Kate Mulgrew Denounces Creationist Film She Narrated

    April 9, 2014
    Tina Volpe
    Comments are off for this post.

The Star Trek: Voyager star, Kate Mulgrew, who narrated a film that declares the sun revolves around the earth, has come to her senses and discredited the film, after the fact.

“Everything we think we know about our universe is wrong,” Mulgrew’s voice argues over cosmic images in the trailer for “The Principle,” according to the DailyMail.com.

Mulgrew has come out publicly on her Facebook page to distance herself from the film. Part of her remark made her point clear: “…Let me assure everyone that I completely agree with the eminent physicist Lawrence Krauss, who was himself misrepresented in the film, and who has written a succinct rebuttal in SLATE. I am not a geocentrist, nor am I in any way a proponent of geocentrism.”

This farce of a documentary tries to prove a geocentric idea that has long been proven wrong – but then again, it was financed by the Holocaust-denier Robert Sungenis, who, by the way, added scientists to the documentary without their consent or knowledge.

Physicist Laurence Krauss, one of several scientists to appear in the trailer, wrote a response piece in Slate. In it he lambasted geocentrism and stated that he did not know how the clips of him were obtained.

A statement Krauss made in Slate says it all, “The notion that anyone in the 21st century could take seriously the notion that the sun orbits the Earth, or that the Earth is the center of the universe, is almost unbelievable.”

It is unclear how much Mulgrew knew before she signed up as narrator, however, many fans in the comment section are glad she has come out against the film.

The film will be released this spring and is strongly advertised on Sungenis’ blog, Galileo Was Wrong.

It is doubtful that more than a handful of people will be rushing to the theaters to see it.

Image via YouTube

  • A J MacDonald Jr

    Interestingly enough, phenomenologically speaking, the only perspective we have of the world is a geocentric one. Think about that. I wrote a book on this subject. Google: “The World Perceived”

  • Skidmark Goatcabin

    What does this have to do with creation? Your headline is misleading and inflammatory…typical.

    • Winston Bougais

      Not all Creationists are geo-centrists. But the Creationist that made this film is. His view of the world is that Creation includes a geocentric element — that is to say, that God made the Earth as the center of the universe. This is a Creationist film, even if it does not exactly fit your brand of Creationism (and there are so many.)

      Didn’t stop to think about that before commenting, did you? … Typical.

      • Christian

        You didn’t stop to think about your comment. Few creationists are centrists.

      • disqus_F490FDIAJ0

        @Winston you have a few idiots in your camp to. Bet you didn’t think about that before placing foot in mouth, did you moron.

        • kabbee

          No doubt, but we try to keep them medicated and off the public stage.
          Your crowd elects them to public office.

  • Mark

    Is it any surprise that man wants to place himself at the center of the universe?

  • David

    Ms Volpe, the title of your article is totally misleading and borders on dishonesty. As you may have guessed, I am an Evangelical Christian that believes God created the earth 6,000 years ago. I attend a church with like-minded individuals and NONE of them believe that the sun revolves around the earth. I assume that you are either an atheist or a “liberal” Christian who does not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible. Your efforts to engage conservative Christians should embrace truth and facts concerning religious and scientific issues. In case you are wondering, I am a scientist with a PhD in Biochemistry from a major public university, not a small, private college, which you were ready to also assume without knowing the facts.

    • kabbee

      So perhaps, speaking as bio-chemist, you would care to address the issue of Carbon-14 dating and the proven rates of decay calculations and calibrations that prove not only was the Earth in existence for far longer than 6,000 years, but also show humans were present as well. I note that some remains in Montana were recently dated to 13,000 years ago, and some others in Siberia to 24,000 years ago. Both, incidentally, showed strong genetic ties to today’s Native Americans.

      And while you’re at it, could you point to any peer-reviewed scientific journals that offer evidence that the Earth is only 6,000 years old?

      • Christian

        If the earth was created from nothing, it would have no previous age.

