Ono Expelled

Oh well, I guess it doesn't matter too much anymore. The film has all but disappeared already. Meanwhile, Indiana Jones grossed 126 million in the first week it was out. I guess he is more popular than Jesus (oops, I mean the designer).

Any word yet on the Harvard lawsuit?

Fair Use section 107: "...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research,"

hmmm... doesn't that mean criticism of the piece itself, not criticism of some other piece (in this case, the Meyers qutoe?) At leas they don't pretend that it's news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research. As for fair use for purpose of "comment"... well, that covers just about anything the court wants it to cover, doesn't it?

"Moreover, defendants have
established for purposes of this motion that the movie contributes to the broader public interest
by stimulating debate on an issue of current political concern. " oh, this is an amusing finding... I'd guess this is where the appeal should strike.

I almost wish I'd never read the decision. I had little enough faith in the justice system in this country.

Well, let's lighten things up a bit. Here are some blasts from the past regarding Ono's lawsuit, back when folks were in a more celebratory mood.

NOW they (the producers of Expelled) are in trouble…
--Andrea Bottaro

Seriously, think about it - with all the apparent deception and documentation thereof going on here, it seems to me like in addition to big monetary damages someone could also do some jail time.
--Mattus Maximus

A cunning plan Balderick.
Bless the IDiots turnip-loving hearts for providing us with such amusement!
--Dr. Bryan Grieg Fry

Evolution and science are one thing, but you don’t mess with Yoko Ono. Everybody knows that. Them boys are in some deep stuff man!!
--386sx

I'm assuming that this means that Rocky Mountain won't be making a big fuss when people start posting clips from "Expelled" on U-tube alongside critical commentary about what insipid dreck it is.

Um, Right?

I think it's just as well. Better that the movie fails over its lies and terrible science/history, than because of copyright issues over a song which has absolutely nothing to do with science/history.

Defenders of the film wont be able to claim the movie was "censored" because of this Yoko Ono business, but the scientific claims were valid.

Remember that the lawsuit is not over, just that the judge rejected preliminary injunction.

Ah, so the lawsuit is still on? Just Expelled is allowed to be shown in theaters, more if they so choose?

Perhaps the lawyers for Ono/Lennon should have focused on the reason for the copyright law's existence ("Progress of Science and useful Arts" as quoted several times by Judge Stein) rather than the specifics of fair use!

Activist Judge - ruling in favor of the film makers in spite of the overwhelming evidence. Legislating from the bench.

Dark day for justice and for law.

We'll have to see how the rest of the lawsuit plays out, but on the bright side if the lawsuit decides against Expelled in finality, they'll be in even deeper trouble.

Cue IDiots misreading the report and gloating...

doridoidae said: Fair Use section 107: "...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research," hmmm... doesn't that mean criticism of the piece itself, not criticism of some other piece (in this case, the Meyers qutoe?) At leas they don't pretend that it's news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research. As for fair use for purpose of "comment"... well, that covers just about anything the court wants it to cover, doesn't it? "Moreover, defendants have established for purposes of this motion that the movie contributes to the broader public interest by stimulating debate on an issue of current political concern. " oh, this is an amusing finding... I'd guess this is where the appeal should strike. I almost wish I'd never read the decision. I had little enough faith in the justice system in this country.

Nice ScottBot parody there, JJ.

I'm glad that the ruling came down as it did. I mean, things will work the other way when we take clips from the movie and rebut them right? It's a two way street.

There is some irony in trying to protect the IP of a song which urges us to "imagine no posessions".

Expelled has many reasons to fail. This frivolous IP suit by Ono is not one of them.

federal Judge Sidney Stein

They aren't related.

I’m glad that the ruling came down as it did. I mean, things will work the other way when we take clips from the movie and rebut them right?

Given that "Expelled" is now playing on all of forty-one screens, even if every creationist in America wanted to celebrate by going out to see it, they'd have hundreds of miles to drive.

FL said: One thing's for sure Things get SOOOOO much more interesting when you guys can no longer rely on ye olde evolutionist judges to do ye olde dirty work! FL

Notice the name. It's conspiracy of people named stein!

Well this from the ruling is rather nice:

"II. FINDINGS OF FACT
“Expelled” is a feature-length (one hour, thirty-nine minute long) nationally released theatrical movie that addresses what it characterizes as a debate between proponents of intelligent design and the scientific theory of evolution."

So no question of Intelligent Design being a scientific theory then .....

It's interesting how FL hadn't been heard from for a while, when the news about EXPELLED was so bad. Now, with this bit of good news, he/she is back. Welcome back FL. Too bad EXPELLED fizzled, huh? The Indiana Jones movie had aliens. Maybe they were the designers.

Scientific update: still no data presented in a single peer-reviewed scientific research paper supporting intelligent design.

;-)

That's because the data is sealed in a super-secret bunker where we can't get at it! You know its bomb-droppingly good if it's sealed in Area 51. Hey.... maybe it IS sealed in Area 51..!

Tsk tsk, Karl, don't you know it's all due to suppression by the Global Darwinist Conspiracy™?

;-D

They aren’t related.

— Martin Wagner

Sometimes I still forget that I can google.

For another coincidence, note the dedication to a Bob Stein.

Hm. Preliminary finding...

Though, I find it hard to believe on the face of it. There is the copyright of Lennon the song writer and there is the performance copyright of Lennon the performer. THere doesn't seem to be anything in EXPELLED critiquing Lennon's oerformance....

The utopia described in Lennon's song Imagine has all good Xian values. So the only difference between that and a xian utopia would be rhetoric. The people in the xian utopia would be praising Jesus and God constantly. But fundie preachers always say that being good is not enough, you have to be good for the right reasons. So Lennon's utopia is no good in the eyes of these righteous lifers.

Not a surprising decision and not a depressing one either, noting that Expelled is failing on its own merits. Nor would the film's reputation enjoy much favorable notoriety from the opposite decision.

My opinion is that it is a much cleaner kill without all the falderal that a drawn out court drama would impose.

Also, it is a decision that favors the unlicensed use of short excerpts of copyrighted material for certain purposes. Such favoritism falls on the just as well as the unjust.

E Pluribus Unum

@ Gary Telles

"Ono or no Ono," that must have been a most rewarding line to write! LOL. Thanks.

Here's the judge's decision, including a finding of fact that the use of Imagine is fair use.

It's pretty much what I was saying in the earlier thread, citing precedents, etc.:

http://acandidworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/08-02066.pdf

See especially the stuff about transformative use starting around page 15.

I hate to see the Expelled folks "win" anything, but this looks like the right decision on that issue.

Yes FL, that's right. I, with head hung low, must concede the victory. As I was reviewing my analyses of the gradual morphological change in canine tooth size from Australopithecus anamensis to Australopithecus afarensis that we are documenting -- a progression beautifully in accord with the predictions of evolutionary theory -- I realized that all of that data, and all of that evidence, and the overwhelming numbers of studies being done in a myriad of scientific disciplines even as you write, must be wrong because of a copyright lawsuit about the use of a song in a movie.

James F said: Scientific update: still no data presented in a single peer-reviewed scientific research paper supporting intelligent design. ;-)

Judge Stein (starting bottom of page 9)

Here, defendants raise doubts concerning the validity of the renewal copyright by arguing that plaintiffs have failed to explain gaps in the chain of ownership. Without any evidence of invalidity whatsoever, however, defendants cannot rebut the statutory presumption.

[emphasis added]

“Expelled” was released in theaters in the United States on April 18, 2008. Defendants timed the release, in part, to coincide with pending so-called “Academic Freedom” bills in several state legislatures, which would permit teachers to offer their students information critical of the theory of evolution.

— Judge Stein (bottom of p. 5)

gwangung said: Hm. Preliminary finding... Though, I find it hard to believe on the face of it. There is the copyright of Lennon the song writer and there is the performance copyright of Lennon the performer. There doesn't seem to be anything in EXPELLED critiquing Lennon's performance....

I posted this a while back but didn't the film "the killing fields" use imagine ? I was wondering if the producers/writers applied the same logic or did they pay copywright fees ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlMfDnsnDvQ

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does this suit have to do with evolution? The movie is still a complete fraud Ono or no Ono.

Gary Telles said:

FL said: One thing's for sure Things get SOOOOO much more interesting when you guys can no longer rely on ye olde evolutionist judges to do ye olde dirty work! FL

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does this suit have to do with evolution? The movie is still a complete fraud Ono or no Ono.

What I enjoy is FL's magical thinking. In his eyes, the movie stands for, and therefore somehow IS, the spirit of creationism, a literal flaming sword slaying the evil evolution. Ono, therefore, must be made to represent, and therefore BE, the force of evolution. Since the purpose of the film is to slay evolution, anyone opposing any part of the film for any reason must be an evolutionist - even if (as may be) Yoko is a creationist who just doesn't appreciate her property being stolen and misused.

And if a court holds that the film made fair use of Yoko's property, this of course isn't a case of a judge doing "creationism's dirty work" - it's a case of the forces of good defeating the forces of evil when the playing field is level.

And so the fact that Yoko's efforts are totally irrelevant to evolution (a subject that may have never crossed her mind) simply does not matter. The film is anti-evolution, therefore only evolutionists would oppose it. In the world of magical thinking, the symbol of something becomes the thing itself.

So, just to do the math here -- the movie tanked. It's now playing on fewer than fifty screens, and in many cases sharing that screen with some other movie. So, as much as I would have preferred for Ono to win, we're still talking about a movie that pretty much nobody saw, and was seen mostly only by those who were already in the ID camp to start with. Sure, the DVD is probably gonna scream "THE FILM YOKO ONO COULDN'T KILL" or something similarly absurd on the cover, but it's still going to go into the hands of the fundies alone.

Until it hits the dollar bin. Then, maybe, I'll buy it.

Make lots and lots and lots of copies, Premise! Make lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of copies. And advertise a whole lot too! There's still plenty of opportunity to throw good money after bad.

DavidK said:

James F said: Scientific update: still no data presented in a single peer-reviewed scientific research paper supporting intelligent design. ;-)

But, but, all you have to do is go to the DI website and see all the scientific, peer reviewed articles published by the "cdesign proponentsists," don't you?

In the prvious thread on this lawsuit, John Kwok said to Paul: “Only a delusional IDiot like yourself would think that Ono will lose.”

Looks like Paul wasn't the idiot. So much for the typical neo-Darwinian and somewhat paranoid mindset-groupthink.

As I noted in that thread, in the contest between Yoko and Stein, I’d bet my left testicle that Yoko loses. And as I also noted elsewhere, I'm also betting my left testicle that there is indeed an edge to evolution via RM+NS. So far, I'm winning.

I guess when your research lab consists of a rented post office box, it’s hard to get much work done.

[quote]The filmmakers selected two lines of the song that they believe envision a world without religion: “Nothing to kill or die for/ And no religion too.”[/quote]

If ID is religious then it is fair use.

Even if the ruling stands, the filmakers have destroyed any claim that ID is anything but religious. A brilliant own goal in pursuit of a quick buck.

What about distribution of the film outside the US where Fair Use does not apply?

Can the copyright owners sue the filmmakers if they sell the DVD unmodified in Europe?

bigbang said: As I noted in that thread, in the contest between Yoko and Stein, I’d bet my left testicle that Yoko loses. And as I also noted elsewhere, I'm also betting my left testicle that there is indeed an edge to evolution via RM+NS. So far, I'm winning.

FL is just desperate. FL is a deranged creationist who has been dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that there is no hope for creationism to win in the scientific arena (of course, this realization is rationalized away by hallucinating a vast conspiracy).

