Thursday, January 30, 2014

How A Heliocentrist Views "The Principle"

In a world of rational thinkers, this would be the kind of response which would characterize the discussion.

In the bubble world of the Self Appointed Ecclesiastical KGB Posse, it is entirely absent.

"The Principle" is every bit as dangerous to the Posse as they desperately want to persuade you it is.

They are right.

The evidence is astonishing, and rapidly mounting, that the Copernican Principle- the foundational metaphysical assumption about reality which lies at the foundation of our modern scientific world view- is wrong.

It does not adequately express the reality we observe around us.

Does this, in itself, prove geocentrism is true?


It does not.

It does, however, establish that the ancient Catholic cosmology is, in important ways, a more truthful representation of reality, of the way things really are, than is the current Big Bang scientific creation myth.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Challenge To Mark Shea During His Unfortunate Meltdown

Mark Shea is begging Rome to come after "The Principle". This is an excellent insight as to why Mark Shea is so much more stupid than the very worst Roman, that his readers ought to stop and consider that the very worst Roman is smart enough to see that Mark Shea is a crackpot in full meltdown. Poor guy.

It is true, of course, that were any Roman foolish enough to take Mark Shea's advice……..then the thoughts of many hearts would be revealed. But no Roman is that stupid.

Are they….?

"The Principle" will gladly, rejoicingly, submit to any canonical process of the Holy Catholic Church.

Mark Shea.

Put up or shut up.

File a canonical lawsuit against "The Principle".

If you do not, then you are exposed as a blustering blowhard.

Tick tock, Mark.

Would someone who has not been banned by Mark please post this on his blog?

Let's get it on.

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

"The Principle" Has Some Great News……..

To the (no doubt) grave consternation of the Posse, "The Principle" is in receipt of an offer for US theatrical distribution.

Our distribution partners are seasoned veterans, who have been through the kinds of wars that powerful, controversial, and important documentary films such as "The Principle" can always expect to stir up.

Details will be announced shortly, here and on our Facebook page.

Oh, and by the way……

Karl Keating, you've got mail.

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Karl Keating: Liar, Defamer, Slanderer---- The First Shoe Drops

Mr. Keating defames, and libels the Producers of "The Principle" on his Facebook page:

"BUT, there remains the issue of anti-Semitism. 

I presume not a hint of anti-Semitism appears in "The Principle," but it does appear in the C.V. of the producer, and that may be enough to get local groups complaining to theaters that might otherwise be willing to show the movie on the basis mentioned above. "

Mr. Keating, we have patiently awaited the moment when you and/or your Posse would cross the line.

Buckle up.

Friday, January 17, 2014

Thoughtcrime: Is "The Principle" Too Dangerous To Be Allowed A Public Release?

The initial marketing test of "The Principle" is concluded.

Beginning December 9, and concluding this day, over 200,000 unique visitors have encountered "The Principle" through its Facebook page, temporary website, or YouTube trailer.

Including Michael Voris' "Vortex" and "Mic'd Up", we have accumulated over 75,000 trailer views.

Almost 12,000 people have "liked" our Facebook page.

Our analytics for engagement are nothing short of incredible.

In short, it is quite clear that "The Principle" has been able to generate objective evidence of an unusually high degree of interest for an independent film, especially a science-themed film, on what amounts to a minuscule marketing budget.

Our thanks go first of all to the incredible campaign engineered and executed by our team.

Our thanks second of all go to all of those who responded to our outreach.

Our thanks third of all go to the Self-Appointed Ecclesiastical KGB Posse.

It is quite clear that our film threatens some people far more than would seem reasonably possible.

These people are determined to do whatever they must to ensure you never get a chance to see it.

I think they are going to fail, and in fact they have already seen their efforts backfire memorably, as "The Principle" simply continues to be not only the most interesting science doc, but the most interesting story in, for now, the Catholic blogosphere, and soon, perhaps, everywhere else.

There are some ideas that are so dangerous, so threatening, that it amounts to a Thoughtcrime to propose them.

We just might have one of those ideas at the heart of our film.

Keep that in mind as the story enters its next, much bigger, even yet much more controversial, stage.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

On the Retirement of "The Pastry Pontiff"

Reader Hugh Beaumont writes: 

It really is not kosher
To engage in this kibbitz
He'd rather your ad hominems
Were ad hominy grits.

I reply:
Yes, "Pastry" is ad hominem.
It's true.
You're right.

Henceforth, the "Pastry Pontiff"
shall remain
just plain
"Mark Shea"

Mark Shea Huffs And Puffs

Needless to say, Mark Shea wishes very much that he could somehow find a single frame in "The Principle" about the Jews.

We continue to watch his machinations with a prudent eye, and will be particularly interested to notice any sudden expression of interest in cosmology on the part of B'nai B'rith!

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Concerning the Financing of "The Principle", And Other Matters…...

Many of our less-friendly objectors have made inquiries as to the financial aspects of our project.

I would never wish to preempt what promises to be an entertaining- even comedic!- quest on their part. ;-)

However, in a spirit of giving as good as we get, I reply:

There is a Pastry Pontiff,
I'm sure you know his name.

