I have to hand it to Expelled producer Mark Mathis: he has guts. No ability to tell the truth at all, but he has guts. He showed up at the offices of Scientific American with a copy of the crockumentary in hand, and let the folks there take a look.
Needless to say, they weren’t overwhelmed by the accuracy of the movie. In fact, "savaged" wouldn’t be too strong a word to use. Check out the reviews there for a bit of schadenfreude. The interviews with John Rennie and Eugenie Scott (both past TAM attendees!) are particularly enlightening.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:19 am
What was Mathis thinking? Did he REALLY expect SA to be “converted” to ID? Really great critical analysis of the movie.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Never underestimate the audacity of a desperate and dishonest man.
Mathis seems to have wedged himself quite nicely into the role of the gleaming snake-oil salesman standing aside the odious huckster of Ben Stein.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Wasn’t Expelled expelled from those guts!?
Or to be specific the large intestine?
May 10th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Asked madge on 10 May 2008 at 10:19 am :
Maybe. Never underestimate how deeply deluded the deeply deluded are.
To us (& most sane people) ‘Expelled’ stinks like its been expelled from Stein’s alimentary canal – whilst he was suffering dysentery!
To him & his self-deluded deluding fans & backers (eg., the Disco ‘tute) well they’ve ‘Expelled’ a masterpiece. They really think they’re right ..
Just hope the rest of the world demonstrates how wrong they are at the box office.
I also think they have two major goals with their ‘Expelled’ propaganda production :
- confirming & reinforcing their supporters in their beliefs & arming them with some more anmmo – however dud & blank that ammo may logically be.
&
- annoying, infuriating & provoking into an over-reaction the scientist /athiest types like us. They want controversy, they want stunts & they want people to think : ” the scientist are so mad about it they’re trying to stop it! Hmm.. there must be something to it then …
Personally I think we’re falling into their trap if we continue to give their peice of tripe much further attention and publicity – better to let it sink into its well-deserved rest at the bottom of the morass of oblivion & only direct people to ‘Expelled Exposed’ or otherwise debunk it calmly if & only if we’re specifically asked about it.
Or :
Don’t keep raising it – it only encourages ‘em!
Honestly, this blog (well ok & PZ’s – &’Expeeled Exposed’ but hey y’get my drift?) is the only place where I’ve ever heard any mention of ‘Expelled.’ Maybe that’s just because I’m an Aussie -or maybe not.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Hmm.. a new silly saying to join these ones :
“If you notice this notice you’ll notice this notice is not worth noticing.”
(Eg. a “No Parking” sign on the summit of Mt Everest!)
&
“Indeed, indeed do we indeed need ‘indeed’?”
&
‘Needless to say’,
It need not be said
But so many needlessly say it
Is this because its not ‘needless to say‘
And that’s why we so often say it?
For if its not needless then needs must we say
But if not we needn’t e’er say it!
& very similarly
“Isn’t saying ‘stating the obvious’ itself stating the obvious – unless whatever was ‘stating the obvious’ was really not that obvious?”
To which can now be sorta added :
“Never underestimate how deeply deluded the deeply deluded are deep in their delusions deluded.”
Hmm … Anyone know if there is there a specific name or term for this sort of repetitive, tautologous type of wordplay?
May 10th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Oh yes, never mind the poetic comma replacing ‘v’ from of ‘never’ & ‘ever’ in the above.
Pedantic, tired, silly, moi?
(Actually : yes!)
May 10th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Arrgh!
That’s ‘form’ not ‘from’.
Ie. Poetic form of never = ne’er / ever =e’er, etc ..
BA I’ve said it before & I’ll say it again .. Please let us edit here! Pretty please with a globular cluster & newest first crescent Moon on top!
May 10th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
You’ve all been reported to the Department of Redundancy Department.
May 10th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
From the podcast: CPR to the beat of Staying Alive.
FINALLY, a use for DISCO music.
J/P=?
May 10th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I’d be willing to waste a few dollars on admission so I could see first hand how bad it is but it’s not showing up here yet. According to their web site, Canadian distribution will begin in the summer.
May 10th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Actually Mathis showing up at Scientific American with “Expelled” was part of their PR plan.
The biggest struggle a PR firm faces when promoting a low-budget movie with a low-budget marketing budget is getting coverage.
Mathis knew that SA would barf all over “Expelled” but that was part of the PR plan to stoke the fires of controversy. After all, it’s much easier to claim that “Big Science” is out to get you if you can show that they dumped all over your movie.
The readers of SA are not the audience “Expelled” was seeking. SA was simply a foil to drum up publicity and confirm the producers’ persecution complex for their core audience.
May 10th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
This is over a month old.
May 10th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
I don’t mean to set up a false-dichotomy regarding the filmmakers, but, screw it. I will.
I find it hard to decide whether the filmmakers are dishonest, or just plain foolish. There are loads of pieces of evidence to support both views, but taking the film to Scientific American (where the raucous Steve Mirsky makes his lair), leads me to think that they TRULY think that they are in the right, on a (pseudo)scientific level.
Balls? Or Bravado?
I dunno. They’re still pricks.
May 10th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Publicity stunt. Just hoping to stir up controversy/quote mine/repeat their Dawkins shenanigans. It’s always a good day when you get to use “shenanigans” in a sentence.
May 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
>>>”Actually Mathis showing up at Scientific American with “Expelled” was part of their PR plan.”
That’s what I was thinking.
“Look! PROOF that ID is discriminated against!”
Meh, let ‘em whine. It won’t get them anywhere. (shrug)
May 11th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Absolutely a publicity stunt. Just more hype that he can spin.
I guarantee that he has a plan on how to use/spin this to his advantage.
-OEJ
May 11th, 2008 at 11:58 am
What’s amusing is the focus on Darwin as resulting in Hitler. Setting aside the illogic it also seems odd given the bloody history of christianity.
Jeffrey Dalmer killed and ate people thinking he would gain the abilities of the emperor from Star Wars. Does that make George Lucas responsible for what crazy people make of his work?
May 11th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Alas, no – Expelled doesn’t stink because of the guts but because of the braindead Hitler zombie (thanks, Orac!) it hauls around. Add to this that ID is rapidly decomposing as a result of such mistakes as Expelled, and you know why creationism publicly isn’t in good odor.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:54 am
This is the same magazine that treated “The Skeptical Environmentalist” like a tabloid article.
I haven’t seen Expelled, but SciAm is a joke these days.
May 12th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Mark,
“…but SciAm is a joke these days.”
Care to explain/back that up?
May 12th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I’m just happy to see the word schadenfreude used in a post. Sometimes I’m easily amused.