"Intelligent design advocates will do anything to advance their views--except science. "The reason for that is simple: doing science has never been their goal. Their goal is to make biblical creationism appear scientific in order to skirt the constitutional ban on religion in public schools. Contrary to the film's claims, the real dogmatists are not the defenders of Darwin, but the religiously motivated advocates of intelligent design."
27 Comments
Adam I · 18 April 2008
Wow... who's left? Ben Stein can't get no love.
J · 18 April 2008
So far, the love is mainly from the Flintstones-as-documentary crowd.
Venus Mousetrap · 18 April 2008
I normally wouldn't be so cheerful about watching people's hard work get smashed to pieces, but after all the lies that have come from them, I feel no displeasure about lying back and watching the flaming wreck. :)
Venus Mousetrap · 18 April 2008
by which I mean reclining, of course.
pjb · 18 April 2008
I absolutely love the irony. The negative reviews that they were counting on all this time have blown up in their face. Instead of having poor scientific reviews to wear as an affirmation of their martyrdom for "academic freedom", their movie goes on to get dumped on by everyone.
Joshua Zelinsky · 18 April 2008
Ok, not to be too rude but who cares? First, the objectivists aren't very politically influential at this point and haven't been for a very long time. Second of all, objectivists have generally been pretty anti-ID and anti-creationism already so this isn't at all surprising. The fact that the Ayn Rand Institute does not like the film is neither surprising nor relevant.
Mark Wickens · 18 April 2008
@Joshua Zelinsky: What is the relevance of how much influence they have or that they are anti-ID? They have arguments that rational people can evaluate on their own merits.
Joshua Zelinsky · 18 April 2008
Mark, it is relevant because the point is that them coming out against the movie isn't in any way really noteworthy. My comment was in part response to pjb and Venus in that the Ayn Rand Institute was expected to say something like this and no one pays attention to them anyways. The point is this isn't one to gloat about.
Tyler DiPietro · 18 April 2008
"The point is this isn’t one to gloat about."
Regardless of "noteworthiness", I've made it a point to gloat about any and all hate that goes their way, because they pretty much deserve it.
Charlemagne · 18 April 2008
Another faggot communist group spits on those who bear witness for Jesus' truth, and this is news how?
Tyler DiPietro · 18 April 2008
I'd just like the add a generic comment to the effect that, if you're going to try to imitate the other side in order to make them look bad, at least make it believable. For a reference point, Keith Eaton is borderline.
Dale Husband · 18 April 2008
Sophist FCD · 18 April 2008
Another faggot communist group spits on those who bear witness for Jesus’ truth, and this is news how?
I think Ayn Rand just rolled over in her grave...and then wrote a mind-numbingly didactic fifty page monologue about it.
PvM · 18 April 2008
Shebardigan · 18 April 2008
Anon · 19 April 2008
Keep talking, loons, because every year hundreds of thousands more kids than the year before are getting exposed to her ideas. ARI op-eds are appearing with increasing frequency in major newspapers. Their executive director now has columns in Forbes and a spot on the Fox Business Network. They are establishing a presence in D.C. this year to do analysis on the issues and advocate them on the political scene. You are about to see a major resurgence of Rand not only in the cultural mainstream, but in politics. Mark this post.
MelM · 19 April 2008
tiredofthesos · 19 April 2008
A film spoof for the currently posting creationist shit ->
Medieval Miller: "Charlemagne was a fag."
Other Medieval RM: "What?"
Medieval Miller: "Charlemagne was a fag."
Medieval Oly: "The hell he was."
Medieval Miller: "Oh yes he was, you boys. I went to install two-way mirrors in the royal bedchambers, and he came to the door in a dress."
***
Back OT:
I couldn't give less of a fuck who such unpleasant cultists as Randians or Scientologists support, since this is NOT something that can be decided by popularity. Further, I assume their views are always distorted beyond any semblance of sincerity by their ghoulish goals.
ellazimm · 19 April 2008
Ooooo, Charlemagne: WWJD?
Rolf · 19 April 2008
Sophist FCD · 19 April 2008
Moses · 19 April 2008
MTS · 20 April 2008
While I'm enjoying watching virtually everyone piling on here, come on: the Ayn Rand institute? Named after someone who made a South American copper baron and someone who blew up ships carrying material foreign aid into heroes? Their disconnect with reality is almost as severe as that within creationist circles. Heck, in their own way, they're about as religious.
loon · 21 April 2008
Ayn Rand = Objectivist = Capitalist
Pretty much the opposite of Communist.
Ayn Rand = Extreme Right Wing
Befuddled Theorist · 27 April 2008
To hear Anybody joining in the fight against Creationism in public school science classes is welcome. Not that the Ayn Rand Institute is a scientific organization, but it does have quite a bit of political sway and should be appreciated for that quality.
To point out the obvious. Fundies have only been truly obnoxious since this administration came to Washington, and lots of money has gotten funneled through organizations like the Discovery Institute.
fnxtr · 28 April 2008
Randfan,ret'd · 14 April 2009
Sophist FCD:
Man, there is nothing more annoying than a sixteen-year-old who just read Atlas Shrugged. Just shoot me now.
…except maybe one who just read Siddhartha or Johnathan Livingston Seagull or The Dancing Wu Li Masters or…
***
Give me that sixteen-year-old open-minded thinker over the caustic, jaded posers who forgot how books once stirred their withered souls; any day.