1. Comment #150410 by Andrew Stich on March 26, 2008 at 9:12 pm

Ha! What was Mathis thinking? What would be the potential benefit of expelling PZ Myers? What would be the potential cost?

However, although this certainly alerted the public to the double standards of the producers, I do think that this will incite some potential viewers to wee it out of curiosity. This will probably hurt the ID movement in general, but it might help the movie itself.

Other Comments by Andrew Stich

2. Comment #150427 by sarah95 on March 26, 2008 at 10:19 pm

I really don't know who'll be right on this: the people saying this really is bad publicity and it'll hurt, or the people saying it's just going to work as good publicity anyway.
Hopefully, the people in the US that do read movie reviews will be put off by how badly recieved it'll be by critics, and other than that I guess we can only hope it doesn't become influential. Ben Stein is such an ass. Anyone who saw the TV show "Win Ben Stein's Money" from the 90's would know that such stupidity and deceitfulness are not below him.

Other Comments by sarah95

3. Comment #150430 by JamesDB on March 26, 2008 at 10:29 pm

I figured that these blogs were getting a lot of hits but for PZ's to be one of the most viewed on the internet because of this is crazy. I would't consider this a case of any publicity is good publicity because it is all soooo bad you can't possibly turn it around. This movie is done and not getting back up, end of story.

Other Comments by JamesDB

4. Comment #150431 by sidelined on March 26, 2008 at 10:32 pm

One must wonder at the entire structure of an organization that hires a comedian{albeit a poor one} and economist to debate a matter of biology education.
Do they perhaps imagine that if the whole shebang crumbles when the movie comes out that they can perhaps slough it off as a poor joke ,hence the hiring of a second rate comedian to play the fool?

Mike Mathis and his ilk are in no danger of having to own up to anything since the people who side with them are beyond much in the way of rational thought and are completely incapable of debate beyond the brief splash of a 30 second sound bite
that they control the editing of.

That said I would also contend that the movie's subtitle "No intelligence allowed" could not have been more correct since intelligence is the absolute last thing that these people are capable of attaining and the last thing they wish to encounter in a real debate of sufficient length.

Perhaps Ben Stein can become the new laughing stock of Hollywood to replace the tiring escapades of Tom Cruise and Scientology.

Other Comments by sidelined

5. Comment #150434 by dragonfirematrix on March 26, 2008 at 10:38 pm

I think it is past time for we non-religious to start thumping our views all over the Earth.

We have a message that is good. We have a message that is correct. We have a message that is honest. We have a message that is backed by scientific proof.

WE ARE A POSITIVE FORCE FOR HUMANITY, WE ARE NOT RELIGIOUS.

Other Comments by dragonfirematrix

6. Comment #150442 by dlitt on March 26, 2008 at 11:29 pm

Certainly the next step in the anthropological evolution of our species will be the dumping of all superstitious nonsense in the dustbin of embarassing credulity.
I'm glad this universe is too large for us to communicate with (possibly) more intelligent life forms. I'd be ashamed to admit I shared my species with credulous twits.

Other Comments by dlitt

7. Comment #150447 by rod-the-farmer on March 26, 2008 at 11:31 pm

dragonfirematrix, I strongly agree with your sentiments, with a small addition

WE ARE A POSITIVE FORCE FOR HUMANITY, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT RELIGIOUS.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

8. Comment #150453 by Steve Zara on March 26, 2008 at 11:56 pm

Comment #150430 by JamesDB

I figured that these blogs were getting a lot of hits but for PZ's to be one of the most viewed on the internet because of this is crazy. I would't consider this a case of any publicity is good publicity because it is all soooo bad you can't possibly turn it around. This movie is done and not getting back up, end of story.

This is a good sentiment, but I fear it is (please forgive me for saying so) possibly naive. The internet is not the world, and blogs really don't matter that much. I know it feels great to see all the activity on-line and read all the comments, but does it get anywhere, or is it just a small minority of the population all patting each other on the back? I don't believe it is quite as bad as that, but we can get seriously carried away as to how important things can be, and we need to get a sense of perspective. The media loves mentioning blogs and internet activity. It all seems so cool. But, it may be worth recalling a couple of campaigns that really looked as if they were going somewhere based on internet activity - the political campaigns of Howard Dean and Ron Paul. No-one on the internet can have failed to notice the latter. Paul was everywhere, and it got to the stage of people declaring him a major candidate. What can happen with this kind of campaign is almost a belief in magic - that if people wish for something hard enough by posting the way they see the future, then it surely must turn out that way!

