issue is that by forcibly denying entry to Dr. Myers, the Expelled team is proving themselves to be a load of WANKERS. And by letting Dawkins in, they’re proving themselves to be STUPID wankers.
If anyone wants to challenge my point about their wankitude, they’re welcome to try. Or they could just keep wanking.
Maybe he meant that Ben Stein is a bigger name than Richard Dawkins in the same sense the Paris Hilton is a bigger name than Richard Dawkins. It’s all about fame, not qualifications, intelligence, integrity… etc. :-/
Grover (#760): You have to understand something. It’s totally about “sharing the knowledge,” but the people who need it most spit it back as if it were a forkfull of rotting fish, and damn the would-be educator to hell for the sin of attempting to educate. This gets frustrating and predictable after a while – hence the hostility. Also, the ID crowd is infamous for its intellectual vapidity and dishonest tactics. There’s a long history here.
Your concerns are noted, but carry limited weight because they fail to address or even recognize important facets of the bigger picture.
Contrast Stuart Blessman’s backtracking, once he was called on his blatant dishonesty:
with:
So, he was “literally 3 feet away from Myers when he was “expelled,”, and could hear, “every word”, and yet, he couldn’t quite make his mind up whether PZ “didn’t cause a disruption”, or whether the “management of the movie theatre saw a man apparently hustling and bothering several invited attendees, apparently trying to disrupt the viewing or sneak in.”
I think that I will go with the four or five accounts of the people that I trust, to be honest.
By the way, Wesley Elsberry, from Panda’s Thumb, has conclusively shown that the domain name, “Expelled”, was bought before the interviews with Dawkins, PZ, and Eugenie Scott.
They did not, at any point, buy the domain for “Crossroads”. Fancy that!
You can never have an open discussion with someone that is blinded by faith. Religion blinds so much more efficiently than anything. My greatest fear is that in America we have lost our ability to reason.
And to further compound EC’s idiocy, if they didn’t know who he was, how could they identify him by name to throw him out?
Maybe they didn’t recognize him, most of us can pick richard dawkins out fairly quick.
Yeah, this is the best thing they could do to themselves. They probably expected PZ, but did not think about Dawkins beforehand because he lives in the UK. Very good.
Out of the frying pan, into the fire.
“Security” is so flawed.
Irony is when the expected is the opposite of the actual event.
So, what is it when someone with intelligence gets expelled from a movie called “Expelled – No Intelligence Allowed”?
You’re right, that IS what we should have expected! :-D
The only thing that could have been better would be to have a third stage uranium-tipped sabot comprised of Richard Dawson injected into the theater.
Survey says!
@ #806:
Matt, what’s going on is the unwashed, ignorant masses of Bible-bashing creationists/intelligent design proponents put together a turd of a movie that PZ Myers has been discussing at length over the last several months. Last night PZ and family, along with other notables as internationally recognized biologist Richard Dawkins, went to go see this Expelled movie. But the movie’s producers singled out PZ, said he tried to “crash” the premiere in Minneapolis by sneaking in “without a ticket” (to a ticketless event), and they let Dawkins in apparently accidentally, while claiming the same (that Dawkins was crashing without a ticket).
The joke is they let the “enemy” in to review their tripe while somewhat misfiring their censoring reflexivity upon a lesser known critic in PZ.
Noticing their huge gaffe, they have since begun the campaign to cover up their screw up by claiming Dawkins got in uninvited (even though there’s a list with his name onn it, as well as PZ’s), and that PZ and crew were there to rabble-rouse.
I’m always proud to be on your blogroll, but never more than today. This made my week.
Hilarious and stupid. What I don’t get is that a policeman stopped him. Did the movie producer own the cinema hall or something? As far as I know they don’t have the ability to stop people going the cinema. Were did he go to see it?
Do you know if their is another screening? I want you to try to get in again, but with a more expansive guest list. What follows is my sample posse.
Get all four horsemen- Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, & Hitchens. Then round up more skeptics- Shermer, Randi, Penn, & Teller. Check Amazon to find some rationalist authors. Throw some ScienceBloggers in for good measure. I just want to see the heads of the Expelled people asplode.
Feel free to add to that if you wish.
As funny as this is, I’m disturbed that there was a screening of this in my city.
So now we are arguing over the definition of the word “crashed” and whether it was a “by invitation only” event?
Don’t forget to see Dawkins and Myers clips from the movie here:
http://forerunner.com/blog
It’s by invitation only! You are all invited!
Bravo PZ. That was the best laugh I had in three days.
Thanks!
Go folks! if we try hard we can make it to the 1000 comments! :P
Er… Jay? I know YouTube is hard, but you realize that you can’t show embedded video of friends-only videos? Trying to emulate the movie’s “publicity” style on YouTube? =)
So now we are arguing over the definition of the word “crashed” and whether it was a “by invitation only” event?
I can’t help it if creationist morons used those phrases. :-D PZ and RD were “invited” same as anyone else.
Well, that would require them to be allowed on school grounds in the first place…
A little hyperbole, but what is the difference between banning them from school grounds and banning their freedom to share their ideas from school grounds? I see no difference.
“Enjoy the smug satisfaction in knowing that you’re pretty much behaving exactly like the fundamentalists that got you so angry in the first place.”
And they’re still shocked that we keep calling them idiots. Awesome.
Oh, my. Is William Walleye at it again?
I am well satiated with this delicious main course of irony. However, I want dessert now. I am expecting an airy, vacuous mouse covered with masses of imitation whipped cream, topped with a red, red, red, wrinkled sour cherry of shame–better known as some frantic whizzing-of-wheels-stuck-in-sand media spin by the IDiots.
Well, yes. We’re doing so because you suggested that PZ was trespassing at a private function to which he was not invited. Since this is not in fact true, others corrected you. Why do you find this surprising?
1) Preventing people from teaching ID in science class is not the same as ‘banning them from school grounds.’
2) Teaching one’s ideas in science class is a merit-based privilege, not a right. ID proponents have failed to earn that privilege, but ask for special treatment anyway.
Creationists are beyond any chance of rational discourse about the evidence behind the theory of evolution and are incapable of participating in anything but soundbites where no real meat can be presented to show the vacuousness of their position.
Had Mr. Stein or any creationist any real balls they would sit down for a real discussion of science in a national forum where each side gives at least a 2 hour presentation of the science with only people that are on their side presenting the evidence that they have to offer.
This could be presented in separate divisions wherein each side refers only to the science they have at hand and with no reference to the other sides position or people.
Following this half hour segments could be put together in an ongoing manner to rebut one another if there was anything left to rebut. So any creationists out there that are willing to talk to people like Ben Stein about actually making a case or do you need to remain in the shadows full of fear at actual science?
#855, Jay Rogers’ blog:
“Check back for my random thoughts on eschatology, world missions, God’s Law and Society, theonomy, Christian Reconstruction, pro-life activism, evangelism testimonies, Neo-Puritan theology and social theory, revival and spiritual awakening, church history, and so on.”
I’d rather watch paint dry.
That is too funny. Those poor people, they don’t know which end is their ass and which is their face. You must have felt pretty ballin’ in front of Dawkins though. You know, I bet he was just a little jealous. In fact, that’s just a little embarrassing for him. On the other hand, what better person to screen the movie than Richard Dawkins?
I love your blog, by the way. Congratulations!
Jay:
No. We’re arguing, not definitions, but the dishonest use of both phrases by the organizers of the event and by the many shameless liars who claim that an event accessible to anyone who pre-registers for admission can possibly be crashed by someone who pre-registered for admission as instructed by the organizers of the event.
If you persist in misunderstanding this simple distinction, then you have joined the ranks or the shameless liars. At this point, it’s up to you. Please make the right choice.
Grover #760
If your people have to resort to strong arm tactics in order to exclude one of the participants in the documentary from watching its screening then the whole ID movement deserves the ridicule it gets.
That Richard Dawkins got through IS the funniest thing that I have heard in a long, long time.
Ruppert #763
What are these ‘illegal things’ that you mention? Besides I see little sign of any of us whining, quit the reverse.
As for the ‘movie’, as you quaintly call it, having the facts then if they did have the facts when making this documentary then why did they not base it upon any such facts instead of creating a story of chronological impossibility? The answers to that question will inform you as to why the Dover case was lost by the IDiots.
I have still yet to see an answer to the question of why they wouldn’t want someone who is in the movie to see it let alone why they wouldn’t want anyone to see it.
I know it’s release is still a ways off but you’d think if they were confident in their material they’d be ok with critics.
Nope. Because they can’t send a movie down the memory hole after it’s been let out.
As much as I’d love to see the Four Horsemen, Penn and Teller, Shermer, and Myers crash the film, I actually think it would be counterproductive.
If one guy goes to see it and they block him, it is because they see him as a threat. But if a multitude gathered outside, that would just give the movie free publicity a la “See the atheists trying to censor us!”. It would just give the semblance of legitimacy.
What this movie needs is more of what PZ did. Laugh about it. And that’s pretty much all we really have to do.
Let’s face it: the point the movie makes consists of repeatedly insinuating that those who disagree with their point of view are Nazis, and the supporting evidence consists of creative edits of interviews with respectable scientists–edits that make these scientists seem to say things no self-respecting human being would ever say.
They have also set up some lofty ideal as the theme of the movie–that all points of view should be argued in the classroom–which they repeatedly contradict by publicly demonizing scientists that happen to be atheists, and (as we have seen with PZ) excluding all dissenters and conscientious objectors from the conversation.
No, I don’t think there’s any need for a big to-do about the movie. It is intelligently designed, after all. And it’s designed well enough to expose perfectly the lack of intelligence behind its design.
I’m more than content to laugh about this movie and watch the fireworks, kind of like Nero fiddling while Rome burned.
Real Time With Bill Maher
Fri, Mar 21
Actor Jon Hamm; Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.); author P.J. O’Rourke; biologist Richard Dawkins.
grrrrrrr
it’s = its
Hilarious.
But I am also jealous you were with Richard Dawkins, my hero. And it brought back bad memories. Mum and dad went on a tour (I think in Egypt)a few years ago. They made friends with a “lovely couple” who they invited to come and stay next time they were in Australia. He was clever, they said, some sort of professor. But, mum said, I don’t know what went wrong. I was talking to him about Numerology and he seemed a bit cross about it. Geez I was only making conversation – with him being a scientist and all I thought he might be interested in talking about numbers. Anyway, I doubt he’ll be coming now. I don’t know if you ever heard of him: Richard Dawkins.
Well, she gave birth to me. I can hardly hold a grudge for life. But say hi to Richard for me and tell him that I have talked mum out of numerology since then. So can he make friends with my mum again?
They don’t even have to be teaching it in science class. ID is essentially banned from being openly discussed anywhere on campus.
So funny to see this thread still going strong. Even funnier (much funnier) are the clowns behind this movie. I’m sure they meant to throw PZ out all along and then cower in the corner (you know, like Smeagol did to Sam on the mountaintop) and cry, “Stops him! He’s a meanie! He wants to hurts us!” And their Christian base will buy it, too, because they love shit like that.
They have only one card to play–the paranoia card. And it’s not even a strategy; it’s a reflex! LOL!
Jason- they’re going to claim we censor them anyway, so why not have fun while we’re at it?
Um way to throw the overly emotional drama in there. Oh and wrong.
Please give me the policy showing that it can not be discussed on campuses… anywhere.
GO ahead.
Paul:
Spectacular! I just hope you didn’t injure anything from laughing so hard.
Folks who wanted a lawsuit:
Seriously what good do you think that would do, even if Paul were to win? It’d be civil case, and he’d be looking at getting his ‘damages’ back. What, exactly, are his ‘damages’? That he didn’t get in to see a terrible movie that he didn’t have to pay for in the first place? Oh the trauma. Pain and suffering of being discriminated against? What dollar value do you think would be set for that?
Now if it were me who’d been barred, it might make some sense. Since I’m of no reknown, the suit would bring the perfidy to light, even if I didn’t get more than my lawyer’s fees back.
As it is, the ‘Expelled’ folks actions _did_ get brought to light, rapidly and widely. They speedily demonstrated themselves to be:
hypocrites
liars
absurd
The last is particularly valuable. In addition to the Voltaire quote above regarding his prayer, there’s the comment “Sometimes the best argument is a belly laugh.”
This is a belly laugh for anybody not already committed to support the movie, one that can readily be shared by the folks in the ‘middle’ who tend to buy the ‘teach both sides’ arguments. A lawsuit would only distract.
The whole thing is funny, indeed, and I think PZ did the right thing by not resisting. It shows clearly how noble we atheists can be, when we acknowledge with a smile the stupidity of the creationists. By just saying “OK, so you don’t want me here, I’ll leave”, PZ made his point clearly without getting involved in annoying, uncertain legal matters. A noble gesture, as I said.
I started reading this thread last night when there were already 250 comments. After I was done with them, I refreshed and got 400. So I kept reading, refreshed, and found the count was at 444. Decided to go to bed. And now there are 804 comments… woh. Impressive.
As I said on Richard Dawkins’ web sight, your tactic deserves a name.
I suggest Turning the Other Geek.
Yes, you’re right! Just like it’s banned from being openly discussed anywhere on the internet!
*eyeroll*
ID is not taught as a science because it’s not a science. People are free to discuss it as much as they like.
Next strawman?
Oh, so ID can be taught and discussed on campuses? So then why isn’t it?
Re: #883
Because there is no content?
Because it is all a lie, and a scam, as has been discussed on campus and off for years now?
no hugs for thugs,
Shirley Knott
Isn’t Dawkins working on his new book “Only a Theory” right now? If he hasn’t finished it yet, I’m sure we’ll see something about this in there.
But what a stinking bunch of festering trash these IDiots are!
Teach the controversy?
Let us have a fair say in your science class, but when one of your scientists wants to come see a movie in which he’s taking part, we’ll get some thug to toss him out?
Just how utterly and hopelessly pathetic can these people become? I guess there are no limits now.
The story didn’t strike me as that funny but reading everyone’s comments here definitely brought out the giggles! Thanks for an amazing blog, PZ.
There are plenty of scientists who consider ID to be science. Who are you to say they’re wrong? And same question to you as above: if people are free to discuss ID as much as they like, then why isn’t it?
Oh, so ID can be taught and discussed on campuses? So then why isn’t it?
Because it’s stupid.
That was hilarious! Incredible!
“There are plenty of scientists who consider ID to be science. Who are you to say they’re wrong?”
It’s not a falsifiable hypothesis. Therefore it cannot be scientifically supported. Why can’t you knuckle-draggers understand this?
BTW, PZ, I haven’t laughed like this since the Pivar incident. FREE PZ! Ben Stein is a crackpot!
Oh, the irony on the Expelled blog:
“It’s (EXPELLED) going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant — which means they’re going to draw in about 90% of the American market.”
-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers, on a film he has not yet seen.
(and we won’t let him see)
I think you can probably answer your own question.
And “reasoning” like that is why there is a movie like “Expelled.” Thank you both for your honest responses.
hahaha That was funny. Those creationists are really stupid.
We’re arguing, not definitions, but the dishonest use of both phrases by the organizers of the event and by the many shameless liars who claim that an event accessible to anyone who pre-registers for admission can possibly be crashed by someone who pre-registered for admission as instructed by the organizers of the event.
Yes. Notice how the IDiots stress the fact that Myers and Dawkins “had no ticket and were not invited”, while conveniently omitting the fact that no one needed a ticket nor an invitation. Just a pre-registration on the website which PZ did for himself and Dawkins. This way they can claim to be absolutely truthful. Ever hear of “sin of omission”?
dsmvwld, Oh, so ID can be taught and discussed on campuses? So then why isn’t it?
Because ID may be summed up as GODDIDIT. ID’s magic, not science. It’s for the closed minds infected by superstition.
No there is the movie Expelled because you types are famous for your persecution complexes. There is no persecution here it’s about science and output.
There is no scientific output from the Cdesign proponentsist crowd. Period. The only output is a marketing campaign and this is exactly that.
Oh wait… now it’s “taught and discussed” … a moment ago it was “discussed.” Which is it?
Oh, now it’s about me? LOL
Define “plenty.” More than two? Yes, but the number of scientists who disagree is – to put it mildly – overwhelming. However, the fact that ID is not considered to be a science is not because it has failed to win a populartity contest, it’s because it has failed to qualify as a science by any meaningful set of criteria.
Here’s a clue for you, dsm: PZ Myers discusses ID in his classes EVERY YEAR. And his students discuss it back. And they all discuss and have a grand old time. That alone brings the lie to your grandiose claims of widespread censorship. Hell, just talking about ID with your fellow students on the campus quad during lunchtime and not being dragged away by security would bring the lie to the statement you made in comment #875.
But feel free to move the goalposts if you wish.
You may be discomfited to learn that private security and private military is a fast growing sector in the US with Haliburton and Blackwater in the lead, that latter being the progeny of Christian fundamentalist Erik Prince.
It does not take much intelligence to fathom where some of the money that supports the ID lobby and also its security apparatus comes from.
There are plenty of scientists who consider ID to be science.
Biologists? People who actually work in the field?
Your statement is as truthful as the other crap you guys say:
There’s a big debate–no there isn’t.
The theory is in danger–no it isn’t.
Evolution contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics–no it doesn’t.
There are no transitional fossils—yes there are.
Radiocarbon dating has been proven to be useless–no it hasn’t
Etc. etc. etc.
“Oh, so ID can be taught and discussed on campuses? So then why isn’t it?”
Because it’s not science (The “theory” is not falsifiable, so it can be proven neither right nor wrong), that there is no evidence that supports it that cannot be explained with the existing theory, because concepts that “prove” it do not stand up unless you start with accepting ID as true (which is a cyclical argument, a failure in logic), and because it opens the door for whatever instructor teaches it to use it as a soapbox to push his or her own religious beliefs on the students.
Aside from that, the understandings that we have gained through testing and using the theory of evolution have brought us great benefits and helped us to understand ourselves and our world better. But ID doesn’t do that. It doesn’t grant that possibility of asking more questions; anything unexplained is easily (and lazily) slopped down as “goddidit”, effectively nullifying the whole concept of education.
ID rewards maintaining mystery rather than the noble pursuit of seeking answers. The results of ID in classrooms will not lead to breakthroughs in science, in medicine, or even in the humanities. In fact, the humanities suffer greatest from ID because it denies the most basic truths about our origins and the makeup of our bodies and therefore our minds.
This is an aside, but please think about the religious groups that insist that clinical depression or disease can be “prayed away”. By cutting the diseases of the mind and body from their biological and chemical origins, these groups do not treat the actual origins of the pain and prolong the patient’s suffering. And then they blame the suffering on the patient’s lack of faith. That is not helping anyone, but I’ll finish up my point:
That is why ID is not taught on campuses. There’s nothing preventing its discussion, and in fact it is discussed often by instructors, students, and overzealous washed-out actors. But the fact is that ID is an idea without evidence, without falsifiability, and without any real benefit to humanity–in short, it is not taught because it is an idea with no redeeming qualities.
I don’t understand the logic of them expelling you. You’ll undoubtedly rip it a good one in a month, why delay the inevitable?
Rev. BigDumbChimp said:
I hope that I am wrong, and I am not sure if it’s a problem, anyway, but I am starting to suspect that it may have something to do with that account of the events from Stuart Blessman. He had sent that to the movie review site – which seems to be an off-shoot of the “Christian Today” site – within an hour of the end of the movie, perhaps less.
That dishonest account, which he has totally contradicted, as I have shown earlier in this thread, is now spreading around various Christian sites, including the Expelled site. To Christians, it seems, that has become the definitive account of what happened (and it obviously portrays PZ in a bad light).
I doubt that PZ will care, but it all seems to be rather convenient, as well as predictable.
Hmmm, no cop’s name, no video, no witnesses… And we should believe this story because…?
Color me skeptical…
There is no greater truth than this.
Any theory or belief which does not stand criticism is obviously unworthy of criticism.
Choose religion, global warming, gravity or how to make creme brulee. If its proponents say it cannot be examined, argued, dissected or reviewed it is because they know it is flawed.
This should be the motto of all scientist or all who love thought.
“QUESTION EVERYTHING”
Hilarious!!
I only wish they HAD gone in with flashlights and fetched out Dr. Dawkins. No disrespect, PZ, but he is a bit more famous than you and that might have gotten coverage on the cable news shows (unless some Democrat somewhere was having the sex.)
Please hurry up with the book, PZ! Think of how this could boost your sales!
I don’t usually post on blogs unless I’ve got something to say, but in this case I’ll make an exception if only to add to the number of posts saying:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
#886: “There are plenty of scientists who consider ID to be science.”
It’s a thought experiment. Nothing more. Propagated by an organization funded principally by ONE man who wants to shove his ignorance down our throats.
I.D.’s failings have been pointed out in court, in the classroom, in books, and in the blogosphere. Repeatedly.
Examine the facts, will you, and stop making meaningless assertions.
@ 855:
Unless the clip to which you refer is the “Sorry, but this video is no longer available” YouTube featured at the top of your blog, you’re lying.
@ 853:
My thought was to have everyone sign up with their own names, but show up with PZ masks on.
@ EC:
You’re annoying and nonsensical. Please stop using our pixels and go away.
Whoops… Ignore the above, I got ninja’d x50.
Yeah! And if it’s not, then as much as people like, why not discuss them does it? Answer that one!
Actually, ID is discussed all the time in college courses, and in biology courses as well as in philosophy and, no doubt, religion courses. It’s used mostly as an example, in trying to teach people how to “think like a scientist” by exposing them to the actual process, of how not to do it. It’s a widely used bad example of fake science.
And while it’s true that there are a few trained scientists who also espouse beliefs in ID, they do not espouse ID for scientific reasons but for other reasons, usually at base religious.
dsmvwld #883 wrote:
ID cannot be taught as a valid or even “competing” science theory in the classroom because it has not been properly formed, researched, or supported according to the criteria of ordinary science. In this sense, it is on the same level as astrology. Astrology doesn’t have the evidence behind it. So if a college or university tried to teach astrology as a legitimate science, an “alternative view” of astronomy, they would lose credibility. Same for sponsoring pro-astrology speakers, as part of a science emporium.
But you can have astrology discussed in history or philosophy class. You can have astrology clubs. You can have astrology talked about in the cafeteria and dorms.
Don’t conflate being “taught in the classroom” with “being discussed on campuses.” You seem to imply that students are being thrown out of the student union cafe if anyone ‘overhears’ them.
If its proponents say it cannot be examined, argued, dissected or reviewed it is because they know it is flawed.
Creationism/intelligent design has been all those things–that is the reason it is not taught as science.
Since when, in a democratic nation, must one “sign in and show ID” to watch a movie?
Oh, so ID can be taught and discussed on campuses? So then why isn’t it?
I guess there is no point in getting you to prove that it isn’t allowed to be *discussed*, is there?
ID theory isn’t taught in science class because – and this is the big secret that the ID proponents don’t tell you – there is NO SUCH THEORY. They have lots of proponents, lawyers, and lobbyists, but few if any researchers or theorists. Try to get someone to state the theory of ID, and it will almost invariably be some variation of “X is so complex I don’t see how it could have evolved”.
A few have tried to go farther and prove that X (the bacterial flagellum or whatever) couldn’t have evolved. So far, such attempts have failed, but that is beside the point. Because even if it succeeded, all it would accomplish is to disprove some facet of *evolution*. ID is all about *evolution*, holes in evolution, “strengths and weaknesses of evolution”, alternative to evolution. It is not a theory in its own right. Without evolution, there is no ID.
That’s not to say that there couldn’t be such a theory. But nobody seems to be putting any effort into developing one.
Color me skeptical…
Because PZ would skip the movie, in which he stars, to harass a cop and get thrown out. Have you looked at the picture of the man? No offense PZ, but he’s a balding, overweight academic who is a professor at a state University.
Somehow, I don’t see him as the trouble type.
Oh, how I laughed!
#840 Sums it up perfectly.
Hmm…They refuse to release the entirety of the interviews but they give DVD’s of selected clips to yahoos like you.
As to “crashed,” you know full well that **signing up on a public website under your real name and being sent a confirmation email** cannot possibly be considered crashing an invitation only event. That is not crashing and the event was not “invitation only.”
@ 903:
There are bloggers on both sides of this debate posting about the farce PZ experienced. The truth of the matter is not open to debate. Unfortunately, truth doesn’t really seem to faze some people…
It happened. The ID contingent have egg on their faces and are wildly prevaricating to minimize the damage. Color you foolish.
PZ! You can’t hide the truth!
“The Truth”
Jason Black @ 900: Excellent explanation. Of course it has to be explained again and again and never seems to sink in.
“Never underestimate the power of human stupidity” – Heinlein
The goons of Expelled might offer advice on how to deal with reason to the People’s Republic of China… because propaganda directed towards Tibet’s peace movement almost always makes them appear more ridiculous and insane.
http://www.dalailama.com/news.htm
Sorry, I can’t find quite the right color in my paintbox.
There were witnessess. Some have posted right here on this thread, and you’ll fine links to other accounts also posted here.
I guess “Glancing at something and forming an opinion without doing even a trivial amount of research or investigation” is what passes for skepticism these days.
Good work, PZ! I’m looking forward to Richard Dawkins comments.
And the comments of the creos here are so clueless – no surprise there.
You’ve successfully laughed me into tears PZ.
Hi–I’m not an attorney, but if you want to pursue legal action against the theater, or the producer — think of the PR! — I’d be happy to help out from here in California. I can make phone calls, etc, email, etc…
Awesome. Hilarious. Thank you for this, PZ.
I mean, I know the Mall of America is private property, etc., and so is the movie theater, etc., but again, think of the PR!
It’s really no shock that a lie from the Cdesign proponentsists camp is what is being spread. It’s par for the course for them.
Poor baby Jesus. Crying by himself over in the corner.
Can you tell me a basic book that would help me get started on evolution? Just curious. Thanks.
Will some please feed Baby Jesus or change his diaper. Whatever needs to be done. Damn but the screaming is annoying!
Creationism and Intelligent Design is actually a complex, long-duration plot by Al Qaeda designed to reduce the ability of Americans to think clearly and logically in accordance with the scientific method. When ID becomes paramount in all schools, the American people will be even more ignorant than they are already and will be easy meat for takeover by fundamentalism to their detriment and enslavement, to the reduction of American power, status and influence throughout the world, to the fear and incredulity of the America’s friends and the glee and triumph of her enemies.
Can you tell me a basic book that would help me get started on evolution? Just curious. Thanks.
Posted by: Hey guys | March 21, 2008 12:59 PM
YES! THE BIBLE!
heh heh….or maybe go here
http://www.kidshealth.org/kid/grow/
Berkeley has a very nice introductory website: Understanding Evolution.
(heading for 1,000 comments)
This has to be the latest I’ve ever showed up to a party. It would have been sooner, but it’s taken me nearly twenty minutes to stop laughing. Best creationist own-goal since Behe at the Dover trial.
“There is a rich, deep kind of irony that must be shared. I’m blogging this from the Apple store in the Mall of America…”
A lesser irony is the underlying OS that PZ was using to write this entry:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/index.html
Try this
Evolution: The Triumph of an idea
UNBELIEVABLE! No really I don’t believe you. You are trying to tell us that you are important enough to the cause that a publicly funded police officer would keep you out of a public theater where you were going to be embarassed by your own words in a movie. Unbelieveable. I like the idea of your dungeon so that your readers only view comments that are praising or supportive. Makes your site look like everyone agrees with you. Common tactic with folks who are nervous about their position.
They are so “clever”. Very funny situation!
You should have insisted they arrest you. They notability would have been well worth a night in the slammer.
The “theory” is not falsifiable, so it can be proven neither right nor wrong
Well actually the basis for ID was Natural Theology, which did have a central falsifiable aspect to it – and a sound version of ID should inherit that falsifiable aspect.
The trouble is that the falsifiable bit basically goes like this; if you find a watch in the road, you would surmise that it was made by somebody, who sat down and decided he wanted to make a watch, and who then maybe sold it to someone, who in turn dropped the watch there – all because there’s no mechanism by which something as complex as a watch could otherwise exist.
So if you pick up a creature, an ant, a cat, a pygmy elephant, it is safe to say that something must have designed it as well because there’s no mechanism other than by intelligent design by which such a complex thing could possibly exist.
So to falsify natural theology, all you have to do is posit a mechanism by which such a complex a thing as a cat, an ant or a pygmy elephant could exist without bringing god into…
Which is why natural evolution replaced natural theology when darwin whipped it out, and why ID shouldn’t be taught in schools outside of a “history of the sciences” class, where it’d fit in between phlogiston and the luminous aether.
The troubling fact that ID also has the side effect of completely retarding scientific progress (because when faced with a question about how a biological mechanism occurs, in say microbiology, “god did it” is quite possibly the least helpful postulate imaginable) is just an added reason not to treat it like a currently valid theory.
Of course Evolutionary Psychology has a habit of going to the extreme in the opposite direction and positing that everything, including literary critcism, can be improved by just declaring that whatever the subject is, it must, some way and some how, be the result of biological evolution.
Even when Occam’s Razor would suggest otherwise and commonsense bursts into tears in despair at the thought.
You obviously don’t come here often.
@Snog…
“UNBELIEVABLE!”
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Gary B. @498, “Ferrous, you’ve never ROTFLMAO or LOL at t.o.?”
[Captain Corcoran vox]
Hardly ever!
[/ccv]
A quick Google search shows that this is a close as I have come: http://tinyurl.com/24yy6y
Richard Dawkins gives Expelled: “Two opposable thumbs down”.
UNBELIEVABLE!
And the laughs just keep coming!
I believe that you have been denied a public accommodation due to your “religious beliefs” or lack thereof.
Check with the state’s Human Rights agency. I’d be pretty certain that excluding you for you lack of religious belief is a pretty clean action.
I know that in Missouri a Chinese restaurant that excluded two deaf individuals and their friend (who used ASL to communicate) from the restaurant because of their disability had a very unpleasant day in court.
The Revised Statutes of Missouri, Chapter 213 state:
213.065. 1. All persons within the jurisdiction of the state of Missouri are free and equal and shall be entitled to the full and equal use and enjoyment within this state of any place of public accommodation, as hereinafter defined, without discrimination or segregation on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, ancestry, or disability.
2. It is an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from or deny any other person, or to attempt to refuse, withhold from or deny any other person, any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, services, or privileges made available in any place of public accommodation, as defined in section 213.010 and this section, or to segregate or discriminate against any such person in the use thereof on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, ancestry, or disability.
3. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a private club, a place of accommodation owned by or operated on behalf of a religious corporation, association or society, or other establishment which is not in fact open to the public, unless the facilities of such establishments are made available to the customers or patrons of a place of public accommodation as defined in section 213.010 and this section.
I am certain that the theater violated a similar statute – and, they may well have violated the terms of their leasehold with the Mall of America. Theaters are low-profit spaces and most busy malls are eliminating them whenever possible. This could do the trick.
Make a complaint to the state agency. Usually that statute of limitations is only 180 days to make the complaint. I costs nothing to start the administrative investigation….
Oh snap! I just saw Mr. Dawkins give a lecture at UT 3 days ago. He was asked about this movie, told us he had not seen it but had been duped into appearing in it under false pretenses. I’m so glad to hear he got in.
Snog, you aren’t paying attention.
PZ hasn’t tried to identify WHY he was expelled, although we could all suppose it is because he is an unforgiving critic of creationism/ID, extending to the IDiotic way they created this flick.
When cops are off duty doing this type of work (i.e. controlling events, traffic etc.), they are paid by the folks who need their services.
Also, the dungeon has plenty of empty space. Have you read all these comments? Then how do you get the impression “everyone” agrees with PZ? From time to time, even PZ’s sycophants disagree with him.
[crew]He’s hardly ever El-Oh-Eeeelled…[/crew]
Three cheers +1 for you! Now back to the gatecrashing. =)
“I’m not an attorney, but if you want to pursue legal action against the theater, or the producer — think of the PR!”
We have all the PR we need from this. No need to martyr PZ any further.
“You should have insisted they arrest you. They notability would have been well worth a night in the slammer.”
No. It wouldn’t.
Come on, people. This is already all over the blogosphere, and once Dawkins appears on Bill Maher, it will probably be on the TV as well. All the egg on the face that Expelled needs, and without any over-dramatic gestures or wasted police or court time.
Seriously, get some perspective.
Being in Canada, I’m not sure when I’ll be able to waste a tenner on Expelled. However, I was watching Ben Stein being interviewed by Pat Robertson, and he comes across as being a complete moron. For starters, he makes the absurd claim that “Darwinism” leads to the belief that “superior races have it as their moral duty to eliminate the lesser races”. Yeah, only if you’re a complete douchebag who slept through your high school biology classes. Perhaps the “solution” is not ID, but a bit of common sense.
