EZ Propaganda: Can Adults Distinguish Between Fiction and Reality?

I don't watch movies much, but my family does quite a bit. Sometimes (more often than I like), I overhear the plot and give in to the urge to watch. On such an occasion, I recently saw "The Day After Tomorrow."It seemed quite obvious that this movie was some sort of tribute to evolution of the Darwin kind (watch the movie again and look for subtle hints, particularly background pictures in the library scenes). In particular, it seemed to be an answer to a puzzling fact, to which creationists are, of late, bringing more and more attention ~ namely, the instantly frozen Mammoths, which creationists claim to have been victims of the violent Noachian Flood.I don't know if the evolutionists have any serious, scholarly attempts for answers to the puzzle of the frozen mammoths or not, but, if they do, such answers are probably somewhat inaccessible to the common person, most likely being in some boring journal or the like.Enter Hollywood with its "The Day After Tomorrow," which proposes these mythical land hurricanes that bring -150 degree air from the trophosphere. Not only does this movie make big government look like it is just dying to help us all, but it provides a realistic-looking (and yet fictional) reason for the instant freezing of some of the wooly mammoths (watch the movie again if you did not see the reference to the frozen mammoths).So, immediately, upon watching the movie I figured this was propaganda to give the common man an answer to creationists' questions about the frozen mammoths. After all, the common man has now seen with his own eyes the terrible storms that froze the mammoths ages ago just like the paleoclimatologist (played by Dennis Quaid, I think) predicted (and if the president had not doubted him, half the world would have been saved).I wondered how effective this has been. Recently, I was allowed a glimpse. A man was repairing the freezer's light (at Hardees, where I work). He would come out every so often to warm up; so I related a funny news story to him, which I often do to people who are chilly. The story spoke of people in Maine who worked in an ice plant. The air outside the plant was -30 degrees fahrenheit, but the air in the freezers was only zero degrees fahrenheit. So the workers would tend to huddle in the freezers to stay warm. I told him, "THAT is just ONE reason I don't live in Maine."It is meant to get a chuckle and no more, but this fella says (and I just crack up whenever I think about this), "Did you ever see that movie "The Day After Tomorrow?" I said I had seen it. Then he says something like {not an exact quote but close, hopefully}, "It's not the ice and the snow, it's that cold air the storm brings down that gets you." He motioned with his hands to help me see the cold air coming down...supressing my laughter and an urge to tell him he had been the victim of propaganda (I don't think he would have believed me)...I just nodded my head. It's like he confused watching "The Day After Tomorrow" with watching a special on NOVA about the Ice Age or something (not that I would consider NOVA's account any less fictional, but I would, at least, understand him regarding NOVA as a source of truth).To me, this just supports the notion that "someone" wants people to believe in evolution and will use any means to achieve this end. Does anyone else see "The Day After Tomorrow" as an obvious attempt, throught propaganda, to shut down a strong creationists' argument among us common people (i.e., folks who are moderately to poorly educated), the group of people, with whom the creationists have, of late, been having some success in convincing?{I don't know which forum, if any, this belongs to...if none, that's alright.}

I was really thinking of the Coffee Shop, but I was unsure if Coffee Shop topics needed to be approved first or not. Many topics there were moved there from here, and that made me unsure. After having read Adminnemoose's (sp?) PNT instructional post (yes...AFTER I posted the PNT ), I'm thinking the Coffee Shop topics don't need approval.On the other hand, Admins might think this topic belongs elsewhere; so...

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

TheLiteralist writes:

quote:

---

Does anyone else see "The Day After Tomorrow" as an obvious attempt, throught propaganda, to shut down a strong creationists' argument among us common people

---

No.We understand how the mammoths were frozen fairly well. It is not an "evolutionist" perspective. After all, a flood is liquid water, not ice. Therefore, the existence of frozen mammoths has nothing to do with either creationism or evolution.The Day After Tomorrow was a silly little movie. The best climatologists have ever said about it is that it has people talking about climate change. Not even the author of the book from which the movie was made is of the opinion that the events in it could actually happen. It's called science fiction for a reason.If you are getting your science information from a piece of science fiction, perhaps you should reconsider your method of information accrual.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

When I watched the movie, I wondered if anyone else beside me actually noticed the absurdity of such temperature drop, which I believe the characters said something like the temperature would drop 10 degrees per second. The reason the trophosphere is so cold is because it is so far and the pressure is so low. Since the pressure is so low up there, molecules move a lot slower. If by some miracle the air from the trophosphere move down into the biosphere, the temperature of the same air mass would increase dramatically simply because of the significant increase in air pressure.So, let us assume that temperature indeed drop that fast if such a storm occurs in reality. Even if people don't die from the temperature drop by locking themselves in a room with a big fireplace, they all would suffocate to death because of the extremely low air pressure.Can anyone tell me how those helicopters got to New York that quickly or where they got to refuel... assuming they came from Mexico?
Anyway, I think the only other movie that beats it for the prize for worst science ever would be The Core. And how the hell does the Earth magnetic field block infrared radiation from the sun?

Well you would say that wouldn't you?please excuse me while I get my deloren upto 88mph... :-)On a more serious note I agree with Rrhain - it's a movie, anyone using it as a guide to the sciences shouldn't be allowed out of the house.

Hi Lam,When the fella was explaining to me, "It's not the snow or the ice, it's the cold air the storm brings down that gets you" (or something like that), he seemed very serious. I am very concerned that most people are NOT able to totally separate fiction from reality when modern special effects can produce such realistic-looking scenes. Afterall, many people who are NOT informed as you are would not necessarily consider it absurd (I am glad you recognized the absurdity...it's hard not to laugh about it, ain't it?), and NOW they have SEEN such storms with their own eyes (the most convincing evidence to most people, I think).It really was all I could do to keep from laughing out loud right in front of the guy because he seemed so serious. I laughed when I wrote the OP for this, and I'm grinning big now. .I think the masses are easily led by TV and movies. One lady, in a religious discussion with my dad (no science involved), told my dad she thought a person's soul turned into a little light and floated away after death. My dad had not heard this idea before, and so, astonished, asked her what made her think this was the case. Well, she had seen it in a movie.You've inspired me. I shall try to make time to do a little research into the absurdity of such storms because, since I think Noah's Flood is somehow responsible for the frozen mammoths, I am bound to run across this "No...those big ice storms froze them" reasoning.Added by edit:
I THOUGHT the magnetic field did filter radiation somehow.
I never saw "Core" though, or, if I did, I have forgotten it.This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 12-13-2004 06:16 AMThis message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 12-13-2004 06:44 AM

You find freezing land hurricanes less plausible than a worldwide flood? Not to say I believe in something a fictional movie posits, but where exactly did you find the scientific evidence of a worldwide flood? Specifically one that sorts fossils?I know plenty have seen this in various Bible movies, but of course this underlines where such a thing was first posited... the Bible. Why is a global flood somehow respectable and less laughable because it is in an old book rather than a recent movie?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Actually, you are confusing our ozone layer with our magnetic field. Take my word for it, the world wouldn't end if we somehow loose our magnetic field.

I have a couple of questions.Firstly doesn't this seem a bit paranoid ?

quote:

---

So, immediately, upon watching the movie I figured this was propaganda to give the common man an answer to creationists' questions about the frozen mammoths

---

If you jump to conclusions like that then I suspect that your own ability to tell fiction from reality is likely to be impaired when you hear a fiction that fits your world view.Secondly would it not be better to investigate the real story behind the frozen mammoths ? Surely that would put you on a better basis to talk about the subject than simply preparing to refute one bad argument. As I understand it, the whole idea that the mammoths were "quick-frozen" is itself something of a fiction.

What I learned recently was that it was default that the earth was WARMER in a prior time until people started dealing with the large mammal that had only be found (in recorded history) in warm climates. Death is easier to figure with the cold. There is the childhood saying, "If you can have more and more heat or more and more cold which would you prefer?" and the answer was more cold, as one can always put more layers (blankets on) but one can only take so many layers of clothes off.

Yup, for one thing mammoths' natural habitats were frozen and barren lands. It's like trying to put a mystery onto dead frozen bodies of Eskimos with the headline, "Eskimos were mysteriously and quickly frozen right after death!!!"

Hi Holmes,I believe the fossils (usually embedded in sedimetary rock, even fossils of the giant land-dwelling dinosaurs) and the tremendous sedimentary rock layers testify of a watery demise of the pre-flood world. In case it isn't clear, I believe the fossils and sedimentary layers, in general, are a direct result of Noah's Flood. I am not so certain that I would try to rely solely on science for all events of the Flood, but I do believe that there is abundant evidence of such an event. You obviously don't believe this.However, while I find your question challenging and interesting, this is not the actual point of the thread. Do you think "The Day After Tomorrow" amounts to someone's desire to give the average person an answer to creationists' rantings about frozen mammoths? In other words, do you think it is evolutionary propaganda? The validity or invalidity of evolution is not actually the issue in this thread, not to me, at least.I have not yet been to the Flood Geology forum, but please, if you're interested, click here for a link to a Flood Geology thread and, when I can, I will try to answer as many Flood related questions as I can.Thanks.

This is true. During the extreme heat in the summer, you can find me walking around almost naked

Heh! It's an old bumper sticker saying.Anyways, PaulK,I can understand you thinking it's paranoid of me, but I have been studying movies since I was twelve in that I look for the "message" that is not so apparent.For instance,
My mom and sister REALLY love the Little House on the Prairie series. They have purchased the 6 seasons that have been made available and have watched it nearly day and night for months. Michael Landon's face is permanently burned into our TV tube. Now the Ingalls family (Michael Landon is Charles Ingalls) is a devout Christian family and the series comes off as a series that teaches old-fashioned morals. But if you watch closely you will notice that fundamentalists are usually portrayed as mental nuts and extremely harsh disciplinarians that give their children mental problems. Or, even more subtle, when Laura Ingalls asks her pa Charles Ingalls, the devout Christian father who goes about doing good, (Michael Landon, who is also producer, so presumably the "messages" are his), "Does God really punish people like it says in the Bible?" Charles Ingalls says, "No, I don't believe He does that." Or something like that. So here is the devout Christian man (admired I'm sure by Christian ladies around the country) saying the Bible isn't COMPLETELY true. This was a very popular series, and I have no doubt that many a devout Christian lady found Charles's logic hard to argue with.Do I think Hollywood preaches? You bet I do!