— phantomreader42

Now that FL is gone, Bigbang has come to crow. It's all so pathetic. It's like being joyous over the fact that the self-destruct charges on the solid fuel boosters worked after the Challenger disaster.

When you start with the answer

What about distribution of the film outside the US where Fair Use does not apply?

Mike from Ottawa said: I would expect that to be the result in any country that is signatory to the Berne Convention.

Bummer, it would have been nice to see Yoko Ono take down Ben Stein. But, like many here, I'm not overly upset about the result; I'm curious about the likelihood of a lawsuit from Harvard/XVIVO though.

Anyone who is overly upset over this should just check out this link to Box Office Mojo...

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm

Since April 18th, Expelled has grossed a TOTAL of $7,614,754 - and note the fact that the producers of this train-wreck of a film were predicting "success" at $12 million on their opening weekend.

Sounds to me like it failed (or flunked) miserably on its own lack of merit. Having a smackdown from Yoko Ono via a judge would've been icing on the cake...

goodwin sands said: ...the movie tanked. ...we're still talking about a movie that pretty much nobody saw...

ben said:

DavidK said:

James F said: Scientific update: still no data presented in a single peer-reviewed scientific research paper supporting intelligent design. ;-)

But, but, all you have to do is go to the DI website and see all the scientific, peer reviewed articles published by the "cdesign proponentsists," don't you?

Don't forget the burgeoning pro-ID scientific research published monthly er, semi-annually, um, well, pretty much never, over at Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design . I guess when your research lab consists of a rented post office box, it's hard to get much work done.

MattusMaximus said: Bummer, it would have been nice to see Yoko Ono take down Ben Stein. But, like many here, I'm not overly upset about the result; I'm curious about the likelihood of a lawsuit from Harvard/XVIVO though. Anyone who is overly upset over this should just check out this link to Box Office Mojo... http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm Since April 18th, Expelled has grossed a TOTAL of $7,614,754 - and note the fact that the producers of this train-wreck of a film were predicting "success" at $12 million on their opening weekend. Sounds to me like it failed (or flunked) miserably on its own lack of merit. Having a smackdown from Yoko Ono via a judge would've been icing on the cake...

the movie was probably seen by over a million or so people.

Paul Burnett said:

goodwin sands said: ...the movie tanked. ...we're still talking about a movie that pretty much nobody saw...

Dividing the amount of money the movie made by a nominal "average" ticket price shows that the movie was probably seen by over a million or so people. Granted, that's only 1/3 of one percent of the US population...but a million people - even fundies - isn't "nobody."

Paul Burnett said: But if by "nobody" you meant a social commentary - "nobody who's important," or people who have the same family name on both sides of their family tree or something like that (thank you, Mister Vice President), you're probably right.

I just heard a radio commercial for Clear Eyes by...you guessed it...Ben Stein. That was his cunning plan all along! Get back into the media spotlight and resume his career as a pitchman for eyedrops!

Paul Burnett said: a million people - even fundies - isn't "nobody."

While conceding that "Expelled" is a commercial film, and that the copyrighted work, Lennon's "Imagine," is the kind of work that lies at the "core" of copyright protection, Judge Stein appeared to give credence to the defendants' theory that the sequence of the movie that includes the 15 seconds of "Imagine" amounts to a "layered criticism and commentary of the song." In other words, the movie-makers adequately "transformed" the work. Citing testimony, Judge Stein -- who later in the opinion compares the case to a Second Circuit precedent called Blanch v. Koons -- writes:

The Cold War-era images of marching soldiers, followed by the image of [Joseph] Stalin, express the filmmakers' view that ["Imagine"'s] secular utopian vision 'cannot be maintained without realization in a politicized form' and that the form it will ultimately take is dictatorship. The movie thus uses the excerpt of "Imagine" to criticize what the filmmakers see as the naivete of John Lennon's views.

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

Paul M said: What about distribution of the film outside the US where Fair Use does not apply? Can the copyright owners sue the filmmakers if they sell the DVD unmodified in Europe?

The doctrine of fair use is no longer exclusive to the United States, with other jurisdictions having either implemented such a doctrine or considering its introduction.

While influential in some quarters, other countries often have drastically different fair use criteria to the US, and in some countries there is little or no fair use defense available. Even within Europe, rules vary greatly between countries. Some countries have the concept of fair dealing instead of fair use.

bigbang said: As I noted in that thread, in the contest between Yoko and Stein, I’d bet my left testicle that Yoko loses. And as I also noted elsewhere, I'm also betting my left testicle that there is indeed an edge to evolution via RM+NS. So far, I'm winning.

Crudely Wrott said: @ Gary Telles "Ono or no Ono," that must have been a most rewarding line to write! LOL. Thanks.

Jay Ballou said:

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does this suit have to do with evolution? The movie is still a complete fraud Ono or no Ono.

There's really no point in asking logic- and scruple- free trolls like FL for reasons. Spare yourself the aggravation and just ignore them.

phantomreader42 said:

Gary Telles said:

FL said: One thing's for sure Things get SOOOOO much more interesting when you guys can no longer rely on ye olde evolutionist judges to do ye olde dirty work! FL

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does this suit have to do with evolution? The movie is still a complete fraud Ono or no Ono.

FL is just desperate. FL is a deranged creationist who has been dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that there is no hope for creationism to win in the scientific arena (of course, this realization is rationalized away by hallucinating a vast conspiracy). FL knows, deep down, that the Dishonesty Institute is a miserable failure. The blood libel against science was a commercial flop and a moral disgrace, and however the cases are decided the crew behind it remain thieves and frauds. FL's dogmatic delusions are totally disconnected from reality, and its fantasies of stealing tax money to force those delusions on other people's children are no closer to fruition. FL is a joke, and in some dark secret place it knows this. So of course FL has to jump for joy at anything, no matter how minor, no matter how meaningless, no matter how pitiful, anything that it can use as fuel for a masturbatory fantasy about the destruction of TEH EBIL DARWINISTS!!!111ELEVENTYONE!! Sad, isn't it?

Gary Telles said:

phantomreader42 said:

Gary Telles said:

FL said: One thing's for sure Things get SOOOOO much more interesting when you guys can no longer rely on ye olde evolutionist judges to do ye olde dirty work! FL

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does this suit have to do with evolution? The movie is still a complete fraud Ono or no Ono.

FL is just desperate. FL is a deranged creationist who has been dragged kicking and screaming to the realization that there is no hope for creationism to win in the scientific arena (of course, this realization is rationalized away by hallucinating a vast conspiracy). FL knows, deep down, that the Dishonesty Institute is a miserable failure. The blood libel against science was a commercial flop and a moral disgrace, and however the cases are decided the crew behind it remain thieves and frauds. FL's dogmatic delusions are totally disconnected from reality, and its fantasies of stealing tax money to force those delusions on other people's children are no closer to fruition. FL is a joke, and in some dark secret place it knows this. So of course FL has to jump for joy at anything, no matter how minor, no matter how meaningless, no matter how pitiful, anything that it can use as fuel for a masturbatory fantasy about the destruction of TEH EBIL DARWINISTS!!!111ELEVENTYONE!! Sad, isn't it?

It sure is sad. And very aggravating no doubt to people who actually engage in science. It irritates the hell out of me and I'm simply an interested bystander. And I have to agree that you're probably right about the delusional nature of FL and other such trolls. Given that, it seems clear that no explanation will be forthcoming of how his assertion follows from the whole Yoko situation. (Yes, I'm looking at you FL) BTW, at the risk of looking real "un-hip" as the kids say, could you tell me the significance of "eleventyone"?

phantomreader42 said: Oh, "eleventyone". Just parodying eXtreme bed spelling (sometimes 1337) and all-caps overexuberance. Start with more exclamation points than necessary, then take your finger off the shift key and you introduce ones. It gets really ridiculous when you start spelling out the numbers generated, in all caps. Another way of showing that the creationist trolls here are nothing more than pathetic jokes, spewing nonsense without a thought in their hollow heads. There's no substance there, so they deserve no response but ridicule and derision. Like translating the idiocy of right-wing nutjobs into TEH DAM LIBRULS IS DEZTROYING AMURIKA!!!111ELEVEN!! And apparently eleventyone is hobbitish as well. Been a while since I read Lord Of The Rings.

phantomreader42 said: And apparently eleventyone is hobbitish as well. Been a while since I read Lord Of The Rings.

