What’s Up With “Expelled”?

On Saturday, I signed up for a screening of Expelled, and got a confirmation by email (two, actually, but that’s a different and altogether less interesting story) for the Apr. 1 showing in Owings Mills, MD.

Now, however, that show doesn’t appear on the RSVP web site. In fact, right now that site doesn’t list any upcoming shows, only past ones.

The confirmation message gave the address of a person at Motive Entertainment, so I wrote to her to ask what was going on. Owings Mills is a bit of a haul for me, so I’d rather not schlep out all the way to Baltimore if the screening’s been cancelled.

She wrote back saying that due to “scheduling changes”, the screening had been “postponed”.

I also can no longer find the link from the movie’s main site to the RSVP section. If I had to guess, I’d say it looks as though they’re trying to avoid a repeat of the PZ Myers/Richard Dawkins kerfuffle or something.

The Life-Dinner Principle and Creationism vs. Evolution

I recently ran across the “life-dinner principle“. In evolutionary biology, two groups (whether different species, or groups within a species) are often in competition with each other. But the selection pressure may not be equal between groups: a fox that can’t catch up to a rabbit may die of starvation, though it may have time to reproduce before it dies; but a rabbit that gets caught by a fox will not reproduce. Hence, the rabbit is running for its life, but the fox is only running for its dinner.

I wonder whether something similar is going on in the meme war between science and creationism. Those of us on the science side are fighting for education, for scientific literacy, for the future of scientific research in whichever country one happens to be.

But for many people in the creationist camp, the stakes seem much higher: the Truth™, their self-worth as important beings in the eyes of the creator of the universe, basic social cohesion (the “evolutionism implies no moral standards” argument), and even the risk of genocide (see the various attempts to tie “Darwinism” to the Nazi holocaust and Stalin’s purges).

If this is so, then the creationists have much more motive to defend their position by any means, including deception.

While there are parallels between memetic and biological evolution, there are significant differences as well, so I won’t try to apply to a clash of ideas the lessons learned from biology.

I do take heart, though, in the fact that I’ve run across two threads recently on Uncommon Descent where IDists have expressed disappointment with ID: one was when PZ Myers was a guest on a Christian talk radio show and utterly trounced the other guest, a creationist who claimed that there are no transitionals in whale evolution, to which PZ was able to name several of these “nonexistent” transitional species. The rout was so complete that one commenter at Uncommon Descent suggested that “In my opinion we should just close our eyes and pretend that this debate never happened.” His wish was granted when the entire thread was deleted.

The other was in the discussion of Richard Dawkins seeing Expelled. Although many are still pushing the idea that Dawkins somehow snuck into the theater under false colors, others have realized the breathtaking hypocrisy of the situation, and fear that it’ll make their side look bad.

So maybe the solution is what people have been advocating for years: educate the public. Have scientists get out of the ivory tower and talk to the public about science (let ten thousand Carl Sagans bloom!). Show people what despicable liars the creationists are.

Flipping the Argument Around

A while back, I suggested that one way to see whether an argument for some religion is any good is to turn it into an argument for some other religion, and see whether it sounds convincing. I was just thinking about this the other day, when lo and behold, Ray Comfort came along and provided perfect fodder to try it out:

Ray:

There is a very good reason that [the atheist] isn’t giving up the argument. It is because each night he has a habit of going on the Internet and surfing his favorite sites. He has an addiction he loves. He drools over pornography that is so pleasurable, it takes his breath away. Literally. Besides that, he has incredible sex with his gorgeous girlfriend, any time he wants. He didn’t know that life could be so good.

Flipped around:

There is a very good reason that the non-Muslim isn’t giving up the argument. It is because each night he has a habit of going home and drinking his favorite wine. He has an addiction he loves. He gushes over wine so delicious, it takes his breath away. Literally. Besides that, he can have pork sausages for breakfast, bacon for lunch, and pork chops for dinner, any time he wants. He didn’t know that life could be so good.

Ray:

Think of it now. A stranger has just come along who wants to put an end to all that pleasure. All of it. If he gives up the battle, he won’t be allowed to even look at a woman with lust, let alone have sex with her. This religious nut wants to make him celibate. Horrors! He wants him to sit in a boring church, singing old hymns, listening to a deathly boring priest, and mindlessly clutching a book filled with fairytales. Give up? Are you kidding?So the unbeliever is going to fight this battle with tooth and nail.

Flipped around:

Think of it now. A stranger has just come along who wants to put an end to all that pleasure. All of it. If he gives up the battle, he won’t be allowed to even look at a woman’s face, let alone her hair, hips, or legs. This religious nut wants to make him celibate. Horrors! He wants him to kneel in a boring mosque, kneeling on a musty rug five times a day, listening to a deathly boring imam, and mindlessly cluthing a book filled with fairy tales. Give up? Are you kidding? So the unbeliever is going to fight this battle with tooth and nail.

Read More

Irony O’ the Week

At the top of the “Blog” section of the site for the new creationist propaganda movie Expelled, it says:

“It’s (EXPELLED) going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant –– which means they’re going to draw in about 90% of the American market.”

