Expelled movie's screenwriter - recently demoted from "evil" to "stupid" - regains "evil" status

Kevin Miller, the screenwriter for Expelled (the controversial documentary about the intelligent design scientists), which premiers in Canada next week, mentioned his blog to me recently. There you can find out useful information such as where it is showing. For example,

Just added new cities in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Alberta, and BC. Please also note that Kelowna and Kamloops have a release date of July 4. The movie opens on June 27 everywhere else. For the actual theatres in each city, visit the theatre located on Expelled's official site.

He also comments on the psychology of the Internet Darwinist:

Back on March 21, for instance, when I commented on PZ Myers's expulsion from the Expelled screening, I was immediately branded as evil. I've never been called a liar so many times in my life. And I was surprisingly touched by how many people expressed sincere concern over the state of my soul, urging me to repent for breaking the ninth commandment.

After I did acknowledge and then correct one or two inadvertent factual errors in my original post, the trolls on my blog backed off on the liar comments for a while and started to assume I was deluded. Maybe Kevin isn't such a bad guy after all, they said. He's just been conned by those nasty IDiots over at the Discovery Institute. Perhaps if we discredit them, Kevin will see he's been duped.

When that strategy failed, I slipped one more notch down the scale from deluded to ignorant. I was told I don't know anything about science, philosophy or screenwriting, for that matter. Several people tried to educate me on these subjects. But when they found my responses to their arguments unsatisfactory, I finally hit bottom. So this is the real reason Kevin got involved in Expelled: He's too stupid to know any better. Poor, poor, Kevin.

But fear not! In the past couple of days, I have reason to believe my status has been elevated once again from stupid to evil. According to recent reports, when Expelled hits theaters on April 18, it will usher in a new Dark Age that will bring an end to science, medicine, the biosphere, and the ozone layer.

Kevin, the Internet Darwinist uses terms like "liar" in a way different from you or me. He may mean that there is a minor factual inaccuracy in your work but he usually means that the overall drift of your work doesn't promote Darwinism. And because Darwinism is Truth, you must by definition be lying. That is the principal thought pattern of the fanatic.

Also, the term "stupid" or "moron" denotes a person who has not wholeheartedly embraced the Cause, who can think of objections to Darwinism. That is not a difficult feat, actually, so growing numbers of North Americans are now evil morons, a fact whch frustrates the Darwinist no end.

Many a morning, when I still had a combox, I would get up in the morning and reject two or three such comments. One thing about the fanatic, it never occurs to him that non-fanatics necessarily doubt his claim that he never persecutes anyone. It would be practically impossible for him to refrain, given his mindset.

But now let's not kvetch, Kevin. The Darwin trolls are rude and noisy, but they do fill the theatres to see Expelled - and when was the last time anyone went to see a documentary about the philosophy of science? Normally, far more people would pay to get out of such a show than to get into it. Yet aren't you #5 in political documentaries?

See also:

Advance screening of Ben Sten's controversial Expelled film at the Varsity theatre in Toronto

The Expelled film (#5 in political documentaries) is coming to 50 screens in Canada, ... plus a surprise in two in store for Americans
(Expelled haters, take heed)!

Oh no, Ono!: Expelled (the film about the intelligent design guys) can still be shown

"Expelled film screens in Canada June 28 2008

To find out why there is an intelligent design controversy:

Expelled: Intellectual property vs. intellectual territorialism

Because I was working at Design of Life blog yesterday, I did not get a chance to cover the Expelled "plagiarism" flap. The accusation was that Expelled was using clips from a film of cellular machines produced by XVIVO for Harvard.

I figured I would catch up with the flap if it grew into an uproar, but it appears to be dying down now. Even PZ Myers has rethought his claim in the matter ("I was wrong" - accessed 10:17 am EST).

I was a permissions editor years ago, so here are some thoughts on the subject from that perspective:

- The Expelled team knew perfectly well that some would try legal action to stop the release of the film. A studio contact told me as much last summer, in response to a message from an anonymous "well-wisher":

"I do hopw that the makers of "Expelled" are aware of the lawsuits launched against the makers of "What the Bleep...", given that they obtained their interviews with several biologists unders false pretenses."

I asked a contact at the studio, and he tapped back,

"No worries. Reality is, in the U.S. you can sue a baloney sandwich if you want."

So I assume that, as professionals, the Expelled team retains legal counsel expert in the area and budgets for frivolous suits.
It all goes into the price of your ticket.

- I have no particular reason to doubt that the Expelled guys hired their own animator and produced cell animations from scratch. It is not a low budget production, and intellectual property issues are a foreseeable risk.

- If Expelled is focusing on the same cellular machinery as XVIVO, similarities may be expected. When I was a textbook editor, we frequently accused our competitors of copying us and they accused us of copying them. Of course we all denied it, but the truth was somewhere in the middle - and not actionable.

The first thing we would do when starting a project was to get hold of the competitors' texts, see what they were doing, identify strengths and weaknesses, note how the market reacted, and decide where we could improve on them. They did not have a case against us because we did not actually copy. We always did our own work from scratch, using different writers, layouts, angles, et cetera. (We had a budget for that.) And, of course, the competitors were taking apart our texts too, doing the same thing.

- Similar mistakes are not necessarily proof of copying, as claimed in the Expelled XVIVO case. In my experience, artists tend to make roughly similar errors when dealing with technical material, as well as errors of their personal invention.

- lastly, people who have worked hard on a long project become fiercely proprietary and territorial, and are apt to see copying where it has not occurred. I know because I did it myself on occasion, but wiser heads restrained me. And I in turn restrained others. Lots of things can be owned, but not ideas.

I wonder what the next flap will be. Expelled's foes had better hurry; the US release is less than a week away ...

Intelligent design film: Volunteer's account of what really happened when Darwinist was kicked out of the screening

Update March 28, 2008 4:45 pm:

I was in a press conference a few minutes ago for the Expelled documentary (about scientists who are persecuted for questioning Darwinism and other materialist evolution theories). Ben Stein, the film's lead, producer Mark Mathis, and others were there.

Mathis confirmed that he kicked PZ Myers out of the film to make a point (Myers endorses the destruction of the careers of those who question Darwinism, yet he was really upset about getting booted from a film).

And ... Myers apparently somehow got into the press conference itself! - "under false pretences" according to the moderator. He was told to be quiet, and he rung off (to the best of my knowledge). He told the media to phone HIM instead.

Greg, at Hollywood Jesus live blogged the affair and is promising updates.

Strangely, while he was in the telemeeting, Myers insisted that Darwinism had nothing to do with Nazi Germany. Of course, historically, Darwin was an enormous influence on the Nazis because his Descent of Man appeared to put racism on a scientific footing. That does not mean (and the Expelled guys made clear that they did not think it means) that today's Darwinists have anything to do with Nazism. But it is a historical fact that Darwin was one of the Nazis' heroes, as historian Richard Weikart painstakingly shows.

Update March 28, 2008 6:51 pm EST A friend writes: "PZ explains on his blog that he dialed in 5 minutes early and overheard the Motive staff describe the secret password required for two-way talking (which some of the interviewees needed to know).

No super spy stuff required…just dialed in early and got lucky."

(Actually, I think, friend, that the Motive staff are NAIVE! They don't understand how bankrupt Darwinism is and what Darwinists will do to protect it. Why didn't they understand this before they got involved?)

Update March 28 2008 10:15 pm EST: Another friend writes to say, "If I was a betting man, I’d put my money on a Motive staff plan to intentionally leak the two-way password five minutes prior, knowing that PZ could not resist dialing in and crashing another party. I think these guys are a little more savvy then you give them credit for…their job is marketing and they are good at what they do…they sit around and dream this kind of stuff up!"

