Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2019 2:05 AM
16 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,011 Year: 7,047/19,786 Month: 1,588/1,581 Week: 410/393 Day: 1/43 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234Next
Author Topic:   Creationists take their fight to the really big screen.
Trae
Member (Idle past 2446 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 1 of 53 (193754)
03-23-2005 6:38 PM


IMAX theaters in the Southern States, including those in Science Museums, are coming under attack for using the E-word (evolution).

quote:
Carol Murray, marketing director of the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History in Texas, said audience members who had watched Volcanoes had commented, "I really hate it when the theory of evolution is presented as fact", or "I don't agree with their presentation of human existence."

As a result, the science museum had decided not to screen the film.

"If it is not going to draw a crowd and it is going to create controversy, from a marketing point of view, I cannot make a recommendation," Murray told The New York Times on Saturday.

http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/...


Gives a completely new meaning to the phrase, “Popular Science.”

Apart from the other implications of this topic, and apart from private IMAX theaters, how could one apply pressure against a ‘Science Museum’ presenting selective science?

{Note from Adminnemooseus: The full title of the cited film is Volcanoes of the Deep Sea.}

{Shortened display form of URL, to restore page width to normal. Also added note. - Adminnemooseus}

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-23-2005 07:29 PM


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 7:49 PM Trae has responded
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 03-23-2005 9:46 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply
 Message 39 by Trae, posted 03-25-2005 9:59 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3881
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 53 (193773)
03-23-2005 7:31 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Not a great deal of content in message 1, but it does seem to be a "lite" topic - So I promoted it.

Opinions on this topics promotion? Take them to the "Considerations..." topic, link below.

Adminnemooseus

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-23-2005 07:35 PM


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


    
commike37
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 53 (193777)
03-23-2005 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Trae
03-23-2005 6:38 PM


There's a lot more to this than the creationists.

Let's look at a simple economic cost-benefit analysis, since Murray uses a marketing point of view.

"If it is not going to draw a crowd and it is going to create controversy..." (from Murrary)

benefits: a crowd that is not large
costs: creating a controversy

Also, let's take a look at another thing that most people leave out: opportunity cost. I'm assuming that the Murray is going to screen another film instead (a pretty safe assumption, since it would be stupid to screen nothing). If instead, Murray chooses to screen Volcanoes of the Deep Sea, rather than the alternative film, you incur what's called an opportunity cost, which is what you could have gained by screening the alternative.

From this perspective, you can see that the decision is based more on economics than religion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Trae, posted 03-23-2005 6:38 PM Trae has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 03-23-2005 7:55 PM commike37 has responded
 Message 6 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-23-2005 9:12 PM commike37 has responded
 Message 15 by Trae, posted 03-24-2005 1:13 AM commike37 has responded

  
CK
Member (Idle past 2268 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 4 of 53 (193778)
03-23-2005 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by commike37
03-23-2005 7:49 PM


Removed by author.

This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 23-Mar-2005 08:03 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 7:49 PM commike37 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 8:23 PM CK has not yet responded

  
commike37
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 53 (193782)
03-23-2005 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by CK
03-23-2005 7:55 PM


removed by commike37 (the author)

This message has been edited by commike37, 03-23-2005 09:42 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 03-23-2005 7:55 PM CK has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3720
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 6 of 53 (193790)
03-23-2005 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by commike37
03-23-2005 7:49 PM


Controversy is Free Advertising
From my very limited knowledge of the films that the IMAX theaters show, I don't imagine a great deal of draw variation between one and another. The draw is nature scenery on a very large screen. I would think that Volcanoes of the Deep Sea should do at least as good in attendance as many of the films.

creating a controversy

My impression, is that someone is just too damn scared of offending the Christian right wing. Or maybe someone in management is part of the Christian right wing. I think that any controversy would be FREE ADVERTISING, and would help attendance.

Moose

Added by edit: Maybe the whole thing is a big trick, and they're going to bring the film back later, to greater success.

This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 03-23-2005 09:22 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 7:49 PM commike37 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:41 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

    
commike37
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 53 (193801)
03-23-2005 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Minnemooseus
03-23-2005 9:12 PM


Re: Controversy is Free Advertising
While that would be true in the North, advertising would be outweighed by the controversy and normative issues in the South. That is bad, "as the loss of venues in the Southern states could be enough to turn profit to loss." Also, even though we may know about this article, the Mail & Guardian Online isn't well-known enough to generate massive advertising, especially in the North where this controversy doesn't exist.

On another note, I don't think that there is enough in the article to conclude that the offended people were from the Christian right. That seems more like a generalization to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-23-2005 9:12 PM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 03-23-2005 9:49 PM commike37 has not yet responded
 Message 30 by Trae, posted 03-24-2005 6:23 PM commike37 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 8 of 53 (193805)
03-23-2005 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Trae
03-23-2005 6:38 PM


let me see ... these are people going to a science museum ... and then complaining about the science?

what better opportunity to demonstrate that science is about science and not about political pursuasion.

show the movie.

and have a discussion afterwords.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Trae, posted 03-23-2005 6:38 PM Trae has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:53 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 9 of 53 (193806)
03-23-2005 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by commike37
03-23-2005 9:41 PM


Re: Controversy is Free Advertising
does it matter whether they are from the christian right if they are from the ignorant wrong?

false beliefs should not affect what is shown in science museums, or we better take the "science" off and put "dumbed down PC entertainment" in it's place

if there is a controversy then have a discussion to review it: what better opportunity to educate people.

just my opinion.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:41 PM commike37 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Thugpreacha, posted 03-25-2005 6:53 AM RAZD has responded

  
commike37
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 53 (193809)
03-23-2005 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by RAZD
03-23-2005 9:46 PM


They are not complaining about science; they are complaining about how science was presented.

All of this is quoted from the article Trae references at the beginning.

Audience Replies:
"I really hate it when the theory of evolution is presented as fact."
"I don't agree with their presentation of human existence."

Bayley Silleck, who wrote and directed Cosmic Voyage:
"They have to be extremely careful as to how they present anything relating to evolution,"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 03-23-2005 9:46 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 03-23-2005 10:05 PM commike37 has responded
 Message 12 by nator, posted 03-23-2005 10:17 PM commike37 has not yet responded
 Message 13 by jar, posted 03-23-2005 10:48 PM commike37 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 11 of 53 (193812)
03-23-2005 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by commike37
03-23-2005 9:53 PM


thats a nit.

for one it is a fact that evolution is a science, an observed phenomenon and a theory.

human existence is what it is, whether sugar coated in fairy tales or scraped raw in reality doesn't change existence, doesn't change the facts that are known and doesn't change the best explanation of those facts.

it used to be that science museums wanted to promote thinking and further exploration of ideas encountered in the museums, either through discussions or individual study (with recommendations available). shying away from a good opportunity to do this is, frankly, disturbing. doing it for economic reasons is no justification in the long run.

I guess they have to decide whether they are a science museum or an entertainment facility. perhaps they should show animations like the baby talking dinos (forget the name) and "ice age" and not pretend to show science.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:53 PM commike37 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by commike37, posted 03-24-2005 12:38 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 310 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 12 of 53 (193814)
03-23-2005 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by commike37
03-23-2005 9:53 PM


"I really hate it when the Germ Theory of Disease is presented as fact."

"I don't agree with their presentation of the idea that the Earth is a sphere and not flat.

"They have to be extremely careful as to how they present anything relating to The Atomic Theory of Matter"

Anybody who would complain about such things would be considered pretty stupid and backward, eh?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:53 PM commike37 has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30941
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 13 of 53 (193829)
03-23-2005 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by commike37
03-23-2005 9:53 PM


"I really hate it when the theory of evolution is presented as fact."

That is a comment that could only have been made by a fool. If it's a real comment (which I doubt) the person who stuttered it must be dummer than a Red Brick.

It's "The Theory of Evolution" stupid.

Dumb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:53 PM commike37 has not yet responded

  
commike37
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 53 (193855)
03-24-2005 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by RAZD
03-23-2005 10:05 PM


for one it is a fact that evolution is a science, an observed phenomenon and a theory.

But evolution is not the end-all, be-all. You're making it out to be a "holy grail," and some people don't like evolution as a "holy grail." You largely ignore about my point about how it is presented. There are two types of theories, empirical and explanatory. The problems do not lie with empirical evolution, it lies with explanatory evolution (namely, how empirical evolution is interpreted and presented). Although they didn't realize it, these people were complaining about the explanatory theory of evolution.

it used to be that science museums wanted to promote thinking and further exploration of ideas encountered in the museums, either through discussions or individual study (with recommendations available).

If evolution is fact, though, does that encourage exploration of the origins of life, criticisms to evolution, and alternative theories?

shying away from a good opportunity to do this is, frankly, disturbing. doing it for economic reasons is no justification in the long run.

But if this movie was rejected due to economic reasons, then would it be fair to blame it on the so-called "Christian right"? And whether you realize it or not, your argument does have relevance to economics, specifically normative economics.

guess they have to decide whether they are a science museum or an entertainment facility. perhaps they should show animations like the baby talking dinos (forget the name) and "ice age" and not pretend to show science.

That's just fallacious. It's just plain discriminatory to say that any movie that doesn't present evolution in the way that Volcanoes of the Deep Sea does is automatically not science. You are running a very extreme example of slippery slope.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by RAZD, posted 03-23-2005 10:05 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by nator, posted 03-24-2005 9:26 AM commike37 has responded

  
Trae
Member (Idle past 2446 days)
Posts: 442
From: Fremont, CA, USA
Joined: 06-18-2004


Message 15 of 53 (193866)
03-24-2005 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by commike37
03-23-2005 7:49 PM


I believe that capitulation to demands as a mean to reduce controversy is prone to backfiring and resulting in continued political pressure.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 7:49 PM commike37 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by commike37, posted 03-24-2005 1:33 AM Trae has responded

  
1
234Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019