Rush Limbaugh Interviews Ben Stein

[pgwenthold]

I've always wondered about that. We're supposed to assume that most dentists recommend their toothpaste over the other toothpastes, but it's not stated. I wonder...

4 out of 5 dentists recommend using "our toothpaste":
- vs. doing nothing at all.
- vs. hitting oneself in the head with a hammer.
- because the 5th dentist was out to lunch at the time.
- as an industrial solvent.
- or the boogeyman will get you.
- because we paid them to.
- for a laugh.
- etc.

Remember, it is about gum:

"4 out of 5 dentists surveyed recommend sugar-free gum for their patients who chew gum."

This does not say, "4 out of 5 recommend Trident." (although Trident is the most common sugar-free gum). It just says that most dentists say, if you are going to chew gum, then sugar-free is better. The other 20% figure it doesn't matter whether it is sugar-free or not.

Actually, from my perspective, the fact that 20% of dentists don't think there is a benefit to chewing sugar-free gum as compared to sugared gum is significant. Personally, instead of opinion surveys, I think that scientific studies would give better information. If there were really a scientifically demonstrated benefit of chewing sugar free gum, don't you think the gum company would market that instead of an opinion survey? Jeez, how hard would it be to say, "Scientific studies show that people who chew sugar free gum have 20% fewer cavities than those who chew regular gum"? The fact that they don't say that suggests to me that they can't.

 

[DOC]

In truth, I am happy that expelled was released. It's complete failure (out of the theaters by ~ week 4) makes it clear that the general public doesn't buy the nonsense.

So the being the top 12th documentary box office movie ever according to Mojo = complete failure. Everybody's got the right to an opinion I guess.

 

[DOC]

Stein: We hope people look at it and say, "You know, these people might have something here. Let's not just accept what the Dawkinses of the world tell us. Let's think about it critically."

Rush: It so illustrates the close-mindedness, the arrogance, and the fear of people who don't think they have to debate what they believe.

Hypocritical idiots.

Ben Stein doesn't seem like a idiot to me:

From Stein's biography:

He {Stein} graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1970 as valedictorian of his class by election of his classmates. He also studied in the graduate school of economics at Yale. He has worked as an economist at The Department of Commerce, a poverty lawyer in New Haven and Washington, D.C., a trial lawyer in the field of trade regulation at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington, D.C., a university adjunct at American University in Washington, D.C., at the University of California at Santa Cruz, and at Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA. At American U. He taught about the political and social content of mass culture. He taught the same subject at UCSC, as well as about political and civil rights under the Constitution. At Pepperdine, he has taught about libel law and about securities law and ethical issues since 1986.

http://www.benstein.com/bio.html

 

[KingMerv00]

Ben Stein doesn't seem like a idiot to me:

From Stein's biography:

He {Stein} graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1970 as valedictorian of his class by election of his classmates. He also studied in the graduate school of economics at Yale. He has worked as an economist at The Department of Commerce, a poverty lawyer in New Haven and Washington, D.C., a trial lawyer in the field of trade regulation at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington, D.C., a university adjunct at American University in Washington, D.C., at the University of California at Santa Cruz, and at Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA. At American U. He taught about the political and social content of mass culture. He taught the same subject at UCSC, as well as about political and civil rights under the Constitution. At Pepperdine, he has taught about libel law and about securities law and ethical issues since 1986.

http://www.benstein.com/bio.html

Education, employment and idiocy are not mutually exclusive.

 

[KingMerv00]

So the being the top 12th documentary box office movie ever according to Mojo = total failure. Everybody's got the right to an opinion I guess.

Expelled got awful reviews. 9% on rottentomatoes.com.

To put that in perspective...that's worse than Catwoman.

 

[wahrheit]

This never ending argumentum ad populum and appeal to authority schtick is driving me potty. I'm looking at you, DOC.

 

[joobz]

So the being the top 12th documentary box office movie ever according to Mojo = complete failure. Everybody's got the right to an opinion I guess.

I see you ignored my post where I analyzed the numbers. It was clear that Expelled had the benefit of Hype and large number of theaters to open with. Unfortunately for Ben Stein and crew, a turd sandwhich still tastes like Poop. No matter how religious the person who made it is.

DOC, please note that even if Expelled was a compelling outstanding, crowd pleaser, If it won academy awards for beauty and heart rending stories, it still wouldn't change the fact that ID isn't science. It isn't an alternative scientific theory. It's not even a theory. It's not even a hypothesis. It's barely a coherent thought.

