NY Times: No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film

| 19 Comments

The NY Times reports in No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film how PZ Myers was expelled from the viewing of ‘Expelled’

Two evolutionary biologists — P. Z. Myers of the University of Minnesota, Morris, and Richard Dawkins of Oxford — tried to go to the movies at the Mall of America in Minneapolis Thursday evening. Dr. Dawkins got in. Dr. Myers did not.

and Dawkins had his comments

Dr. Dawkins said the hoopla has been “a gift” to those who oppose creationism. “We could not ask for anything better,” he said.

Mathis, the producer of the movie claimed that

Mr. Mathis said in an interview that he had confronted Dr. Dawkins in the question and answer period after the screening and that Dr. Dawkins withered. “These people who own the academic establishment and who have great friends in the media — they are not accustomed to having a level, open playing field,” Mr. Mathis said. “I watched a man who has been a large figure, an imposing figure, I watched this man shrink in front of my eyes.”

Knowing Dawkins, I sincerely doubt this representation.

That is not how Dr. Dawkins recalls it. He said Mr. Mathis said “enemies” were attempting to interfere with the film.

“It is impossible to imagine what Mathis is afraid of,” Dr. Dawkins said. “It is impossible to credit such bungling and inept public relations.”

19 Comments

I wonder what makes the NY Times think that PZ is an evolutionary biologist.

I see that Mathis is now claiming that he recognized Dawkins and allowed him in. If that is so, why didn’t Mathis go up and talk to the star of his film before it was shown? I’m sure that if Mathis did recognize Dawkins and allowed him in, then he would have made an anouncement to the gathered crowd that they had a distinguished British guest among them. It still doesn’t explain the reports that Mathis was surprised to see Dawkins asking a question after the movie.

Oh yeah, weren’t they accusing Dawkins of sneaking into the theater last night?

I guess more lies for Jesus.

The NYT article is a little tepid. The reporter is apparently not much impressed by the irony. However, she did write an earlier piece on the deception used to get interviews from Myers et al so perhaps it would be worthwhile to send her a copy of the backstory on the domain name registration. That little ‘slipup’ is nearly as damning as the cdesign proponentists blunder.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to send her links on the backstory all the way back to the Wedge Document.

I guess more lies for Jesus.

I’ve become no longer surprised to see this, rather I expect to see them lie. Rather shocking given the context but fool me once, try 7 billion more times and I’m gonna catch on to it.

Also in the NY Times piece:

Mark Mathis, a producer of the film who attended the screening, said that “of course” he had recognized Dr. Dawkins, but allowed him to attend because “he has handled himself fairly honorably, he is a guest in our country and I had to presume he had flown a long way to see the film.”

This contrasts with Kristine’s account at Amused Muse:

Mark Mathis, the producer, didn’t recognize Richard until Richard stood up after being called on in the Q&A (I think that’s what they called it) after the (so-called) film.

I’d like to see this discrepancy addressed explicitly and clearly. Did Mathis recognize Dawkins and allow him to attend because he’s such a gentleman? Or did Mathis have no idea Dawkins was there until the film had finished?

I’d also like to know which of the party signed in on the website, and which were guests; how the mechanics of it worked. I gather PZ signed in at the website and was on the list of attenders as a result. Did Richard Dawkins do the same thing, or was he there as a guest? If Mathis was looking over the lists before people actually showed up at the theatre, what names would have been visible? This might help explain matters better.

Cheers – Chris Ho-Stuart (aka Duae Quartunciae)

They are the laughing stock of the world!

After spending all that time packing the audience with ideological “safe” people, I suppose that thinking it was “a level, open playing field” is no more delusional that the premise of the movie in the first place.

What good is a movie if no one is allowed to go see it?

m arie:

What good is a movie if no one is allowed to go see it?

It’s a futile attempt to keep the number of bad reviews down.

Has Mathis ever met a lie he didn’t like? It takes a special kind of mind to boldly tell bald-faced lies to people’s faces and expect them to believe it.

Actually I am very pleased that pee wee myers and doggins lied and cheated to gain admission and that the movie gets additional publicity. What the dirtbag atheist pee wee myers cult doesn’t realize is that the more of their vomit bag character they reveal, the more they rant, the more they rail, excoriate Ben and company, the more they whine and complain and bitch about their paid for appearances as unfair…well let’s just say you can’t buy that kind of publicity.

As a retired fortune 500 exec who spent a lot of time herding techo wirehead egomaniacs around trying to extract useful work and ideas, while permitting their weird cultlike personalities to have internal voice…well let’s just say I am not surprised by the pee wee and doggins behaviors nor that the howling demoniac, sychophant crowd find it amusing.

Do you morons realize the value of all the free pub the producers have extracted from you goons just by setting up a blog, holding screenings, releasing stories, and you have swallowed the bait just like good little dorks.

Intelligent Morons really make my day.

Keith Eaton Wrote:

Actually I am very pleased that pee wee myers and doggins lied and cheated to gain admission and that the movie gets additional publicity.

Children, your brain on Intelligent Design, be warned, it causes you to misrepresent fact in spite of all the evidence.

Thanks Keith. Your contributions always do miracles for our cause.

Here’s another that needs to join the brotherhood at the Bathroom Wall. This one makes jacob seem positively sane. Send Pole Greaser there too the next time it surfaces.

Keith Eaton:

As a retired fortune 500 exec who spent a lot of time herding techo wirehead egomaniacs around trying to extract useful work and ideas, while permitting their weird cultlike personalities to have internal voice…well let’s just say I am not surprised by the pee wee and doggins behaviors nor that the howling demoniac, sychophant crowd find it amusing.

I think this bit clinches it: Keith is a parody, like Pole Greaser (who has already admitted to it).

No parody here just an honest appraisal of the warped mindset and psychologically disturbed personalities of pee wee, doggins, and the band of pseudointellectual brown-nosers who pant around the net sniffing and hoping to get some little ego satisfaction by applauding blasphemy.

If evolution calliber intellect was involved in engineering and technoogy we’d be riding around in hay wagons dressed in goat skins.

Evolutionary biology: thalidomide and viagra …what else??

Thanks Keith for that impressive display of intellect and sophistication. Assuming that you are a Fortune 500 exec (and not a parody – hard to do though), I’ll bet you did wonders for morale; ensuring maximum productivity from the the people who you relied on to line your pockets while self-congratulating yourself on the genius of your political social skills as you climbed the corporate ladder. And of course, the towering intellect of Fortune 500 execs is testified by their uncanny ability to avoid driving companies to bankruptcy through mind-numbingly stupid decisions. Nope. We never, ever hear of corporate executives doing mind-numbingly stupid things. And of the Fortune 500 execs that I have met, not one has ever been a towering egomaniac steeped in hubris. And of course, corporate executives are never blasphemous, and never immoral – just ask all those tobacco execs.

Thanks for putting yourself on display for the amusement of all here. It was a good laugh, but please, the joke grows wearisome after time.

“Parody”…another tactic in the PT-mafia flowchart.

William Wallace:

“Parody”…another tactic in the PT-mafia flowchart.

As opposed to changing someone’s posting to make it seem he said something he didn’t? What a short memory we have my confused Christian friend.

PvM:

William Wallace:

“Parody”…another tactic in the PT-mafia flowchart.

As opposed to changing someone’s posting to make it seem he said something he didn’t? What a short memory we have my confused Christian friend.

Please excuse William: he was taught that thinking was “The Devil’s Hobbyhorse.”

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by PvM published on March 21, 2008 7:50 PM.

Evolution of the Heart was the previous entry in this blog.

Pioneer Press: Biology prof expelled from screening of ‘Expelled’ is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter