The film, “Expelled” is not out yet, but the wikipedia article about it is already longer than the one for “Gone with the Wind”. The overall tone of the article is very negative. Claims that ID is not science are made over and over. Crticism of ID-critics is not allowed.

Slso, the blogosphere explodes with acidic remarks, insults, and foul language against it’s producers and people who review the film positively.

How can that be? Such a frantic and one-sided activity catched my interest, and I looked a bit deeper. The film makes the point that educators and researchers who speak positively about Intelligent Design are being discriminated against, denied tenure or being barred from teaching.



The film has been shown in private pre-screenings for a couple of months now, but the blogosphere explosion occurred after PZ Myers was escorted away from the premises of such a private screening in Minnesota.

There are a multitude of posts, and here is a selection of them together with my comments.

1. A You Tube video of two people at the screening, Richard Dawkins, who saw the film, and PZ Myers, who was ‘expelled’ from seeing “Expelled”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bffyfVadZ14&feature=related

This video was made shortly after the event, but looks quite professional which makes me think that they were already planning to comment of the film after the screening. Myers was expelled and this gave this ‘interview’ of Dawkings with Myers a new spin. Myers can be heard saying that he ‘kind of instructed’ people (anti-ID people) to sign up for future screenings. He also stated on his blog that he would ‘cheer’ each time he sees himself in the film during a pre-screening.

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/08/im-gonna-be-a-m.html

That gives me the impression that the sole reason for him attending is to disturb. Thus the producer was correct in barring him seeing the film. Dawkins, ‘the perfect English gentlemen’ never made any comments in that direction, so he was allowed in to see the film. Logic, isn’t it? But of course the anti-ID lobby makes it look like that the film producer did not recognize Dawkins would be in the audience. Same fact, different interpretation.



2. That Myers was ‘expelled’ was reported by a student who stood behind him and Dawkins in line at the door.

http://lookingcloser.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/richard-dawkins-crashes-the-par...

Clearly the student initially misinterpreted the events. After reading many descriptions of what happened, I figure that is what went on: Myers went out of the line to the front to get some copied of a kind of non-disclosure form all viewers had so sign. He went back and asked other people in the line if they would want one to fill out while they were waiting. Then, a security guard comes and tells Myers that he needs to leave and that the producer has barred him from seeing the film.

The student’s interpretation was that the going to the front and speaking with other people in the line was trying to disturb the screening. He didn't realize that Myers was trying to kill time and being helpful to his fellow viewers. The student writes a quick report along that line and wasn’t prepared for the storm that brewed over him. Soon later, he was called ‘a liar’ and ‘a disgrace for his university’, by Myers.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/expelled.php#comment-795721



The student soon corrected his report, but it was too late. The anti-ID lobby poured over that poor student with insults. The f-word was used countless times in comments on Myer’s blog and Overstreet has to censor many posts on his blog (something Myers didn’t do. He let the rage flow freely on his site). The student also claimed that an invitation was needed, but Myers claims that he registered via a website. Couldn’t it be both? Some people got invitation tickets while the remaining seats were given away by a ‘first come first serve’ web registration? Nobody hostile of ID saw that possibility. Instead they used the confusion to discredit that student some more.

Well, Myers reaction to the student’s report was too definitely harsh. But somehow, his insults of the student can’t make it into the wikipedia article of the film. What are the editors afraid of? Taint the image of the anti-ID saint Myers?



3. One of the few blogposts with substance

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2400,Expelled-Overview,Josh-Timonen

This is quite refreshing, even though it contains much (now common) criticism of the film, because this post also contains some information about the film itself.



http://www.artsandfaith.com/index.php?showtopic=16419&hl=

A more balanced blog about the film. Good, because it is free of those four letter words, which can be fond on anti-ID sites.



--------



My conclusion so far: people advocating that ID is not science are determined to crush all dissent. They want to ‘nip the bud’ by discrediting all pro-ID activities. I assume that Dawkins and Myers are intelligent people. So why do they have to resort to such under the belt attacks? Don’t they have better non-emotional arguments? What are they afraid of?

http://www.richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins