My neighbor made the documentary Flock of Dodos, which airs on Showtime tonight. Go to the site and watch the trailer.
here is some response from the I.D. camp, and Randy's rebuttal, from the DVD extras:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Doodley doodley do
9 comments:
I turned it off the moment he quoted PZ Myers.
He loses all credibility by citing that third-rate intellectual wannabe...
it's good you're here, Huck.
Hey, nice haircuts.
Its blanket indictment of so many people as "dodos" already kills their credibility, Huck.
Is it just me, or is the logo on the front page of the site just on the sunny side of plagiarism? Life of Brian, anyone?
When producers make a "documentary" that amounts to little more than an ad hominem attack writ large, they're not contributing anything to the debate. Don't count on me to tune in.
First of all, I have no personal attachment to all this one way or another. I put it up because the info was forwarded to me and it looked interesting and amusing, and I am very much about supporting my friends, neighbors, and my community in their creative endeavors.
There are plenty of opinions and goings-on in the world, in my 'hood, and amongst the bloggers here that I sometimes look at and say, "Well, that is not what I believe, and if I had to be the judge I'd call it just plain wrong." But in the spirit of open discourse, and allowance for the falibility humans, and the openness to the possibility of actually learning something from people I don't agree with (if only by the reaction that is inspired), I try very hard not to put my foot down in absolutism, unless someone or thing is clearly being harmed, and my neutrality equates complicity.
It's easy to cry moral, intellectual, even instinctual superiority in debate. This is even a known debate technique, though it is also a premise marked as faulty logic, aka Association Fallacy. Huck, I'm certain you have read more on all of this than I have, nonetheless, tuning out because someone you don't respect is not totally reasonable, though completely within your rights. All evidence tends to be weighed in a judicial process, and weak points are thrown out. Additionally, PZ Myers is very influential, so it would seem logical that he not be omitted from the debate entirely. But, as usual, I'm glad you're here to point out these things. Still, you're stance is fairly reactionary.
Citizen H - I hardly think the use of the term dodos which, if you watched the trailer, is applied to both camps and is ultimately posed as a question, is a serious indictment. I do believe that it is intended to be humorous in order to keep the debate lighter. Furthermore, the logo is so clearly Life of Brian as to be allusion, a send-up, an homage, and is a device used quite widely in our culture. There isn't enough concealment of origin for it to be plagiarism.
If this were an ad hominem attack, I hardly think that the ID figures in the film would have claimed so much comfort with it. You are welcome to see it as such, and you clearly do, but I really think that's projecting a level of aggression and emotion that just isn't there.
I really don't care what anyone thinks about this issue. Science will continue to provide us with fascinating answers and beautiful and complex understandings of how things work as much as it will fumble along with slow discoveries, misunderstandings, fallacies based on subjectivity and hidden agendas. It has to be bumpy, strange, contentious, enlightening, etc., because it's all human - it's all wrong and it's all right, just like your opinions.
I meant to write "our opinions."
you're stance is fairly reactionary.
I can see how you would think this based on my comment, however the only "reaction" that can be claimed is that I am extremely bored and underwhelmed by the PZ Myers of the world. You can call it an association fallacy if you wish, but the association is not of my design.
As for ID v Evolution v Any Thing Else, I am completely agnostic on the issue. It is absolutely not worth the vehemence or vitriol when there is as much subjection on every side, and from every angle.
And you and I agree on the largest point here -- I simply do not care either. But that does not deny me in any way the position of calling a hack a hack, and questioning the veracity of anyone citing -- in an argument partially against ad hominem criticism, no less -- one known almost exclusively for such discourse.
Keep in mind, I had a pretty good idea what it was when I clicked on it, and had I not a relatively open mind, I wouldn't have even bothered.
Words I See
When I Read the Phrase
"Intelligent Design"
While Squinting.
BY DAVID NG
- - - -
Interior Design
Bullshit
- - - -
from : http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/lists/11DavidNg.html
Huck - I hear ya.
Really, though, you should have called me out on poor apostrophe placement - "you're." Not that it's grounds for argument dismissal.
I still can't get behind the indifference to tree clearing, however. But maybe you and I can discuss that when I see you on the other side, my friend.
Oh Peteski.. do you know where you're going to?
Post a Comment