ID is to evolution what LSD is to education. It's a hallucinogenic diversion which merely deludes the person into thinking they have learned something through "alternative" means. It offers no substance and no information. It has no verifiable grounding in reality. It's a dream that only exists in the dreamer.

 

[grayman]

Ben Stein doesn't seem like a idiot to me...

In economics, no. I'm fairly certain that if a documentary on economics was made, his input would be valued, indeed.

However, let's say that you, DOC, made a documentary pushing for the teaching of an economic system, where, Person X makes a small investment in a business. But, if he gets persons A, B, and C to join in his business, X becomes their manager and receives 10% of their profit. Then if A,B, and C can each get three more to invest, then they get 10% of the newcomers profit, and X moves up the chain and still gets 10% of the profits. Then the newcomers get three newcomers each... and so on.

Mr. Stein would not commend you for making an insightful documentary that makes one think. He would not say, "DOC has a degrees in theology (just play along for a moment) and teaches at university. He must not be an idiot."

No. Mr. Stein would say something along the lines of, "DOC is out of his element of expertise."

 

[Worm]

Ben Stein doesn't seem like a idiot to me:

From Stein's biography:

He {Stein} graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1970 as valedictorian of his class by election of his classmates. He also studied in the graduate school of economics at Yale. He has worked as an economist at The Department of Commerce, a poverty lawyer in New Haven and Washington, D.C., a trial lawyer in the field of trade regulation at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington, D.C., a university adjunct at American University in Washington, D.C., at the University of California at Santa Cruz, and at Pepperdine University in Malibu, CA. At American U. He taught about the political and social content of mass culture. He taught the same subject at UCSC, as well as about political and civil rights under the Constitution. At Pepperdine, he has taught about libel law and about securities law and ethical issues since 1986.

http://www.benstein.com/bio.html

and I agree that he doesn't sound like an idiot ... right up to the point where you hear him talk about ID.

You see, he's clearly an intelligent guy, Columbia and Yale don't just hand out degress with cereal boxes, and his experience suggests some good knowledge, but when he fronts a film that claims that supporters of ID are hounded out of scientific posts he does, unfortunately, sound like an idiot.

Not becuase he supports ID (although that is almost reason enough) but becuase he claims that many people have been ostracised from the scientific community because of their ID beliefs.

The problem is that there is no evidence for such a claim. None. There are quite a few insinutations, innuendos and accusations, but a distinct lack of actual evidence. When you look at the details presented, the actual circumstances seem, frankly, rather benign and workaday. Now if Stein wants to believe that these cases are horrible examples of scientific repression, fair enough, he can belive what he wants. But when he makes a movie out of it and tries to convince the public at large of some huge conspiracy - he sounds like an idiot.

If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and goes 'quack', I'm going to go ahead and assume it's not a cow in disguise.

 

[Foster Zygote]

No matter how you cut it, out of all the of documentaries ever made it the 12th highest grossing according to MOJO. So I stand by my original statement that it has done relatively well.

So what? Seriously DOC, so what? Does this have anything to do with the veracity of the claims made in Expelled?

 

[DOC]

Expelled got awful reviews. 9% on rottentomatoes.com.

To put that in perspective...that's worse than Catwoman.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[JoeEllison]

Do you have a source for this?

More proof that you don't bother to actually read any of the posts you respond to.

 

[joobz]

Do you have a source for this?

yeah. It's the site. Called "Rotten tomatoes.com"
You know. The site that he said gave the score.
You can go there.
WWW.rottentomatoes.com
Type in "Expelled", and get a link to
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/

Then, on that page, you'll see this big number NINE, right there.

Quotes from various reviews that are found on that page

Embracing evolutionary theory will turn you into a close-minded, God-denying Nazi -- that's the upshot of this ludicrous propaganda piece.

Junk science meets even junkier filmmaking in Expelled -- a no more shameless, stupid and loathsome piece of propaganda has ever skulked its way into the theater.

Stein's credibility is blown on this poorly constructed diatribe, and you'd be smart to save your bucks.

This is propaganda, a political rant disguised as a serious commentary on stifled freedom of inquiry.

 

[DOC]

yeah. It's the site. Called "Rotten tomatoes.com"
You know. The site that he said gave the score.
You can go there.
WWW.rottentomatoes.com
Type in "Expelled", and get a link to
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed/

Then, on that page, you'll see this big number NINE, right there.

Quotes from various reviews that are found on that page

Well, Rotten Tomatoes has their reviews for "Expelled", and Mojo has theirs:

Out of 437 votes on Mojo this is the breakdown:

GRADE THIS MOVIE
Readers B- (437 votes)
Your Grade Log in
GRADE BREAKDOWN
As: 273 62.5%
Bs: 19 4.3%
Cs: 3 0.7%
Ds: 3 0.7%
Fs: 139 31.8%

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm

Maybe this helps explain it being the 12th highest grossing documentary of all time.

 

[Mashuna]

Doc, I know you've got a lot to choose from. But would you say that your most favouritist fallacy in the whole wide world is the argumentum ad populum?

 

[wahrheit]

Doc, I know you've got a lot to choose from. But would you say that your most favouritist fallacy in the whole wide world is the argumentum ad populum?

I thought argument by authority was #1. But I'm afraid nobody wants to wade through almost 2000 posts to actually count them.

 

[joobz]

Well, Rotten Tomatoes has their reviews for "Expelled", and Mojo has theirs:

Actually. this isn't true.
Rotten Tomatoes aggregates the reviewers from published movie critics across the country. Mojo does a simple internet poll for thiers.
So you see, it's NOT RT's reviewers, but America's Reviewers.



As to your "top 12 grossing Doc. films", I see you have selectively ignored the fact that it only did well because of effective PR campaign to get into a good number of theaters. Unfortunately, it was too poor of quality to keep it in the theaters for long.

I did some quick number crunching and found out that
Adjusting for inflation (assuming a constant 2.5% inflation rate), Expelled does do worse than Roger and me. However, interestingly, it is still ranked #12 overall.

This changes a lot when you do consider how many theaters it played in.

Ranking the top 95 documentaries (I had to remove 5 of them because they do not have theater count information) of all time based upon the dollars/theater I found out that Expelled doesn't fair so well.

On total sales/total theaters, Expelled ranked #87, just loosing to Metallica's some kind of monster tour. On Opening day sales/opening day theaters, Expelled ranked # 90. If you inflation adjust these numbers, the ranking drops further down to #92 for both measures. Remember these numbers are out of 95 total movies.

As such, it is clear that Expelled's total ticket sale success is due to marketing savy and the convincing of 1000 theaters to run the movie.

#87-#92 out of 95 documentaries? Not very impressive at all.


Oh well, the funny point to all of this is that even if it was the Number 1 feel good movie of all time, grossing 1billizilion dollars, it still wouldn't mean ID is valid science.

 

[DOC]

Posted by DOC

No matter how you cut it, out of all the of documentaries ever made, it was the 12th highest grossing according to MOJO. So I stand by my original statement that it has done relatively well.

So what? Seriously DOC, so what? Does this have anything to do with the veracity of the claims made in Expelled?

The movie was about freedom of Ideas and freedom of discussion. It never said Darwinism (or whatever you want to call it) was false and ID was true. It just wants the right to put it (ID)on the table.

And the fact that the "Goo to the Zoo to You" theory is popular with scientists doesn't have anything to do with its veracity either.

 

[DOC]

Doc, I know you've got a lot to choose from. But would you say that your most favouritist fallacy in the whole wide world is the argumentum ad populum?

All I said is that the movie has done reasonably well. That seems to bother some people in here. I never said the fact that it has done well (for a documentary) had something to do with the veracity of its claims. That strawman was brought up by someone else.

 

[joobz]

Posted by DOC

No matter how you cut it, out of all the of documentaries ever made, it was the 12th highest grossing according to MOJO. So I stand by my original statement that it has done relatively well.

Of course you do. You have a habit of ignoring context and relevance.

The movie was about freedom of Ideas and freedom of discussion. It never said Darwinism (or whatever you want to call it) was false and ID was true. It just wants the right to put it (ID)on the table.

It was on the table in science already, and it was found to be unscientific.
It would be equivilent to demanding that christian churches teach geography. It's completely unrelated.

And the fact that the "Goo to the Zoo to You" theory is popular with scientists doesn't have anything to do with its veracity either.

Of course not, because that theory doesn't exist in science. Perhaps you'd like to explain the mechanism of the "Goo to the Zoo to You". I did a search on compendex, pubmed, web of science and couldn't find it anywhere.

I could find many papers on evolution and natural selection, but not that theory you described. Curious.