Okay, 10:15 pm EST friend, my own view is that PZ craves attention because he has neither good evidence that his theories are true nor a distinguished publication record. If it was a Premise Media strategy, as my friend believes, it may be miscalculated. Many journalists in the legacy media are about as independent in these matters as dairy cows. (Cows who are not milked face really, really serious suffering, so they must go along with barn routines.) I myself am perpetually amazed at the stupidities that science journalists will believe, but then I co-wrote a book in which that was a major theme, The Spiritual Brain: A neuroscientist's case for the existence of the soul. Most of the time, their gullibility was hilarious.

Update March 29 2008 11:05 am EST: Here's PZ on the stunt. He doesn't "feel" set up, but I just don't know.

March 29 2008 5:46 am EST: Here's an account of the teleconference that gives some idea of the sort of people who seek to ruin the careers of scientists who doubt Darwin. Note that, in this account, all errors and crimes of Darwin's followers are denied - indeed, definitions constantly shift so no error can ever be pinned down - until you look for a more rational, less hate-filled account. In an era when the Catholic Church has apologized for historic wrongs, this sort of thing should arouse suspicion, quite apart from the general bad character and free indulgence of hate that the site exhibits.) Note: It was submitted, I think twice, to the combox and I don't publish naked URLs, so I have placed it here.


Here are some clips from Expelled.


March 28, 2008 3:45 am: Re the new level of caution around the screenings of Expelled (the documentary about the suppression of scientists whose research shows that there is design in the universe), line producer Mark Mathis writes back to say, "Yes, that's the concern, that illegal recording will occur with the intent to damage the film."

The part I don't get is, why didn't Mathis think of that before? There's a huge scandal just under the surface - the suppression of evidence against materialist theories of all kinds. The suppressors are deadly serious ideologically, and most are funded by tax money.

Plus, they have thousands of media allies who have never considered for a moment the possibility that materialism might not be true - because they never hear, let alone report, the evidence that disconfirms it.

Well, in my experience, people who land up in this arena almost always learn the hard way what they face ...

March 28, 2008 10:49 AM I interviewed Mark recently, and he said,

MATHIS: The national media has a very high concentration of people who are liberal, agnostic, or atheist. That creates self-reinforcing feedback.

DOL: Self-reinforcing feedback ... you mean, they don't know many people who disagree with them? So they keep hearing that they are right all the time and they believe it. Their own opinions bouncing from wall to wall?

MATHIS: That's right. Today, we have a very large percentage of agenda journalists - so convinced they are right that they don't protect themselves against their own biases.

These agenda journalists tend to be at the top - they are outspoken, absolutely convinced, and determined to tell stories according to their own philosophy. At a lower level, you get people who are really not thinking about it. They tell their stories with a bias that they don't even realize they have.

So the big question is, can Mark's film survive the onslaught? Given that he was in TV news for ten years, I will put my lunch money on that.

While I am here, here's a video interview between American evangelical RC Sproul and Ben Stein, star of Expelled. I presume you can see Ben in long pants again, but write to tell me if it ain't so.

Update March 27 2008 7:22 pm EST : Line producer of Expelled, Mark Mathis, writes to say, re the cancellation of some screenings, "Some cancelled, most rescheduled. Big concerns about piracy. Also very hard to keep up with all the demands."

I have written back to ask whether he means by "piracy" that surreptitious videocam-ing from the audience could result in, for example, stuff on YouTube - stuff that won't even make the final cut.

It is certainly true that they are concerned about piracy. I cannot get a DVD from them myself and, as a journalist and published author who makes her living by writing, I would be the last person to support violation of intellectual property rights. (This annoys me because it creates a problem for me, as the film won't open in Canada till AFTER April 18.)

Update March 26 2:04 pm: I have just been informed that further Expelled screenings have been cancelled for security reasons. I will update when I have more information. The film will open as planned in April, according to my sources. Also, the story is leading in the blogosphere. So is Ben Stein, I gather.

Update March 26, 2008 8:41 pm A credible source informs me that some of the screenings have been cancelled, but that others are planned, and that he himself was asked to chase guests for new screenings. Hmmm. Is it possible that the Expelled folk are changing venues to avoid planned disruptions? Well, we'll see.

Update March 26, 2008 4:09 pm According to the Web site, the film will be in theatres March 18, and you can find out from
Carmike when it is coming to town. (Or get together a party to phone them up to tell them not to show it, thus guaranteeing DVD sales.) Also, you can get group rates, so if you are Darwin fans, you can all go together and boo in unison. (Yes, I DO think that way about you. And NO, PZ Myers is NOT a nice guy. Anyone who doubts this, scroll down for some of his comments. Check out this, for example, but I quote some of it below, in what is becoming a very long post, I see. But at least it's all here in one place.)

Update March 26, 2008 4:31 pm: Here's some stats from Premise Media on the Technorati blog popularity results.

SANTA FE, N.M. (BUSINESS WIRE)--Something amazing happened yesterday. The controversy around Premise Media’s upcoming movie Ben Stein’s EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed became the hottest topic in the blogosphere. According to BlogPulse, a service of Nielsen Buzzmetrics, the issue held the number one slot throughout the day on Monday, March 24th (http://www.blogpulse.com). There were also over 800 results on Technorati (www.technorati.com).

“It is amazing to see the reaction of PZ Myers, Richard Dawkins and their cohorts when one of them is simply expelled from a movie. Yet these men applaud when professors throughout the nation are fired from their jobs and permanently excluded from their profession for mentioning Intelligent Design,” said producer Mark Mathis. Mathis was at the event that has raised this controversy.

Mathis continued, “I hope PZ’s experience has helped him see the light. He is distraught because he could not see a movie. What if he wasn’t allowed to teach on a college campus or was denied tenure? Maybe he will think twice before he starts demanding more professors be blacklisted and expelled simply because they question the adequacy of Darwin's theory.”

I've got some calls and mail out to various places to find out why they cancelled the rest of the advance screening. Maybe security, as I first heard, or maybe they don't feel they need them now, or who knows?

PZ Myers, who was evicted from an Expelled screening last Thursday, was the person who said

The only appropriate response should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy, far-right politicians … I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It's time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.

Update March 26, 2008 12:51 pm

[Update notes from March 25 and following are below.]

A friend tells me Expelled was cut down from 8 hours to 90 minutes. That is more or less normal. It probably means that people who think they are in it may not be in the end. They will most likely be on the DVD.

Foxfier, formerly Sailorette observes that Myers himself said,

Oh, well. I have two warnings for the creationists.

One, I will go see this movie, and I will cheer loudly at my 30 seconds or whatever on the screen, and I will certainly disembowel its arguments here and in any print venue that wants me. That's going to be fun.
Two, next time I'm asked to be recorded for a creationist propaganda film, I will demand more money, and a flight and a limousine to the premiere. They can pay for my tuxedo rental, too. And my hotel room will have a jacuzzi and a bowl of M&Ms — green ones only.

Well, I can certainly see why he didn't endear himself to Mark Mathis.

The prospect of him cheering "loudly" wouldn't endear him to me.

She adds

Sounds like disruption to me-- you try it sometime, bet you get kicked out of the movie.

Hat tip Ffs!

(Note: She originally posted this in the combox here.)

Someone whose comment I rejected wrote to tell me that PZ Myers is a nice guy in person. I don't care, okay. I am entitled to take him at his word as provided in his posts, linked above and below. And I intend to - unless he informs me personally that it is all hogwash, in which case, ....

Also, a friend asks, given Myers's well-advertised views,

Would a known Christian, especially one with a known ID persuasion, be able to take a course under Myers without fear of intimidation, ridicule, belittling and threats found on his web site?

Well, here is his university's policy on the subject:

The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. Inquiries regarding compliance may be directed to the UMM Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Officer at (320) 589-6021.

While we are here, you would think that so zealous a defender of "science" as Myers would have a stellar publication record. Friends searched for me and this is all they could find (though it only goes back twelve years):

Ethanol teratogenesis in the zebrafish, Danio rerio.
Author(s): Myers PZ, Larson M, Hartwell M
Source: DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Volume: 235 Issue: 1 Pages: 245-245 Meeting Abstract: 339 Published: JUL 1 2001
Times Cited: 0

2. Title: Calcium signals monitored from leopard frog optic tectum after the optic nerve has been selectively loaded with calcium sensitive dye
Author(s): Dudkin EA, Myers PZ, Ramirez-Latorre JA, et al.
Source: NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS Volume: 258 Issue: 2 Pages: 124-126 Published: DEC 18 1998
Times Cited: 4

Dudkin EA. Myers PZ. Ramirez-Latorre JA. Gruberg ER. Calcium signals monitored from leopard frog optic tectum after the optic nerve has been selectively loaded with calcium sensitive dye. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Neuroscience Letters. 258(2):124-6, 1998 Dec 18.
UI: 9875543

Stachel SE. Grunwald DJ. Myers PZ. Lithium perturbation and goosecoid expression identify a dorsal specification pathway in the pregastrula zebrafish. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.] Development. 117(4):1261-74, 1993 Apr.
UI: 8104775

Myers PZ. Bastiani MJ. Growth cone dynamics during the migration of an identified commissural growth cone. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Journal of Neuroscience. 13(1):127-43, 1993 Jan.
UI: 8423468

Myers PZ. Bastiani MJ. Cell-cell interactions during the migration of an identified commissural growth cone in the embryonic grasshopper. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Journal of Neuroscience. 13(1):115-26, 1993 Jan. UI: 8423467

Myers PZ. Bastiani MJ. NeuroVideo: a program for capturing and processing time-lapse video. [Journal Article. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Computer Methods & Programs in Biomedicine. 34(1):27-33, 1991 Jan.
UI: 2036787

Metcalfe WK. Myers PZ. Trevarrow B. Bass MB. Kimmel CB. Primary neurons that express the L2/HNK-1 carbohydrate during early development in the zebrafish. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Development. 110(2):491-504, 1990 Oct.
UI: 1723944

Myers PZ. Eisen JS. Westerfield M. Development and axonal outgrowth of identified motoneurons in the zebrafish. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Journal of Neuroscience. 6(8):2278-89, 1986 Aug.
UI: 3746410

Eisen JS. Myers PZ. Westerfield M. Pathway selection by growth cones of identified motoneurones in live zebra fish embryos. [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Nature. 320(6059):269-71, 1986 Mar 20-26.
UI: 3960108

Myers PZ. Spinal motoneurons of the larval zebrafish. [Journal Article. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Journal of Comparative Neurology. 236(4):555-61, 1985 Jun 22.
UI: 4056102

Green DM. Myers PZ. Reyna DL. CHROMPAC III: an improved package for microcomputer-assisted analysis of karyotypes. [Journal Article] Journal of Heredity. 75(2):143, 1984 Mar-Apr.
UI: 6546940

Funny, my lead author on The Spiritual Brain, Mario Beauregard, has 70 publications and I suppose he is in the same age range as PZ.


Plus: Here are a zillion links to the controversy from Greg Laden. Note also Brazilian news coverage.

March 24, 2008: Update note from line producer Mark Mathis, who writes me to say:

"You should know that I invited Michael shermer to a screening at NRB in Nashville. He came and is writing a review for scientific American. I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more. "

Note: See also the earlier post on PZ Myers getting expelled from Expelled.

For convenience, where there are further developments (and there clearly are), I will update from here, and it's not my fault if the story is confusing.

March 25 2008:

8: 11 am: Chris Hewitt of the Minneapolis-based Pioneer Press writes

"Expelled," subtitled "No Intelligence Allowed," is the controversial film that argues schools should be teaching creationism as an alternative to evolution. Myers, an associate professor of biology at the University of Minnesota-Morris -- and, more to the point, a
prominent atheist -- was interviewed for "Expelled" last April, although he says he was told the film was an evenhanded look at the intersection of science and religion and was to be called
"Crossroads."

I will be very surprised if the film "argues schools should be teaching creationism as an alternative to evolution." I assume that Ben's school in the film is a metaphor. (While we are here, the Discovery Institute does NOT think that intelligent design should be taught in schools, only that arguments against Darwin's theory should be permitted.)

Hewitt - like many people - would be very surprised, I think, at just how bad the evidence is for Darwinian and other materialist evolution. But don't believe me, read Michael Behe's Edge of Evolution. For example, there is very little evidence that Darwin's natural selection functions as a source of new information - which it must do if it is to have the status Darwinists insist on. That is WHY expressing public doubt is so risky. A huge amount of prestige and grant money is at stake.

Hewitt goes on to note:

"Myers was in the Twin Cities this week for the American Atheists Conference 2008 in Minneapolis and, coincidentally, he learned there was to be a free screening of "Expelled" at the Mall of America Thursday night. So he registered to attend with his wife, Mary, along with what Myers called "a whole parade of atheists," including internationally famous science writer, Richard Dawkins, whose books include "The God Delusion."

"They all got in, but Myers did not.

So could there be anything unusual about Myers that annoyed the organizers?

Well, a friend draws my attention to some Myers comments at Raving Atheist:

(WARNING: You are about to read the sort of language that pretty much guarantees that a comment will not see the light of day at THIS blog. But I have no means of explaining what I think is going on otherwise.)

On politics:

Howard Dean was my favorite in the last big campaign. If someone stands up and says what they think and tells the wingnuts and religiots to go sit on their thumbs and spin, they'll get my vote.

At one point, the interviewer asks, "In a related matter, how come when I enter the search term "demented fuckwit" into Pharyngula I get about a zillion hits?" (09-20-2007, 08:34 PM)

Myers's reply:

Somebody's got to be in charge with slapping around the demented fuckwits. The position has devolved on me. (09-20-2007, 08:39 PM)

The whole interview may be enlightening if you've the stomach.

Reading it, I now get a much clearer sense of what probably happened at the theatre at Mall of America last Thursday night.

Here's my take: Mark Mathis does not mind atheists in general but he did not want THIS guy in the theatre at his private (= non-commercial) screening. The point about making PZ "to pay to see it" comes down to this: If PZ came to the theatre for a regular commercial screening - not a private screening organized by the producer - and didn't mind his mouth, well that would be somebody else's problem, not Mark's.

Actually, I don't doubt there is more to the story. But this kind of thing has got to be a factor. I would love to see a security video.

March 25 2008 7:09 am EST:

Volunteer Leonard Gee, whose account of PZ's ejection is provided below, writes to clarify,

I was a volunteer and eyewitness at the Minneapolis Expelled movie where Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers showed up uninvited to this private event. PZ MYERS was asked to leave by security. Dawkins was admitted. Thank you also for posting my comments about the Expelled Minneapolis showing which Expelled Associate Producer Mark sent you. "Anonymous" on this blog questioned my comment pondering why Dawkins used a passport and not a driver's license. Blogger Al offered this explanation as a possibility:until 10 years or so ago, UK driving licenses simply did not have a photograph on them Thanks Al. To me that seems like a very reasonable explanation. My main point was simply to witness what I saw..in this case the fact that Dawkins signed in under "Clinton" and used a passport.
- Leonard Gee

My own view is that some are hoping that the uproar around PZ Myers can be used to discredit the film itself. My sense is that that won't happen. Not getting admitted to a private screening under controversial circumstances is hardly the same thing as suffering a concerted effort to ruin one's career, which is what happened to a number of ID-friendly scientists - with the hearty endorsement of PZ Myers, as you can see from the quote above. That is precisely what Expelled is about.

For the first time - in this film - many members of the public will get to see what Darwinism looks like up close - how the Darwinists enforce against anyone who questions their dogma. I wouldn't have believed it myself ten years ago. But it is what the evidence actually shows. There is no question that the history of life did NOT unfold the way they say, but the public trough is a hard habit to break, and they show no sign of wanting to break it.


March 24, 2008 9:55 pm EST A friend offers some angst posts at the science blogs:

Cognitive Daily

PZ's posts:

"Expelled"

"Late night quick one"

"Busy busy busy"


My friend notes that this blogger is collecting the links to all the blog posts about the incident:
"PZ Myers Expelled, gains sainthood"

I am told to expect more information soon. If I don't hear from anyone, I think I will just buy the DVD and send it to Myers.

12:52 pm: At Uncommon Descent, Dave Springer argues that the explanation for the discrepancy between the Expelled producers' account and Dawkins's and Myers's account about whether Myers received an invite to the Expelled screening is that Myers was gaming the system by responding to an invitation he had not actually received.

He fooled the host by gaming the invitation/response system employed. The host wasn’t checking RSVPs against a list of invitations sent out but rather just assumed that any RSVP received was in response to an invitation sent out.

Perhaps PZ will issue a statement on this. Meanwhile, I will still pay for his ticket if he agrees to sit through the film.

In other news, the Inside Higher Ed weighs in on the whole affair, opining

The movie, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” is already generating press in advance of its April 18 release. With a widely recognizable host, an explosive topic and a self-consciously conspiratorial tone, the slickly produced documentary at least has the ingredients for success on a Michael Moore scale. While popular conceptions of academe as a haven for aloof, godless eggheads isn’t uncommon, some scholars are especially worried that the movie could make an end run around science and take a misleading message to the public. The producers retort that intelligent design, prohibited in the classroom, has rightly reappeared in the cineplex.

Well, if you WANT an idea to spread, make it sound dangerous. If they taught ID in the classroom, most students would just snore through it. Now they won't.

Note: The above link originally read "Chronicle of Higher Ed". A helpful reader corrected the error for me. The reader insists that there is a big difference between the two politically, but I don't know.

Oh, and here's Richard Dawkins's account of Expelled:

The whole tone of the film is whiny, paranoid -- pathetic really. The narrator is somebody called Ben Stein. I had not heard of him, but apparently he is well known to Americans, for it is hard to see why else he would have been chosen to front the film. He certainly can't have been chosen for his knowledge of science, nor his powers of logical reasoning, nor his box office appeal (heavens, no), and his speaking voice is an irritating, nasal drawl, innocent of charm and of consonants. I suppose that makes it a good voice for conveying the whingeing paranoia that I referred to, so maybe that was qualification enough.

Now, to the film itself. What a shoddy, second-rate piece of work. A favourite joke among the film-making community is the 'Lord Privy Seal'. Amateurs and novices in the making of documentaries can't resist illustrating every significant word in the commentary by cutting to a picture of it. The Lord Privy Seal is an antiquated title in Britain's heraldic tradition. The joke imagines a low-grade film director who illustrates it by cutting to a picture of a Lord, then a privy, and then a seal. Mathis' film is positively barking with Lord Privy Seals.

I take it that he didn't have a good time, so I am glad if he didn't have to pay. If line producer Mark Mathis takes up my idea, neither will PZ have to pay. (I have offered to pay for PZ's ticket if he watches the film all the way to the end.)


9:05 am Meanwhile, science journalist Chris Mooney argues that Myers' getting the bum's rush out of the theatre will probably help Expelled.

A friend writes to say,

- after getting several comments from his readers suggesting that this is NOT good for 'Expelled' Mooney wrote the following...........
"could you folks please try, just this one time, to check your highly developed critical faculties at the door, and accept that most Americans don't see it your way, and won't? All they'll know is that Ben Stein has a new movie out and it's really controversial and getting a lot of attention."

Well, thanks to Darwin's fans, they probably know a bit more now ....

Another friend writes to remind me that the worst thing that could happen to Expelled would be indifference. You know, polite applause and all that. He asks me to remember Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. Screams from The New York Times about the film supposedly being anti-Semitic got it free publicity Gibson just couldn't buy.

I think that the ID guys should give the Times's Cornelia Dean the Phillip Johnson Wedge award for really putting the Expelled advance screenings on the map with her story about PZ's ouster. Unless they would prefer to give it to PZ himself.

Apparently Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers posted a YouTube video on March 22 on Myers's expulsion from Expelled. It's been viewed 1866 times since then (9:18 am EST) and is worth watching for their side of the story.

I think that Mark Mathis should let me pay for a ticket for Myers. Because I can link to his blog when he trashes the film, it would be a business expense for me.
But Myers would have to agree to sit through the film before running off to trash it. None of this, "I really tried, I sincerely honestly tried" stuff. If I pay, he ruddy watches the film.


So many people are coming to the blog today, that I should really take the opportunity to advertise my books. Here they are. The earlier story follows:




Earlier story:

Well, we have heard from Cornelia Dean of The New York Times that

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.

On those facts, everybody agrees. After that, things break down.

Well, I asked line producer Mark Mathis what he recalls from the evening, he sent me the account of a volunteer, Leonard Gee, which he said I had permission to post. I have changed the post only by adding some hard returns, for paragraphing, and cleaning up inevitable bad code:

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Minneapolis, Minnesota preview screening

March 20th 2008

As a local volunteer from Minneapolis, Minnesota I assisted with setting up the special Minneapolis preview screening of the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. The movie was set up specifically for specially invited guests of the film.

Unfortunately, more than just invited guests showed up. In fact several other rather notable uninvited guests also showed up as well - one by the name of P.Z. Myers and the other well known atheist Richard Dawkins (who were also in the film). After notifying the security at the Mall of America the P.Z. Myers was attempting to actually enter the theatre uninvited- the Mall of America security politely insisted he leave the theatre.

As the remaining movie guests filed past the volunteer I.D. checker several remaining Myers family members and friends, notably among them the atheist Richard Dawkins, checked in as a Myers invited guest.

Richard Dawkins signed in using the name ³Clinton² Dawkins and used his passport-rather then a drivers license to enter the theater as a guest of the Myers. (This is usually the kind of drama I am used to seeing on the screen once inside the movie theatre on the screen-and not in the hallway of a movie theatre. I knew it was going to be an very ³interesting² night ahead- indeed!).

Before the movie started, producer Mark Mathis first briefly introduced the film. Because this was a special early preview of the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, producer Mark Mathis mentioned that the film version we would be watching would be projected a bit dimly- as this was not the final directors-cut version of the film.

In spite of some minor technical issues with this early version of the movie I must say - the film really did a remarkable job presenting the controversy and really delivered on content. The imagery of the film was both powerful and beautiful- while at the same time nostalgic films clips injected some needed levity into a rather serious film subject.

The basic premise of the movie is simply that there should be a fair and open forum to present both Darwinian theory and Intelligent Design theory. The film suggests there should be academic freedom of speech.

Unfortunately, however, as the movie points out with numerous examples: openness within the academic community is slowly eroding and being replaced by a kind of academic political correctness.

Academia is slowly being closed off to new ideas - even scientific ones. The movie presents to the audience numerous dramatic examples of where there has been radical suppression of alternative scientific theories (hence the title of the film).

Why is this happening exactly? The movie suggests it is because scientists and academics simply dare to ask questions and about Darwinian evolutionary theory- which must be not be questioned. The movie provides numerous dramatic examples of this academic intolerance from Darwinists towards Intelligent Design theory.

Question and Answer session

Other than the movie itself, another highlight of the evening for me was the wonderful discussion that took place with producer Mark Mathis during his post-film Q&A session.

Although the general tone of the discussion was very civil things become energized when it became apparent that Richard Dawkins,one of the main interviewees in the film, was in the audience.

Dawkins stood up and abruptly started firing off questions at Producer Mark Mathis - who politely and very professionally informed the audience that this person was well-known atheist Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins stood up and questioned Mathis on several issues. He questioned Mathis on why P.Z. Myers was denied access to the free preview showing of the movie.

Mathis calmly responded by explaining that Myers had simply not been an invited guest to this free preview and pointed out the fact that he could pay to see the movie after its release.

(He also joked that he enjoyed the idea of Myers paying $8.00 to see the movie along with everyone else).

It certainly did not escape notice of myself or many in the theatre that Dawkins apparently also had entered into the free movie preview apparently as an uninvited guest.

After Mathis responded to Dawkins' first objection - Dawkins then claimed to object to the film on the premise that any interview he had done in the film was under the assumption that he was interviewed by Ben Stein and Mark Mathis for a film that was to be about the even-handed look at the Intelligent Design vs. Darwinian evolution controversy. The conversation basically went like this:

Dawkins: I agreed to be in the film under the assumption that I was being interviewed by Ben Stein (and by Mark Mathis) for a film that was to take an even-handed look at the Intelligent Design/Darwinian Evolution controversy.

Mathis- It was a fair treatment.

Dawkins--You got me into the movie under false pretenses.

Mathis- I told you that it was a movie about intelligent design and Darwinistic evolution controversy + (various other things that were in the
movie)

Dawkins: I was bending over backwards to define an example of what could be a potential source of life's origins. Repeats 'I was bending over backwards' several times. You ridiculed the alien concept.

Mathis- I did not ridicule the concept- we just showed in the movie what you said in response to the question.

Mathis- I want to correct- what you said on the radio show wasn't accurate; wasn't true (more discussion took place)

Dawkins- sorry I did misstate but it was a minor point.


Mathis:- I didn't think it was minor - you called me a liar.

At one point during the exchange between Mathis and Dawkins one unidentified audience member in the audience even politely stood up in obvious disagreement with Dawkins and correctly suggested that the main point of the film was that Intelligent Design should be presented along with Darwinian evolution.

Dawkins then attempted to try to continue in debate with Mathis even though Mathis had previously said that wanted the after-movie Q & A session to be about Q & A and not "debate". I really admired Mathis' smooth, controlled handling of the entire eveningŠespecially the Q & A session. He provided the forum with the type of welcoming and respectful open conversation - the kind of conversation and open discussion the film itself suggests should be much more commonplace -. especially within the academic community in America.

- Leonard Gee
Minneapolis, Minnesota

Meanwhile:

One blogger found himself expelled for even writing about the Expelled film.

In the next few hours, this blog post was visited by more than 10,000 new visitors. And many of them wrote to me, either via Comments on this blog, or by email. Almost all of them demonstrated clearly that they’ve already made up their minds about Expelled even before it is ready for theaters. And almost all of them seem to think that Stuart is launching some kind of nuclear attack on them and their evolutionist theories. They have risen up en masse and published character assassinations of Stuart, calling him “a shameful liar” and “a disgrce to his university,” when in fact he was just a college student and a moviegoer who sent me an off-the-cuff email telling me about his memorable moviegoing experience.
Sounds like somebody’s really scared. I’ve been buried in hate mail from evolutionists and athiests in the last 24 hours, much of it laced with obscenities and spectacular recommendations about sex acts that Christians should go and do with themselves. Ah, what fine representatives for their worldview. Very little of the response has borne any substance. (I’ve posted some of the comments that came in, but only those that were offered with civility and restraint. I eventually gave up on sifting through the pile for looking for more.)

Having heard these and other accusations - including a claim of a "fairly libelous"accusation from foxfier (the accuser seems unaware that foxfier is a woman), I contacted line producer Mark Mathis.

Incidentally, last summer, I (Denyse) was at a meeting where four scientists whose careers had been shipwrecked by frantic, persecutory Darwinists spoke about what had happened to them.

An elderly scientist got up and said that it almost provoked him to thoughts of violence, to think that these fine people should be so burdened by troubles and struggles because the evidence from their work did not support Darwin.

Well, maybe Expelled will help. Most of them are in the film, I gather.

Look, I can't help the fact that Darwinism isn't true. Nor can they. They - and I - just want the persecution to end.

Imagine Yoko Ono Shutting Down Showings of Expelled?

So far it is imaginary.

Ono is seeking at least $75,000 in damages and injunctive relief.

Her case turns on the use of some lines from Ono’s late husband John Lennon’s ”Imagine”*.

On April 30, 2008, a New York-based United States judge, Sidney Stein, enjoined “further distribution” of Expelled until Yoko Ono’s lawsuit for copyright infringement is heard.

A legal eagle friend has shown me a copy of the judge’s order, with hand-scrawled changes. It means that new copies of the film can’t be sent out until the hearing later this month, but so far as I can see, the current copies of the film can continue to be shown.

*While finding the link to Lennon and “Imagine” on YouTube, I noticed quite a number of attacks on Expelled. But so far no one seems to have pirated footage of the film, or at least not that they are crowing about.

I almost think that’s too bad. I am getting impatient. So many American friends have seen it, but it is not coming to Canada till at least June 6.

While we are here, how is Expelled doing after 17 days?

Well, as I write this (7:18 EST), it is #6 in political documentaries, #13 in documentaries, and #10 in Christian documentaries at MOJO. Here’s the daily calendar view. I don’t yet have more than an estimate for this weekend's box office, but it comes out to:

TOTAL LIFETIME GROSSES: Domestic: $6,619,000 est.

About the people who are confidently predicting doom for Expelled, a friend writes to say that they crack him up:

I believe it's #13 of all time in box office receipts after only two weekends and it's possible, if not likely, it will crack into the top ten before it's done. $6 million going into the third weekend is tanking? This person needs to check out "Where in the world is Osama Bin Laden" which came out on the same weekend as EXPELLED. I don't think Spurlock's bomb (the guy who brought you Supersize Me) has even made $300k yet. That's a poor performing film. By contrast, EXPELLED is a huge success.

By the way, I wouldn’t pay much attention to reader opinion at the MoJo site:

GRADE THIS MOVIE
Readers B- (362 votes)
Your Grade Log in
GRADE BREAKDOWN
As: 229 63.3%
Bs: 12 3.3%
Cs: 3 0.8%
Ds: 3 0.8%
Fs: 115 31.8%

In other words, what you think of Expelled depends on whether you think that scientists should be allowed to talk about evidence of design in the universe or life forms. But if you don’t think so, you were less likely than others to see the film. In fact, I have no idea what proportion of the 31.8% who failed the film did in fact see it. There would really be no need for them to do so, of course; they could always watch another film and go home and rant about Expelled anyway.

Will Expelled foes try to influence Internet search rankings?

I received this press release moments ago:

The skinny:

1. The Expelled producers have filed suit in the Northern District of Texas seeking declaratory judgment that there is no copyright or other infringement. Premise Media also seeks its attorneys’ fees in responding to the XVIVO claims.

2. They also suspect that some will try to influence Internet search ranks for Expelled, to direct persons seeking information to attack sites instead. (To solve this problem, just go to Expelled directly.)

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed Producers File Lawsuit and Expose Other Efforts to Suppress Free Speech

Movie to Open in over 1,000 theaters This Friday

Premise Media is ready to challenge the unfounded copyright infringement claims asserted recently by representatives of XVIVO, LLC concerning original animation Premise Media created for the documentary, EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed.

On April 14, 2008, Premise Media filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas seeking declaratory judgment that there is no copyright or other infringement. Premise Media also seeks its attorneys’ fees in responding to the XVIVO claims.

The suit results from unfounded claims recently made by representatives of XVIVO. These claims have received wide distribution as part of an ongoing campaign attempting to discredit the film and its producers.

Premise Media has also learned of grass root efforts that are underway to try to influence the ranking of internet searches regarding Expelled by those wanting to learn about the film. Their stated goal is an attempt to counter-site those searchers to other websites that criticize the themes in the movie.

“We are not surprised that opponents of our film are attempting to interfere with its important message. As the movie documents, similar tactics are being used across the country against many of the researchers, scientists, and professors who want to engage in free debate within science but have inadequate resources to challenge the Establishment. However, we do have the platform to confront the ‘thought police,’ and we will work tirelessly to open the doors of free speech and inquiry,” said Executive Producer and Premise Chairman Logan Craft.

Executive Producer Walt Ruloff noted that, “EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed opens in over 1,000 theaters nationwide this Friday, April 18th. It is interesting that these efforts are made less than ten days before the movie debuts and involve those who continually seek to thwart open debate. While bullying tactics may work against some individuals who are trying to explore the origins of life, it will not work against us. We certainly will not allow a small group of self-appointed gatekeepers to infringe our rights of free speech and our obligation to expose them for what they are – namely, intellectual thugs unwilling to accept any dissent from Darwinian orthodoxy.”

Ben Stein, the star of the movie, also makes it clear that no one will shut him up. “I came to this project unsure what I would find. I am now amazed at the intolerance of many academic elites. I feel that it is my mission to speak out on behalf of targeted dissenters and fight for their freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry.”

Advance screening of Ben Stein's controversial Expelled film at the Varsity theatre in Toronto

I have been invited to an advance screening of Expelled (the widely denounced #5 political documentary about the attempts to silence the intelligent design guys) on Thursday, June 26, at 7:00pm at The Varsity Theatre - 55 Bloor St. West in Toronto. The film opens the following Friday June 27 (or Saturday June 28) at the Cineplex Odeon.

I wonder who will picket or try to crash? (There was a big hoo-haw over the screening at the Mall of the Americas when "raving atheist" biologist PZ Myers got ejected by line producer Mark Mathis.) Perhaps I will recognize some prominent local figures strutting importantly on the sidewalk.

Picketers please note, there is a wide sidewalk, and plenty of coffee shops nearby. The restrooms in the Cumberland Terrace are usually pretty clean too.

Be reassured, picketers! The government-funded Nanny Monster is always right, and she says that neither the universe nor life forms show evidence of design, despite the evidence. And in our random universe, the biggest Monster should rule, and that is She.

She said it. You believe it. That settles it. Now get out there and give the legacy media some good photo ops, will you? Most of you are supported by my tax dollars, among other things, and I deserve something for that. Don't look too ragged, or people won't believe that you are as important as you believe yourselves to be.

Insufficiently Nannied? Then see clips from the film here.

I understand that somewhere or other, a helpline is available for anyone who - on learning information that is new to them - has Doubts. You can contact this worthy enterprise through ohjustgrowup.com

From the invite,

In the film, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," author, former presidential speechwriter, economist, lawyer and actor Ben Stein examines the attempts of scientists to challenge the idea of Darwinism only to be expelled from the academic community.

More, from the presser:

Controversial feature documentary starring Ben Stein - opens across Canada - Friday, June 27, 2008

In a controversial new satirical documentary, author, former presidential speechwriter, economist, lawyer and actor Ben Stein travels the world, looking to some of the best scientific minds of our generation for the answer to the biggest question facing all Canadians and Americans today:

Are we still free to disagree about the meaning of life?

Or has the whole issue already been decided…
while most of us weren’t looking?

Toronto) June 3, 2008 — It’s a movie that Ferris Bueller would take the day off to go see. What freedom-loving student wouldn’t be outraged to discover that his high school science teacher is teaching a theory as indisputable fact, and that university professors oppose any fellow scientists who dare question the prevailing system of belief? This isn’t the latest Hollywood comedy; it’s a disturbing new documentary that will shock anyone who thinks all scientists are free to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.

If you are from the legacy media and want to see the film before harrumphing that it is false, all utterly false (just like Mark Steyn "isn't" really a good writer):

Toronto Press Screenings:

Friday, June 6 10:00am Scotiabank Theatre (259 Richmond St W)
Monday, June 9 10:30am Scotiabank Theatr (259 Richmond St W)
Friday, June 13 10:00am Varsity Cinemas (55 Bloor St W, 2nd Floor)
Monday, June 16 10:30am Varsity Cinemas (55 Bloor St W, 2nd Floor)
Thursday, June 26 07:00pm Varsity Cinemas (55 Bloor St W, 2nd Floor)

I expect you should contact V Kelly & Associates 416-466-9799, info@vkpr.ca for a press pass.

See also:

The Expelled film (#5 in political documentaries) is coming to 50 screens in Canada, ... plus a surprise in two in store for Americans (Expelled haters, take heed)!

Canadian radio bureau chief: Yes, the campaign to suppress free speech in Canada does affect the United States

Oh no, Ono!: Expelled (the film about the intelligent design guys) can still be shown

"Expelled film screens in Canada June 28 2008

Recently, there was a special screening for Members of Parliament.

If you want to know why there is an intelligent design controversy, read:

The Expelled film: The box office and other important stuff

Many people were hoping that the Expelled documentary about the suppression of evidnce for intelligent design of the uiverse and life forms would tank at the box office. It seems to have stayed in the top ten, opening on many fewer screens than the films that ranked higher. Says Entertainment Weekly:

Also of note, Ben Stein's political/science documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (No. 9) earned $3.2 mil. That's a very respectable total for a documentary, although non-fiction fare rarely opens in 1,052 theaters, as this right-leaning movie did. It's also, as you'll no doubt read elsewhere, substantially smaller than the $23.9 mil that the left-leaning Fahrenheit 9/11 debuted with in 2004 — but I'm not sure that's a fair comparison given how Michael Moore's film was about a much more resonant topic, had broad mainstream buzz, and opened during the summer.

Nevertheless, Expelled performed much better than the weekend's other new current-affairs documentary, Where in the World Is Osama Bin Laden? That movie, the second feature from Super Size Me's Morgan Spurlock, banked a mere $143,299 in 102 locations, for a terrible $1,405 average.

Here's Daily Box Office on the details.

One source, Darwinian Fundamentalism, notes,

The full weekend estimates for Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed are in, and these numbers indicate that it will end up doing 43% better than expectations. Before the weekend, I found 3 estimates which averaged $2.2 million. The indications are that it will end up at $3.153 million, which is 43% above estimates and a huge opening for a documentary.

Several important observations: while it ended up 9th overall, it ended up #5 in per screen average, and #3 in per screen average on Sunday. This is a very key number, because it means it was successful for theater owners, and they are likely to keep it around longer.

My own view is that Expelled's biggest enemy will be the people who are disappointed that it is not a holler for Jesus. I am hearing from some of them already (or would be if I hadn't turned the sound off).

Also, Vic Holtreman at Screen Rant offers a surprisingly sensible estimation of the critics' frothing over the Expelled documentary. He begins by observing that

Your opinion of the film will with almost complete certainty be predicted by your opinions on Darwinism vs Intelligent Design.

Yes, exactly. In consequence, most reviews are a waste of time. You should see the film yourself.

It all reminds me of the frantic campaign by Darwin fans to pull down the ratings of the critical Design of Life textbook supplement. It didn't work, but the effort they put into it was pretty impressive.

Also, David Klinghoffer comments on the link between Darwin and Hitler:

The Darwin-Hitler connection is no recent discovery. In her classic 1951 work The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt wrote: “Underlying the Nazis’ belief in race laws as the expression of the law of nature in man, is Darwin’s idea of man as the product of a natural development which does not necessarily stop with the present species of human being.”

The standard biographies of Hitler almost all point to the influence of Darwinism on their subject. In Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, Alan Bullock writes: “The basis of Hitler’s political beliefs was a crude Darwinism.” What Hitler found objectionable about Christianity was its rejection of Darwin’s theory: “Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest.”

John Toland’s Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography says this of Hitler’s Second Book published in 1928: “An essential of Hitler’s conclusions in this book was the conviction drawn from Darwin that might makes right.”

For more on Hitler's "Second Book (Zweites Buch)", go here.

Expelled film coming to Canada - fifty screens, and ... a surprise or two in store for Americans

I just talked to Kevin Miller, one of the Expelled screenwriters. Having cleared the legal hurdle created by Yoko Ono's lawsuit, the Ben Stein film about the intelligent design guys is opening on 50 screens across Canada starting June 28.

Update on screenings here (2008 06 15)

Considering the problems that dogged the production of Expelled (claims that key Darwinists were tricked into taking part, the ejection of "raving atheist" PZ Myers from a showing, accusations of copyright violation (not really substantiated), release delayed from February to April, and of course, Ono's lawsuit), it is surprising that the film is even out of the can, let alone that it is #5 in political documentaries.

Pretty remarkable given that, as Kevin points out, it is a film about the philosophy of science.

Another way of looking at that is: Anyone who thinks there is no culture war in progress should reflect on the fact that a film about the philosophy of science could be the #5 political documentary.

So it will be fascinating to watch the ritual denunciations in Canadian legacy media, and the accompanying predictions of disastrous sales.

Kevin, born in Saskatchewan but currently living in BC, also told me about two upcoming developments in the States that I can't yet reveal except to say that American harrumphologists will be plenty annoyed. Stay tuned.

Incidentally, I had been complaining about the fact that the Expelled folk wouldn't send me an advance copy, not even when the Canada release was delayed due to Ono's lawsuit. (It was supposed to be June 6.) Well, Kevin couldn't get an advance copy either, and he was the screenwriter. They took no risks, he confirmed, that the film might end up on the Internet (instead of grossing $7.5 million so far).

See also Oh no, Ono!: Expelled (the film about the intelligent design guys) can still be shown

"Expelled film screens in Canada June 28 2008

Intelligent design film: Volunteer's account of what really happened when Darwinist was kicked out of the screening

Expelled ten days later ...

According to Box Office Mojo, Expelled is estimated to have

- earned $5,282,000 in 10 days.

- it is currently ranked 6th in political documentary, 12th in Christian, and 15th in documentary.

- It is currently ranked 13 in films, but every film ranked above it was released in far more theatres.

Meanwhile, John Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono, is suing the Expelled filmmakers over their use of his 1971 song Imagine, ranked all time # 3 by Rolling Stone. The producers claim they cited it under fair use for commentary and criticism.

The Expelled producers replied to Ms. Ono, "Let it be," adding,

Premise did not pursue a license for the song and had no obligation to do so. Unbiased viewers of the film will see that the Imagine clip was used as part of a social commentary in the exercise of free speech. The brief clip - consisting of a mere 10 words - was used to contrast the messages in the documentary and was not used as an endorsement of EXPELLED.

But the irony of this lawsuit was not lost on the film's star Ben Stein, "So Yoko Ono is suing over the brief Constitutionally protected use of a song that wants us to 'Imagine no possessions'? Maybe instead of wasting everyone's time trying to silence a documentary she should give the song to the world for free? After all, 'imagine all the people sharing all the world...You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the World can live as one.'"

John P. Meyer at Pegasus News thinks, as I do, that

Frankly, it looks like the instigators of the lawsuit are playing right into the hands of the filmmakers, who're naturally (and in time-honored fashion) taking the approach that "all publicity is good publicity."

Apparently, Ms. Ono is trying to stop the distribution of Expelled, but there she certainly hasn't the advantage of originality. However, at least one group of fans has sent me a message urging that people see the film soon in case she succeeds.

In case she succeeds? I can't think of a better way to be sure that a billion people see it.

Meanwhile, if you want to hear and see Lennon's Imagine, go here, and here's Lennon with the other Beatles, in Let it be.

Oh no, Ono!: Expelled (the film about the intelligent design guys) can still be shown

On Monday, John Lennon's widow Yoko Ono lost her attempt to prevent the distribution of Expelled because of an excerpt from Lennon's "Imagine." Ono is appealing, and doubtless, this high-profile case will impact other copyright issues. But here's some gen for now:

From the Associated Press:

NY judge: Film can use John Lennon song By TOM HAYS

[ ... ]

U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein ruled that if the case went to court, the filmmakers would probably win under the fair use doctrine.

"That doctrine provides that the fair use of a copyrighted work for the purposes of criticism and commentary is not an infringement of copyright," Stein wrote in his decision in Manhattan federal court.

[ ... ]

At a hearing last month, Falzone had argued that the segment of the song in the film — "nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too" — was central to the movie because "it represents the most popular and persuasive embodiment of this viewpoint that the world is better off without religion."

The film, he said, is "asking if John Lennon was right and it's concluding he was wrong."

Ono had countered by saying, "One of the most basic rights I control by reviewing and choosing licenses is the right to say `no.' The filmmakers simply looted me of the ability to do so."

Hmmm. It's a bit more complex than Ono is making out, because the right she is claiming undermines the opportunity to critique her late husband's work, which is NOT one of the purposes of intellectual property rights.

In fact, it's a bit like the Canadian "human rights" regime (which is why I no longer have a combox, unfortunately). If you want to know more about that, go here, but actually the worthwhile end of the Canadian blogosphere is lighting up across the board : Here, for example, are also
Jay Currie
Small Dead Animals
Mark Steyn
Free Mark Steyn
Five Feet of Fury

Back to our topic, from the BBC news: Ono loses Lennon song legal bid:

Ono, her son Sean Ono Lennon, and Julian Lennon - Lennon's son from his first marriage - had sought a preliminary injunction before the film gets a wider release.

But Mr Stein ruled that if the case went to court, the film-makers would probably win under laws allowing the use of copyrighted material for commentary or criticism.

[ ... ]

The film presents a sympathetic view of intelligent design - the theory that the universe is too complex to be explained by evolution alone.

It opened in the US in April and is set for release in Canada later this month and on DVD in October.

Note: Intelligent design does not say, strictly speaking, that the universe is too complex to be explained by evolution alone. Lots of things are very complex - like a pile of gravel, for example. A pile of gravel could evolve if someone dumped a bit more every day. What differentiates some types of complexity is that they seem to require intelligence. A good novel and life in the universe have more in common in that respect than a pile of gravel has with either of them.

From the NY Post: IMAGINE! YOKO LOSES BID TO NIX SONG By KATI CORNELL June 3, 2008 --

Oh no, Yoko.

A federal judge unplugged a bid by John Lennon's widow to stop the producers of a movie disputing Darwin's theory of evolution from using a snippet of the former Beatle's iconic song "Imagine."

Yoko Ono, 75, sued the makers of "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," claiming the movie uses an excerpt of the song without her permission and wrongly suggests that she somehow authorized or sponsored the film.

But Manhattan federal Judge Sidney Stein found in favor of the film's producers, noting that the 15-second clip from "Imagine" is used for a "transformative purpose" that sets out to "criticize the song's message."

From The Press Association: Yoko loses Lennon's song court bid

Yoko Ono has lost her court case to block the use of John Lennon's song Imagine in a film challenging the theory of evolution.

Lennon's widow had sued the makers of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, saying they used parts of the song without her permission.

Federal Judge Sidney Stein said the filmmakers were protected under the "fair use" doctrine, which permits small parts of a copyrighted work to be used without an author's permission under certain circumstances.

And at Uncommon Descent, Dave Scot writes,

Yoko Ono’s copyright infringement suit against the makers of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed for using 15 seconds of the Lennon song Imagine was thrown out of court. Of course we all knew it was no more than a nuisance suit brought because Ono didn’t approve of the film’s negative view of the philosophy expressed in Imagine.

And here's the Fair use Project (who represented Expelled):

“This case is not just about fair use, it is about free speech,” explained Anthony Falzone, executive director of the Fair Use Project and lead counsel on the case. “The right to use portions of copyrighted works in order to criticize them and discuss the views they represent lies at the heart of the fair use doctrine because that right is essential to the free flow of ideas, thoughts, and debate.”

What's that? Right to criticize and discuss? A stake through the heart of Darwinism!

Expelled Movie: Catholic columnist liked it, and its Jewish backbone, much better than he had feared

Columnist Christopher A. Ferrara, of New Jersey-based Catholic magazine Remnant, admits,

When I went to a local movie theatre to see “ Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” during its short run, I went with very low expectations, and more out of a sense of duty than anything else. The critics had uniformly savaged this documentary exposé of the academic tyranny of the Darwinian establishment, and even allowing for their liberal bias I had expected to encounter a schlock production along the lines of other such films produced with the backing of evangelicals and fundamentalists.

But the film about the ID guys wasn't as bad as Ferrara feared.

Actually, on that score, I could have told Ferrara to fear not. The film was made by professionals, not by people who save souls by emptying theatres. Anyway, he writes,

Imagine my surprise and delight when I realized that the critical savaging of this film was probably motivated primarily by fear—fear that “Expelled” might actually succeed in tearing down what the film, in a thematic allegory, likens to a Berlin Wall in academia, behind which are confined in lonely exile the hardy few who have dared to challenge the teaching of Saint Darwin by stating the obvious: that the emergence of life in all its unimaginable and irreducible complexity can only have been the result of creation according to an intelligent design. With Ben Stein, the lawyer, former presidential speechwriter and Hollywood celebrity as its front man and narrator, “Expelled” is a lavishly mounted and brilliantly executed piece of anti-Darwinian propaganda, in the best sense of the word.

and

It hardly needs to be explained how stunning a breakthrough this film is, even despite its flaws (including a rather painful-to-watch appeal to Jeffersonian liberalism as the antidote to Darwinism). I paid three times to see “Expelled,” for the sheer pleasure of watching over and over again such an unexpected bombshell of a movie, hardly believing that Stein would have lent his name to the production, since it surely means the end of his Hollywood career.

Of course, when someone's career "ends" because he says something that so manifestly needed to be said (witness all the establishment types insisting that it ain't so, ain't so, ain't so ... ), that's because he has outlived that career.

Ferrara also notes that the film ends with "a tableau of three Jewish intellectuals: Stein (valedictorian of his class at Yale Law School), nuclear physicist Dr. Gerald Schroeder (formerly of MIT and now a professor at Hebrew University), and mathematician and philosopher Dr. David Berlinski" and he then goes on to talk about David Berlinski's excellent The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions.

Agnostic Berlinski is particularly hard on "Catholic evolutionists" in a Remnant interview with Berlinski in Paris (May 9, 2008), which he reproduces just below the rview of Expelled:

CF: Let’s turn to the Catholic Church, which is our focus here. Let’s talk in particular about somebody like Ken Miller who piously assures us that “as a Catholic, I have no problem reconciling the theory of evolution with my faith.” But then he’ll turn around and deny intelligent design. Now my question would be, isn’t that a disingenuous position?

DB: Well, I hesitate to talk about Ken Miller’s Catholic faith because I regard him as being disingenuous across the board…. As I understand Miller, he’s not denying intelligent design. He’s simply pushing it to a level such that it will never be an impediment to any particular dogma in the here and now. And he’s perfectly prepared to say that the cosmos is in some sense intelligently designed. He’s prepared to say that because the evidence is overwhelming that it is. He’s just determined not to see evidence of intelligent design in any process of living systems.

CF: And why?

DB: Because that would put him squarely in conflict with prevailing orthodoxy…. Like so many other people, Ken Miller wants to serve as many gods as he can.

CF: …. So that’s the issue. Where is there a place for God in the system of someone who says, at one and the same time, I am a Catholic, but life arose through a stochastic process? Where is there room for God in that system? A verbal affirmation?

DB: He [God] is very far away where he can do no trouble and interfere with no human activities, and that is exactly the point of the exercise: to retain the piety of devotion without any inconvenience of faith.

But the whole interview is worth reading, particularly when Berlinski addresses the unfruitful tautology of "survival of the fittest" (which makes few or no predictions) and compares it to the fruitful tautology of Newton's account of gravity.

Note: Blogging may be spotty for a few days because I will be teaching at Write! Canada and I have recently been apprised that I have 19 students, as of last count, in Freelance Survival 101, or whatever we are calling it this year. So I must prepare, prepare, prepare. I will likely blog, but probably only one entry at a time rather than five at once. Meanwhile, slainte and l'chaim and salaam and all that to all readers!

Note: Blogging may be spotty for a few days because I will be teaching at Write! Canada and I have just been apprised that I have 19 students, as of last count, in Freelance Survival 101, or whatever we are calling it this year. So I must prepare, prepare, prepare. I will likely blog, but probably only one entry at a time rather than five at once. Meanwhile, slainte and l'chaim and salaam and all that to all readers!

"Expelled Exposed" Exposed - the saga continues

Here's a useful link to the response to efforts to pretend that scientists whose research convinces them that the universe shows evidence of design do not face persecution.

(I've covered the persecution for years. To say it is not happening is, to me, like saying 9-11 didn't happen. It is always possible for an ideologue to construct an alternate reality - a legend in his own mind, in which the event is not happening. He likes his alternate reality, of course.)

[Evil Disco warning]

Most of the falsehoods in circulation about the film can be traced to a website called "Expelled Exposed" set up by the pro-Darwin National Center for Science Education (NCSE) as part of its PR effort to smear the documentary last year. “Expelled Exposed” alleges that Expelled made “dishonest attempts to make mountains out of molehills and to create martyrs where martyrdom does not exist.” As John West observed in response, "The basic thrust of [“Expelled Exposed”] seems to be the preposterous claim that pro-ID scientists never, ever face harassment, intimidation, or persecution. Not ever! Scientists who claim otherwise—such as biologist Richard Sternberg, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez, and Baylor University engineering professor Robert Marks—must be cry-babies or worse. The NCSE's approach is otherwise known as 'blaming the victim.'"

Anyway, this is how the film is doing in DVD:

Amazon.com Sales Rank: #294 in Movies & TV (See Bestsellers in Movies & TV)

Popular in these categories: (What's this?)
#8 in Movies & TV > Documentary
#70 in Movies & TV > Comedy

#8 - that's in the Top Ten in docs. Not bad for a film that so many were determined to destroy. Even St. Yoko Ono ... wow!