Sorry, but films like this almost certainly aren't going to fail because of hits on some blogs. They aren't going to fail even because of great articles on a site like this. They will only fail if people don't want to see them, and, unfortunately, the message of this film is very popular. Casting someone well-known like Stein in it was clever. Even generally poorly reviewed films like The Passion of The Christ can be major successes, because people want to hear the message.

There is a huge war for rationality to be faught. Posting on blogs and on superb sites like this can help organise campaigns, but posting alone is rarely actually part of the fight, in my view. Maybe I am just feeling pessimistic today - if anyone has a more cheerful attitude to this, I would love to hear it!

Other Comments by Steve Zara

9. Comment #150457 by dlitt on March 27, 2008 at 12:20 am

Comment #150453 by Steve Zara on March 26, 2008 at 11:56 pm
[major edit] ...and, unfortunately, the message of this film is very popular.

Very true. Josh's review of the movie - where he repeatedly mentions the audience's positive response to the most ridiculous moments - demonstrates the size of their 'choir.'

Other Comments by dlitt

10. Comment #150458 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 12:27 am

Steve Zara-

if anyone has a more cheerful attitude to this, I would love to hear it!

In the end, no matter how long it takes, we simply HAVE to win, because we have a stronger motivatiing force.

The truth.

Liars only have greed.
Sure, that can pull you along like a rope tied to a horse, but it can't pump you up like Rocky.

No one ever adrenaline lifted a giant tree off a little girl's leg due to profit motive and thirst for power.

And no one ever hurled every speck of their heart and will and metabolic strength energy into a knockout punch to stop an assailant in the name of a lie.

They're liars, they know they're liars, they already lose.

Maybe that's still naive, but life experience and history bear me out.

Bad guys win for awhile, but ultimately they self destruct.

Their motivators suck.
They have to lose.
Surely as apples fall down.

Other Comments by Diacanu

11. Comment #150462 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 12:34 am

Steve/Dlitt-

There used to be a big choir for slavery.
Took awhile, but it fell down.

Truth wins out, bullshit implodes, progress isn't a myth, we're right, they're wrong.
I wouldn't be here if I thought otherwise.

Other Comments by Diacanu

12. Comment #150466 by njwong on March 27, 2008 at 12:52 am

I have to agree with Steve. The internet, and particularly the blogosphere, is not the real world.

I am reminded of Howard Dean's 2004 presidential candidacy. Although he was hugely popular on the internet, the majority of folks out there don't use the internet, and Dean got kicked out early from the race.

All the hoo and hah from the rationalist blogs will not dent the potential market for this movie in the real world. We will need to let this film die on its own de-merits. Rationalist sites should move on from this topic, as continuously harping on this will simply give free publicity to this movie which it doesn't deserve.

Other Comments by njwong

13. Comment #150471 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:02 am

njwong-

Rationalist sites should move on from this topic,

Then where the fuck does it stop?

When does the head hanging, and tails between the legs routine stop?

What's going to be the criteria?

When does the stand ever get taken?

Why not just shut the fucking site down, and burn our copies of TGD, and be good little closet atheists again?

Won't that be lovely?
Hand the religiots everything?
Oh, let's!
Can we?

Yeah, let's just let them spray their propaganda everywhere, and not say anything, let's let them puke their lies all over the fucking planet, and let it all slide, let's just not rock any boats.

Let's ust be good little boys and girls while these deluded wackaloons ruin everything, and smear their shit on everyone's brain unanswered.

Or, maybe you can give me a list of things you've arbitrarily chosen for us to focus on.

Sorry for the hostility, it's not personal, but I hate quitter-talk.

Other Comments by Diacanu

14. Comment #150472 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:14 am

njwong-

as continuously harping on this will simply give free publicity to this movie which it doesn't deserve.

Well, that may just be unavoidable.

Oh well.

Everyone saw the rumble in the jungle, and what do people remember?
That Muhammed Ali fuckin' won.

They wanna make this a public tussle?
Let's fuckin' win.
No bad publicity my ass.

They lie, and lie, and lie, we call 'em on every single one.
It's what you gotta do.
It's what this site is about.

Other Comments by Diacanu

15. Comment #150475 by Logicel on March 27, 2008 at 1:20 am

Regarding the blogosphere not being the 'real' world, tell that to all the newspapers whose stock prices have been halved within recent years (because of the competition from 'unreal' people getting their information from the 'unreal' blogosphere.