There's no substance there, so they deserve no response but ridicule and derision.

"Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them."

-Thomas Jefferson

ben said:

DavidK said:

James F said: Scientific update: still no data presented in a single peer-reviewed scientific research paper supporting intelligent design. ;-)

But, but, all you have to do is go to the DI website and see all the scientific, peer reviewed articles published by the "cdesign proponentsists," don't you?

Don't forget the burgeoning pro-ID scientific research published monthly er, semi-annually, um, well, pretty much never, over at Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design . I guess when your research lab consists of a rented post office box, it's hard to get much work done.

FL said:

I’m glad that the ruling came down as it did. I mean, things will work the other way when we take clips from the movie and rebut them right?

Maybe si, maybe no. Guess you'll find out if your fellow evolutionists are up to the challenge. One thing's for sure Things get SOOOOO much more interesting when you guys can no longer rely on ye olde evolutionist judges to do ye olde dirty work! FL

So I see that the referenced ISCID has been established as a "scientific" journal that publishes "peer reviewed" (creationist/id) papers. It's not a mainstream journal, but specifically intended to publish only ID papers, thus giving weight to their claims to have peer reviewed papers published. Interesting.

Mike from Ottawa said:

What about distribution of the film outside the US where Fair Use does not apply?

Good grief. What makes you think there is no such concept outside the US? While I enjoyed seeing Ono go after Expelled in a schadenfreudey way, the use of a snippet of Imagine seems to be smack in the middle of fair use. I would expect that to be the result in any country that is signatory to the Berne Convention.

I find the responses to this fascinating.

They're all pretty reasonable - many along the lines of "well it's a pity the decision went to Expelled, but that's the way it goes". At worst there are expressions of disappointment.

Contrast this with the decision made by Judge Jones, and the ID/Creationist reaction to it. They screamed, ranted, raved, made death threats, accusations, and generally went into the mother-of-all hissy-fits which seemed like it would never end.

Speaks volumes for the types of people involved on the two sides, don't you think?

That explains why Dembski thinks believing in Klingons is childish, while believing in ID is A-OK.

— John Kwok

Gary Telles said:

phantomreader42 said: Oh, "eleventyone". Just parodying eXtreme bed spelling (sometimes 1337) and all-caps overexuberance. Start with more exclamation points than necessary, then take your finger off the shift key and you introduce ones. It gets really ridiculous when you start spelling out the numbers generated, in all caps. Another way of showing that the creationist trolls here are nothing more than pathetic jokes, spewing nonsense without a thought in their hollow heads. There's no substance there, so they deserve no response but ridicule and derision. Like translating the idiocy of right-wing nutjobs into TEH DAM LIBRULS IS DEZTROYING AMURIKA!!!111ELEVEN!! And apparently eleventyone is hobbitish as well. Been a while since I read Lord Of The Rings.

Ah, got it. Thanks. Just can't force myself to do that whole 1337 thing. I'd feel really silly.

Mike M said: I find the responses to this fascinating. They're all pretty reasonable - many along the lines of "well it's a pity the decision went to Expelled, but that's the way it goes". At worst there are expressions of disappointment. Contrast this with the decision made by Judge Jones, and the ID/Creationist reaction to it. They screamed, ranted, raved, made death threats, accusations, and generally went into the mother-of-all hissy-fits which seemed like it would never end. Speaks volumes for the types of people involved on the two sides, don't you think?

Mike from Ottawa said:

What about distribution of the film outside the US where Fair Use does not apply?

