Monday, March 24, 2008

Dear Denyse: Seriously, what the hell is WRONG with you?

[Greetings, Pharynguloids. I mean you no harm. Take me to your cooler. Hey, pull my tentacle. No, really.]

[Tail-wagging update, 1:55 PM. Scroll to bottom for more jaw-dropping Denyseitude.]

To get up to speed, first go here; I'll wait. Actually, no, I won't -- that's the great thing about blogs, isn't it?

And now for this morning's unintentional, Denyse-infested hilarity, look at the recent update here:

March 24, 2008: Update note from line producer Mark Mathis, who writes me to say:

You should know that I invited Michael shermer to a screening at NRB in Nashville. He came and is writing a review for scientific American. I banned pz because I want him to pay to see it. Nothing more.

Note: See also the earlier post on PZ Myers getting expelled from Expelled.

For convenience, if there are further developments, I will update from here, and it's not my fault if the story is confusing.





Make sure you appreciate the retardedness of what Denyse just published as an update. After earlier reproducing a note from a volunteer stating that PZ was turned away because he showed up "uninvited," Denyse now -- clearly without understanding that she is now contradicting that earlier accusation in its entirety -- says she has it on good authority that PZ was expelled for simple (and infantile) financial reasons.

First, not only is this new reason inconsistent with every earlier defense from the film's creators, but it's simply unbelievable. If Mathis truly felt that way, he could have demanded that PZ -- unlike everyone else -- just pay admission, and I'd bet my left nad that PZ would have calmly handed over $10, or whatever reasonable fee Mathis decided arbitrarily to ask for, and everyone would have been happy, except that that would still have been a PR disaster for the movie's creators.

In addition, if Mathis had seriously wanted to "ban" PZ, he could have done it when PZ registered for the screening, rather than waiting until PZ got to the theatre. But that's still not the funniest part. No, the funniest part is when Denyse writes:

For convenience, if there are further developments, I will update from here, and it's not my fault if the story is confusing.

But there's nothing confusing about what happened here, Denyse -- PZ already explained it nicely and concisely as I pointed out in my earlier post. The only thing confusing here, Denyse, is your insistence on trying desperately to believe every changing story coming from Mark Mathis, and trying to reconcile them. Because as long as you insist on treating Mathis' inconsistent and self-contradictory lies as fact, Denyse, you will be perpetually confused.

Not to mention perpetually stupid, but we've already covered that in earlier posts, and repeating it again here would just be cruel. So I won't.

IT'S MIND-BOGGLING IS WHAT IT IS. The more I think about Mathis' latest clearly-contrived defense, the more it just plain creeps me out. Think about it -- Mathis allegedly accepted PZ's online registration, approved it, allowed PZ to travel to the theatre and, only after PZ got there, did Mathis demand that he leave on pain of arrest because ... he wanted PZ's ten dollars.

There are no words for this. Truly, there aren't.

Pharyngula-flavoured update: If you have any thoughts of going over to Denyse's place and leaving a comment trying to educate her, I'd save the keystrokes. She moderates her comments section and simply refuses to approve dissenting comments of any kind. The phrase "hermetically-sealed" comes to mind. So does "pig-ignorant," but "hermetically-sealed" sounds so much cooler, don't you think?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Apparently, Denyse has a history of being a blabbermouth.

(Wag of the tail to Pharyngula commenter Kristine.)

UPDATE, 1:55 PM: And just when you're trying to make sense of the current 53 varieties of excuses, Denyse pulls another one out of her intellectual centre:

12:52 pm: At Uncommon Descent, Dave Springer argues that the explanation for the discrepancy between the Expelled producers' account and Dawkins's and Myers's account about whether Myers received an invite to the Expelled screening is that Myers was gaming the system by responding to an invitation he had not actually received.

He fooled the host by gaming the invitation/response system employed. The host wasn’t checking RSVPs against a list of invitations sent out but rather just assumed that any RSVP received was in response to an invitation sent out.

Perhaps PZ will issue a statement on this.

I have no idea what to make of this latest rationalization since it doesn't make any sense no matter how you examine it.

On the one hand, I was under the impression that the film registration was on a public website and available to anyone, so to accuse PZ of hijacking someone else's directed invitation would be utter nonsense. On the other hand, if there were explicit and named invitations, how incompetent would you need to be to not be cross-checking those RSVPs as they came in?

No matter how you look at this excuse, it just fails utterly, and you'd have to be a total retard to take it seriously.

Oh, wait ...

: I just heard back from PZ that the film registration was openly available to anyone at a public website. Another lame lie shot to pieces. I'm sure Denyse will be correcting the record any minute now ... the day Satan begins ice-skating to work.

, the most depressing thing about watching Denyse being spoon-fed one horrifically dishonest excuse after another is that she simply swallows that newest defense hook, line and sinker ... until someone comes along to blow a hole in it -- then it's just on to the next one.

It apparently never occurs to her to examine, even for a minute, the logical consistency of each new rationale to see whether it makes even superficial sense. It comes in and Denyse embraces it, while she then suggests it's everyone else's job to do her research for her.

It's not that she's stupid or dishonest -- it's that she's so appallingly fucking lazy that's so grating. If she were any lazier, I'm guessing she'd need someone to chew her food for her.


Dr.Dawg said...

What a tangled web we weave, when we practise to deceive.

I wonder what tomorrow's excuse will be? Twelve foot space lizards?

Mike said...

Space lizards...I can hardly wait.

Actually, I can hardly wait for Michael Shermer to, ah, "review" this film.

That will be nearly as entertaining as watching these liars.

¢rÄbG®äŠŠ said...

That Denyse sure is a superstitious gal.

liberal supporter said...

Looks like they took Kathy's excuse writing course "they didn't come and disrupt my lecture like I baited them to because they couldn't afford to. It's not because they have jobs, unlike me."

Yakaru said...

I think Mathis himself doesn't have a clue why he did it.

Red Tory said...

If nothing else, her gullibility and willingness to shamelessly fabricate ad infinitum while suppressing the introduction of contradictory facts, quite neatly illustrates the fifth-rate mentality and complete lack of integrity required to be an advocate of “intelligent design.”

liberal supporter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
liberal supporter said...

Intelligent design itself is not a problem. It's just that it has little to say from a scientific point of view. The continuous "making stuff up" to explain each flaw found, as Denyse is doing, is what distinguishes it as less than a theory, less than a hypothesis, more on the level of musing and speculation. So it cannot be taught as science.

You often see this kind of making stuff up whenever one tries to force fit religious ideas into the everyday activities of science, i.e. explaining the physical world. Just as science is struck dumb, or at least pleads "not my area" when it is asked to answer religious questions. That seems a little more honest though.

Science tries to answer "how" and "what". Religion tries to answer "why". The creation stories are supposed to provide a backdrop and context to the central question of "why". They are not to be taken literally.

I think these people want it taken literally in order to dumb down the population so that anything that happens, and anything the government does can be explained away as the will of God. They want people to take each thing that happens as a new phenomenon and not try to connect it to any other thing. That kind of misuse of religion as a tool of power is nothing new, but I thought we had left it behind.

KEvron said...

"'s not my fault if the story is confusing."

AAAH-HAHAHAHAHAHA! how essentially denyse! oh! and she spilled the beans, too!

hope you appreciate that i've used a week's allowance of exclamation points on one comment....


Kristine said...

(Wag of the tail to Pharyngula commenter Kristine.)

And a shimmy to you back! :)

I wrote a poem about that whole affair with the Smithsonian:

When Judge Jones
Put ID’s ass to bed,
Mrs. O’Leary
Had a film gig so brain dead
And when this cow
Tipped us all off,
I winked an eye and said,
“There’ll be no ID at the Smithsonian!”
Liar! Liar! Liar!