My account of the affair at the Mall of America has been confirmed by none other than the movie producer, who wrote to Denyse O’Leary:
You should know that I invited Michael shermer to a screening at NRB in Nashville. He came and is writing a review for scientific American. I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more.
This is what I’ve been saying all along; I was not “unruly”, nor was I “gatecrashing”; Mathis saw me there, and on a petty, arbitrary, vindictive whim decided to have me thrown out without legitimate cause. It really is that simple. That is how creationists operate.
Hey, now Mathis repeats the same thing in IHE.
Mathis later confirmed in an e-mail that he had barred Myers from the screening. “Yes, I turned Mr. Myers away. He was not an invited guest of Premise Media. This was a private screening of an unfinished film. I could have let him in, just as I invited Michael Shermer to a screening in Nashville. Shermer is in the film as well. But, in light of Myers’ untruthful blogging about Expelled I decided it was better to have him wait until April 18 and pay to see the film. Others, notable others, were permitted to see the film. At a private screening it’s my call.
“Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expell no one.”
Unless it’s someone they don’t like.
(The IHE article isn’t very good — it’s the usual media mush that runs away from the idea of actually calling idiocy idiocy.)
Sounds lame. That dude is a newb 4 life.
PZ, you must now ensure that you do see the film but without paying, one way or another, even if its youtube.
shermer is writing a rewiew for scientific american, they are expecting a favourable review then??? creationists are a strange bunch.
For the record, I didn’t pay to see ‘A Flock of Dodos’ when it came out – they had several free screenings. Why oh why oh why would I pay for this particular exhibition of mental abberancy?
Skatje’s right about the whole “how to get in without enriching the filmmakers” question, and you, sir, should register for another free screening, if possible, under the name of “Peter Ian Smith-Staker”. It’s kind of an acronym… =) … (apologies to Simon Pegg for modifying his joke in ‘Hot Fuzz’)…
There is a torrent currently available.
Not that I’m suggesting you should download it illegally or anything, no siree!
How embarrassing for them. PZ, you may want to get a screen-cap of Denise’s page. I don’t need to tell you how many things the UD crowd have ‘disappeared’ down the memory hole.
These people want political power. They want their boys in the White House, congress, and on the Supreme Court.
I hope Joe Christian, who otherwise might be applauding Mathis et al., takes a moment to reflect upon what life might be like if abusers of opportunity and authority have real power over us.
He wants you to pay to see it, so he has you bullied by a uniformed thug, threatened with arrest in front of your family and friends? And then spreads lies about you?
But then, lying is the core of this whole thing, isn’t it? It started long before the day they first contacted you, when they decided to make this deceit-filled film. The threats and bullying are just side-effects.
Now they can’t complain about “scientists” being “expelled” because of their belief in ID. All we have to say is, “We banned Gonzales because we want him to pay to teach at ISU. Nothing more.”
They’ve set the precedent! :-)
Sad…so sad, and yet, so predictable. http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/03/they_cant_even_keep_their_own.html
Well, this is an honest response that actually makes sense. Mathis probably should have stated his reasoning immediately to avoid all the ridiculous dissembling on his behalf..as they look like lying hypocrites at this point. They could have merely been called “petty”.
Why do really religious people tend to find it so much easier to lie?
Dr Benway @ 6 said: I hope Joe Christian, who otherwise might be applauding Mathis et al., takes a moment to reflect upon what life might be like if abusers of opportunity and authority have real power over us.
While I agree with the spirit of your post, don’t abusers of opportunity and authority have real power over us now?
So Mathis writes a letter to O’Leary explaining what really happened, and then she publishes it on-line for all to see? These people have the intellectual wherewithal of Saturday morning cartoon villains. Watch out for people with obviously fake accents and mustaches.
“I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it”
what a dick!
They want *you* to pay, but not Dawkins or creationists? WTF? Sounds like his story is evolving to adapt to current conditions. :-D
shermer is writing a rewiew for scientific american, they are expecting a favourable review then???
They probably don’t expect fundies to read it.
