You don't actually have to see a movie to know that it's ****.And what does this guy know about rocket science, anyway? I know something about it. I mean I haven't actually dealt directly with rockets or been at any launches or taken a degree in it or anything like that. But my father is an actual rocket scientist and I've listened to my father talk about it for years. I've even read some things he's written (and he is very reputable). I've also read some things about the history of rocket science. And you know what that means, don't you? It means I know rocket science too. So this guy needs to just shut up about rocket science because he doesn't know anything about it.
... Nobody who is intelligent needs to see it. Just listen to Ben Stein. Just read reputable people who have seen it. Just learn about the history of the movie (i.e., the lies they told to their interviewees).
It's not rocket science. It's not science at all.
Like I do.
Then there's good ol' Frame:
If you're going to talk about integrity, you should stop defending ID right now because this movement is run by an organization of people who believe that the ends justify the means.Ends justifying means? You mean like saying its okay not to actually see movies you are critiquing simply because it serves your purposes in wanting the movie to look bad?
I love it when defenders of the empirical method defend anti-empirical methods to pursue their purposes.