By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - New Charles Darwin film is 'too controversial' for religious American audiences

highwaystar101 on 14 September 2009
Kasz216 said:
tedsteriscool said:
FaRmLaNd said:

44% aren't aware of what theories Darwin is associated with O.o

I don't care if you don't think evolution is correct, but simply not knowing what theories he created at all? Don't these people get taught anything in school?

On topic, maybe the film is simply crap? But it can't be too horrible if it got distributors everywhere else. I definitely think there have been some business disputes with the distributors (eg percentage or gross or something) that he hasn't been able to work out with them.

Its like GTA, create controversy. It usually helps ones financial prospects if done correctly.

 

EDIT I thought Hitler was more influenced by Eugenics then he was Darwinism?

It's fairly common knowledge that the US educational system fails.

Something like one fifth of British teens think Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

Winston Churchill who played a MUCH MORE direct role in the history of England then Darwin did in the history of anything.

People in general are... not stupid persay... but don't care to remember stuff that doesn't directly impact their lives.

Yeah, I think it was 22% or something, I remember that study. 58% of people thought that Sherlock Holmes was a real person too. I've found a brief report on it here. Mind you most British people are idiots (I can say that I'm English, and I'm included with the stupid lot anyway), luckily the rest of us are geniuses so we can balance it out.



Around the Network
ironman on 14 September 2009

Where were they planning to show the video? In schools? If so, I completely side with everybody who was against it.



Past Avatar picture!!!

Don't forget your helmet there, Master Chief!

Rath on 14 September 2009
Kasz216 said:
tedsteriscool said:
FaRmLaNd said:

44% aren't aware of what theories Darwin is associated with O.o

I don't care if you don't think evolution is correct, but simply not knowing what theories he created at all? Don't these people get taught anything in school?

On topic, maybe the film is simply crap? But it can't be too horrible if it got distributors everywhere else. I definitely think there have been some business disputes with the distributors (eg percentage or gross or something) that he hasn't been able to work out with them.

Its like GTA, create controversy. It usually helps ones financial prospects if done correctly.

 

EDIT I thought Hitler was more influenced by Eugenics then he was Darwinism?

It's fairly common knowledge that the US educational system fails.

Something like one fifth of British teens think Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

Winston Churchill who played a MUCH MORE direct role in the history of England then Darwin did in the history of anything.

People in general are... not stupid persay... but don't care to remember stuff that doesn't directly impact their lives.

The history of biology? Or even science?

 

Afterall, Darwin is widely considered the father of modern biology because the theory of evolution is so very central to it, given that biology is one of the major branches of science he is easily one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century.

 

But yeah, stupid people are stupid in every country.



megaman79 on 14 September 2009

magic, thats the problem. People believe in magic.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Kasz216 on 14 September 2009
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
tedsteriscool said:
FaRmLaNd said:

44% aren't aware of what theories Darwin is associated with O.o

I don't care if you don't think evolution is correct, but simply not knowing what theories he created at all? Don't these people get taught anything in school?

On topic, maybe the film is simply crap? But it can't be too horrible if it got distributors everywhere else. I definitely think there have been some business disputes with the distributors (eg percentage or gross or something) that he hasn't been able to work out with them.

Its like GTA, create controversy. It usually helps ones financial prospects if done correctly.

 

EDIT I thought Hitler was more influenced by Eugenics then he was Darwinism?

It's fairly common knowledge that the US educational system fails.

Something like one fifth of British teens think Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

Winston Churchill who played a MUCH MORE direct role in the history of England then Darwin did in the history of anything.

People in general are... not stupid persay... but don't care to remember stuff that doesn't directly impact their lives.

The history of biology? Or even science?

 

Afterall, Darwin is widely considered the father of modern biology because the theory of evolution is so very central to it, given that biology is one of the major branches of science he is easily one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century.

 

But yeah, stupid people are stupid in every country.

Believe it or not,  yes.  Sceince is considered worthless to most people.



Around the Network
FaRmLaNd on 14 September 2009

Ask them that when they're on a plane to their holiday destination overseas lol.



Final-Fan on 14 September 2009
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
Something like one fifth of British teens think Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

Winston Churchill who played a MUCH MORE direct role in the history of England then Darwin did in the history of anything.

People in general are... not stupid persay... but don't care to remember stuff that doesn't directly impact their lives.

The history of biology? Or even science? 

Afterall, Darwin is widely considered the father of modern biology because the theory of evolution is so very central to it, given that biology is one of the major branches of science he is easily one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century.

But yeah, stupid people are stupid in every country.

Believe it or not,  yes.  Sceince is considered worthless to most people.

It took me a minute to figure out what you were even talking about, but now I'm confident you simply misunderstood what Rath was referring to. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Kasz216 on 14 September 2009
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
Something like one fifth of British teens think Winston Churchill was a fictional character.

Winston Churchill who played a MUCH MORE direct role in the history of England then Darwin did in the history of anything.

People in general are... not stupid persay... but don't care to remember stuff that doesn't directly impact their lives.

The history of biology? Or even science? 

Afterall, Darwin is widely considered the father of modern biology because the theory of evolution is so very central to it, given that biology is one of the major branches of science he is easily one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century.

But yeah, stupid people are stupid in every country.

Believe it or not,  yes.  Sceince is considered worthless to most people.

It took me a minute to figure out what you were even talking about, but now I'm confident you simply misunderstood what Rath was referring to. 

Oh, i see how.  I'd still argue that yeah.  Winston Churchill did a lot more.

Afterall the only reason Darwin published was he was about to get beaten to the punch.

 A world without Churchill would be different. 

A world without Darwin... we would be talking about "Wallace's Theory of Evolution."



Final-Fan on 14 September 2009

I suppose that can be argued, but on the other hand I thought Darwin was a better scientist who'd spent years and years observing and refining his theory and text, while Wallace was just going to publish a paper on an idea he'd just thought up. Since they had roughly the same idea, I'm sure Wallace's theory would have prevailed -- eventually, but it might well have taken a lot longer to get accepted, like what happened to Chandrasekhar and black holes.

Darwin/history of biology vs. Churchill/history of England ... an interesting battle but perhaps a little off topic.



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Kasz216 on 15 September 2009
Final-Fan said:

I suppose that can be argued, but on the other hand I thought Darwin was a better scientist who'd spent years and years observing and refining his theory and text, while Wallace was just going to publish a paper on an idea he'd just thought up. Since they had roughly the same idea, I'm sure Wallace's theory would have prevailed -- eventually, but it might well have taken a lot longer to get accepted, like what happened to Chandrasekhar and black holes.

Darwin/history of biology vs. Churchill/history of England ... an interesting battle but perhaps a little off topic.

What?  No.  Alfred Russel Wallace did a LOT of fieldwork.  His fieldwork was really important at the time.

He just gets a bad rap by some people because he had some nonconventional ideas among evolutionary scientists.   He was a big fan of Human Consiousness not having a physical concept and instead being immatieral.  Believed in souls... stuff like that.

I'd argue Wallace may be more important then Darwin, because if it wasn't for Wallace... there is no gurantee Darwin would of even released his findings.

It almost seemed as if he was willing to die with his research before Wallace sent him his thesis.  Which is actually something i'm guessing this movie is going to talk about.