He then goes on to claim that “Darwinism” doesn’t explain anything, and as an example he says “it doesn’t explain how gravity holds the planets together in their orbits” or “how thermodynamics works” or “how physics or laws of motion work”. No shit, Stein. Perhaps somebody lied to you about what evolutionary biology claims to explain and you were gullible enough to believe it, but don’t assume everybody else does not allow intelligence when it comes to understanding simple facts.
Oh, that’s brilliant!!! And by that I mean — BRILLIANT!!! ROFLMAO!
Best Thread Ever! From the whole event, the initial LOL and ROFLing, the trolls, the trolls getting a can of whoop-ass handed to them, through Cuttlefish’s best rhyme ever, Rev BigDumbChimp getting in some excellent anti-Tard, Kristine’s analysis and so on.
Never mind 1000 responses; let’s go for *1859* responses and then raise a glass to Charles D. :)
I’m not an attorney, but if you want to pursue legal action against the theater, or the producer — think of the PR!
I am thinking of it. That’s why I hope he doesn’t do it.
“I am certain that the theater violated a similar statute – and, they may well have violated the terms of their leasehold with the Mall of America. Theaters are low-profit spaces and most busy malls are eliminating them whenever possible. This could do the trick. ”
Get the whole MOVIE THEATER kicked out of the mall because of some silly incident with a private-ish screening? Like, I said, PERSPECTIVE. Get some.
SWEET ZOMBIE JESUS!!!
The hypocrisy is suffocating!!!
The whole basis of this pile of diarrhea marketed as ‘Expelled’ is the bias against teaching ID/Creationism and here we have the movie management refusing to let the ‘other side’ even see it?
If there was any doubt about how dishonest, childish, and spineless creationists are……
Not even wrong.
When I was back in college (yes, we had pterodactyls) we had one mandatory philosophy course (engineering school). It was basically a historical review, with an emphasis that we not go build death machines. You know, that design award means crap if it is for designing gas chambers for Treblinka/Buchenwald/etc.
“Snog, you aren’t paying attention.”
He’s an obvious hit-and-runner. Don’t even bother.
Damn disloyal sycophants. Can’t someone get a **proper** sycophant around here??? Now where could someone go to find people who will always reflexivly agree, even when faced with insurmountable evidence of their error? **cough**DI**cough**
“It’s (EXPELLED) going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant — which means they’re going to draw in about 90% of the American market.”
-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers, on a film he has not yet seen
—-Just saw this on the expelled website. I guess they didn’t want you to see it so they can pretend your comments don’t matter?
Congratulations! You just made it into Dawkins’s next book.
Maybe someone should ask why Stuart Blessman lied about PZ’s behavior.
[email protected]
“-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers”
Funny, I thought they interviewed PZ Myers **for the film** because he is an expert **evolutionary biologist.**
Well done, guys. All I have to add is “Project Steve” and this query:
The ID movement has never succeeded in publishing a peer-reviewed research paper in any of the journals indexed at the National Library of Medicine, which currently encompasses over SEVENTEEN MILLION citations. Amongst these citations the theory of evolution, on the other hand, has never been disproved. NLM covers all branches of the life sciences, and needless to say a paper providing evidence against evolution would receive a huge amount of attention. So what’s the problem? There are two possibilities:
1. ID is based on religious belief and supernatural causation, not science.
2. A concerted worldwide effort by research scientists, scientific journal editors, educators, and the media has unjustly prevented a single valid ID manuscript from being published.
(The NLM has a public database, too)
Dawkins mentioned the humorous story during his lecture today at the American Atheists Conference in Minneapolis. Although I could have sworn he said you were “arrested”. Were you?! Maybe he just meant “accosted”?
That is the best laugh I have had in years. Too bad you did not have more “guests” at hand!
@ Ian (908)
I could see that as a Life-of-Brian-does-Spartacus moment:
(Police officer comes up to ticket line) “Okay, Who here is PZ Myers – we’re going to throw him out.”
“I’m PZ Myers.”
“No, I’m PZ Myers!”
“I’m PZ Myers, and so’s my wife!”
#964 James F:
Forgot a third possibility (or added it to no 1) There is no empirical evidence for ID / creationism. None.
It is not for lack of trying. A good indicator of their frustrations: since ID/creationists can not produce the evidence, they have resorted to distortions, quote mining, and of course outright lying.
EYEWITNESS REPORTS CONTRADICT Meyer’s Lies:
“Other reports list tens, possibly hundreds dead from Dawkins as he ran threw the theater attacking movie goers with his teeth. Hamstrung by various hate crime laws the police had to stand by helplessly as Dawkins sated his ghoulish thirst for human blood by tearing the throats out of patrons. Dawkins then looked over the writing, broken bodies of his victims, screamed “Were is your God now?” and ran off into the night.
On report explains the mystery man who distracted police from Dawkins presence was none other than infamous atheist blogger PZ Meyers. Meyers was reportedly attempting to sell his daughter Skatje Meyers to passing strangers when police were forced to intervene.
This report is another warning to us TRUE Christians must always be on our guard since terrorist can strike at any moment. Yesterday it was a bunch of false Christians in the state no one cares about, today it might be you. Remember no one is safe when atheists are on the lose.
The only way to be safe people is to be aware and be with Jesus.”
As I predicted, the Creatins and IDiots have gone ahead and fabricated their group-savvy media whine-fest that PZ and Dawkins entered unbeknownst an uninvited to rain on the Expelled parade.
I’ll take my $1 million of Monopoly money in large bills, preferably delivered in an aluminum briefcase.
Creationists get egg on their face!
*cue evolutionary egg jokes*
/me is curious to hear what R. Dawkins thinks of all of this.
Kevin: If you’re feeling disoriented, you can always take the tinfoil hat off.
Who are these “scientists” who consider ID to be science? I want them named and shamed! (I’m in the UK so I’m not as familiar with ID proponents as you are in the US, but I’m learning…)
It just shows what a great deal of damage can be done by “fence-sitters” in this game. Any so-called “scientist” who believes such rubbish is not worthy of being called a scientist. ID IS NOT SCIENCE! I’m just a humble musician and I understand that. These trouble-makers (for that’s what they are) should reconsider their views and fall in with the rest of the Science community. Then the ID’ers will have one less plank (and a major one to boot) to hold them up.
I’m sorry! I just skimmed through the last part of that. Now I feel stupid. Mea culpa.
So, PZ, now you know how Adam feels.
(that damned Tree Of Knowledge will get you every time!)
I do like the idea of making up PZ Myers masks for future viewings. Unfortunately, the real PZ is probably wary of this ersatz martyr movement and all the (blog) publicity, but that’s the price of prominence.
One other trick I read elsewhere for would-be viewers:
Some theaters still use generic tickets for admission (I wouldn’t know, because I haven’t been to a mainstream theater in years). If so, you could consider buying a ticket for a different movie that you do support, while ‘accidentally’ walking into the one showing Expelled. Think of it as another way to Win Ben Stein’s Money.
Well, I did laugh at the punch line – that they missed kicking out Richard Dawkins. But I’m afraid I’m not as dignified as you. I didn’t find this story funny at all. I found it very upsetting.
All the producer probably had to do was tell the officer “that man is an atheist,” and then the officer’s own prejudice about what that word means for a person would do the rest. When people hear you’re an atheist, they have a reaction kind of like if they’d heard you were a pedophile or a neo-Nazi. “He’s an atheist. He must be a bad person! I’d best kick him out before he starts trouble!”
It reminds me of the days when I went to a church youth group and a police officer came to us to talk about his work busting up satanic cults and stuff. He had a whole table full of paraphernalia – animal skulls, knives and chalices, voodoo dolls, the works. And he told us about certain rock groups and what their names “really” meant (you may know some of them: Knights In Satan’s Service [KISS] Antichrist/Devil’s Children [AC/DC]. There are more). On the one hand, as a young Christian kid I found that stuff kind of scary, but even then my skepticism was tapping me on the shoulder saying “wait, the POLICE are spending official time and money on this nonsense???”
Total awesomeness. Epic Win.
And, applause for Cuttlefish. “Like a Trojan Eohippus”. Brilliant!
Expelled from Expelled: it’s all just so perfect, I had to check the calendar to make sure it wasn’t April 1st.
Eric #965 wrote:
I’m just guessing here, but if Dawkins did use the word “arrested” it could be another instance of language differences. One meaning of the word “arrested” is “stopped” — Myers was stopped at the entrance. I think this usage is more common in England.
If this is the case, expect to see creationists taking advantage of the linguistic confusion, and making claims that Richard Dawkins is lying and making false accusations about what happened when his party tried to crash the church during a private worship service.
Oh, wait. I mean when Dawkins and his friends tried to get into a public screening of a movie for which they had previously registered. My bad.
Ok, I know it’s been awhile since this comment, but I can’t resist.
It would be no different if you tried to crash an advance test screening of Indiana Jones or Star Trek except the security would have been tighter.
It would only be comparable if it was Harrison Ford who was kicked out of an advance test screening of Indiana Jones, and he was kicked out specifically because the producer didn’t want him to know that he re-cut all of the taped scenes into something called “Indiana Jones’ Diary”, a movie about how he wants to get married but can’t ever find a date. And even then it’s missing the beautiful ironic component.
PZ must just look meaner than some of the other skeptics. This is an utter amusing story, but I feel sorry for Dr. Dawkins! He had to watch the thing!
Hilarious story. (Plus, I’m doing my part to get this up to 1000 comments.)
Here’s clip of the movie on youtube with PZ and Dawkins. Hurry before the copyright cops have it removed!
#967: “Welease Wichawd Dawkins!”
This is the second idiotic Megamall security guard story I’ve heard in as many months.
The last was the security guards banning a bunch of people who planned on standing completely still for a few minutes, simultaneously.
VERY DANGEROUS!
Even more dangerous, apparently, than Richard Dawkins. snrk.
Oh, what the hell, going for 1000…
Exactly.
PZ did exactly the right thing. He wasn’t fighting for somebody’s life, or taking a stand against an unjust law; he was just standing in line to view the screening of a movie made by creationists, people who have a long track record of being the most contemptible liars.
By remaining calm and perfectly reasonable–affable and obliging even –they end up looking ridiculous. They were exposed as the hypocritical, deceitful, paranoid cowards that they are. It is a priceless object lesson, and few things could have better highlighted the difference between religious fundamentalism and science.
987! Only 13 more!
Just doing my bit to push this up to 1000. PZ, this would have been hilarious anyway,but you told the story very well. Awesome noodly set up.
Where are the ID scientists?
Back up the ass the nitwit pulled them out of.
The last was the security guards banning a bunch of people who planned on standing completely still for a few minutes, simultaneously.
Was that the ImprovEverywhere group?
Admit it, every one here is hoping to be the 1000’th comment.
This made my day. Yay PZ! Well handled!
All of these posts for an irrelevant movie and some inane oversight by a theater manager and officer?
I’ve heard funnier better stories from inanimate objects.
You all need to get out more.