NOVA's Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moridin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Design trial
AI Thread Summary
NOVA's "Judgment Day" explores the landmark Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, focusing on the scientific validity of evolution versus intelligent design (ID). The program highlights the court's conclusion that ID is not science and cannot be separated from its religious roots, emphasizing the importance of teaching scientifically accepted theories in schools. Discussions reveal that proponents of ID attempted to rebrand creationism, but the trial exposed their tactics and lack of scientific credibility. The show aims to enhance public understanding of science and its educational implications. The ongoing debate over how to present these concepts in classrooms continues to evolve.
  • #51
I sometimes wonder if there would be as much discussion if they had simply called it the law of evolution to begin with...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
NeoDevin said:
I sometimes wonder if there would be as much discussion if they had simply called it the law of evolution to begin with...

Probably not. The real issue seems to be the perceived threat against the Christian fundamentalism

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/overheads/archive/oh20010316_6_scrn.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #53
I am so sad that Michael Ruse book has not come out yet- It must be delayed again. Oh well, if you are waiting for something good...

Kenneth Miller's new book entitled "Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul" will be out June 12 this year. He has made the first few pages available online:

http://onlyatheorythebook.com/

In other 'news':

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ (29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent)
From The Origin of Species to the origin of bacterial flagella - If you are going to read one paper on the evolution of 'the' bacterial flagellum, read this one.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Evolution/PSCF12-97Miller.html (Debunks creationist claims about the Cambrian radiation)

Google video version of Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-404729062613200911

NCSE has a youtube account: http://www.youtube.com/user/ExpelledExposed
Evolution of the eye:
Intelligent design is creationism:
Another good youtube account http://www.youtube.com/user/DonExodus2

NCSE exposes the creationist movie expelled: http://www.expelledexposed.com/

Rockefeller University Symposium on Evolution (Introduction by Paul Nurse): http://www.rockefeller.edu/evolution/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #54
Thanks for the updates, M. Much appreciated.
 
  • #56
Here is a scathing review of Expelled by Ken Miller.

Trouble ahead for science

Puzzled, the editors of Scientific American asked Mark Mathis, the film's co-producer, why he and Stein didn't interview such people, like Francis Collins (head of the Human Genome Project), Francisco Ayala, or myself. Mathis cited me by name, saying "Ken Miller would have confused the film unnecessarily." In other words, showing a scientist who accepts both God and evolution would have confused their story line.

Despite these falsehoods, by far the film's most outlandish misrepresentation is its linkage of Darwin with the Holocaust. A concentration camp tour guide tells Stein that the Nazis were practicing "Darwinism," and that's that. Never mind those belt buckles proclaiming Gott mit uns (God is with us), the toxic anti-Semitism of Martin Luther, the ghettoes and murderous pogroms in Christian Europe centuries before Darwin's birth. No matter. It's all the fault of evolution.

Why is all this nonsense a threat to science? The reason is Stein's libelous conclusion that science is simply evil. In an April 21 interview on the Trinity Broadcast Network, Stein called the Nazi murder of children "horrifying beyond words." Indeed. But what led to such horrors? Stein explained: "that's where science in my opinion, this is just an opinion, that's where science leads you. Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place. Science leads you to killing people."

That immortal phrase: "Science leads you to killing people".
 
  • #57
Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor: http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=482728 . It is one of those "academic freedom" bills, which is one of the reincarnations of "teach the controversy".

B.(1) The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, upon request of a city, parish, or other local public school board, shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.

Notice how the topics explicitly stated have a common denominator? Notice that it also separates evolution from abiogenesis.

The state sounds familiar? That's right, Louisiana was the stage for the now famous supreme court case of Edwards vs. Aguillard in 1987 where Justice Brennan struck down the Creationism Act banning the teaching of evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/edwards-v-aguillard.html

Some Reactions:

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080521/NEWS01/80521030
http://www.nola.com/timespic/stories/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1210051370253650.xml&coll=1
Louisiana creationism bill passes house committee
Panel OKs bill on science texts
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #58
Of my, my, my. Next time you come into contact with an IDC supporter that want it to be taught in school, you can retort with the following information provided by the Discovery Institute showing their inconsistencies as ammo. This was on page four and I though it was hilarious. Why did they testify if they opposed it?

For the record, we do not propose that intelligent design should be mandated in public schools, which is why we strongly opposed the school district policy at issue in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case.

Page 7 states that

Should public schools mandate Intelligent Design?

No. The priority of the ID movement has long been focused on developing the theory of intelligent design through scientific research, scientific publication, and other forms of scientific discussion and does not seek to push ID into schools. In today's politically charged climate, attempts to mandate teaching about intelligent design only politicize the theory and will only hinder fair and open discussions on the merits of the theory among scholars and within the scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do not know enough about ID to teach about it accurately and objectively.

h*ttp://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453
 
  • #59
Excellent job by NOVA. All of these creationists appeal to emotion. One of them said it hurt his dignity that we came from smaller life forms. Aw, poor baby's dignity was hurt. Another stupid claim was because they didn't understand it that it must be false. Reza Aslam in a book discussion with Sam Harris pretty much echoed the same statement. It's lazy, pathetic and stupid.
 
  • #60
LightbulbSun said:
Excellent job by NOVA. All of these creationists appeal to emotion. One of them said it hurt his dignity that we came from smaller life forms. Aw, poor baby's dignity was hurt. Another stupid claim was because they didn't understand it that it must be false. Reza Aslam in a book discussion with Sam Harris pretty much echoed the same statement. It's lazy, pathetic and stupid.

Not to mention a textbook example of the moralist fallacy.

To quote Dawkins: "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction. Jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic-cleanser; a misogynistic homophobic racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniac".

It does wonders for your sense of dignity, doesn't it?[/color].
 
  • #61
Opponents of Evolution Adopting a New Strategy:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/us/04evolution.html

Antievolution legislation in South Carolina dies:

http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/news/2008/SC/636_antievolution_legislation_in_s_6_5_2008.asp
http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007-2008/bills/1386.htm

Dembski has now officially gone of the deep-end:

h*ttp://www.uncommondescent.com/culture/in-an-undesigned-world/

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter’s signing of a transgender anti-discrimination bill points up the lunacy that ensues in a world without design (see here).

http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2008/06/dembski_on_the_consequences_of.php

I don't know if that is sad or just pathetic.

On David Berlinsk

http://www.slate.com/id/2189178/entry/2189179/

"Berlinski is a critic, a contrarian, and—by his own admission—a crank."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #62
This might be of interest.

Science, Evolution, and Creationism
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876
Free download available.

. . . . Although evolution provides credible and reliable answers, polls show that many people turn away from science, seeking other explanations with which they are more comfortable.

In the book Science, Evolution, and Creationism, a group of experts assembled by the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine explain the fundamental methods of science, document the overwhelming evidence in support of biological evolution, and evaluate the alternative perspectives offered by advocates of various kinds of creationism, including "intelligent design." The book explores the many fascinating inquiries being pursued that put the science of evolution to work in preventing and treating human disease, developing new agricultural products, and fostering industrial innovations. The book also presents the scientific and legal reasons for not teaching creationist ideas in public school science classes.

Mindful of school board battles and recent court decisions, Science, Evolution, and Creationism shows that science and religion should be viewed as different ways of understanding the world rather than as frameworks that are in conflict with each other and that the evidence for evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith. For educators, students, teachers, community leaders, legislators, policy makers, and parents who seek to understand the basis of evolutionary science, this publication will be an essential resource.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top