He rattles cups and rattles nerves
and genr'ly fans the flame

Of his great Inquisition
into a dang'rous bunch

The film they made cost almost
half enough to buy him lunch.

Monday, January 13, 2014

Public Challenge To Dave Armstrong Re: "The Principle"

UPDATE: Dave has declined.

Gee, who could have possibly seen *that* one coming?

Dave Armstrong has exposed my pathetic ignorance.

I am so ashamed.

I hang my head in abject shame, to have been so deftly exposed by a man whose own credentials are, we must certainly assume, impeccable.

Mr. Armstrong: While it is clear that you shall certainly wipe the floor, as one of your commenters has suggested, with such a woefully inadequate opponent as my unworthy self, I nonetheless hereby issue a public challenge to you:

I will debate you, at our expense, in a public format, on a resolution to be agreed upon in advance, which resolution might include any among the following:

1. RESOLVED that science documentaries ought to be only produced by scientists, or those with scientific credentials (which ones)?

2. RESOLVED that "The Principle" is a film which ought not be taken seriously, due to the lack of scientific credentials of its Producer

3. RESOLVED, that Catholic apologists ought not throw stones when they live in glass houses

Other resolutions are possible, and ought to be considered by us mutually.

Please get back to me, Dave.

This would be fun, even though you will doubtless find me easy pickings……

Monday, January 6, 2014

Viewing Link for :"The Principle" On "Mic'd Up", Wednesday January 8, 8pm Eastern


Discovery Institute on The Copernican Principle and the Multiverse

h/t once again to Velika Bluna….

One of the interesting ideas expressed in "The Principle" is that the multiverse is seen (by one its leading proponents) as the extension of the Copernican Principle to its logical conclusion.

Discovery Institute's Denyse O'Leary follows the multiverse to its logical conclusion.

"Logic and reason are likewise irrelevant. Consider the multiverse claim that there are "infinite copies of you and your loved ones leading lives, up until this moment, that are absolutely identical to yours." Mathematician George F. R. Ellis notes that, if so, the deep mysteries of nature are too absurd to be explicable and that the proposed nine types of multiverse in one scheme are "mutually exclusive." True, but in a multiverse, "inexplicable" is okay. "Absurd" and "mutually exclusive" are meaningless concepts. It is equally meaningless to assert that one event is more probable than another. As David Berlinski puts it, "Why is Newton's universal law of gravitation true? No need to ask. In another universe, it is not"(Devil's Delusion, p. 124).
You can, of course, make reason and logic your personal brand of nonsense if you wish. In that case, statements like this will annoy you: Earth's habitability rating has "taken a hit" because it is too close to "the warm edge" of our zone. Earth's habitability has a probability of 1, so how can its rating take a hit? Berlinski would likely say, no need to ask. In another universe it has not."

"A question arises: If, in the multiverse (especially the many worlds version) everything possible is true, why do cosmologists trash traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs? Because there is a critical catch: Anything may be true, including contradictory states, except serious dissent from the Copernican principle--the principle that Earth and our universe are nothing special. Physicist Rob Sheldon sums it up:
'Multiverse theory is designed for one purpose, and one purpose only, and that is to defend atheism. It makes no predictions, it gives no insight, it provides no control, it produces no technology, it advances no mathematics, it is a science in name only, because it is really metaphysics.'"

Some of these ideas are also addressed in previous posts here at Magisterial Fundies:

It is time for a serious examination of this Copernican Principle; what is it, how did we accept it, what are its ultimate consequences for our science, our faith, our culture, our future?

"The Principle" is coming.

The timing couldn't have been better.

Friday, January 3, 2014

Thursday, January 2, 2014

Lawrence Krauss Goes Silent On Twitter, Won't Answer the Question......

See here for Part One.

Well, on strictly empirical grounds, we have a situation where Lawrence Krauss has alleged "The Principle" to be nonsense.

On examination, it turns out he has never seen it; he advances this on the basis of a trailer.

On further examination, he advances this on the basis that he was "used to sell something he does not believe in".

I think we can reasonably, if provisionally, conclude he is referring to the views of others in the film, particularly concerning the existence of God, with which views Dr. Krauss manifestly does not agree.

Obviously, I could give a hoot whether he is offended that we would include other viewpoints.

He doesn't get to edit our film, just interview for it.

There is another, more interesting possibility however, and were I a betting man, I should not neglect to keep this one in mind as the story develops.

Dr. Krauss is on public record concerning the implications of the CMB Axis.

We, probably alone among all documentary projects, actually interviewed him concerning these statements.

He perhaps might recall his answers, and, in light of Planck's results, find himself in a position not unlike that of a politician who, unable to retrieve the footage, is left with the option of attempting to discredit the source.

We'll see ;-)

One of the good things about "The Principle" is that we retain 35 hours of unedited raw footage of all of the interviews, and transcripts, and we are very prepared to respond to any and all allegations of impropriety or selective editing.

Boy howdy are we prepared.

I keep telling people: "The Principle" is the one movie you absolutely must see THIS year!