Griptonite Games today announced the release of “Ben Stein: It’s Trivial,” a quick-witted new trivia game exclusive to the Apple iPhone and iPod touch. “Ben Stein: It’s Trivial” is priced at US$4.99 and is now available from Apple’s App Store on iPhone and iPod touch, or at http://www.itunes.com/appstore
“iPhone and iPod touch users will love Ben Stein: It’s Trivial,” says Griptonite Studio Head, J.C. Connors. “It’s a fun, intelligent, funny game that will challenge players wherever, whenever. Plus it has monkeys!”
With over 1200 ranked questions from trivia categories such as Natural Wonders, Pop Culture, Sports, and Random Steinage, players are up against the Master of Trivia himself, Ben Stein! Taking full advantage of the platforms’ capabilities, “Ben Stein: It’s Trivial” features fast-paced, tongue-in-cheek gameplay and a clever, fun art style. Alongside simian cohort Cheex the Monkey, players answer trivia questions to win points and prizes from Ben Stein’s Estate.
The game features multiple levels of increasingly difficult questions interspersed with special Bonus and Lightning Rounds. Unique unlockable prizes, catchy tunes and memorable Ben Stein quips add tons of replayability.
More info here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Carl H.” for the heads up.]
First trivia question: In the movie “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off,” which former-Nixon-speechwriter-turned-actor asked, “Bueller?… Bueller?… Bueller?”
Unique unlockable prizes? How about defining some of those prizes? I would then be tempted to have a go!
Tell Mr. Creationist he sucks.
I bet the developers got Mr. Stein involved by telling him their coding skills featured “intelligent design.”
ah Ben. proof that a collection of trivial knowledge does not make you smart……..
This is your chance to “Win, Ben, Stein’s, MONEY”.
The Dude abides.
i just watched the “Expelled” movie last night. It is interesting that a film devoted to debunking the theory of evolution spent no time whatsoever talking about fossil records. Since these seem to be strong evidence for natural selection and adaptation, it would have been good to tell us how ID explains the evidence differently.
The ID case rests on the absence of an adequate empirical account about the origin of organic life. ID presents a view about what caused that. Big Bang theory presents a competing view. ID does not present a competing theory about the transition from single-celled organisms to the diversity of species we see now. As such, it is not a competing complete scientific view.
If the goal of scientific education is to teach our best current explanatory paradigm then ID cannot be considered as something worth teaching.
It amazes me that an intelligent person such as Ben Stein can be so completely deluded and in such denial about the realities of science that it causes him to be inherently dishonest towards himself and others.
I see that Freedom of Speech & Expression has become conditional.
It’s only a freedom if you’re willing to put up with the BS from the people who can’t stand you for your beliefs.
Grow up.
If you aren’t interested in the app, don’t buy it.
If you aren’t interested in what Mr. Stein’s beliefs are, don’t listen.
Get over yourselves.
@sickofthis…
Hay, we’re expressing ourselves!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
the first amendment applies to government control of speech, not to the decisions of individuals or private institutions.
be prepared to be judged by others on the basis of the content of your speech. Arguing that ID is a rival scientific explanatory theory is risible, and will affect how others perceive you.
Your all a bunch of morons. Everyone knows that we were placed here by space creatures. We are nothing but an experimental petri dish. These aliens check on us every now and then, but the experiment was abandonded many years ago when the human evolved in the wrong direction. Rather than termninating the experiment, the Creators decided to let us run our course and see if we would self destruct. They “swing by” to check on us every now and then and use some of us for food when needed (missing people). So all of your are wrong and should take a chill pill and be thankful you arent space food.
…It’s a Cookbook!
I think Ming may be on to something!! Sure explains a lot of things. I suggest Ming start a religion centered around the stated theory. All he/she needs to do to get some cred is have a couple Hollywood types join and bingo they have themselves a tax deductible charity organization!
Here we go again:
When Darwin first proposed his theory, the most strident opposition came not from Christian fundamentalists but rather paleontologists. Why? Darwin was correct when he postulated that the fossil record would clearly demonstrate evolution. He stated that one would see “interminable varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by the finest graduated steps.” He also knew that the fossil record was “perhaps the most obvious and serious objection” to his theory but figured that with more time and exploration, the fossil record would vindicate him. After 150 more years of digging, the record still opposes the basic tenets of evolution. The Paleontologists were right, the fossil record does not back up Darwinian postulations.
Now, since the fossil record still strongly argues against Darwinian evolution, scientists are abandoning classic Darwinian conjecture and have jumped to “Punctuated Equilibrium” as a way to try to salvage a Godless theory that is more in line with the fossil record. (no transitionary fossils) However, this ‘new’ theory strains credibility when we realize that the vast majority of mutations are harmful, undermining survival, or are neutral at best. Mutations almost never make a species better, but worse and have never made one species transform into a new species.
Darwin’s Leap was that if minor variations in a species were multiplied over millions of years, it would stop being one species and start being another. There is plenty of evidence of the minor variations, but to this day the only evidence that one species changed into another is in artistic representation, not in the fossil record.
Keep trying.
it’s amazing, the code for the game just “evolved” no intelligence was used.
The non-functional code is then picked up by Microsoft and they do whatever with it.
All of you who dare to question just shut up now! Our theories are not strong enough to withstand any scrutiny whatsoever.
transitional fossil evidence:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/transitional.html
7over, just because you’ve been told by people that the fossil record doesn’t back up evolution doesn’t mean it’s true.
There are many, many transitional fossils. Also, evolution, since it’s a testable, scientific theory, actually makes predictions that can be tested. In one case, such a prediction was that there should be some sort of transitional lifeform that led to whales at a certain point in Earth’s history. That point in history would have coincided with a certain rock layer. Paleontologists started looking in that rock layer, and sure enough, they eventually found a beautiful specimen of a mammal that was an obvious transitional form between land mammals and whales.
So again, just because someone tells you something doesn’t make it so. I would expect you to look up what I just told you to confirm it. Just, do yourself a favor and look up actual scientific writings on it, not just what people do and don’t tell you over on conservapedia…
if u don’t vote 4 BS u r anti-semetic
Expelled is not explicitly about darwinism vs. intelligent design. That is used as the major example to illustrate the main thesis, which is that there is a lack of diverse thought in our education system. If you profess a belief that differs, even slightly, than the status quo, you are exiled.
That is far more important to our daily lives than arguments about where we came from.
Expelled is not explicitly about darwinism vs. intelligent design. That is used as the major example to illustrate the main thesis, which is that there is a lack of diverse thought in our education system. If you profess a belief that differs, even slightly, than the status quo, you are exiled.
there’s plenty of diversity in our educational system (in religion departments and departments devoted to the history of ideas) just not within science departments with respect to the question of what counts as valid science.
To argue that being against the teaching of ID as a competitor to the theory of evolution is to be against either freedom of expression or freedom of education is both false and dishonest.
To use an analogy, suppose you were in charge of hiring someone to work alongside you on your farm. You have the choice of hiring someone who thinks that decisions about when to plant the crops should be made on the basis of the season and the temperature and how long it has been since the soil was tilled etc. and someone who thinks we should consult whether the planet Venus is in the appropriate constellation for maximal fertility or not.
You would hire the first person because you think that what this person believes is more in line with your overall goals. It just doesn’t really make sense to think that planetary location has anything to do with how well your crops will fare. I think that academia’s widespread decision not to hire people working in ID is analogous.
@7over:
I find your lack of understanding of evolutionary theory disturbing. Please do some research on non-creationist websites, and read actual science books to learn some real science.
Secondly, you would be wise to do some actual scientific research on punctuated equilibrium. First, it was not just made up out of thin air to try to “save face” about the supposed non-existence of transitional fossils. It is an actual scientific theory proposed by Stephen J Gould that is (much to the surprise of creationists) backed by scientific observations!! Who would have thunk? I mean, don’t those crazy scientists just keep throwing their crazy theories against the wall and see what sticks? Oh wait, that’s creationists. And none of their ideas stick to the wall for more than a few seconds.
Last I checked, schools also don’t teach theories about Unicorns, Pixies, or Phlogiston existing in science classrooms… does that mean they are being unfair and exclusionary about these things and should give them “equal time”?
Plus, how can you hire someone to teach biology who doesn’t believe in evolution, when evolution underpins the vast majority (if not all) of modern biology? I’m pretty sure no one is being denied a position teaching English because they don’t believe in evolution. Heck, my prof when I took history of psychology last year (at a liberal Canadian University) didn’t seem to believe in evolution… or at least, she somehow managed to justify spending class time talking about how “science is as much of a religion as creationism” and how there were “problems” with evolution (the usual canards) and it should be taught as a “theory” rather than a “fact”.
@mike k.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Perhaps a series of floods?
Ben Stein’s a big fat idiot.