It seems to this real person who works, communicates, and is entertained via the Web throughout each and every day, that the folks that are more critical than I regarding the 'real' effects of the Web, are much more optimistic and easily disappointed than I. Yes, the confrontation against Theism will be a long slough, and the Web will make that a bit shorter, but for goodness sakes, don't expect miracles.

Other Comments by Logicel

16. Comment #150476 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:26 am

Logicel-

but for goodness sakes, don't expect miracles.

No, but we can find America looking for the northwest passage, and we can get cellphones and internet by aiming for the U.S.S. Enterprise.
;)

Other Comments by Diacanu

17. Comment #150477 by Boukeb on March 27, 2008 at 1:27 am

Of course the blogosphere is part of or overlaps with the real world. The fact that the bozos behind Expelled themselves use the Internet and some blogs for communication purposes, is in my opinion a clear sign that it is to be taken seriously (the Internet and blogs that is, not the Darwin leads to holocaust shit movie).

Other Comments by Boukeb

18. Comment #150481 by Richard Morgan on March 27, 2008 at 1:45 am

Once again, Steve Zara has said it all.
Steve, I know that realism and pessimism often look similar, but you're right in your interpretation of blog behaviours.
It's like this use of the word "global", which I find a little dumb. Because of the nature of the Internet, if I want to post a photo of my breakfast on my blog, well, I can claim that my breakfast went global!
Also, I sometimes wonder if people realise that the "globe" is not entirely English-speaking. While English is often the favoured common language for internet communication, there is a different world out there.
Watergate was a scandal that "went global". Sporting events "go global". 9/11 was intensely global.
But a shitty little creationist film, and an expelled biologist?
This is a true case of what Steve says :

What can happen with this kind of campaign is almost a belief in magic - that if people wish for something hard enough by posting the way they see the future, then it surely must turn out that way!

(My highlighting)
Oh, and I suppose I can now claim that my opinions have "gone global".

Other Comments by Richard Morgan

19. Comment #150482 by Bonzai on March 27, 2008 at 1:45 am

Holy Mary virgin mother of Christ, how many threads do they want to create out of a non story? No one likes being kicked out of a movie, but c'mon now, isn't it a bit narcissistic to keep talking about it forever? Get a grip.

Sorry for being so negative, just can't stand the herd mentality being on displayed on these threads lately.

P.S. Can't stand PZ either, what an egomaniac.

Other Comments by Bonzai

20. Comment #150484 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:54 am

Bonzai-

Well, maybe it is a bit blown up for getting kicked out of a movie.

It's just that the movie happens to be a pack of harmful creationist lies.

And that one of those lies is the po-faced sniffle-pussed victimhood of ID proponants.

And them tossing out someone who happened to be in the film (under false pretenses) toots a big horn for the whopper-tude of their lie.

Yeah, it has to be pointed out with big neon arrows, and banging on a pan with a spoon.

It's irritating, I'm sure, but it has to be done.

Other Comments by Diacanu

21. Comment #150485 by Bonzai on March 27, 2008 at 1:55 am

WE ARE A POSITIVE FORCE FOR HUMANITY, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT RELIGIOUS.

I am beginning to doubt the second statement.

Other Comments by Bonzai

22. Comment #150486 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:57 am

Richard Morgan-

I know that realism and pessimism often look similar, but you're right in your interpretation of blog behaviours.

What's the alternative?

A better tactic?

Or, silence?

Other Comments by Diacanu

23. Comment #150488 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 1:59 am

*Sigh* herding cats indeed...

Other Comments by Diacanu

24. Comment #150489 by cyberguy on March 27, 2008 at 2:02 am

One thing I have learnt about political publicity campaigns (having been part of one in NZ) is that you can win your cause by just winning over the key decision-makers - you don't have to win 50 % of everyone in the country.

Once you become a group that can be seen to represent a "voting bloc" you start to win over other influential groups who are like-minded enough not to want to alienate you. You do this by targetted persuasion, the way that people like RD, PZM and CH are doing now.

However, the problem with us atheists is the "herding cats" syndrome. No-one tells us what to think or do - not even other atheists! So the idea of an atheist voting bloc is a difficult one.

All the same, by constantly hammering the truth and by knocking down the theist arguments (over and over again) we will slowly gain the upper hand in this meme-war, and gather influential supporters along the way. Actually I think we do already have the upper hand, and our opponents know it!

After the Dover Trial, the religious types had to retire to lick their wounds and to try another tack. This dishonest film is their next best shot. Let's make sure it misses the target!