And speaking of “A Flock of Dodos” – I saw that last year. What I thought was cool was that it *didn’t* make creationists look like dodos. Sure, they were scientifically illiterate, but they weren’t insulted or linked with Nazis or anything like that. Unlike the makers of “Expelled”, the people behind “Dodos” don’t have anything to be ashamed of, in my opinion.
Good to hear that he’s admitted it. Now all those who were speculating about the whole incident being a super-duper clever PR move can shove off, already.
(I know that this is nitpicky but… He can’t even capitalize correctly or consistently. Come on! I guess professionalism just isn’t this guy’s bag.)
Ha! Dawkins.
D’oh!
I wonder if Mark Mathis realizes that he’s coming across less as a film-maker and more as a thumb-sucking little child with these comical tantrums and demands?
I’m glad you acted the adult in your dealings with these people and their disgraceful, dishonest outfit, PZ. Mathis should be embarrassed, and I’ve no doubt, before too long, he certainly will be if he continues to carry himself in such an infantile way as this.
Ahh, I love the smell of TSIB! in the morning.
I’m sure a certain Herr Goebbels is spinning in his grave (if he has one) over this propaganda fiasco. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but still…
It’s been my understanding, from a few behind the scenes people like grips and such, most filmmakers usually give free showings of a film to anyone who contributed to the making of it, especially those who managed to get into the credits. Such people don’t necessarily get to attend a premiere, but the studio, distributor, producer or director will arrange a gratis showing, as a way of saying thanks. It’s a professional courtesy that’s been around forever.
Of course expecting “professional” and “courtesy” in this case…
Apparently the story has been picked up by AP
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortsharpscience/2008/03/are-id-proponents-being-silenced.html
Interesting how all it says about the movie is – “The movie argues that schools should teach creationism as an alternative to evolution.”
Nice framing!
Oh no! I just was on gmail and the ad bar had Expelled advertisements. First time I’ve seen ads for the movie outside the times I’ve actually been looking for info on the movie. I’m curious if my easter jokes about Jesus and Kanye West are what tipped of the google ad machine.
There is a torrent currently available.
Be careful. It seems that any “torrents” are actually virus-laden frauds. I have seen three warnings online from users. Check the “health” status before you download anything. I have not seen any valid copy of “Expelled” online yet.
So Mathis writes a letter to O’Leary explaining what really happened, and then she publishes it on-line for all to see?
Well, she has a history of spilling the beans, so inartfully that some (including me) have wondered if she’s a deep-cover troll. I have concluded that she is a deeply clueless nitwit.
Mathis is sure you’re a liar, since you’re quoting him, and he knows what he is spewing…
While reading that AP article I started thinking maybe Mathis is actually the deep cover troll and out to destroy ID by making such a ridiculously incompetent film (and PR blunders) purportedly in support of it.
.
.
.
nahh!
…I want [PZ] to pay to see it. Nothing more.
Hmmmm…reeks of after-the-fact spin doctoring to me. Just sayin.
That’s fine. He’s simply sounding petty and vindictive, like he is. Obviously, whatever PZ might (or might not) pay to see it is nothing to a sack of sick like Mathis, but if Mark wants to show what an asshole he is, I won’t stand in his way.
Way to go, Mathis, you avoided PZ’s review of your insipid nonsense, got Dawkins’, and you got your expulsion story as well. The story of where scientists were not expelling ID, but ID was expelling science. Because, of course, ID can’t bear the scrutiny of science. Not exactly the line that Expelled wishes to sell, rather the truth they don’t want to get out. These IDiots are always too angry, evil, and stupid, though, even to adhere to the particular lie they’re espousing at a given time.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
#11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pious_fraud
What I really don’t like about the CHE story is not especially its mindless “balance”, but that it suggests that ID is actually not allowed to be discussed in classes. I doubt that anyone has documented a single instance where a student has brought up ID or creationism, and the teacher has refused to discuss it at all (I’m not saying it never happens, but I suspect it occurs too rarely for it to have been documented).
They won’t discuss for very long something as barren of evidence, science method, or even any interesting ideas, as ID happens to be, I’d estimate. But not discuss it at all? Hey, class sessions are supposed to address the impediments to learning, and as such, ID is well worth a few minutes of discussion.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
After having followed this for the last four days, here’s my impression about the whole affair:
cdesignpropIMPLOSIONonentsists.
Indeed, “nahh!” captures it pretty well. This guy and all those involved seem to be the real deal even if it’s hard to accept that anyone can be that degenerate.
Oh, apropos “stupid”:
It is written:
“But ye shall offer the burnt offering for a sweet savour unto the LORD; two young bullocks, one ram, seven lambs of the first year;” (Numbers 28:27)
Now that the burning of dead animals on an altar fell out of fashion a long time ago it seems that the cdesignproponentsists have found an adequate ersatz: they’re quite literally stuck on burning stupid.
The only question is if it’s also “a sweet savour onto the Lord”.
Well, it appears that’s not the case and HE chose to answer Voltair’s only prayer instead ;)
Doesn’t that last line about not expelling anyone contradict the entire rest of the message?
“Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expell no one.”
Still trying to stick to his talking points despite being caught with his pants down. He’s gunning hard for Wanker of the Year.
“but that it suggests that ID is actually not allowed to be discussed in classes. ”
Ugh, this is the biggest damn lie of all, and any journalist sloppy enough to perpetuate it should be fired.
“I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more.”
as shady as this is………..i still don’t beleive it but, Mark has proven to be an honest man so we should take him at his word:)
Wouldn’t it have been easier for him to just ask PZ for $7.50?
A New Scientist reporter asks Mathis some difficult questions.
I like his admission that the film’s equation of ID with religion “makes them uncomfortable,” referring to the IDiots who have spent so much effort denying the connection.
Glen D
It is of course clear why Mathis would want to prevent PZ from seeing the movie before the premiere, while inviting Shermer. PZ would pen a review so scathing it would leave it gasping for air. Whereas…, well I am personally going to ask Shermer this evening what he thought of it, and why he think Mathis would invite him to the screening, and not PZ.
It is of course clear why Mathis would want to prevent PZ from seeing the movie before the premiere, while inviting Shermer. PZ would pen a review so scathing it would leave it gasping for air. Whereas…, well I am personally going to ask Shermer this evening what he thought of it, and why he think Mathis would invite him to the screening, and not PZ.
Well, apparently you are “no one,” PZ, since “we expell [sic] no one.” “I turned Myers away … we expell no one.” Does Mathis even read the e-mails he writes?
By the way, please note this correction. The article you cite is from Inside Higher Ed (IHE), not the Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE).
But, in light of Myers’ untruthful blogging about Expelled
What did you blog that was untrue about Expelled? All this does is make them/Mathis look even more childish.
Drat!
Wrong link – sorry.
Here is the link to the AP story
http://www.fortmilltimes.com/124/story/109698.html
That bears repeating.
.
.
.
.
Obviously not. Irony-meters were checked at the entrance together with cameras and cell-phones.
PZ – I think you should register for another screening under the name The Right Honorable Lord P. Seal…
I’ve seen Shermer’s review — I can’t say much about it, since it hasn’t been published yet, but if Mathis expects a friendly, supportive, conciliatory review…he has miscalculated.
So, in trying to spin it away from any conspiracy theory-ish explanation that he didn’t want the evilness of PZ to trash the showing, he decides that the best counter is… to proudly claim he was acting like a petulant 4 year-old. Yeah, that’ll help.
Carlie – heh. It does seem, though, according to other commenters whose opportunities to register for other screenings have suddenly and mysteriously dried up, that Mr. Mathis has taken his ball and gone home.
(Sigh. If only that were true.)
“Unlike the Darwinist establishment, we expell no one.”
I’m so glad my cup was only in my hand, and hadn’t made it to my mouth yet.
Professor Myers,
I’ve recently discovered your blog after Andrew Sullivan linked to the Expelled fracas the other day. I’m loving it so far. As a fan of Professor Dawkins, I respect and admire both of your efforts to keep after the psycho-dummies of the Christianist world. May they be eternally (har!) disappointed in their failed efforts to convert everyone. Best regards.
At least he’s FINALLY being honest. True enough it’s far too late to help at all.
Oh, I doubt that he expected Shermer to write a friendly review, but he perhaps hoped that he would write a less widely-read review. Plus now he can hold up Shermer to counterbalance his expelling of Myers. He’s still calculating.
Glad to hear it. Can’t wait to read Shermer’s review. Yet, somehow I don’t think Mathis would expect Shermer’s review to be any less widely read than PZ’s, given that Shermer will publish in SciAm. Having already invited Shermer in Nashville, perhaps Mathis thought one atheist review would be enough?
Glad to hear it. Can’t wait to read Shermer’s review. Yet, somehow I don’t think Mathis would expect Shermer’s review to be any less widely read than PZ’s, given that Shermer will publish in SciAm. Having already invited Shermer in Nashville, perhaps Mathis thought one atheist review would be enough?
If his story is true, why didn’t he refuse PZ’s initial request for admission when PZ signed up on the web site?
@#50, #51:
Leaving aside the whole “Published in Scientific American” bit, I’m sure we can rely on PZed to point his readership at the other guy’s review, thus delivering the worst of both worlds for the idiots.
Just wanted to say that it’s refreshing to see Mathis live up to his nick.(Ass Prod)
I’m not sure if the link has been posted, but I found this to be a very entertaining review of the movie:
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortsharpscience/2008/03/are-id-proponents-being-silenced.html
There is a torrent currently available.
All the torrents I’ve seen so far are fakes.
I expect they are going to used the “Reviewed By Scientific American” as a pseudo-endorsement and then try and rely on the fact that SA is a monthly magazine and Expelledwill have a 3-day run to prevent anyone from being influenced by the review, when it comes out in May or June. But SA has a blog.
Mathis doesn’t like you, PZ. And I’m sure your feelings are so hurt. In retrospect, Mathis looks like a big wuss. If he wasn’t, he could have simply told you to leave himself instead of getting the hired help to do it.
Actually I think he was more scared of you than Dawkins. I think the British are taken aback at first by our crazies. I guess Dawkins was lucky he got out of there before they got too out-of-hand. I’m sure he had to deal with a fair amount of vitriol from some of the dweebs.
They’ll find the sentence most appropriate for quotemining and slap it above the newspaper ads for the single weekend people will have a chance to pay to see the film. For example, if Dawkins’ account of the Good Friday Massacre had been published in Scientific American, it would go like this:
which would have been pulled, of course, from the complete sentence, “Cheap laughs that could only be raised in an audience of scientific ignoramuses (and here Mathis’ propaganda instincts cannot be faulted: he certainly knows his target audience). “
This is his way of getting back to you for calling him “the Ass Prod”
sorry, that should be “getting back at you”
Anyone else read the description of the Q & A period in New Scientist and think of this scene from The Simpsons?
Grampa: “All questions will be answered, all fears will be allayed, with one incontrovertible demonstration. May I have a volunteer from the audience? Yes, you sir. Now, sir, you’ve never seen me before, is that correct?”
Homer: “That is correct.”
Man: “Well then how come his face is on the bottle?”
Homer: “Um…”
Grampa: “Um…”
And Stein should be publicly flogged for his Dachau performance–I wonder how many of those audience members honestly couldn’t give two shits for all the ‘Christ-killers’ who died in Dachau. Hell, I bet there were more than a few there who’d be happy to see New York get wiped off the planet.
And just when you thought that they couldn’t get dumber…. Davescot weighs in (I won’t like there, you all know where it is).
Old Davescot never fails to bring teh stoopid.
like = link
On a tangentially related subject, it seems like the Guestbook at benstein.com is not functioning. The last entry is from March 19. I tried to post something, and though I received a message saying that my post was successful, it never showed up.
J. D.
PZ, I do have one question about this whole bruhaha. When you signed up to go to the movie using your own name, which name did you use? Did you use “PZ Meyers” or “Paul Meyers”?
J. D.
@66
I would hope he used neither, since neither are his name.
Gods, that Denyse O’Leary is bone-jarringly stupid! First she torpedoed the producer’s excuse. Then she quote-mines Prof. PZ Myers talking about something else and breaking out the rhetorical jackboots. The actual threat by PZ Myers was to “laugh out loud” and there, he was writing of seeing the film Expelled.
Truly it has been said of her, “There is no bottom to dumb.” She just keeps sinking lower and lower.
At least this acknowledges that PZ was not “kicked out” because he didn’t have a ticket. At that point, no one had tickets. He was lined up for a ticket. And a vindictive little producer of third-rate propaganda recognized his name.
PZ says “That’s how creationists operate”.
Actually it is how one person operated at one point in time. You will probably find that atheists, agnostics and scientists are welcomed with open arms into most Christian run gatherings .
I do wonder how much additional money the movie will make or not make as a result of having arbitrarily thrown PZ out. Will it have positive or negative repercussions on the ticket sales? I would wish that it be negative, but I can’t help but think that the media attention will bring in more people than might otherwise have attended–like curiosity slowing for a freeway accident. Would this not constitute a reward to Mathis and company for being vile and deceptive? Is it likely we will see more of this sort of propaganda in the future with their monetary success? This would be a reason why I have not watched even one Michael Moore movie: agree with him or not, all you do is line his pockets and make him more likely to produce another movie.
On another note, if more people see the movie, does it sway people positively or negatively? Will more people swing creationist or toward reason? Will it polarize the lines more sharply by making people less amenable to persuasion one way or the other? Will the movie help create a wall that is more difficult to cross?
I hope reasoning people see this movie and realize that they need to pay attention more keenly to what kooks all over are up to in attempting to undermine science education. Maybe a lot of school boards will be re-populated sans creationists this November as a result. Still, I can’t help but voice the concern that maybe the exact opposite will occur.
Wow, in the same statement where he “explains” why he expelled a registered attendee, he flatly states that he and his group “expell no one”? These people really do have no sense of irony…!
Then again, maybe he was hoping to squeak by on the technicality that he didn’t actually write “expel”.
Ross, I don’t doubt you. I know many Christians who are very welcoming of people of other faiths. But what PZ is saying is that creationists work this way, and he’s right, at least as far as the leaders of the movement go. A lot of folks in the rank and file just don’t know any better, and believe what they’re told by their leaders. But those who are in the forefront are mostly aware of the issues and have been exposed to the science behind evolution, and they choose to ignore it. They then deliberately misrepresent it to make their ideas look more sane by comparison.
I wouldn’t point this out specifically, but part of your post makes me think you may have missed this part: evolution is not opposed to Christianity, or religion in general. There are millions of devout Christians who accept evolution as the mechanism God chose for how to build life on this planet. If you’re under the impression that evolution is necessarily atheistic, you’ve been misled.
OK, edit post #66 in your head – Myers, not Meyers. Sorry!
J. D.
The mastodon is sinking deeper into that tar pit.
The google cache of Expelled’s RSVP page still has working links to the individual screenings that are coming up. Although most of them say they’re full, some of them appear to let you sign up still.
See? Even our in-house creationists — although still clueless enough to confuse Christianity and creationism — don’t try to spin Expelledgate. I’ll go tell Mooney & Kirshenbaum.
See? Even our in-house creationists — although still clueless enough to confuse Christianity and creationism — don’t try to spin Expelledgate. I’ll go tell Mooney & Kirshenbaum.
Wow, definitely don’t pay to see it now. Acquire it through TOTALLY LEGAL MEANS.
Also, I like the creative spelling of ‘expel’ in the article. Very… academically sound of them.
Somebody get the smelling salts for Mathis and his fellow matrons. He is going to have a case of the vapors in his shock, shock I tell you, for anyone outspoken in their support for reason and reality. I’m sure Mathis wishes he could snap his fingers and P.Z. and indeed all scientists who call Mathis’ creationism naked would just disappear.
Poor delicate little thing.
Just a question.
Will “Ass Prod” be able to find a job after this fiasco?
I’m sure the DI will have other fictions, I mean “documentaries” that they will want produced. That, or WorldNutDaily.
Maybe Davescott will ask them to produce a show on “A Day in My Life” where he singlehandedly saves the world, kinda like PeeWee’s Big Adventure.
“I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more.”
Under normal circumstances, that would be a little dickish, but what the hell. But we’re talking about a movie you were in! That is just fucking RUDE!
Kicking you out but failing to spot Richard Dawkins = fucking hilarious.
Kicking you out in the first place, having put you in the movie and thanked you in the credits = absolutely, unbelievably atrocious manners! That’s the bit that’s still got me utterly gobsmacked.
And yeah, the “Expelled” torrents are indeed all fake.
They’ll find the sentence most appropriate for quotemining and slap it above the newspaper ads for the single weekend people will have a chance to pay to see the film. For example, if Dawkins’ account of the Good Friday Massacre had been published in Scientific American, it would go like this:
“…Scientific!…” –Richard Dawkins, Scientific American
which would have been pulled, of course, from the complete sentence,
Mad Magazine once did a parody of that kind of quotemining – which reminds me: I haven’t read Mad in decades, but if it’s still around, will it do a parody of Expelled? That would be the cherry on the whipped cream on this sundae.
Kristine, I enjoyed your most recent post, for its attempt to return the focus to legitimate controversies and real questions. I’ll keep my eye out for the Lawrence Krauss video. Or is it Knauss. I forget. ;-)
Leon #71, it’s sophistry.
See, PZ wasn’t expelled, he was barred.
If you’d’ve played D&D, you’d know the difference.
Darn it John, you beat me to it. I dutifully read the whole thread to make sure nobody had picked the nit yet, and there it is in the last post. Curse my antipodean time zone!
Somehow, I suspect that they won’t be collecting your nine bucks.
Here’s an odd fact I wouldn’t have thought possible.
Mark Mathis is not primarily a film producer. His primary professional expertise and claim to fame is how to get good publicity.
He is author of “Feeding the Media Beast: An Easy Recipe for Great Publicity.”, and has his own website for his company: Mathis Media, which extols Mark as the “no-spin doctor”.
The irony is almost beyond belief; but this is the same Mark Mathis. It is confirmed by the photo at Kevin Miller’s blog, used to illustrate Mark’s frank admission of being a petulant douchebag (my paraphrase). See And now, a word from Mark Mathis.
I guess this information has been passed on somewhere here; but I had not seen it before and perhaps others have not either. Incredible.
I bet the irony of expelling a scientist from Expelled is lost on the Expelled producers. After years of cognitive dissonance, what could one more blatant hypocrisy possibly do?
And as for that phlegmatic trivial pursuit savant they hired, it’s probably completely lost on him.
Don’t worry, Al Gore, the leading climate scientist, inventor of the internet, and soon a biological wunderkind, will make THE fact filled movie about how Darwin has it all figured out, and burn those creationist heretics at the proverbial stake.
In case that doesn’t work, just stick your fingers in your ears and yell nah nah nah anytime the word God and creation is mentioned in the same sentence.
Oh, look, a creationist troll with no coherent point to make. How original.
All these years, people have been asking ‘what would Jesus do?’ If his followers are anything to go by, he’d spend most of his time making snide, unconstructive comments on the internet, apparently.
Posted by: Jesus is Lord | April 2, 2008 4:21 AM
You made me cry…please don’t lie in my name or I’ll send you to that hot place.
Pacem
P.S. Gwar is my FAVORITE band.
Not only did Al Gore not invent the internet, he never claimed that he did.
In case that doesn’t work, just stick your fingers in your ears and yell nah nah nah anytime the word God and creation is mentioned in the same sentence.
naw, we’ll leave all the willful ignorance to you lot.
thank’s