Liars for Jesus denounced

The jig is up for Bob Sungenis and Rick Delano as a whole bunch more of the scientists they lied into participating in their quack geocentrism movie join Lawrence Krauss and Kate Mulgrew in denouncing them for the misrepresenting frauds they are.

I wonder if the backers of this fraudulent project are going to demand their money back or just bull their way through this, claiming a conspiracy against them by Shadowy Forces and Jewish bankers?

The impressive feat is that the film has heaped this much embarrassment on the name of the Church without being seen by anybody–and it likely never will. All in the service of the prodigious egos of two men.

An appropriate story for Spy Wednesday.

  • Thinkling

    Wow Robert Sungenis and Lawrence Krauss together?

    “The Farce is strong with this one”

  • B

    I highly doubt anyone was lied to. Kate Mulgrew read the entire script, word for word. If she didn’t agree with it, she shouldn’t have read it. But claiming she was ignorant on what the movie was *really* about is ridiculous.
    The fact is, no one has seen the movie. I don’t even think it’s about geocentrism. From my understanding, all they did was ask these scientists to talk about new findings that show an issue with how we understand heliocentrism. I don’t think geocentrism will come into play until the sequel. But like I said, no one (except Sungenis, etc) has seen the movie, so that’s just speculation…but that’s my understanding.
    And from what I’ve seen, no one is pointing to the Church regarding any of this. Chiiiillll.

    • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

      No one said she was provided with the whole script. All that was necessary for her voiceover was her part.

      • B

        Her part was “narrator”.

        If the *narrator* can’t figure out the plot of the film deals with geocentrism….then the film is probably not about geocentrism.

        • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

          Depends on the narration, and the reading and understanding skills of the actress involved. She only has to pronounce the words correctly, she doesn’t have to understand what she reads.

        • Heather

          Narration in goofy pop science, or not so pop pseudoscience, tends to be along the lines of “What if everything we think we know is wrong?” over a backdrop of majestic stars. It tends to be grand and sweeping and vague and mostly made of platitudes. Especially when your premise is made of paper-thin nonsense.

          The narrator part probably reads something like “A paper by so and so in 2006 suggests that our understanding of [concept] may not be as complete as we once thought.” Cut to the cherry-picked statements from the interview with so-and-so edited together to support the paper-thin nonsense.

          Unless you are already familiar with the names and concepts the script is having you talk about, chances are you wouldn’t be able to tell it was made of any more nonsense than any other upper band cable documentary you were asked to narrate.

  • http://www.parafool.com/ victor

    So far no riots at our embassy at the Vatican, though, so that’s a good thing.

  • ednaciurleo

    Never heard of this movie~~

  • Mark R

    I am sure it was just a job for Kate Mulgrew of “Mrs. Columbo” fame. Most people are in need of a paycheck now and then and we should not be over-awed because a person was once on TV more frequently.

    • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

      Whoa. Your reference for Kate Mulgrew is “Mrs. Columbo”? … Fascinating.

      • CJ

        Well, it was better than her other gig. #should’vestoppedatDS9

        • Shawna Mathieu

          While I hated Voyager myself, you have to admit, most people think of Captain Janeway when they think of Kate Mulgrew.

        • Rosemarie

          +J.M.J+

          You mean “Gilligan’s Island in Space?”

          http://youtu.be/CoRl4e_Lu0I


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X