Or, more likely, to become 'the most underwhelming film that most people ignore and watch something else, maybe something with Morgan Freeman in it. Yeah, that sounds cool.' instead. And if they are used quote mined sources for their movie you know it's just going to be the same old bullshit rehashed for the n-th time but with shinier special effects and an extra large dollop of 'NASA cover-up conspiracy'.
The US founding fathers were in fact super Christian (not that there is anything wrong with that). But clearly most of them believed in the separation of church and state in so far as they did not want to be like the Britain they had separated themselves from. The origin of that whole idea is that Britain had an established state religion, but they did not want an official state religion because it's restrictive of personal freedom. I'm sure they would have loved it if everyone was Christian like they were, but they were also not against other religions existing (the original colonies existed partially because there was not religious restrictions in the colonies like there was in Britain at the time). The original US was founded on religious freedom, which could only exist in the absence of an official state religion.webkilla said:
I read this and was like "Who did she play in Mass Effect? I know Sirtis was in the first one..."senordesol said:
She did voice-acting work for BioWare?senordesol said:
Oh dear. The plan has already begun to tear apart at the seams. Why didn't the fools build it with a thousand and one hulls? When will they learn?!
If you are referring to the choice of her character's name over her real-life name, I think you displayed why they are referred to that way in your post - you named the roles that, for better or worse, those people are widely known for. The name "Kate Mulgrew" rings a bell, but "Captain Janeway" is more easily recognizable. Click-baiting is a disagreeable tactic, but I think the name choice makes sense here by aiding clarity.2xDouble said:
Janeway here was hired to do a voice over for a trailer. She was mislead about the topic of the documentary said trailer was for. Escapist and others wrote some news articles about it, assuming she was totally aware of the real topic of the documentary. She responded by letting us know she was misinformed, and had she known she would not have participated.Magmarock said:
You got me curious so I looked it up.seditary said:
You know the way if you try and save a word document without giving it a title, it'll just use the first paragraph of the document rendering a stupidly long name?
Because it's a documentary that straight up lies, quote mines and twists things around to make geocentricism even remotely plausible.Magmarock said:
Not to mention that they thought they could use a Star Trek Captain to legitimize their science. Everybody knows if you want to make what you are saying true you have to get Morgan Freeman.1337mokro said:
WTF!!! okay now I understand I watched that video for a bit and now understand. People actually believe this. I thought this documentary was something scientific like how the earth was formed and the likelihood of other planets having life on them or something. Why would people believe this, why would people want to believe this.1337mokro said:
Yeah, but unlike Creationism, there is no part of the Bible that says "And then the sun went around the Earth" (unless we're going to look way too hard at the incident where the sun went in reverse).Zachary Amaranth said:
