There are a couple questions first. We see it every day here, the effectiveness of the lie that creationism is science just like evolution. How much more effective is the lie packaged up into a slick documentary narrated by a comforting, trustworthy, grandfatherly narrator like Ben Stein?
Will this documentary, like most documentaries, will be released and disappear? Or will it, like The Thin Blue Line of many years ago, break through into the national consciousness?
At a minimum it should prove popular across the Bible Belt. One can imagine that even if it isn't carried by local theatres that fundamentalist churches in places like Dover, Pennsylvania, and Topeka, Kansas, will be running it nightly for months. Blockbuster and Netflix will likely carry it. Many will buy it. It might possibly receive a lot of attention nationally. It doesn't seem impossible that the current whining about supposed scientific censorship of creationist views will become a deafening national outcry.
Of course, this will all be taking place during a presidential election year. The first primary will be January 8, 2008, here in New Hampshire, and the film's release is just a month later. Candidates who were recently asked for a show of hands of who did not believe in evolution (was it three hands that were raised?) will now be asked their reaction to the charges in the documentary and what they plan to do about it as president.
The problem of communicating the difference between proposing an idea and doing the science to support the idea, the one that we see writ here in the small everyday and that occasionally gets writ larger on the national scene when events like Dover and Kansas occur, could be about to get writ larger than we've ever seen it before. Given that the intended audience is the American public, which for the most part doesn't know that a year is the time it takes for the earth to orbit the sun and can't find Iceland on an unmarked map, is science ready to make their case with effectiveness and clarity? Is it even possible?
Have you recently been transferred to the Department of Redundancy Department? :D
I'm far less concerned about creationists like NJ than I am about the American public. Almost all documentaries receive very little attention, and maybe that will be the case here, but if it isn't then it raises the very real danger of a kneejerk political reaction in the face of an outraged populous. What will be the response of the scientific community? Will they send out Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet (Brights???) to further alienate the masses? Is a measured response that makes clear why ID isn't science why this is the ID community's fault within the ability of the scientific community? I'm frankly very worried.
long story..a any rate the win 98 program only has minimal programs, and to my dismay, no spellcheck.
Notepad and Wordpad are available for editing on Win98.
For spellchecking, if you use Internet Explorer or Firefox, then Google Toolbar includes a spellchecker (http://toolbar.google.com). Whatever you type into the message reply box is spellchecked when you click on the Google Toolbar spellcheck button.
If you can use the latest version of Firefox with Win98, it automatically spellchecks everything you type into the message reply box.
Another good one is 1-Click Answers. Just hold down the alt key, click your mouse on any word anywhere on your screen, and a window will pop up with the definition. Including supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!
Nobody had a ticket. You reserved a seat online, and they checked your name off their list at the front of the line.
I was not trying to sneak in. I reserved my seats under my own name.
I was called aside by a security guard, who asked if my name was PZ Myers, and who said that the producer had specifically asked that I be removed.
So I presume Richard Dawkins had also reserved a seat online? I wonder if he used his own name. Since he's in the movie maybe they felt they shouldn't prevent him from attending a screening.
Here's a review of the movie by Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel. They apparently attempted to prevent his attendance, but he got in anyway. The review includes a YouTube clip that no longer works, so I wonder if the producers requested it be removed.
You know what's worst about this for me, at least until I actually get to see the movie? I like Ben Stein, or did.
I agree, I think you've identified the key point. When Ben Stein asks, "Why not God?" he's actually declaring, "ID is religion." Perhaps much less to fear here than I originally thought.
But of course, then there's the Florida legislature considering a law that provides job protection for those taking a position against evolution. This is the kind of traction I'm worried about, because the law has little use beyond protecting teachers who present unscientific ideas in the science classroom.
Percy, I'm asking you now. Do you think this is a satire? I still can't tell.
Obviously not satire, don't know why you're even considering the possibility. It will be interesting to finally see it and discover if it's really as poorly made as initial reports claim. Tactics like allusions to Hitler are something you'd expect from a first year film student with delusions of significance, so it doesn't seem promising.
But quality aside, the film will succeed in cementing in fundamentalist minds how misbegotten and evil is evolution. The lesson ID learned from creationism is, "When the facts is on your side then use the facts, otherwise obfuscate and demonize."