1. Comment #88205 by bradpitcher on November 15, 2007 at 10:35 am

Are you talking about the "Bad Ben Intro" where they flash this quote across the screen?
"If people think God is interesting, the onus is on them to show that there is anything there to talk about. Otherwise, they should just shut up about it."

Other Comments by bradpitcher

2. Comment #88207 by Rtambree on November 15, 2007 at 10:55 am

Oooh - evolution is one big conspiracy by a clandestine cabal of egg-headed scientists orchestrated out of their secret base underneath Darwin's House near London. Beware, the new Knights Templar.

Other Comments by Rtambree

3. Comment #88208 by jakelovatto on November 15, 2007 at 10:58 am

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=201624-3&highlight=

ben stein makes a speech and i think it is played at this conference.

I'm watching now and i'll try to say how many minutes in.

Other Comments by jakelovatto

4. Comment #88209 by headcold on November 15, 2007 at 10:58 am

Rtambree!!!

Remember the first rule of the cabal of egg-headed scientists:

1. There is no cabal of egg-headed scientists.

Other Comments by headcold

5. Comment #88210 by jakelovatto on November 15, 2007 at 11:01 am

It is at the 27 minute mark when he is introduced just watching to see if the extended trailer is shown.

Slow streaming unforntunately

Other Comments by jakelovatto

6. Comment #88212 by aoratos philos on November 15, 2007 at 11:05 am

jakelovatto is correct, you have to wait for the second win media file to play to watch the full clip.
The only clip of RD is where he says "as a scientist , i'm pretty hostile to rival scientific theories" or words to that effect.

I don;t know if this is what RD is referring to as being misedited? take a look.

Other Comments by aoratos philos

7. Comment #88215 by Rtambree on November 15, 2007 at 11:20 am

Dawkins says he's hostile to a "rival doctrine" and it had an obvious cut (or edit) between shots as he was saying it.

Dawkins needs to have his own tape recorder with him at all times during interviews so he can't be quoted out of context.

Other Comments by Rtambree

8. Comment #88216 by Bonzai on November 15, 2007 at 11:24 am

Can you sue for willful misrepresentation?

Other Comments by Bonzai

9. Comment #88222 by Gymnopedie on November 15, 2007 at 12:27 pm

I'm not sure why everyone is caught up with the ID movie trailer, most of the event is a complete laugh-fest of spouting the first stupid thing that comes to mind.

Other Comments by Gymnopedie

10. Comment #88225 by The author on November 15, 2007 at 12:53 pm

Now, there we got another evil propaganda movie. Seems a bit more expensive this time.

Other Comments by The author

11. Comment #88226 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Another celebrity non-entity leveraging lunacy to elbow themselves temporarily back into the limelight. Pathetic really, especially at this guys age, and sort of sad.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

12. Comment #88229 by room101 on November 15, 2007 at 1:18 pm

First of all, F*** you Ben Stein, you disingenuous prick...

There, I feel better. Sorry, but I think that about captures how I feel regarding idiots like him and the other conservatives spinning this whole thing and making the science community look like a bunch of fascists.

Wow...frightening stuff. Especially after watching the NOVA "Judgment Day" special.

I can't believe these ID "scientists" crying about things like how they've been shunned and ostracized and have not been taken seriously - like a bunch of 8 year-old little girls.

But, hey, maybe Stein is on to something. Forget about facts and evidence. Get a really good PR movement going. Reality, science, and truth are not issues or relevant anymore. It's all about language and spin.

Other Comments by room101

13. Comment #88232 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 1:34 pm

They have a point of course, they are being ostracised, sidelined and ignored. In much the same way as the guy at the party insisting he is a poached egg, "No REALLY I am a poached egg, here ... stroke my shell!!", is likely to be avoided.

The problem, such as it is, is not with the other partygoers.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

14. Comment #88233 by robert s on November 15, 2007 at 1:39 pm

"If you were really a poached egg, you wouldn't have a shell, would you?"

Other Comments by robert s

15. Comment #88234 by Diacanu on November 15, 2007 at 1:39 pm

Expelled is a good word.

As in what my colon did to yesterday's sandwiches.

Other Comments by Diacanu

16. Comment #88235 by room101 on November 15, 2007 at 1:41 pm

briancouglanworldcitizen:

Indeed, you are correct. As Pat Condell so eloquently states (paraphrasing):

"If you want us to believe you're a chicken, start showing us some eggs."

Other Comments by room101

17. Comment #88236 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 15, 2007 at 1:45 pm

14. Comment #88233 by robert s on November 15, 2007 at 1:39 pm
"If you were really a poached egg, you wouldn't have a shell, would you?"