      • disqus_F490FDIAJ0

        @kabbee, and your vast knowledge comes from who? Books written by men full of theories and over a 50 year period this has become the law in your community, but according to your comment, only those who agree with your assessment of the universe are worthy to speak of it. Just because someone wrote a PEER-REVIEW or opinion of evidence does not make it fact, You have no one who was around millions of years ago to back up your evidence, it’s been proven over and over again, if you say something loud enough and say it enough times, people start to believe it, YOU are proof of that!!!

        • kabbee

          Sheesh, I think I’ve been Godwinned…

          Or is it “Goebbeled”?

        • John Bray

          The stars were not created until the 4th day. Add that to the 6,000 year figure, with the caveat “my day is of 1,000 years”

          Parallax distancing is exactly like flat-map triangulation: two points to determine a third, and it can be measured exactly the same way. We can see and measure the distance between us and a lot of stars.
          Given the speed of light,
          Why can we see stars that break this rule, by being farther away by measurement than the 10,000 years accounted for in this method?
          I don’t need peer-review. I can do it with a telescope and a pencil.

        • DonC

          If the light from distant galaxies is more than 6000 light-years away, how did they get created? Unless you are postulating that it was the Earth that is only 6000 years old?

        • disqus_F490FDIAJ0

          You guys are so smart, how come we still have aids, cancer, the common cold with all the wisdom you guys display on yahoo, when actually your ignorance is deafening. You’re not as smart as you sound. I can google all the crap you have written.

          • kabbee

            We tend to trust the learning offered in accredited schools over what the voices in our heads tell us, and we certainly don’t trust the ones in yours.
            We also learned our grammar lessons, too. Now if you want to trade insults, I’m game, but it’ll have to be elsewhere. Personally, though, I’d rather hear from the biochemist who doubtless has a three-figure I.Q. and there’s no evidence you do.

          • disqus_F490FDIAJ0

            Kabbee, did I hit a nerve, you’re acting kind of pissy? You who think your children of Einstein seem to act as though you’re so much better than everyone else and anytime people like you start putting people down for lack of grammar, actually gives credence to evolution, so crawl back under your rock.

          • kabbee

            Well, as a former English teacher, your remedial lesson right now is on P-R-O-J-E-C-T-I-O-N. We’ll add that to your grammar homework. That’s where you accuse someone else of what’s going on with you. Re-read who got “pissy” first, and making you look like a fool isn’t an act of anger; it’s an act of a social conscience. Evolution is a scientific reality and a fact; deal with it.
            Best advice I can give you is don’t bring a squirt pistol intellect to a Wild West shootout.

          • disqus_F490FDIAJ0

            Evolution is a scientific realty, and “FACT” sure it is, see it’s people like you who need a reality check. You keep running your mouth, as a former Sp Ops, I could find you, you former English teacher. I’m glad your a former teacher, because we don’t want or need your kind teaching our children. One other thing, I could bring a squirt gun to your shootout and I promise, you would lose to the squirt gun. Your lesson of the day is, K-E-E-P-MY-MOUTH-SHUT

          • kabbee

            Best you give the keys to the asylum computer room back to the nice guy in the white coat and promise you’ll start taking your meds, there.
            And don’t think about the gub’m’nt folks who might come by and haul your hiney off for violating federal laws with that nonsensical threat. BTW, it’s “you’re,” not “your” in the sentence you used. You might talk to the shrink about your issues with teachers; it could help you get along better in this world.

    • Winston Bougais

      Actually, it is your presumption that is wrong. Ms. Volpe did not sate nor imply that all Creationists are geo-centrists. But the Creationist that made this film is. His view of the world is that Creation includes a geocentric element — that is to say, that God made the Earth as the center of the universe. This is a Creationist film, even if it does not exactly fit your brand of Creationism (and there are so many.)

      Your tendency to judge without considering all the facts, as well as the assumptions you made within your comment, says a lot about why you are a Creationist, despite a university-level science education and a wealth of evidence that Young Earth teachings are bunk.

  • John_QPublic

    When The Principle is proven right, are Kate and Larry going to point out that they were in it?