Other Comments by cyberguy

25. Comment #150490 by Diacanu on March 27, 2008 at 2:05 am

Finally, another optimist!!
The sour-pussery was getting to me!

Other Comments by Diacanu

26. Comment #150494 by cyberguy on March 27, 2008 at 2:14 am

I'm with you on this one Diacanu.

Too many atheists are placid and passive - not really prepared to stand up for what they know is right.

I want to physically be there to protest the lies!

Other Comments by cyberguy

27. Comment #150495 by bitbutter on March 27, 2008 at 2:19 am

Make sure you boost the search visibility of the expelled exposed site by linking to it anytime you write expelled online.

Other Comments by bitbutter

28. Comment #150496 by Bonzai on March 27, 2008 at 2:19 am

And them tossing out someone who happened to be in the film (under false pretenses) toots a big horn for the whopper-tude of their lie.

How about actually debunking the film say by having educators making a rebuttal in the media instead of keep banging on PZ being booted out?

There is just so much whining one can take. For people who are open to creationist persuasions this would do nothing to educate or persuade them, it just comes across as a story of gossips and a battle of inflated egos (both PZ's and those responsible for the decision to kick him out) This is just juvenile.

Focus on the message, not the personalities.

EDIT

Heard that they are going to put up an hour long discussion between RD and PZ over the incident here. More he says she says and for a whole bloody hour! The fan boys and girls no doubt are salivating for it.

Oh, brother, spare me.

Other Comments by Bonzai

29. Comment #150500 by Richard Morgan on March 27, 2008 at 2:56 am

Diacanu

What's the alternative?

A better tactic?

Or, silence?

My excellent young friend, for once, you are completely missing the point. I was not talking about what should or should not be done. We were just describing what is going on, and trying to interpret it correctly.
That's all.

Other Comments by Richard Morgan

30. Comment #150505 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 3:12 am

What's the alternative?

A better tactic?

Or, silence?

Use blogs and sites like this to organise - to arrange campaigns - e-mails and letter-writing. Use resources like this to prepare rebuttal materials, to write books, to prepare for discussions with people "in real life".

PZ does this sort of thing on his blog. He arranges campaigns to target teachers and politicians.

To parody some attitudes a bit - just posting LOL - BEN STEIN IS PWNED on a forum or blog achieves very little, but some people, as I said, seem to almost think it will act like it is some kind of sympathetic magic - put enough pins in your description of Expelled in posts, and will die just by force of will.

Sites like this can do a tremendous amount of good. They can build communities, and provide support. But if we want to actually stop nonsense like this film, more has to be done than posting here that it "just won't be a success".

Other Comments by Steve Zara

31. Comment #150507 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 3:16 am

Bonzai-

How about actually debunking the film say by having educators making a rebuttal in the media instead of keep banging on PZ being booted out?

There was a point to publicising it, because of the hypocrisy involved. But I too am feeling this has been overblown, but more than that, it won't actually achieve that much. Many, many people want to believe what the film says, and if this story is used against them they will justifiably respond that the hypocrisy of the film-makers is not an argument that the message of the film is incorrect.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

32. Comment #150509 by RobDinsmore on March 27, 2008 at 3:23 am

Bonzai:
Heard that they are going to put up an hour long discussion between RD and PZ over the incident here. More he says she says and for a whole bloody hour! The fan boys and girls no doubt are salivating for it.

Oh, brother, spare me.

I have to agree with your sentiment here. This site is a little to fan boyish and I have actually considered writing a complaint about it. I don't know how something can be billed as a "clear thinking oasis" when it keep jamming all these RD images down your throat and promoting him like some sort of, for lack of a better word, god. My idea of clear thinking is ideas without BS embellishment or celebrity attached to them.

Other Comments by RobDinsmore

33. Comment #150510 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 3:23 am

Comment #150466 by njwong

I have to agree with Steve. The internet, and particularly the blogosphere, is not the real world.

I was not quite right. I mean it was not the "real world" in the context of this issue. There is no real "blogosphere" (I HATE that word :) There are groups of people talking to each other. Just because some groups talk, does not mean that there is much connection with others. A hundred blogs can scream and yell about Expelled, but that is not going to impact the tens (hundreds?) of millions who would love the message of this film much if at all.

Comment #150509 by RobDinsmore

My idea of clear thinking is ideas without BS embellishment or celebrity attached to them.

I disagree somewhat. This is not a cold scientific site. It is part of a campaign. Campaigns need charismatic leaders. Sometimes hero worship is needed, and it is even better when you have someone who deserves it. The danger is letting it become tedious. (I can point to an example of that. The "Four Horsemen" video last year was quite interesting to watch, but some of the "this DVD will save the world" reaction was a bit emarassing to read).

Other Comments by Steve Zara

34. Comment #150517 by mikejswalker on March 27, 2008 at 3:55 am

Bonzai said,

Focus on the message, not the personalities

Now that right there, is the way to go ladies.
Trying to swat flies, with a big clumsy sledgehammer just leaves em with their wings on their hips, and a huge smug grin.

Smart is the way forward.

Don't get played.

My cynical side says, Mathis called a meeting entitled
"How do we promote this message'.
Reckon what is happening here was core to that meeting.

Someone's gonna get a bigger car out of this.

Let's go in Ninja like, and hide the keys.

Other Comments by mikejswalker

35. Comment #150519 by Bonzai on March 27, 2008 at 3:59 am

Steve,

Campaigns need charismatic leaders.Sometimes hero worship is needed,nd it is even better when you have someone who deserves it.

My alarm bell goes off like crazy when I hear something like this. This sounds too much like the Maoists who argued that a charismatic leader was necessary for the revolution. That was before my time, but many participants are still around and the literature is still available.

Religion makes silly truth claims, but that in itself is no worse than believing in the Easter Bunny. Much worse is the promotion of conformity, the herd mentality and fanaticism, without which religious beliefs would be just private fantasies, stupid perhaps, but wouldn't be able to cause much harm.

I hate words such as "campaign" or "movement" because they convey a kind of lack of reflection and self knowledge. You don't try to fight an enemy by turning into it, even just a little bit. That's why I positively loath the RRS.

Other Comments by Bonzai

36. Comment #150523 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 4:07 am

Comment #150519 by Bonzai

I think you are overreacting (although I am sure with the best motives):

I hate words such as "campaign" or "movement" because they convey a kind of lack of reflection and self knowledge. You don't try to fight an enemy by turning into it, even just a little bit.

Ghandi was charismatic. So was Einstein. It does not have to be a bad thing. I am not talking about lack of reflection. Sometimes you need someone who will inspire you to do it, like a good teacher.

However, I do see your point, and have a lot of sympathy with it.

Perhaps it is not best for me to talk about the RSS. My normal composure might soon be lost...

Other Comments by Steve Zara

37. Comment #150528 by JazzX on March 27, 2008 at 4:16 am

I don't think it was a calculated publicity stunt. If they wanted to do that, they should have thrown out Richard Dawkins.

Other Comments by JazzX

38. Comment #150530 by Bonzai on March 27, 2008 at 4:18 am

So was Einstein.

Well Einstein didn't lead any movement and hated being a "leader" of any sort. He was much of a scientific loner. Maybe I am naive and idealistic, but sometimes I do wish RD would just stick to science and writing beautiful pop science books. Too much polemics and fighting words from the man, even with fellow scientists such as Gould and Slone Wilson (Why can't one just do his own thing and let the science speaks for itself?).

And yes, I much prefer the style of another Richard, Feynman.

Other Comments by Bonzai

39. Comment #150531 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 4:26 am

Comment #150530 by Bonzai

Too much polemics and fighting from the man, even with fellow scientists such as Gould.

But that led to some wonderful and informative writing. Scientists often fight like that. It is the way ideas get tested as they should.

What Dawkins is doing is, rightly, turning that kind of acceptable and useful scientific method of discourse to religion. Good for him, I say! I think he pitches it right - I find (for example), Daniel Dennett a bit to cosy about it all sometimes.

This is a world in which religious beliefs are influencing public policy in worrying, possibly dangerous, ways. We need polemics, just as long as they are part of an effective campaign.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

40. Comment #150532 by Peacebeuponme on March 27, 2008 at 4:27 am

Steve

Perhaps it is not best for me to talk about the RSS. My normal composure might soon be lost...

You had a run-in with these guys, right?

Actually I was glad to notice that the link to their site was removed from this one a long time ago. I have some issues with the way they go about things.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

41. Comment #150535 by Steve Zara on March 27, 2008 at 4:36 am

Comment #150532 by Peacebeuponme

You had a run-in with these guys, right?

It wasn't so much that. I just find my heart sinking when someone tries to debate creationists and gets things embarassingly wrong, or tries to write a scientific rebuttal and clearly does not know the science. If you go into debate to show how ignorant and mistaken others are, it is not very effective if you end up showing your own ignorance.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

42. Comment #150536 by Gymnopedie on March 27, 2008 at 4:43 am

So there are pros and cons of this whole issue, I'm shocked!

As for publicity, that refers simply to public awareness/notice. So I don't really see how publicity can be good or bad (except that good publicity might refer to more people noticing the story).

Other Comments by Gymnopedie

43. Comment #150537 by cyberguy on March 27, 2008 at 4:43 am

What's the alternative?
A better tactic?
Or, silence?


Excellent question. What about non-violent direct action? Note that this film is an excellent opportunity for atheists to get their voices heard in their local communities! In fact the film is a "godsend" for atheists if you figure out how to use this chance.

For example:

1. Poster over the top of any outdoor advertising for the film with a pithy rebuttal in
large letters. Refer to the Expelled Exposed website - http://www.expelledexposed.com/ (Thanks bitbutter. BTW, how do you get the link like you do it?)

2. Write letters to you local community newspaper pointing out the obvious flaws in the movie.

3. Phone local talkback radio stations to get the atheist voice heard. Get your atheist friends to do it too. Be polite and informed. Be direct and to the point. Remember - soundbites, people!

4. If you feel like some fun, picket your main local cinema that is showing the movie. Of course go with as many atheist friends as you can, and tell the media first. Look tidy and be prepared to answer the question "Have you actually seen the movie?" The answer is you have read numerous reviews by people who have, you have seen all the movie trailers and the publicity material, but you are not going pay to see a movie made by a bunch of creationists.

5. Erect a countering banner at a prominant location. Maybe it just needs to list the URL for the Expelled Exposed website.

6. Email, write and call any advertisers associated with the movie to tell them you will be boycotting their products or services, and you will be telling all your friends to do the same, due to their support of this dishonest film.

7. Note any local politicians, mayors, city councillors who go to the opening night. Email, write, and call them to express your disapproval. Say that you will not be voting for them, based on their support for his movie.

8. Get inventive - insert your own ideas here...


Just doing one or two of these easy things is a practical way for atheists to be heard in the "real world" - and hence raise our profile as responsible but concerned members of our local communities.

Other Comments by cyberguy

44. Comment #150539 by scoobie on March 27, 2008 at 4:52 am

From reading the press release referenced above it seems they still can't stop lying, and they're still too stupid to realise how obvious their lies are.

Recognizing the opportunity to make a point of the inconvenience and pain that they, and others like them, have caused to numerous scientists and educators, the decision was made beforehand to deny Myers access to the film if he actually showed up.

In which universe does that make any sense?

Other Comments by scoobie

45. Comment #150544 by mikejswalker on March 27, 2008 at 5:02 am

Throwing out RD would have been too obvious. No reason. Seen to be frightened.
With PZ they had a back up excuse. He (apparently) wanted to wreck it.
Mathis; 'I'll have the sweet looking SV12 S Biturbo Evolution Merc please and slam it on the Atheist account!!!!'.

Regards,

Other Comments by mikejswalker

46. Comment #150555 by scoobie on March 27, 2008 at 5:26 am

Just a pity they didn't tell PZ at the time that they were expelling him according to a prearranged plan in order to make a point. I guess that's because they hadn't made that story up yet.

Other Comments by scoobie

47. Comment #150559 by Geoff on March 27, 2008 at 5:29 am

Bonzai, as I understand it, the hour long RD/PZ film is a general discussion between the two of them, the only part about "expelled" is the segment that's already been posted here.

Other Comments by Geoff

48. Comment #150604 by Divineosaur on March 27, 2008 at 6:55 am

A lot of people say "What was Mathis thinking!?" But here is a guy who advocates so called Intelligent Design. I say what is he ever thinking?

Other Comments by Divineosaur

49. Comment #150621 by DamnDirtyApe on March 27, 2008 at 7:27 am

Maybe we should kerb our enthusiasm a bit, but let's not forget those expelled guys are a bunch of manipulative lying hypocritical jerks.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

50. Comment #150637 by the_ultimate_samurai on March 27, 2008 at 7:46 am

im split on this, on the one hand...yes it will probably be good bad publicity (that is the publicity is SO bad that people go to watch it just to see if its REALY that bad) but how that will help them in the long run i dont know.
as the amount of people saying "this movie sucks" increases the amount of people willing to whim it will go down.

also the poor reviews will make movie theatres less likely to show it (it will probably NOT get shown here) which will hurt them.

so its just an issue of degrees, which one of those two mutualy exclusive things will be in greater force. to which i dont know.

Other Comments by the_ultimate_samurai