Good grief. What makes you think there is no such concept outside the US? While I enjoyed seeing Ono go after Expelled in a schadenfreudey way, the use of a snippet of Imagine seems to be smack in the middle of fair use. I would expect that to be the result in any country that is signatory to the Berne Convention.

Henry J said:

the movie was probably seen by over a million or so people.

I figure they're in 3 groups: Some of them fundamentalists, some dedicated science supporters doing reviews, and some masochistic science supporters.

Amazing how you can comment blood libels like Ben Stein and restart a flagging career. Yahoo featured him as an economist commenting on stocks. The guy is sooo reliable!
Check out today's NYTimes article on 'weaknesses and strengths': the new mantra of teaching the controversy.

Oops, I meant "commit" blood libels

Deeming the “Imagine” 15 sec. clip "Fair Use" seems like the right decision. But what about the slavish copying of Harvard's "Inner Life of the Cell," which would seem to be not-so-fair-usage?

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2460,Expelled-ripped-off-Harvards-Inner-Life-of-the-Cell-animation,David-Bolinsky

blackant said: ... Check out today's NYTimes article on 'weaknesses and strengths': the new mantra of teaching the controversy.

Amazing how you can comment blood libels like Ben Stein and restart a flagging career. Yahoo featured him as an economist commenting on stocks.

raven said: Stein has been a yahoo financial columnist for a while...

chuck said:

raven said: Stein has been a yahoo financial columnist for a while...

You could have stopped right there ;)

raven said: Stein has been a yahoo for a while...

blackant said: Amazing how you can comment blood libels like Ben Stein and restart a flagging career. Yahoo featured him as an economist commenting on stocks. The guy is sooo reliable! Check out today's NYTimes article on 'weaknesses and strengths': the new mantra of teaching the controversy.

Does anyone know where else we can get theater # and up to date earnings information?

Mike M said: ... Contrast this with the decision made by Judge Jones, and the ID/Creationist reaction to it. They screamed, ranted, raved, made death threats, accusations, and generally went into the mother-of-all hissy-fits which seemed like it would never end. Speaks volumes for the types of people involved on the two sides, don't you think?

blackant said: Amazing how you can comment blood libels like Ben Stein and restart a flagging career.

blackant said: Oops, I meant "commit" blood libels

Er, has anyone reported the responses of Ms. Ono and the Lennon brothers yet?

— Pierce R. Butler

THE RELIGION OF EVOLUTIONISM'S IRON GRIP ON AMERICA'S INSTITUTIONS VIA THE COURTS IS COMING TO AN END. THIS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING. DOVER WAS THE LAST VICTORY FOR THE GODLESS. NOW THE TIDE HAS TURNED! THE GOD-FEARING MAJORITY WILL TAKE THE COUNTRY BACK! WE WILL BECOME THE INSTRUMENT OF HIS JUSTICE AGAINST GODLESS EVOLUTIONISM AND ALL OF THE DISGUSTING ABOMINATIONS IT SPAWNED SUCH AS ABORTION, MOVIES, SODOMY POROGRAPHY, LIQUOR, GAMBLING, AND DANCING! EVOLUTIONISTS WILL HAVE TO CONFESS WITH THEIR MOUTHS THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND BELIEVE IN THEIR HEARTS THAT GOD HATH RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD OR ELSE! WE WILL HAVE PZ MYERS ON HIS KNEES, AND MAYBE EVEN RICHARD DAWKINS TOO! (WE WILL HAVE HIS SIDE OF THE POND IN TIME AS WELL!)

Memo to Joyboy: Your side lost this one legal decision.

Get over it. (Hopefully, you'll lose in Louisiana too!)

FL :)

Umm, FL, joyboy reads like he's aligned with you.

Why are the rabid creationists always incapable of punctuation and paragraphs?

Joyboy:

First - TURN OFF THE CAPS!

On the internet, a post in all caps is invariably viewed as a shorthand for "You should skip me right now, I was written by an semiliterate idiot". Despite it's apparent accuracy, you probably don't want to telegraph that idea right out of the gate.

Also, regardless of joy you might get from perceiving yourself to be yelling at the godless heathens, using all upper case actually makes your screed even less intelligible - if that's even possible. Typefaces are intelligently designed like that, with lower case more readable for block text.

Secondly, that funny L-shaped key marked "enter" is used for making "paragraphs".

"Paragraphs" are used to break your thoughts into coherent pieces, so that your screed is readable, or at least somewhat more readable.

If you actually find that you have any coherent thoughts, you would use the key like this (Enter)

And put the new thought here. (Enter)

See how easy that is?

joyboy said: ...ALL OF THE DISGUSTING ABOMINATIONS IT SPAWNED SUCH AS ABORTION, MOVIES, SODOMY POROGRAPHY, LIQUOR, GAMBLING, AND DANCING!

Cheryl and stevaroni:

For once I agree with FL. I think joyboy is a "Darwinist," maybe even an atheist, just having fun.

I can have fun too: Ono lost because God is fed up with you "Darwinists." "Darwinism" gave us the music of the devil, rock & roll, and God is taking action. Bo Diddley left the building this week. I don't think Pat Robertson would call that a coincidence. Y'all better start learning to say, "a-one-and-a-two..." ;-)

If joyboy's spoofing the creos, he's rather consistent about it:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/05/from-rna-to-hum.html#comment-156171
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/05/louisiana-is-ne.html#comment-153699

Is this some variant of Poe's Law?

[/offtopic]

Evolution is responsible for movies and dancing? Joyboy clearly has to be a parody. Plus he spelled PZ Myers correctly. That's a dead giveaway.

For once I agree with FL. I think joyboy is a “Darwinist,” maybe even an atheist, just having fun.

For once I agree with FL. I think joyboy is a “Darwinist,” maybe even an atheist, just having fun.

Joyboy has to be a parody. The comment at the end about the other side of the pond clinches it.

Parody... he spelled PZ's last name correctly.

I think joyboy has captured something important. Creationists threaten us with eternal damnation, we threaten them with fact and logic, and both of our chosen weapons pass right through the other like smoke.

If I'm not mistaken, all of the activities referenced by JoyBoy are found within the pages of the Bible and have been practiced by one or more of the "moral majority" referenced therein, no?

FL stands for 'Flawed Logic' or 'Flailing Longjohns '. Or perhaps it is just short for FLOOD. Imagine a World without Trolls....

Romartus said: FL stands for 'Flawed Logic' or 'Flailing Longjohns '. Or perhaps it is just short for FLOOD.

DavidK said: If I'm not mistaken, all of the activities referenced by JoyBoy are found within the pages of the Bible and have been practiced by one or more of the "moral majority" referenced therein, no?

Dan said: ... No movies mentioned in Bible. Plenty of wine (going back to Genesis 19:32, when Lot's daughter's got him drunk so that they could fuck him) ...

And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

Joshua Zelinsky said: Joyboy has to be a parody. The comment at the end about the other side of the pond clinches it.

You missed one (utterly well-earned) toot in Genesis 9:20-21:

You were so sure all the profits would be given to the suit, no more distribution, no video sales, no rental income.

Stevaroni,

Noah curse's goes to Ham and Cannan for not doing anything about his nakedness. The two who cover him up aren't cursed. Also, in the ancient Middle East, seeing a parent naked was considered extremely disrespectful. Look at Leviticus 18 where where uncovering nakedness of relatives is connected with incest and other sexual crimes.

Stevaroni,

Noah curse's goes to Ham and Cannan for not doing anything about his nakedness. The two who cover him up aren't cursed. Also, in the ancient Middle East, seeing a parent naked was considered extremely disrespectful. Look at Leviticus 18 where where uncovering nakedness of relatives is connected with incest and other sexual crimes.

Is this some variant of Poe’s Law?

Flint said: Creationists threaten us with eternal damnation, we threaten them with fact and logic, and both of our chosen weapons pass right through the other like smoke.