Exactly! It subtly underpins and supports the primary derangement. Well spotted!:-)

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

18. Comment #88238 by Nick Good on November 15, 2007 at 2:02 pm

They might have budget for production standards, but they're still talking shiite!

The Galileo reference was especially ironic, made me chortle that one did...So much so, I was beginning to wonder if it was a spoof.

Other Comments by Nick Good

19. Comment #88240 by koldito on November 15, 2007 at 2:14 pm

Halfway through the video he says that "we live in a free society, not in nazi Germany". Do we get to call Godwin's Law on him?

Other Comments by koldito

20. Comment #88243 by mumbles on November 15, 2007 at 2:27 pm

I would like to suggest to Professor Dawkins that in the future he insist a running clock be IN CAMERA with him at all times. His interviewer of course has that extended to themselves. I think I saw this in a Columbo... Anyways, unless they want to edit the footage to the extent that they have his disembodied head answering questions (which I'd like to doubt) they have no power.

Think of it as asking a magician to do his routine stark naked.

Better yet, he could slap a pocketwatch onto a bandanna, hat or stylish beret. Okay perhaps that's a step to far.

How about a running hourglass?

Other Comments by mumbles

21. Comment #88244 by AdrianT on November 15, 2007 at 2:36 pm

Stein, go do a film about real expelled people like thousands of gays from the US military, including fluent arabic speakers. You'd find youself asking the questions to the FRC. What a total prick.

Other Comments by AdrianT

22. Comment #88245 by Ian on November 15, 2007 at 2:51 pm

I like their grasp on time: First we had the time of Galileo, then Einstein and finally Darwin.

As everybody knows, Einstein published special relativity in 1859 and Darwin natural selection in 1905.

Simple really.

Other Comments by Ian

23. Comment #88246 by Klaatu barada nikto on November 15, 2007 at 2:53 pm

20. Comment #88243 by mumbles

I would like to suggest to Professor Dawkins that in the future he insist a running clock be IN CAMERA with him at all times.

They would probably furnish a countdown clock to Armageddon.

Other Comments by Klaatu barada nikto

24. Comment #88247 by geru on November 15, 2007 at 3:00 pm

Oh man.. Does anyone else get the feeling watching this, that these people are from bizarro world or something? Scary..

Other Comments by geru

25. Comment #88249 by geru on November 15, 2007 at 3:08 pm

12. Comment #88229 by room101

But, hey, maybe Stein is on to something. Forget about facts and evidence. Get a really good PR movement going. Reality, science, and truth are not issues or relevant anymore. It's all about language and spin.

Yeah, too bad that real scientists are busy doing research and stuff, so they don't have time to run around doing interviews for propaganda movies. :)

Other Comments by geru

26. Comment #88260 by nogodsever on November 15, 2007 at 4:12 pm

It's hard to listen to him for long, he's such a goddamn mushmouth.

Other Comments by nogodsever

27. Comment #88261 by geru on November 15, 2007 at 4:12 pm

Whoa, somewhere around 44 minutes of the longer video, does Ben Stein compare his work "for free science" to the sacrifices of the amputee patients of the US army?

What a modest individual!

Other Comments by geru

28. Comment #88265 by dancingthemantaray on November 15, 2007 at 4:20 pm

" they think ID is nonsense in the scientific journals...they think it's nonsense in the courts...they think it's nonsense in the schools..."

Did it not occur to you that it IS nonsense you cretin...

Other Comments by dancingthemantaray

29. Comment #88270 by Diacanu on November 15, 2007 at 4:35 pm

dancingthemantaray-

Did it not occur to you that it IS nonsense you cretin...

Not for an instant! We can't be "mud animated by lightning!", we just CAN'T!
Just because!
He feels it strongly in his deep, deep feelings!
Feely, feely feel!
Therefore, Jesus!

Other Comments by Diacanu

30. Comment #88273 by Duff on November 15, 2007 at 4:53 pm

I am Ben Stein. I'm stupid. Really. I'm not mud, but I'm close to mud. The evidence shows that I am not even close to Galileo, or Einstein because I can't get tenure, simply because I don't believe in Darwin. I'm smart, but I've been warned because I don't believe in facts or science I'm going to be disregarded.
It's my duty to get the word out. If you're stupid, you won't be granted tenure. And then who will fight this battle for the stupid, simple people?
I'm Ben Stein. Believe me, I know I'm Ben Stein, because I'm stupid.

Other Comments by Duff

31. Comment #88274 by Jack Rawlinson on November 15, 2007 at 4:57 pm

Stein? You're an actor, right?

