Expelled the Movie- Contributer banned from screening.

[ollkiller]

Ye might have heard about the new film Expelled. It's the new film about creationism. Anyway they banned one of the contributers from the screening. Below piece explains.

"PZ Myers, whom the producers of Expelled co-opted by fraudulent means to appear in their movie, was apparently told by security staff at a screening that the producers of the film had EXPLICITLY SPECIFIED THAT HE WAS TO BE DENIED ACCESS TO THE SCREENING, and the security staff told him that if he tried to gain entry to the screening, that police would be called and he would be ARRESTED ...

But here's the best bit ...

The same security staff ALLOWED PZ's family and an invited guest to enter the cinema and see the screening.

The identity of the invited guest? None other than RICHARD DAWKINS."

You ask a guy to appear in your film, include a thank you in the credits and then won't let him watch the film and then let in the most prominent athiest on theplanet. Made me laugh anyway. What do ye think.

[Oh Hamburgers!]

I think the Richard Dawkins issue is irrelevant, but I do agree that it seems in very poor taste to deny screening of a moving from someone who did something for them. It makes me feel like the way they used his material may be in poor taste or out of context.

I don't really know anything about the situation though, maybe there were extenuating circumstances?

[nebula]

There's an answer for this given on the Expelled website.

This was written by a college student who had been given a ticket to see the screening.

The full write-up can be found here.

But enough about the film

[ollkiller]

There's an answer for this given on the Expelled website.

This was written by a college student who had been given a ticket to see the screening.

The full write-up can be found here.

But enough about the film

[artsylady]

He can see it in theatres.

He may not have been invited because he'd been trashing it. I probably wouldn't have invited him either.

[artsylady]

Trashing it, providing the other side of the debate, pointing out where he was taken out of context, it's all the same.

I think we've heard over and over and over the 'other side of the debate'. It's preached as ultimate truth in classrooms, movies, the media etc.

You don't think Dawkins has had enough platform to reveal his side of the debate?

Here we go with 'out of context' again.

I don't remember seeing Dawkins stating this, but it wouldn't surprise me if he had made this claim.

I wonder if they'll release it in Australia? I think it would be interesting if they did to see people's reaction to it (it would undoubtedly be very different to American reception). Maybe they'll release it here as a comedy .

Right. As long as you can laugh about it, you don't have to take it seriously, right?

[artsylady]

Proponents of ID have published in peer related journals.

http://www.discovery.org/a/2640

[DozyBen]

Hey

I've just had a look through that list on origins. There are 4 peer-reviewed books, 2 peer-reviewed philosophical books and 7 articles in anthologies that were peer-reviewed.

The 7 articles were not themselves peer-reviewed. The 2 philosophical books are just just that, philsophical. One is just a current state of affairs piece and the other is about the consequences of naturalism. Of the 4 peer-reviewed books, one is a collection of non-peer-reviewed essays (!), one is a critique of origin of life studies, the third is a critique of natural selection and the fourth is an attempt to number crunch ID.

Where is the science? You support ID as an alternative scientific theory. What is the ID hypothesis? What data would support that hypothesis? How would you look for that evidence?

Think it through. If evolution is false, how do we develop the next generation of anti-biotics? This is just one example of how screwed we would be if we ditched evolution in favour of ID.

You must have heard the evolution theory many times, been told what data would support it and then probably seen for yourself the fossils that evidence the theory. How does one maths book compare to that behemoth of theory and evidence?

To be honest, it doesn't. This is why we rubbish ID. Not because any religious issues but because ID does not pass scientific scrutiny. Like Cache says, we'd take ID seriously as a scientific theory if it could show some solid science behind it but it hasn't yet.

[The Lorax]

Hey

I've just had a look through that list on origins. There are 4 peer-reviewed books, 2 peer-reviewed philosophical books and 7 articles in anthologies that were peer-reviewed.

The 7 articles were not themselves peer-reviewed. The 2 philosophical books are just just that, philsophical. One is just a current state of affairs piece and the other is about the consequences of naturalism. Of the 4 peer-reviewed books, one is a collection of non-peer-reviewed essays (!), one is a critique of origin of life studies, the third is a critique of natural selection and the fourth is an attempt to number crunch ID.

Where is the science? You support ID as an alternative scientific theory. What is the ID hypothesis? What data would support that hypothesis? How would you look for that evidence?

Think it through. If evolution is false, how do we develop the next generation of anti-biotics? This is just one example of how screwed we would be if we ditched evolution in favour of ID.

You must have heard the evolution theory many times, been told what data would support it and then probably seen for yourself the fossils that evidence the theory. How does one maths book compare to that behemoth of theory and evidence?

To be honest, it doesn't. This is why we rubbish ID. Not because any religious issues but because ID does not pass scientific scrutiny. Like Cache says, we'd take ID seriously as a scientific theory if it could show some solid science behind it but it hasn't yet.

Insightful post. I hope someone on the ID side takes a stab at your questions Ben.

What is the ID hypothesis?

What data would support that hypothesis?

How would you look for that evidence?

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

What is the ID hypothesis?

What data would support that hypothesis?

How would you look for that evidence?

I could ask the same about evolution.

What is the evolutionary hypothesis and how does it agree with the Word of God.

Where are the transitional fossils that should number in the millions and millions but can't be found?

How do you interpret the evidence? Meaning with an outlook from Gods point of view or mans?

Peace,

Dave