Mystery of the 'award-winning' creationist film

[a_haworthroberts]

I note that Creation Ministries International are describing their documentary film 'Evolution's Achilles Heels' as 'award-winning' (but the link provided mentions NO specific award):
http://creation.com/creation-encourages-believers
http://ukstore.creation.com/catalog/evo ... -1706.html

And it's not the first time CMI have made such a boast (and not told anyone WHAT award was 'won'):
http://creation.com/winning-back-the-culture
"Another example of an easy-to-use witnessing tool is CMI’s recent award-winning documentary, Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels. This documentary is, without question, one of the most powerful creation resources ever produced. Why not show it to your unbelieving friends?"

And at the risk of REPEATING myself:
http://creation.com/conferences/eah-launch/ca/
"CMI’s award winning documentary, Evolution’s Achilles Heels, will be shown".
ALL I see mentioned here is fervent recommendations from several Christian groups eg The Dove Foundation. But NO 'award'. Indeed The Dove Foundation does not appear to decide on any awards:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dove_Foundation

Which films were beaten by 'Evolution's Achilles Heels' CMI? Why have you not bragged more prominently about the win on your website if it really occurred?

Or are CMI lying?

I have emailed Tas Walker and John Hartnett (the others block any emails from me).

Any answer - should it be forthcoming - will be shown here.

For what's it's worth it looks like the following (see the last CMI link above):
""If we could award ’Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels’ more than five Doves, our best rating, we would! This is an intelligent and remarkable look at the holes in the theory of evolution, and it features fifteen … Ph.D.’s that closely inspect the various downfalls of this theory." The Dove Foundation."
Has been deliberately transformed into:
"this is an award-winning documentary".

I would call that lying. What would CMI call it?

[Brian Jordan]

Google doesn't seem to know of any award.

[a_haworthroberts]

It will be interesting to see how CMI describe the film the next time they mention it on their website. Will the lie be quietly dropped?

[Mountkeen]

There are lies too about the relevance of the "experts" who have contributed to it.

Dr Don Batten - no publications or last published 20+ years ago
Dr Mark Harwood - A doctor of satellite communications, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Jim Mason - A nuclear physicist, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Jonathan Sarfati - A physical chemist, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Tasman Walker - A mechanical engineer, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.

[Roger Stanyard]

There are lies too about the relevance of the "experts" who have contributed to it.

Dr Don Batten - no publications or last published 20+ years ago
Dr Mark Harwood - A doctor of satellite communications, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Jim Mason - A nuclear physicist, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Jonathan Sarfati - A physical chemist, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.
Dr Tasman Walker - A mechanical engineer, not qualified because field of study is not relevant.

The same old tired set of bores who have achieved nothing at all in the last decade.

[Mountkeen]

I came across this in reference to one of the 15 PhDs who are cited in this "documentary".

Dr Robert Carter - http://creation.com/dr-robert-carter

"Dr Carter was converted to Christ at an early age, but did not know what to do with the theory of evolution. He always knew what he wanted to believe, but had no way to express what he was thinking and no evidence to support his views."

I make no further comment.........

[a_haworthroberts]

I came across this in reference to one of the 15 PhDs who are cited in this "documentary".

Dr Robert Carter - http://creation.com/dr-robert-carter

"Dr Carter was converted to Christ at an early age, but did not know what to do with the theory of evolution. He always knew what he wanted to believe, but had no way to express what he was thinking and no evidence to support his views."

I make no further comment.........

Strange how people who make stuff up (I mean YEC apologetics not any real science they may be doing or studying or affirming eg on proteins) to reaffirm/enable/arm others in their 'Biblical Christian' faith think that the other creationists who persuaded them against mainstream science did not 'ever' make anything up. They seem to be deluded by the 'joy' of creationism and the soundbite that 'my science and my religion are no longer at odds' (thanks to science being replaced with biblical or alleged 'biblical' 'science').

[a_haworthroberts]

So. It's now an 'acclaimed' documentary only ...
http://creation.com/how-to-approach-your-pastor

[MisterGordons]

Ashley Haworth-Roberts needs to do research before mocking others. This film is award winning but because the writers used the word 'acclaimed' does not negate that fact. It was a runner up for best documentary in the Christian Worldview Film Festival in 2015. http://www.christianworldviewfilmfestiv ... 15-awards/

[a_haworthroberts]

Ashley Haworth-Roberts needs to do research before mocking others. This film is award winning but because the writers used the word 'acclaimed' does not negate that fact. It was a runner up for best documentary in the Christian Worldview Film Festival in 2015. http://www.christianworldviewfilmfestiv ... 15-awards/

If you are the runner up you have not won the award! This link - which I do not recall finding when I did an internet search during 2016 - simply confirms that when CMI several times called this film 'award-winning' THEY WERE REPEATEDLY NOT SPEAKING THE TRUTH.

Fortunately - perhaps because they then read my earlier comments here (including of 20 May 2016) - they are now belatedly being truthful. I do not mock people when they are truthful.

[Mountkeen]

Ashley Haworth-Roberts needs to do research before mocking others. This film is award winning but because the writers used the word 'acclaimed' does not negate that fact. It was a runner up for best documentary in the Christian Worldview Film Festival in 2015. http://www.christianworldviewfilmfestiv ... 15-awards/

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

[MisterGordons]

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.

[Roger Stanyard]

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.

Big deal. It was an also ran in a field of four and the event was about as obscure as they get.

[a_haworthroberts]

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.

Most dictionaries would define 'award-winning' as having won a prize in recognition of quality. I took the previous CMI articles to be claiming that this film won first prize (possibly the only prize in its class) at a film competition/festival.

But - as we now know - it came second. (I do not think the Falklands War is a suitable analogy; the film did come second out of six contestants according to the link. It did apparently win some acclaim from this obscure looking group of judges - who may or may not possess any suitable scientific background with which to assess the claims of these CMI experts with a particular agenda:
http://www.christianworldviewfilmfestival.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian ... m_Festival)

PS at 2.40 am. Gordons is making up facts. The link does not say that the runner-up films won an award or prize. Unless he has evidence to the contrary? Which I doubt since CMI themselves are now merely saying 'acclaimed'.

PPS CORRECTION AT 2.46 AM. I now note that the link described ALL the films listed as 'award-winning' (ie ALL SIX in the documentary category). So technically the CMI film won some kind of 'award'. But the term seems a little meaningless if all six entrants (apparently) also were 'award-winning'. Perhaps CMI should have been more specific in the first place.

[a_haworthroberts]

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"From the "You Gotta See This" department. The mentally challenged atheopaths at BCSE's forum are so driven by hate, they're still gnawing on a bone to attack Creation Ministries International. Even when caught lying, they lie more. Don't let atheism ruin your minds, kids. -CBB
http://www.forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewto ... f=1&t=3765"

I cannot speak for anyone else but I have NOT lied in this thread. (I made one error last night - and then quickly corrected it as soon as I realised I was mistaken.)

Bob Sorensen lies on his pages 52 weeks a year. As this thread demonstrates. And the fascist never ever corrects a single lie when the lie is pointed out (and proven to be deliberate not accidental). Never. Not once.

I expose this person as the piece of dirt that he is. That is why he hates me so much. I have also exposed the hate I get from Long. And I will do the same re bigot Baldwin if he carries on whining.


Meanwhile:
http://www.forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewto ... 176#p51176