1. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    29 Jun '06 10:20
    Originally posted by TheSkipper
    Oh, I see, so it is like what Christians tend to do with Evolution. Tit for tat I suppose.

    TheSkipper
    I concur. There is a large amount of strawman contention on sundry issues. However, if our aim is truth, why propgate distractions?
  2. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    29 Jun '06 21:21
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    That's rich coming from the author of "Contact."
    Carl Sagan wrote Contact, wich by the way is an excellent book/film (got to love Jodi Foster). That aside why would his writeing contact change the validity of that quote one way or another?
  3. Standard memberDavid C
    Flamenco Sketches
    Spain, in spirit
    Joined
    09 Sep '04
    Moves
    59422
    29 Jun '06 22:341 edit
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    That aside why would his writeing contact change the validity of that quote one way or another?
    No room in Freaky's world for fiction, I suppose.

    edit: Ironic, ain't it?
  4. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    30 Jun '06 04:45
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Carl Sagan wrote Contact, wich by the way is an excellent book/film (got to love Jodi Foster). That aside why would his writeing contact change the validity of that quote one way or another?
    Carl Sagan wrote Contact
    You are absolutely right: I don't know what I ate that caused the brain fart, but excuse me, nonetheless. I absolutely loved the movie (Jodie Foster makes everything better, IMO), and am aghast that I didn't give credit where due.

    Sagan, before he left this planet of sod, pulled off the greatest slight of hand in recent memory. He created a story that (unbeknownst to him and other evolutionists) unwittingly told the truth about the "science" he (and Asimov, among others) had been proselytizing for years. Namely, the emperor hasn't any clothes. IMO, one of the most important films of the entire industry.
  5. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    01 Jul '06 23:19
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    [b
    Sagan, before he left this planet of sod, pulled off the greatest slight of hand in recent memory. He created a story that (unbeknownst to him and other evolutionists) unwittingly told the truth about the "science" he (and Asimov, among others) had been proselytizing for years. Namely, the emperor hasn't any clothes. IMO, one of the most important films of the entire industry.[/b]
    sorry, have you actually read Contact? the emperor is fully clothed and suggest you would be ill advised to put words saying anything other than that into Carl Sagans mouth. right or wrong you are entitled to that opinion but it was not one shared by Mr Sagan. I would be interested to know in what way you think that 'the emperor has no clothes' as you put it?
  6. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    02 Jul '06 03:44
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    sorry, have you actually read Contact? the emperor is fully clothed and suggest you would be ill advised to put words saying anything other than that into Carl Sagans mouth. right or wrong you are entitled to that opinion but it was not one shared by Mr Sagan. I would be interested to know in what way you think that 'the emperor has no clothes' as you put it?
    I put no words into Sagan's mouth that didn't first come from the same. Are you truly of the impression that Sagan's message in Contact was anything but a treatise on the opposing faiths?
  7. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    02 Jul '06 12:39
    again have you read the actual book?
  8. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    02 Jul '06 12:50
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    again have you read the actual book?
    No, just watched the movie, based on Sagan's book. Was the movie an unfair representation of the book?
  9. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    02 Jul '06 16:17
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    No, just watched the movie, based on Sagan's book. Was the movie an unfair representation of the book?
    from the perspective of this conversation yes. the film got mauled by hollywood, still a good film but it majerly changes the emphasis from the book, which I would highly recomend reading. I would agree that the film does do a whole religion and science should walk hand in hand thing but that wasn't in the book. In the book it ends with evidence.
  10. Standard memberscottishinnz
    Kichigai!
    Osaka
    Joined
    27 Apr '05
    Moves
    8592
    02 Jul '06 20:192 edits
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    He created a story that (unbeknownst to him and other evolutionists) unwittingly told the truth about the "science" he (and Asimov, among others) had been proselytizing for years. Namely, the emperor hasn't any clothes. IMO, one of the most important films of the entire industry.
    Which is why your side has been sooooooo effective in getting it removed from science?

    Hahaha Freaky. You're just making me laugh with your ridiculous assertions now. You want to make statements like "evolution isn't true" then you are going to have to explain away EVERY piece of evidence to the contrary. Many have tried, all have failed.
  11. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    03 Jul '06 03:21
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    from the perspective of this conversation yes. the film got mauled by hollywood, still a good film but it majerly changes the emphasis from the book, which I would highly recomend reading. I would agree that the film does do a whole religion and science should walk hand in hand thing but that wasn't in the book. In the book it ends with evidence.
    Apparently Sagan didn't consider it a "mauling," at least not one to which he objected. Otherwise, why allow his name in the credits as a source for the screenplay? Either Sagan felt completely comfortable with the film adaptation of his book, or he was more of a hypocrite than the religious characatures he depicted within the film.

    The fact remains, the movie relayed the 'truth' of evolution as a concept of faith, not evidence. Disingenuously, however, he attempted to put evolution and Christianity on the same footing, evidence-wise. Given the tenuous position currently held by evolutionary 'science,' this was clearly a case of stacking the deck.
  12. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    03 Jul '06 04:17
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Apparently Sagan didn't consider it a "mauling," at least not one to which he objected. Otherwise, why allow his name in the credits as a source for the screenplay? Either Sagan felt completely comfortable with the film adaptation of his book, or he was more of a hypocrite than the religious characatures he depicted within the film.

    The fact remains, ...[text shortened]... n currently held by evolutionary 'science,' this was clearly a case of stacking the deck.
    How could he have considered it at all, him being 3 years dead when the movie came out?
  13. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    03 Jul '06 12:18
    Originally posted by frogstomp
    How could he have considered it at all, him being 3 years dead when the movie came out?
    Zemeckis recalls, "I had a great relationship with Carl through the whole project."

    Zemeckis worked with Sagan on striking the balance between human interest and science.

    However, although Sagan did pass away prior to the film's release in 1997 (November 9, 1934 – December 20, 1996, accoring to the Wik), therefore within months of the release (not the three years you suggest), he finished the project and had no objections to the completed product. Neither did his co-contributor, Ann Duryan, raise any objection to the final product which was dedicated in the credits, "For Carl."

    Funny how you're always reaching erroneous conclusions based on half-baked information, don't you think?
  14. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    03 Jul '06 12:21
    Originally posted by howardgee
    FreakingIdiot strikes again!!!!!!
    Don't go wetting your pants so fast, howie. The only thing I got wrong on this one was Sagan was merely a "contributor" to the story and a co-producer; he received no credit for the screenplay, as I erroneously stated in an earlier post.
  15. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    03 Jul '06 13:51
    Originally posted by FreakyKBH
    Don't go wetting your pants so fast, howie. The only thing I got wrong on this one was Sagan was merely a "contributor" to the story and a co-producer; he received no credit for the screenplay, as I erroneously stated in an earlier post.
    Have you ever been right about anything?
Back to Top