Show us the science or shut up, you self-aggrandizing gobshite tit.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson

32. Comment #88275 by geru on November 15, 2007 at 5:11 pm

I've watched the first 55 minutes of the video, and I am scared. Is this a time warp to the 50's, or do these people really represent a considerable part of modern American people?

If I watched a few more of these speakers, my atheistic views would probably start to crumble, since I couldn't convince myself that these people aren't controlled by Satan..

Other Comments by geru

33. Comment #88281 by JSW on November 15, 2007 at 5:58 pm

Not for an instant! We can't be "mud animated by lightning!", we just CAN'T!

Now, mud animated by breath, on the other hand...

Other Comments by JSW

34. Comment #88282 by Diacanu on November 15, 2007 at 6:05 pm

JSW-

Now, mud animated by breath, on the other hand...

*Badump-ching!*

Other Comments by Diacanu

35. Comment #88287 by discipline on November 15, 2007 at 6:48 pm

> GERU: "Is this a time warp to the 50's, or do
> these people really represent a considerable
> part of modern American people?"

Over 50% of Americans would agree with Stein. That's 150 million people. Wealthy people. With lots of guns.

Sure, it's fun to mock rubbish like this, but if we dismiss it, we lose. Where is the pro-evolution film with a similar budget and production values? As usual, the creationists and right-wing evangelicals have the finances and motivation to produce this kind of slick propaganda.

This film will be popular and influential in a large segment of the U.S. population, no matter what us intellectuals, scientists, and Europeans think. Unless we speak out more boldly...

Other Comments by discipline

36. Comment #88295 by 82abhilash on November 15, 2007 at 8:51 pm

I am optimistic. I think this film will only be popular among small private gatherings if at all.

Other Comments by 82abhilash

37. Comment #88300 by atheist_peace on November 15, 2007 at 10:20 pm

Fuck Ben Stein and fuck this film.

He expects Creationism to have equal time against Evolution? Creationism is not a science, and there are no credible scientists in the field of creationism. This is like expecting 1984 and 2001: A Space Odyssey to be taught alongside real History.

This rubbish is obviously propaganda created by religious extremists, for religious extremists.

Other Comments by atheist_peace

38. Comment #88301 by okmichigan on November 15, 2007 at 10:38 pm

Contact them:
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/contactus.php

maybe if you say something crazy like "stop with your flinstones bullshit" they'll quote you on their BLOG! instant fame.

Other Comments by okmichigan

39. Comment #88302 by Diacanu on November 15, 2007 at 10:50 pm

82abhilash-

I am optimistic. I think this film will only be popular among small private gatherings if at all.

Wow, that is optimistic.

Especially in the face of all the money The Passion and Left Behind have gobbled up from the credulous hordes.

Other Comments by Diacanu

40. Comment #88306 by clearthinker on November 15, 2007 at 11:15 pm

This film could just be another cospiracy paranoia theory. On the other hand there could be a case to answer. Is it really the case that there is an establishment which threatens anyone who dares to question its presuppositions? Going by the reacion on this thread I would suggest that the evidence is strongly in favour of the latter.

This site prides itself on being a 'clear thinking oasis' and yet all we get is 'fuck this film' and Ben is stupid. In fact this type of reaction is sadly all too typical of many on this website and allows theists who read it to make the perfectly legitimate point that atheists are acting like fundamentalists.

In addition as I have read through some of the threads here I have found over and over again evidence that proves the basic thesis of the film. People who question whether Alisatir McGrath or John Lennox should be allowed to teach in Oxford - just because they do not accept the atheist point of view. The argument is simple - we are right (intelligent, scientific etc) and therefore anyone who disagrees with us is wrong (stupid, faithhead, etc) and so should not be teaching.

I think the movie has a point. There is a narrow atheistic fundamentalism which seeks to stifle debate, remove religion from public life (education, politics, the media) and which squashes any dissenters from within its own ranks - not by force of argument but by shouting, rhetoric and just plain simple bullying. Sadly this website illustrates clearly how narrow the New Atheism has become. It is very disappointing.

Other Comments by clearthinker

41. Comment #88308 by Stewart on November 15, 2007 at 11:29 pm

I don't know about optimism, but it's not like we can say in fear "what would happen if people who thought like that were in power in the States?" They are in power and despite all their attempts to erode rational thought, they keep hitting snags like Judge Jones in the Dover trial. Not that the battle does not have to be fought; it does and most energetically. But the most nightmarish scenarios are not happening. Those in power would love summarily to dismiss anyone with a position of influence who spoke in favour of Darwin and didn't profess religious belief. The great thing is that enough steps forward have been taken that that's not that simple to do anymore. And frankly, despite the numbers of believers out there, the way we are getting attention now and the way many of them are reacting makes me feel they're feeling quite a bit of panic. They can't just shut the internet down and that means their youngsters have access to what we are telling them. Those tempted to look who also have more brains than fear are going to end up deserting them. Despite the fact we can't be "herded" into power the way they do it, I like to think the above observation means their side will keep on losing those with both brains and guts. So much the better for us.

All that said, I'm afraid "Expelled" will not be limited to private gatherings and our side needs to be on the cutting edge of getting a more sensible message heard. Like Nova on Dover.

Other Comments by Stewart

42. Comment #88309 by MuNky82 on November 15, 2007 at 11:31 pm

A while ago I saw an Internet clip of the Colbert Report (we don't get it here) where his Wørd was "Wikiality" which basically is that "if enough people agree on something it is the TRUTH". He was displaying the weakness about Wikipedia , but it fits into religion so well too, especially the regional amplification of some memes (Bible Belt etc.) If everybody around you agree on something you accept as the truth eventually. "Forget about reality lets all live in a wikiality. Truth is democratic after all..."

Other Comments by MuNky82

43. Comment #88315 by logos_tech on November 16, 2007 at 12:49 am

What's needed is a film, possibly Expelled 2, showing how Holocaust Deniers are denied tenure, jobs and what not. Perhaps if this is done the public will take notice of what exactly is being foisted upon them in the name of "fairness". Holocaust denial is not history and ID is not science!

Other Comments by logos_tech

44. Comment #88317 by Diacanu on November 16, 2007 at 1:08 am

Clearthinker-

This site prides itself on being a 'clear thinking oasis' and yet all we get is 'fuck this film' and Ben is stupid.

Hyperbole much?

You seem to be finding only what you're looking for.

Other Comments by Diacanu

45. Comment #88318 by Converse02 on November 16, 2007 at 1:28 am

If the creation museum is any indicator, I think Expelled is going to be BIG, REAL REAL BIG. It's going to make millions and Christians are going to point to it every thing we say there are no peer-reviews science journals.


For those we think these are little groups of fundies, they are not. They are the wealthy mainstream Christians, and they are legion. Their cunning makes up for their stupidity.

The problem is that real scientists, the professors, the PhDs, the grad students, doctors, all over the world, are locked in universities towers. They just don't know how to combat this type of media, public relations thing.

Other Comments by Converse02

46. Comment #88322 by Diacanu on November 16, 2007 at 1:44 am

*Long sigh*
This place is going to be besieged with Steinies after this comes out.
I can feel it in my gut.

Other Comments by Diacanu

47. Comment #88324 by brainsys on November 16, 2007 at 1:47 am

Comment #88315 by logos_tech
"What's needed is a film, possibly Expelled 2, showing how Holocaust Deniers are denied tenure, jobs and what not"

I don't follow your arguement. We have one as President of the United States and another as the President of Turkey. I guess that is what happens to people entrenched in a non-evidence based belief system.

Other Comments by brainsys

48. Comment #88327 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 16, 2007 at 2:41 am

40. Comment #88306 by clearthinker on November 15, 2007 at 11:15 pm

I refer you to my post #13. Yes they have a point, but is the same point that everyone who thinks they are some kind of lone genius going against the flow, has.

Of a million people who think they have overturned some well established scientific fact or principle, how many do you imagine actually have? For the answer to that question simply have a google browse on the subjects of perpetual motion, cold fusion or the "moon landing hoax".

We diss this movie not because we are irrationally unreasonable, but because to even the modestly informed it is self evidently disingenous, long debunked, endlessly recycled drivel which is perpetuating the deception of people and retarding progress in a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines as a result. It is at least as morally reprehensible as television evangelists, although I grant you, that would be hard to top.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

49. Comment #88331 by brainsys on November 16, 2007 at 3:40 am

Brian,

you are quite right in your forceful expression of contempt for the film. However, perhaps we should play these nutters at their own game. Every University Science department (and other clear thinkers?) should put their hands in the pocket and put on free public showings of this film followed by a discussion.

Putting a few extra bob into the hands of these charlatans might grate but they already have enough. Surely what we need to do the opposite of what they accuse us of - which is to put *their* claims under the shining light of widespread exposure and, if you think you are good enough, convince all but the diehards that the evidence points to the corruption of the accusers rather than the accused.

Other Comments by brainsys

50. Comment #88343 by Jack Rawlinson on November 16, 2007 at 5:20 am

"clearthinker"? Comedy gold.

And no, I'm not going to waste any time actually responding to your witless post.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson