Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America'

[Mari333]

this is humiliating.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sept11.2009





Creation, starring Paul Bettany, details Darwin's "struggle between faith and reason" as he wrote On The Origin of Species. It depicts him as a man who loses faith in God following the death of his beloved 10-year-old daughter, Annie.



The film was chosen to open the Toronto Film Festival and has its British premiere on Sunday. It has been sold in almost every territory around the world, from Australia to Scandinavia


However, US distributors have resolutely passed on a film which will prove hugely divisive in a country where, according to a Gallup poll conducted in February, only 39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution.





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6173399/Charles-Darwin-film-too-controversial-for-religious-America.html

[Ian David]

1. Yep. I posted that earlier.

Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=228&topic_id=56306&mesg_id=56306

[Razoor]

2. good grief!

This makes me sick! cant show a film because it might offend a group? whatever happened to the saying? if you dont like it dont watch it.
I guess only in america. I am at a loss of words.

[Psephos]

3. Oh, gimmee a break. How did Fahrenheit 911 get distributed? n/t

[Oeditpus Rex]

28. Independently

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_9/11#Financing.2C_pre-release_and_distribution

[Psephos]

29. Exactly. A film that can draw an audience will find money.

I think Moore has proven that ours is secular enough a society to promote films that can fill seats at the theater, regardless of the subject.

IMO, that's been true for decades now.

[Generic Brad]

4. Only 39%?!!!

That is embarrassingly high.

[countmyvote4real]

5. Only 39% of Mercans believe in science! OMFG

It's no wonder about idiots that want the status quo.

[Psephos]

9. 39% is also approx. the percentage that believe in MIHOP/LIHOP, so draw conclusions at your own risk

[countmyvote4real]

10. At least MIHOP/LIHOP have questions.

I don't think there would be much overlap, but I wouldn't object to finding out.

[Psephos]

18. As does Intelligent Design

Any hypothesis attempts to ask questions and provide answers.

But the true scientific test of a hypothesis is not whether it has an answer for observed phenomenae, but whether it makes predictions that can be tested experimentally.

Any good scientist tries to falsify or prove wrong his/her hypothesis. Only if it survives the experimental gauntlet can it be elevated to theory.

A hypothesis that cannot be tested experimentally is not scientific. It's religious or political. \

Evolution has passed the tests for theory status. The evidence from molecular genetics alone is simply breathtaking. Intelligent Design cannot be subjected to falsifiable tests, by definition, because it's based on a belief in something that can't be tested. Ditto MIHOP/LIHOP.

As a rule of thumb, it's fairly easy to sort what's scientific from what's not by listening to the discussions. When they're full of vitriol, conspiracy, and ad hominem, then it's a safe bet that science is not involved. No one argues whether the Sun will rise tomorrow or calls someone else a knuckle-dragger or moran for thinking so.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

21. I appreciate your explanation in a way simple enough ANY person can understand.

Maybe, you should get into marketing!!! :bounce:

[countmyvote4real]

22. That's all lovely and well understood. But IMHO, Intelligent Design does not equate to MIHOP/LIHOP.

Has any evidence been deliberately destroyed that might prove or disprove that there is Intelligent Design?

It has been apparently observed, documented and reported that is not the case with MIHOP/LIHOP questions. The links are out there. I'm too lazy to google them for you as it would appear to be a waste of my time.

Oh look! There's a caveman riding a dinosaur! (Sorry. I must be caught up in the debate logic of the time.)

Peace.

[Psephos]

23. Both are based on beliefs that cannot be tested experimentally

That's my only point, but it's a strong one, and it's what determines what's scientific from what's not.

I'm using "scientific" in its precise form here. It's not a synonym for "right." A belief-based hypothesis could be "right" without being scientific.

A scientific theory is one that 1) explains all significant observations, and more importantly, 2) is testable. A testable hypothesis makes predictions that can survive attempts to disprove them experimentally. Designing tests to falsify, instead of bolster, a hypothesis is what a true scientist does. It requires a habit of skepticism, not of suspension of disbelief. A scientist who is in love with her hypothesis is in danger of forfeiting her best tool.

If we treat unprovable hypotheses, no matter how appealing they seem, as the equivalent of tested scientific theories, then we will no longer possess knowledge, only beliefs. Science is the wall that separates them.

If you're interested in thinking about this further, look for a discussion on the seductions and dangers of thinking inductively and believing that it's scientific. Here's a good place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability


After that, check out Nicholas Taleb's The Black Swan. It's a landmark book about uncertainty, about why thinking scientifically is so difficult, and about why the things we think we know but actually don't are the source of our biggest griefs. Taleb, I might add, foresaw the financial system meltdown two years before it happened, as an example of a likely Black Swan problem.

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Swan-Impact-Highly-Improbable/dp/1400063515/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252987532&sr=8-1

[countmyvote4real]

31. I'm just saying that "sunlight" (info/data) is the best policy.

Thanks for the links.

[Psephos]

33. I agree completely :)

[ixion]

6. It will be available via netflix

I've got it in my queue already.

And now that the story has made the news, I'll bet it finds a distributor. ;)

[KittyWampus]

8. Hence the reason for the bogus story.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

7. How the hell can only "39 per cent of Americans believe in the theory of evolution"?

[Mari333]

11. here is a page with some stats

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Ah yes, the right wing and their nuttery

one of these days they will close them schools, and burn them books.

And sadly I am not kidding

And yes, this is nuts

[HelenWheels]

13. Couldn't they show it in the blue states at least

Americans aren't all knuckle dragging idiots

[rurallib]

14. Yet again, reality scoops the Onion on great satire.

[Webster Green]

15. It is humiliating.

This country is seriously fucked up. :banghead:

[MadMaddie]

16. So let me get this straight

In America where the right is gungho about freedom of speech, American rights, blah..blah..blah... they are okay with the film industry making a decision not to show a movie that disagrees with their religion.

Well what the heck about the rest of us. Maybe we want to see the movie.

Censorship the great Republican Christian uneducated way!!

[burning rain]

17. Truly, God has blessed America with all those things....

with which God blesses believers.

[WCGreen]

19. The devolution of America...

[misanthrope]

20. And pretty much par for the course...

...In case there was any doubt what America stood for, the last few years are revealing it in full and it's disgusting.

[cynatnite]

24. They're trying to make controversy, IMO

controversy sells.

I'm not even convinced that gallup poll is accurate.

[LynnTheDem]

25. Yeah, the Iranians aren't too happy about the film, either.

...



Yes, it's bloody humiliating & embarrassing. The "religious" rightwingnuttery have become the very terror they screech against.

[jonnyblitz]

26. this is why god created torrents.

:o there are no borders on the internets.

[fujiyama]

27. Wow this is one fucking backwards-ass country

:wtf:

Then again, where else would have people protesting expanding health coverage to all of its citizens?

[Kablooie]

30. The brainless right wing imbeciles may be a stupid minority but they control the country.

I don't understand how a small, deranged faction can so totally grab hold of this whole country and force it to do it's will.

Yeah, I know, the media control everything, but why the hell is the media controlled by these buffoons? How did that happen?

I'm beginning to think that people that have brains should begin to consider other countries to live in. The U.S. is happily sinking into a morass of ignorance.

[seabeyond]

32. i dont know the real scoop on this but u.s. produces and allows all the crap...

and i dont believe only 39% believe in evolution.

not buying it.