"Smile -- you're on Candid Camera"

A New York Times article by Darwinist propagandist Cornelia "Corny" Dean says,

A few months ago, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins received an e-mail message from a producer at Rampant Films inviting him to be interviewed for a documentary called “Crossroads.”

The film, with Ben Stein, the actor, economist and freelance columnist, as its host, is described on Rampant’s Web site as an examination of the intersection of science and religion. . . . .

But now, Dr. Dawkins and other scientists who agreed to be interviewed say they are surprised — and in some cases, angered — to find themselves not in “Crossroads” but in a film with a new name and one that makes the case for intelligent design, an ideological cousin of creationism. The film, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” also has a different producer, Premise Media.

There she goes again with that "ideological cousin of creationism" stuff.

The article continues,

The film is described in its online trailer as “a startling revelation that freedom of thought and freedom of inquiry have been expelled from publicly-funded high schools, universities and research institutions.” According to its Web site, the film asserts that people in academia who see evidence of a supernatural intelligence in biological processes have unfairly lost their jobs, been denied tenure or suffered other penalties as part of a scientific conspiracy to keep God out of the nation’s laboratories and classrooms . . .

. . . . .If he had known the film’s premise, Dr. Dawkins said in an e-mail message, he would never have appeared in it. “At no time was I given the slightest clue that these people were a creationist front,” he said.

Eugenie C. Scott, a physical anthropologist who heads the National Center for Science Education, said she agreed to be filmed after receiving what she described as a deceptive invitation.

“I have certainly been taped by people and appeared in productions where people’s views are different than mine, and that’s fine,” Dr. Scott said, adding that she would have appeared in the film anyway. “I just expect people to be honest with me, and they weren’t.”

You expect them to be honest with you? If your responses depend on who is interviewing you and why, how are you being honest with them?

These Darwinists don't understand that you are supposed to smile and say "I'll be darned" when told that you are on Candid Camera.

I wouldn't mind being interviewed by filmmakers and authors. They can lie to me all they want. May they make a big sucker out of me. May I be completely bamboozled. May they show me no mercy.

These Darwinists should be grateful for the opportunity to publicize themselves and their views. They take these opportunities for granted. And they should not look a gift horse in the mouth.

Here is another article that I wrote on the same subject.
.

READ MORE

Hypocritical Darwinists play footsie with religion

At the same time that Darwinists are trying to get all criticisms of Darwinism banned from the public schools as alleged violations of the so-called separation of church and state, they themselves are seeking closer ties with religion. A webpage titled "The Clergy Letter Project Presents Scientists in Support of Clergy" says,

Scientists from across the country have generously agreed to serve as technical consultants to clergy members who have questions about the science associated with all aspects of evolution. If you have a question, find a local scientist on the list below, or search by areas of expertise. Many of the scientists listed have also expressed a willingness to entertain requests to speak publicly or lead a discussion about their areas of expertise.

Also, this is discussed here and here.

This shameless hypocrisy may backfire on them someday.

READ MORE

Wickedpedian thugs fine-tune attacks on Yecke

One Wickedpedian thug appropriately named "Odd nature" wrote on the discussion page of the Wickedpedia bio of Cheri Yecke,

The article is looking better. My only concern is that in the recent change to "hired the Internet accuracy-watchdog service ReputationDefender to help clarify the record" implies that the record was indeed inaccurate, something that has subsequently been shown not to be the case. I think "hired the Internet accuracy-watchdog service ReputationDefender to change the record to reflect her views" or simply "hired the Internet accuracy-watchdog service ReputationDefender" are more accurate. Odd nature 21:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, we can't suggest that maybe the record could use some clarification, now can we? And how could ReputationDefender possibly "change the record" to reflect Cheri Yecke's views?

Another Wickedpedian thug inserted the following in the section titled "Allegations of Nepotism":
.

. . . Yecke's husband was hired as the deputy secretary of professional regulations by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation amid allegations that his qualifications do not significantly distinguish him from the rest of the qualified candidate pool available in Florida.

No one claimed -- or could claim -- that "his qualifications . . . significantly distinguish him from the rest of the qualified candidate pool available in Florida." He is not a rocket scientist. His Florida state position is just one of general administration and requires no specialized knowledge. According to a news report, his background is undistinguished --

While she [Cheri Yecke] was education commissioner in Minnesota, her husband was appointed to an $84,000-a-year position as a deputy commissioner with the state's economic development agency.

Dennis Yecke held a number of executive positions with the U.S. Marine Corps. He has a bachelor's degree in business administration from University of Wisconsin-River Falls, according to his resume.

In addition to his two-year stint in Minnesota, he was also a budget analyst for the Virginia Department of Planning and Budget for 10 years.

Anyway, how did the hiring of Dennis Yecke for his positions in Florida and Minnesota suggest "nepotism"? What authority or influence might Cheri Yecke have had in selecting him for those positions?

Anyway, I am digressing. It is not my purpose here to just defend Cheri Yecke -- my purpose here is to stop Wickedpedia censorship. Truth is a defense against charges of libel but is not a defense against charges of arbitrary censorship. And Wikipedia is run by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit outfit and Cheri Yecke is a candidate in a public election and the IRS says that her Wikipedia bio must therefore be presented as a "public forum" that is "conducted in a non-partisan manner."
.

READ MORE

Outhouse wall for outhouse poets

This post is reserved for limericks and other poetry. I recommend that poetry already posted elsewhere on this blog be copied under this post.

This post has its own post label -- "Limericks and other poetry" -- and a link in the left sidebar.

The post title is a parody of Panda's Thumb's infamous Bathroom Wall, a dumping place for censored comments.

READ MORE