-Atheist blogger and fabulist PZ Myers, on a film he has not yet seen.

I hope they change that to read “PZ Myers, on a film he tried to see but got kicked out of“.

This whole situation is comedy gold. PZ was not only interviewed for the film (under false pretenses, by the way), but was also allegedly thanked in the credits. But no, they won’t let him see it.

Oh, did anyone mention that it’s a movie about viewpoints being suppressed, and interested parties not being allowed access to information?

But of course the kicker is that while PZ Myers was specifically singled out to be expelled, they were apparently too stupid or clueless to notice who else was coming, so they allowed Richard Dawkins in.

Truly, these people are lying despicable fuckwads.

Update, Mar. 22: The Twin Cities Pioneer Press has an article (registration or BugMeNot required) about this.

Also, Skatje shares her impressions of the movie.

A Sri Lankan Mystery

The last thing that came out of recently deceased author Arthur C. Clarke’s printer was a sheet that said:

<blockquote 

lurrlsrtr lurrlsrrt lurrlrtsr lurrlrtrs lurrlrstr lurrlrsrt lurrlrrts

lurrlrrst lurltrsrr lurltrrsr lurlsrtrr lurlsrrtr lurlrtsrr lurlrtrsr

lurlrtrrs lurlrstrr lurlrsrtr lurlrsrrt lurlrrtsr lurlrrtrs lurlrrstr

lurlrrsrt lultrrsrr lulsrrtrr lulrtrsrr lulrtrrsr lulrsrtrr lulrsrrtr

lulrrtsrr lulrrtrsr lulrrtrrs lulrrstrr lulrrsrtr lulrrsrrt ltusrrlrr

ltursrrlr ltursrlrr lturrsrrl lturrsrlr lturrslrr lturrlsrr lturrlrsr

lturrlrrs lturlrsrr lturlrrsr ltulrrsrr ltsurrlrr ltsrurrlr ltsrurlrr

ltsrrurrl ltsrrurlr ltsrrulrr ltsrrlurr ltsrrlrur ltsrrlrru ltsrlrurr

ltsrlrrur ltslrrurr ltrusrrlr ltrusrlrr ltrursrrl ltrursrlr ltrurslrr

ltrurrsrl ltrurrslr ltrurrlsr ltrurrlrs ltrurlsrr ltrurlrsr ltrurlrrs

ltrulrsrr ltrulrrsr ltrsurrlr ltrsurlrr ltrsrurrl ltrsrurlr ltrsrulrr

ltrsrrurl ltrsrrulr ltrsrrlur ltrsrrlru ltrsrlurr ltrsrlrur ltrsrlrru

ltrslrurr ltrslrrur ltrrusrrl ltrrusrlr ltrruslrr ltrrursrl ltrrurslr

ltrrurrsl ltrrurrls ltrrurlsr ltrrurlrs ltrrulsrr ltrrulrsr ltrrulrrs

ltrrsurrl ltrrsurlr ltrrsulrr ltrrsrurl ltrrsrulr ltrrsrrul ltrrsrrlu

ltrrsrlur ltrrsrlru ltrrslurr ltrrslrur ltrrslrru ltrrlusrr ltrrlursr

ltrrlurrs ltrrlsurr ltrrlsrur ltrrlsrru ltrrlrusr ltrrlrurs ltrrlrsur

ltrrlrsru ltrrlrrus ltrrlrrsu ltrlursrr ltrlurrsr ltrlsrurr ltrlsrrur

ltrlrusrr ltrlrursr ltrlrurrs ltrlrsurr ltrlrsrur ltrlrsrru ltrlrrusr

ltrlrrurs ltrlrrsur ltrlrrsru ltlurrsrr ltlsrrurr ltlrursrr ltlrurrsr


At first, it was thought that this was a test pattern, but today, estate executors discovered a storage room in Clarke's home filled with similar pages. The oldest ones were written out by hand in notebooks. Later ones appear on reams of fanfold printer paper, while the most recent ones appear to have been printed on a laser printer and bound together.


No two words are the same. All use only the letters A C E H K L R S T U. It is not known why these letters were significant, nor which rules were used to generate the "words". For instance, although many "words" contain two, three, or four instances of the same letter, never does a letter appear three times in a row.


With ten columns of eighty "words", each double-sided sheet holds 1600 "words". Investigators estimate that the entire collection comprises about nine billion such words.
RIP Arthur C. Clarke

Well, crap.

Arthur C. Clarke has passed away. Not that this was entirely unexpected, but it still sucks.

Creationists Just Can’t Help Quote-Mining

From a post by the Discovery Institute:

Darwinists in Florida are in a tizzy trying to figure out why they oppose the proposed Academic Freedom Act in their state. Sometimes they claim the act isn’t needed because no one who questions Darwin is being denied academic freedom. Other times they insist the act should be rejected because academic freedom is nothing but “smelly crap.”

(emphasis added.)

If you play follow-the-link, you’ll find the original quotation from Florida Citizens for Science:

This academic freedom stuff is merely the next evolutionary step as anti-science folks continue their attempts to shove creationism into the public school classroom. First, there was blatant creationism. Next there was intelligent design. Both failed miserably. Now comes along academic freedom. Same smelly crap, different packaging.

Clearly, in this context, what the Florida Science writer meant was that the Discovery Institute’s new “Academic Freedom™” initiative was the same crap as “Intelligent Design™”, with a new name, not lowercase academic freedom. I swear, these people can’t stop lying and quote-mining. Is it a hobby with them? An addiction? What? Do they even realize they’re lying?

Oh, and I just reread my old post about what I thought creationists would do after the Dover trial. Read More

California Requires Qualified Teachers; Conservatives Upset

An appellate court in Los Angeles has ruled that a California couple must enroll their children in school. In this case, the parents have had several run-ins with protective services, and the intent of this particular ruling seems to be to ensure that someone outside the family can see whether they’re being abused. But it’s potentially more far-reaching than that:

Unlike at least 30 other states, home schooling is not specifically addressed in California law. Under the state education code, students must be enrolled in a public or private school, or can be taught at home by a credentialed tutor.

There are any number of reasons why parents might want to homeschool their children: maybe they’re afraid of school shootings, or think that they can do a better job than the public schools. But some people are obviously afraid that their children might become educated:

Glenn and Kathleen, a Sacramento-area couple who requested that their last name not be used for fear of prosecution, home school their 9-year-old son Hunter because their Christian beliefs would be contradicted in a public school setting, Glenn said. He is troubled by the idea that his son would be exposed to teachings about evolution, homosexuality, same-sex marriage and sex education .

Oh, noes! God forbid kids should learn how their bodies work! Then they might make responsible sexual choices and not accidentally conceive the next generation of warriors for Christ! And they might learn that there are (gasp!) homosexuals in California. Heavens!

But this is what education is all about: learning things and being exposed to new ideas. What these parents are saying, in effect, is that their beliefs can’t hold their own in a free marketplace of ideas, or else that they don’t trust their children to tell good ideas from bad ones on their own. Either way, is this really something that should be encouraged?

If the above summary of California law on education is accurate, then what it boils down to is “If you don’t want to send your kids to public school, that’s fine. You can send them to a private school, or teach them yourself, as long as they’re being taught by someone qualified.” This is the same as saying, “You can take your kids to the state-run hospital to get their shots; or you can take them to a private clinic; or you can even administer the shots yourself, if you’ve demonstrated that you can do it properly.” But apparently that’s not good enough. These people are fighting for the right to have unqualified people teach their kids.

The California constitution, Article XI, says:

A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the Legislature shall encourage by all suitable means the promotion of intellectual, scientific, moral, and agricultural improvement.

Which I guess pretty much constitutes a right to education. As I said above, there are plenty of valid reasons to homeshool one’s children, but keeping them ignorant isn’t one of them.

C-SPAN.edu?

One common meme among the religious right is that universities indoctrinate students.

If you don’t trust academia, what can you do to keep an eye on it? Well, if you don’t trust the government, you can watch C-SPAN and see sausage legislation being made. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a C-SPAN for academia?

As it turns out, there is: universities aren’t exactly shy about sharing their stuff. A bit of googling turns up all sorts of course videos online. So not only is it possible to keep an eye on those evilibrul academics as they indoctrinate our precious bodily fluids, it’s easier than ever before in history.

So if you’re a creationist or other rightard who thinks universities are out to indoctrinate students, consider this an invitation to watch some courses, in the name of keeping an eye on them.

Dembski: Scientific Literacy = Assault on ID

Bill Dembski warns his fans:

Paul Kurtz’s Center for Inquiry is partnering with SUNY-Buffalo (the State University of New York) to offer an Ed.M. in “scientific literacy”

So? Private organizations team up with educational institutions all the time. What’s so bad about this program?

(which will include a whopping dose of Darwinism and an assault on ID).

It’s okay for the Center for Inquiry to promote atheism in the name of science but anything that even gets close to theism, like design, is streng verboten.

(emphasis in the original).

I couldn’t find the part on CFI’s page where it says that candidates will be required to eat the heart of a cdesign proponentsist while setting fire to a stack of Jonathan Wells books, but Dembski quotes an email message that lays out their nefarious plans:

Explore the methods and outlook of science as they intersect with public culture and public policy. Understand the elements of scientific literacy.

This unique two-year degree, offered entirely online, is ideal for students preparing for careers in research, science education, public policy, and science journalism, as well as further study in sociology, history and philosophy of science, science communication, education, or public administration.

Some of the courses required to complete this 33 credit hour master of education degree program include Scientific Writing; Informal Science Education; Science Curricula; Critical Thinking; History and Philosophy of Science; Science, Technology and Human Values; Research Ethics.

Honestly, I don’t see why Billy’s getting his panties in a twist over this. Does he really think that teaching people what science is and how to think critically constitutes an “assault on ID”? If so, doesn’t this constitute an admission that ID is made of fail and can’t withstand scrutiny?

Or does he think that CFI is a sort of atheist Disco Institute? That would justify his paranoia, since he presumably knows how the DI likes to distort the truth to advance its cause.