Expelled

Victimized by EXPELLED?

Spread the love

Richard Dawkins posts a letter on his website by an anonymous individual who, supposedly inspired by his viewing of EXPELLED, now holds Dawkins and fellow Darwinists responsible for the Holocaust. Dawkins then shifts the blame to Ben Stein and EXPELLED.

This is the same Dawkins who in books and videos rails against religious people for their credulousness and stresses the need in science and all aspects of life to examine things closely and follow the evidence. So, what is the evidence that this letter is genuine? And who’s benefitting from the letter?

We don’t know who the author is. Moreover, Dawkins is clearly putting it to good use in excoriating Ben Stein and EXPELLED. Until Dawkins provides some compelling evidence that this letter is for real, I would suggest regarding it as the work of a troll seeking to elicit precisely this reaction.

What if I’m wrong? What if the letter was sent to Dawkins by someone who meant what he wrote? It would just mean that someone wrote an intemperate letter and missed the care and nuance with which the producers of EXPELLED traced the intellectual history from Darwin to the Nazis.

Hard as it may be to believe, I get my share of intemperate letters by (ostensibly) rabid Darwinists who listen to people like Dawkins, Shermer, and Dennett, and conclude that I’m trying to destroy science. Do I publicly charge Dawkins et al. with duping them? I suppose I could play Dawkins’s game, but I prefer to hold people accountable for their own indiscretions.

14 Replies to “Victimized by EXPELLED?

  1. 1
    minerva says:

    A jerk without the courage to use a real name writes:

    My God, I just read the letter, you are horrible people! How dare you play upon people’s painful emotions for your own political and religious gains? You sick, sick, individuals, you should be so ashamed. You disgusting, weak, terrible people! I can understand manipulating the facts of biology; you’ve been doing that for years. But maybe the accusations are correct; your morals really are as lacking as your intellect. You should publicly apologize for your ad hominem, and your ridiculous film.

    Of course, you’ll never approve this comment, and I’ll never see it posted, because you are cowards. Prove me wrong.

  2. 2
    wnelson says:

    The IDiots are coming! — ’round up the usual suspects!

    Crap, guys — this is getting old — when does protesting too much get a week off?

  3. 3

    This is also a good time to listen to

    Download it to your ipod:

    Darwin’s Deadly Legacy (audio part 1)

  4. 4

    And…
    Darwins Deadly Legacy (audio part 2)

  5. 5
    Jason Rennie says:

    But Dr Dembski you are clearly making a grave mistake here.

    After all, whoever wrote to Dicky D, was wrong but whenever you get letters about trying to destroy science, they are correct because you are trying to destroy science.

    Clearly I can see your confusion here.

    Why isn’t this obvious double standard reasonable to you ? 😉

  6. 6
    kairos says:

    Bill

    your arguments are pure reason. Indeed, I don’t see how a guy lik RD could decently write what he did write after having more and more (and more) argued about religion as a virus that is as virulent and dangerous as smallpox but much more difficult to eradicate!
    This is simply unreasonable.

  7. 7
    specs says:

    But, wouldn’t we have considered it an unforgiveable breach of etiquette for Dawkins to release the writers identity? Or, to put it another way, what could he have done in this regard that would have satisfied you?

  8. 8
    russ says:

    But, wouldn’t we have considered it an unforgiveable breach of etiquette for Dawkins to release the writers identity? Or, to put it another way, what could he have done in this regard that would have satisfied you?

    specs:

    I just received a letter informing me that as we speak, babies are being tortured as a result of your post #7. I hope that in the future, you will not make such irresponsible comments.

  9. 9
    kairos says:

    #1 “You should publicly apologize for your ad hominem, and your ridiculous film. Of course, you’ll never approve this comment, and I’ll never see it posted, because you are cowards. Prove me wrong.”

    Provided that it’s not necessary to prove what is mere evidence, are you sure not to be a bit tired … ?

  10. 10
    Stone says:

    Why does someone as smart as Dawkins always make himself out to be an ass when insulted? Bridle thy tongue…. or in this case thy keyboard.

    Nobody believes this man has been wronged as many times as he’s claimed.

    The formation of a new genus question stumped him, then he told us a magical tale where he was going to chase off the creationists(he is a terrifying man isn’t he?) but then decided to make a speech completely irrelevant to the topic about .. was it fish to frog evo or something? lol

    then this shit… Oh yes, I’m sure someone would take the time to write you because we all know you ARE biology Mr. Dawkins…

    And yes, every creationist is a blood thirsty beast intent on destroying your establishment… You know, some people just go into their respective industries and never have this drama.. I’ve heard people in physics debate the genesis/big bang subject, and not turn it into a series of personal attacks.

    And even if expelled wasn’t honest with what their movie would be showing, to go on camera and say what he said, was just stupid.

    Attempting to overstate his bounds and put a percentage on the probability of there being a God? Is he high? How incredibly self important…

  11. 11
    Upright BiPed says:

    Well, well… Expelled in now projected to do $3.8 mil in its first full week (Fri-Thu)…..not bad at all.

  12. 12
    leo says:

    Attempting to overstate his bounds and put a percentage on the probability of there being a God? Is he high? How incredibly self important…

    But, he said he couldn’t put a number on it, until Stein kept asking and then he said one. You could tell pretty easily that he made it up and didn’t really care about the question.

  13. 13
    Stone says:

    Actually I believe Stein asked him if he could put a percentage on it then when he said 98 or 99%, stein pressed him he began to change it…

    But come on, dude haggled it down to 50%! Like he’s pulling numbers out a magic hat… Did he not think perhaps someone might, dare I say, SEE the film ? LOL

    It’s hard to feel bad for Dawkins at any rate.

  14. 14

    Stone: “The formation of a new genus question stumped him, then he told us a magical tale where he was going to chase off the creationists(he is a terrifying man isn’t he?) but then decided to make a speech completely irrelevant to the topic about .. was it fish to frog evo or something?”

    This was probably the question about the origin of new information by mutation. See refutation of critic, incuding raw footage and timeline.

Leave a Reply