Mystery of the 'award-winning' creationist film

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Fantasist creationists

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:46 pm

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"They're looking for excuses to hate. The entire forum is chock full of misrepresentation, personal attacks, dreadful logic, and more." 'The Question Evolution Project'.

A perfect description of Cowboy Bob's facebook pages. And if you disagree with their claims there you get censored, banned and then vilified.

By contrast if you disagree factually with something on this forum (where personal attacks do appear but speaking for myself I always try to be fair and factual, and correct any errors) you (ie anyone) can say so (as Mister Gordons did). We are not the ones deliberately posting lies or non-factual comments and then banning people from correcting the lies or errors. But the liar Sorensen only has enough courage to shout from afar that we are all (including me) posting misrepresentations and lies. He does not have the courage to come here and say that (not even in his usual vague and non-specific way). Everyone can see why. Most of the time his claims that I have posted 'lies' here are themselves complete lies that he cannot possibly defend. His excuse for his mendacity? The judgmental tosh that 'lying is what atheopaths do'. (So I guess Trump must be an atheopath too.)
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 7999
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Mystery of the 'award-winning' creationist film

Postby Mountkeen » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:40 pm

MisterGordons wrote:
Mountkeen wrote:
Coming second means you didn't win. It's a bit like Argentina claiming it won the Falklands War.


This is a disingenuous straw man. Nobody claims that CMI won first place. They won an award. The site confirms this.


No it's not a strawman, it is a perfectly useful analogy. Because the site does not "confirm" that the film won an award. It states that the film was "Runner-Up". It makes no statement about runner-up being linked to an award.

If you want me to make a less frivolous analogy I will. It's a bit like the producers of "The Big Short" claiming in their marketing that the film won Oscar for Best Picture at the 2016 Academy Awards. It didn't. If they did so they would be quite correctly accused of misrepresentation (or in plain speech - lying). Then again the misrepresentation of facts is par for the course for CMI.
Mountkeen
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 5:11 pm
Location: West of England

'Award-winning' creationist film

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:47 pm

Mountkeen wrote:
MisterGordons wrote:
Mountkeen wrote:
Coming second means you didn't win. It's a bit like Argentina claiming it won the Falklands War.


This is a disingenuous straw man. Nobody claims that CMI won first place. They won an award. The site confirms this.


No it's not a strawman, it is a perfectly useful analogy. Because the site does not "confirm" that the film won an award. It states that the film was "Runner-Up". It makes no statement about runner-up being linked to an award.

If you want me to make a less frivolous analogy I will. It's a bit like the producers of "The Big Short" claiming in their marketing that the film won Oscar for Best Picture at the 2016 Academy Awards. It didn't. If they did so they would be quite correctly accused of misrepresentation (or in plain speech - lying). Then again the misrepresentation of facts is par for the course for CMI.



As I did not immediately notice, the link Gordons posted on 19 January refers to '2015 AWARD WINNING FILMS'. The CMI effort is one of those listed. Thus you could probably say it won a 'silver medal'. But the original phrase used by CMI - without them posting a supporting link to see the context - was 'award-winning'. Which to me strongly implied 'gold medal' or perhaps even 'sole award in its category'.

However I am prepared to acknowledge that what Gordons has said since 19 January is broadly accurate. (Is the liar Sorensen prepared to acknowledge my acknowledgement.)

Unlike all the **** we have been getting from Trump spokespeople since 20 January.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 7999
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: 'Award-winning' creationist film

Postby Mountkeen » Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:45 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:

As I did not immediately notice, the link Gordons posted on 19 January refers to '2015 AWARD WINNING FILMS'. The CMI effort is one of those listed. Thus you could probably say it won a 'silver medal'. But the original phrase used by CMI - without them posting a supporting link to see the context - was 'award-winning'. Which to me strongly implied 'gold medal' or perhaps even 'sole award in its category'.

However I am prepared to acknowledge that what Gordons has said since 19 January is broadly accurate. (Is the liar Sorensen prepared to acknowledge my acknowledgement.)



Yes but "probably" award winning is a bit like "almost unique". It either is or it isn't.
Mountkeen
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 5:11 pm
Location: West of England

Re: 'Award-winning' creationist film

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:49 pm

Mountkeen wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:

As I did not immediately notice, the link Gordons posted on 19 January refers to '2015 AWARD WINNING FILMS'. The CMI effort is one of those listed. Thus you could probably say it won a 'silver medal'. But the original phrase used by CMI - without them posting a supporting link to see the context - was 'award-winning'. Which to me strongly implied 'gold medal' or perhaps even 'sole award in its category'.

However I am prepared to acknowledge that what Gordons has said since 19 January is broadly accurate. (Is the liar Sorensen prepared to acknowledge my acknowledgement.)



Yes but "probably" award winning is a bit like "almost unique". It either is or it isn't.



I did not use any phrase 'probably award winning'. The link posted by Gordons said 'award winning'. Whatever that meant in practice ie in this case that the film was the runner up not the outright winner. CMI made unclear and misleading comments on their website, now made more accurate. But what Gordons stated here was broadly accurate.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 7999
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Mystery of the 'award-winning' creationist film

Postby Brian Jordan » Wed Feb 15, 2017 4:52 pm

It's always going to be a matter of interpretation unless the definition of "award" is both specified by the competition organisers and also conforms to general usage.
I think the nearest we can get is on the home page, where it says
The week ended with an awards ceremony with 13 different awards
http://www.christianworldviewfilmfestival.com/film-festival/
The listing clearly shows 13 winners, which neatly matches the 13 "awards".
I write "awards" because in fact, the list shows only four awards - the rest are merely described as "bests", among which the creationist DVD is clearly a second best.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4171
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Previous

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests

cron