Darwin historians not misrepresented

CMI ^ | July 25, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

Darwin historians not misrepresented

More controversy erupts with renewed allegations against the makers of The Voyage—this time directly from three interviewees.

“Historians misrepresented by creationists” shouted the headlines of the website of the National Center for Science Education...

[GodGunsGuts]

This is a good development. The more they Darwin-drones squawk, the more people will buy the movie.

PS This is a “Made for TV” Movie, so hopefully they will raise enough money from video sales to air the movie internationally.

[smokingfrog]

Has anyone seen this movie? Any reviews?

[CottShop]

yelling, screaming, and character assassinations are all they have left for ammo- We’ll see the true agenda, the true nature of evos exposed as they systematically attack the creators of htis movie while ignoring all the issues- just as they did when hte movie ‘no intellgience allowed’ came out- it appears they are even running out of spitwads to throw- now that hteir ammo has vanished like hte dodo-bird

[GodGunsGuts]

Here’s a review:

http://www.movieguide.org/articles/1/316

To find out more about the movie you can go here:

http://www.thevoyage.tv/default.aspx

Or to the CMI website:

http://creation.com/

[GodGunsGuts]

The more they attack the movie the better IMHO. Think of all the free publicity!

[theFIRMbss]

>the more people will buy the movie

They may want to wait. Jennifer Connelly will play Darwin's wife in a big budget pic of his life called "Creation." She is always great.

[GodGunsGuts]

Sorry, they lost me at the title. Shouldn’t they have called it “Evolution”? Why do you suppose they are trying to confuse evolution with creation???

[Mogollon]

I would like an evo to explain how the following evolved from a lifeless planet devoid of organic chimicals:

Citric Acid Cycle

And I don't want to hear it took millions and billions of years for it to 'evolve' because some of the chemicals (synthases, transaminases, dehydrogenases) degrade rapidly outside a living cell and would be worthless within hours or days at most.

The Krebs cycle is the power plant of the cell, without it no cell can survive.

[smoothlikeeggs]

Darwin and this old argument has already lost. There is no DNA link at all to modern humans. It is time we put this to rest. Evolution does exist in the animal kingdom but not to humans.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[smokingfrog]

Quality: * * * * Acceptability: +4

WARNING CODES:

Language: None
Violence: None
Sex: None
Nudity: None
RATING: Not Rated

> No sex, violence, bad language or nudity? Hollywood would not approve.

[GodGunsGuts]

Can you believe such an offensive movie made it throught the ratings system! Heads are gonna role!!!

[par4]

Your headline is quite misleading, if you actually go to the website you'll see that the three science historians were deceived into contributing and then found what was presented was distorted.

We were led to believe that the movie was being made to be shown as an educational film on Australian broadcast television and possibly elsewhere. Fathom Media was revealed to be a subsidiary of Creation Ministries International when publicity for the movie began to appear on the internet."

Previously, William Crawley, a blogger for the BBC, reported (June 21, 2009) that Bowler was "unhappy to be appearing in what he regards as an 'anti-Darwinian' film which offers an historically distorted portrait of Darwin" and that he along with Browne and Herbert "only discovered that they had inadvertently contributed to a Creationist film a month before the film's release." Phil Bell, the CEO of Creationist Ministries UK, acknowledged that Fathom Media was established as a front company, explaining, "At the end of the day ... [when] people see 'Creationist', instantly the shutters go up and that would have shut us off from talking to the sort of experts, such as Professor Bowler, that we wanted to get to."

Crawley added, "I asked Phil Bell if this method of securing an interview was 'deceptive'. He said: 'Well, it could be called deceptive.

If you have to lie about why you want an interview and hide who you're representing through front companies perhaps you need to seek guidance on morals and ethics from a higher authority.

[GodGunsGuts]

They didn’t lie, they just withheld the fact that they are creationists, otherwise the Temple of Darwin fanatics would not have agreed to be interviewed. How else do you propose to penetrate the inner santums of the Darwin cult?

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

"Bowler was "unhappy to be appearing in what he regards as an 'anti-Darwinian' film which offers an historically distorted portrait of Darwin""

They didn’t lie, they just withheld the fact that they are creationists, otherwise the Temple of Darwin fanatics would not have agreed to be interviewed.

Seems that Creationists are adopting the Islamic strategy of it's OK to lie for the cause.

[par4]

OK, they didn't lie, they deceived. They set up a front company to get interviews with respected historians because they knew that they wouln't get an interview if the subjects knew what their real motives were. Was the movie shown on Austrailin Public Television as they were led to belive?

Also, the only ones who are "goes crazy" are the creationists who are looking to stir up some noise about this loser:

So far, The Voyage that Shook the World seems to have attracted little attention independently of the controversy over its misleading the historians: no reviews of it appear at Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic. The sole positive review cited at CMI's website is from Ted Baehr on Movieguide, which, despite its neutral name, describes itself as a ministry "dedicated to redeeming the values of the mass media according to biblical principles, by influencing entertainment industry executives and helping families make wise media choices"; Baehr also gave four stars to Expelled. There are no signs that the movie is going to have a theatrical release in the United States

Face it, this film is a dud and no amount of feigned controversy is going to resurrect it. Why do you feel the need to label the historians as Temple of Darwin fanatics? Where's your proof that these 3 are cultists? Just because they don't subscribe to your views doesn't make them cultists any more than your ideas make you a cultist also.

Maybe creationists would be able to get interviews with scientists if they didn't insult them by referring to those who believe in evolution as fanatics. A little respect would go a long way.

anyway, it's too nice out to sit here and discuss this today.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Crawley added, "I asked Phil Bell if this method of securing an interview was 'deceptive'. He said: 'Well, it could be called deceptive. If you have to lie about why you want an interview and hide who you're representing through front companies perhaps you need to seek guidance on morals and ethics from a higher authority.

Are you implying that historians tailor their "opinions" and the "facts" according to who they are talking to.

That may help explain why they had to "deceive" the historians as to their true identity.

[Stultis]

Sacha Baron Cohen (Ali G, Borat, Brüno) also used shill, front companies to draw in legitimate interviewees.

The new face of creationism?

[GodGunsGuts]

They did not reveal the purpose of the docudrama precisely because the Temple of Darwin cult has something to hide. It’s kind of like investigative journalists or law enforcement officers who use hidden cameras to expose a crooked politician, an evo-cult masquerading as science, etc. I have no problem with this whatsoever.