HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! PZ Myers edition.

Fuck me. Hey, Matthew ... are you feeling even stupider than usual these days? I'm just curious.

THE PANTS-PISSING IRONY OF IT ALL. If you follow the link to the NYT article, you get to see the jaw-dropping hypocrisy of Expelled's creators. Early in the article, we read:

But Walt Ruloff, a partner in Premise Media, the film’s producer, said the screening was one of a series the producers have organized for the film, which opens April 18, in hopes of building favorable word-of-mouth among people likely to be sympathetic to its message. People like Dr. Myers and Dr. Dawkins would not have been invited, he said.

And yet, only a few paragraphs later, we read:

Mr. Mathis said in an interview that he had confronted Dr. Dawkins in the question and answer period after the screening and that Dr. Dawkins withered. “These people who own the academic establishment and who have great friends in the media — they are not accustomed to having a level, open playing field,” Mr. Mathis said.

Quite right. So, the organizers go to great pains to exclude from that viewing people they see as unsympathetic to their "message," then turn around and claim that they're providing, for the first time, a "level playing field."

Is it possible to be any stupider or more dishonest than that? Sadly, yes it is.

THERE'S DUMB, AND THEN THERE'S MATTHEW. I realize it's just being cruel, but refresh your memory, if you would, as to how The Politic's Matthew (at that link above) claimed that my linking to him was only doing him a favour based on his claim that "the potty-mouthed Canadian Cynic demonstrated his talent to aid his opponents’ cause more than his own."

Then peruse the comments once again to see how poor Matt had his nads yanked out and laid across the anvil, while everyone on the planet came by to give them a whack or two. And yet -- to this day -- Matthew still genuinely believes he got the better of that exchange. How deluded do you have to be to actually think that?

No, for God's sake, don't answer that -- it was obviously rhetorical.