Admin webmdave Posted November 19, 2007 Admin Share Posted November 19, 2007 This two-hour program is divided into 12 chapters. Choose any chapter below and select QuickTime or Windows Media Player to begin viewing the video. If you experience difficulty viewing, it may be due to high demand. watch chapter 1 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">A TOWN DIVIDED</h2> The rural community of Dover, Pennsylvania is torn apart in the latest battle over the teaching of evolution, and parents file a lawsuit against the town's school board in federal court. running time 10:50 chapter 1 transcript watch chapter 2 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">WHAT IS EVOLUTION?</h2> More than 150 years ago Charles Darwin developed the theory of evolution to explain how the diversity of life arose, laying the foundation for modern biological science. running time 7:04 chapter 2 transcript watch chapter 3 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">INTRODUCING INTELLIGENT DESIGN</h2> The Dover School Board attempts to introduce into science classrooms the idea that life is too complex to have evolved naturally and therefore must have been designed by an intelligent agent. running time 8:47 chapter 3 transcript watch chapter 4 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">THE TRIAL BEGINS</h2> The court is asked to decide whether the School Board promoted religion or had religious motivation, and whether intelligent design is science. running time 9:32 chapter 4 transcript watch chapter 5 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">THE FOSSIL RECORD</h2> A 2004 discovery in the arctic of a transitional fossil from fish to land-dwelling animals is the latest substantiation of Darwin's theory of evolution. running time 8:36 chapter 5 transcript watch chapter 6 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">A VERY SUCCESSFUL THEORY</h2> The ongoing scientific quest to investigate the unknown has led to some of the strongest evidence for evolution, including findings in modern genetics and molecular biology. running time 9:26 chapter 6 transcript watch chapter 7 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">THE NATURE OF SCIENCE</h2> After experts point out that supernatural causes cannot be tested scientifically, the defense begins its case for intelligent design. running time 8:24 chapter 7 transcript watch chapter 8 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">EXAMINING INTELLIGENT DESIGN</h2> In court, biochemist Michael Behe argues that the concept of irreducible complexity is evidence for intelligent design, while biologist Ken Miller points out the weaknesses in that concept. running time 9:11 chapter 8 transcript watch chapter 9 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">FAITH AND REASON</h2> As the legal teams battle it out in court, the clash between evolution and intelligent design takes a toll on the Dover community. running time 7:25 chapter 9 transcript watch chapter 10 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE</h2> The court looks at evidence that the Dover School Board was motivated by religion. running time 9:49 chapter 10 transcript watch chapter 11 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">A CULTURE CONFLICT</h2> Some proponents of intelligent design would like to see the theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral, and political life. running time 8:52 chapter 11 transcript <a name="ch12" id="ch12"> watch chapter 12 in Quicktime Windows Media: hi | low <h2 class="video">CLOSING ARGUMENTS</h2> After six weeks, the trial concludes with closing arguments that were as divided as Dover itself had become, and Judge Jones renders his unequivocal verdict. running time 10:38 chapter 12 transcript http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2007/11...-design-on.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott_In_Michigan Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I was able to watch all but the first few minutes of this program. It was the first time I'd really been able to see both sides of the debate laid out and explained clearly. Often, in the past, I've read things or listened to conversation in which it was more of an argument rather than being constructive and educational. It was rather interesting to watch this as a new ex-Christian as well, as I had a different perspective than I'm used to. Anyway, good program. It seemed to be somewhat biased in favor of evolution, but I think that that may have been the result of a weak presentation of evidence given in the court case for intelligent design. The explanations of both sides' points are done very well, so understanding where each side comes from may make more sense after watching this. One thing I told my wife after it was over was how the side that supported intelligent design should have kept a strictly non-religious stance. I think they started off trying to, but evidence lead back to them being Christians. I really don't understand why intelligent design is often tied to Christianity anyway. The only thing I can think of is that it's typically Christians who are pushing it. Is there any sort of movement in other countries to make schools teach both evolution and something like intelligent design or creation? My point is that intelligent design shouldn't be associated to any particular religion. Lastly, I'm a little surprised that, in the midst of the evolution vs. creationism/I.D. debates, that there is pretty much never anyone trying to point out that these two things can co-exist. I'd not expect this point to be made by anyone in the scientific community since the existence of a creator cannot be tested and verified, but surely there are those in the I.D. community who have considered that both evolution and I.D. could both be spot on at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Lastly, I'm a little surprised that, in the midst of the evolution vs. creationism/I.D. debates, that there is pretty much never anyone trying to point out that these two things can co-exist. I'd not expect this point to be made by anyone in the scientific community since the existence of a creator cannot be tested and verified, but surely there are those in the I.D. community who have considered that both evolution and I.D. could both be spot on at the same time. Not to be an asshat, but I have to give you my input. Of course they can co-exist in society and for human culture, but is ID really a science? ID presupposes a supernatural influence to nature, while science is the study and organization of the natural. If you watch the rest of the video you'll see there's not much or anything at all the ID can provide, and even worse, their own "scientists" claim there are way of testing ID, but they never do. They spend all the time and money just propagating their idea, while never establishing a research field. To me that screams polemics rather than science. ID is at the best a hypothesis, but so far no one have managed to fit that hypothesis with repeatable experiments. Until someone does, it has to be kept as a fringe idea. It isn't new after all. The idea is only thousands of years old, and it has been modified to adjust to new knowledge. ID is on the same level as Astrology, and on the video you can see even the ID proponents agree. So if ID becomes part of the curriculum for science, we have to add Asatru, Astrology, Hinduism (Brahma creates the world by opening his eye etc) and all other beliefs. After all, they fit just as much. In the end, an individual can on a personal level believe in a creator, that's fine. We can also educate kids in school about comparative religions and different faiths. But supernatural mysticism and magic, does not belong in science class, or the word Ontological Naturalism doesn't mean anything anymore and we have to fall back to things like exorcism and spider leg with bat blood mixtures and flying carpets. (On another note, one or two of the guys that promoted ID were taken to Federal court for perjury. They did lie under oath.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott_In_Michigan Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 HanSolo, no worries about coming off as an asshat. You didn't at all. I'm right there with you about keeping the education system free of the things you mentioned (astrology, I.D., etc.). The point I was making in the paragraph that you quoted was that I'm just surprised that none of the pro-I.D. people have tried to make the case for the co-existence of I.D. and evolution. I'm not necessarily agreeing with that view though...my personal stance on evolution and I.D. is still up in the air after having just recently deconverted. What did you think about the guy who had penned that plan to push I.D. into the public school system as part of a Christian effort to "fix" problems? I wanted to reach into the TV and ring his neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 HanSolo, no worries about coming off as an asshat. You didn't at all. Good. I'm right there with you about keeping the education system free of the things you mentioned (astrology, I.D., etc.). No, no, that's not what I said. I think it's essential to keep the science education free from it. But it's completely okay for me if there's a different class for these issues. Maybe they should teach philosophy more and religion, and combine ID into that? I believe in open education and that things are not taboo, but it's also important to separate the subjects by their defined context. The point I was making in the paragraph that you quoted was that I'm just surprised that none of the pro-I.D. people have tried to make the case for the co-existence of I.D. and evolution. I'm not necessarily agreeing with that view though...my personal stance on evolution and I.D. is still up in the air after having just recently deconverted. For some scientists that do believe in Evolution and ID there's no problem. They just know that they can't prove ID. It's like that guy that used to lead the human genome project and then became Christian (whatever his name was - to lazy to look up), he believes Evolution is a true and real science, but that there's a designer behind the system. So yeah, it can co-exist, I think even Behe one of the strongest scientists behind ID also believes in Evolution to 99.9%! It's only misinformed Christians that take the arguments and run with them. Just like the philosopher Anthony Flew that used to be a strong atheist, and became a Deist. Christians took that as him becoming a Christian! And that's not true. He doesn't believe in Jesus, God, Bible and all that stuff, but just the anonymous a non-interacting intelligent creating force. People hear what they want to hear... What did you think about the guy who had penned that plan to push I.D. into the public school system as part of a Christian effort to "fix" problems? I wanted to reach into the TV and ring his neck. I guess you're referring to the wedge document. It shows how dishonest many leading Christians are. To them, Christianity is not a faith or a belief, but a political agenda. Total opposite to what I grew up with. If I still were a Christian, I'd say they are the false ones. Or was it the Christian that became the chairman of the schoolboard? He was really delusional. He said some things that just made my skin crawl. He seriously didn't have a problem with lying in court? (He was the one that was taken to federal court for perjury. And it was the judge that filed it. And that judge was/is Christian and appointed by Bush. If you go so far to even piss of a Christian judge appointed by the Christian president... then you really have gone too far.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott_In_Michigan Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 No, no, that's not what I said. I think it's essential to keep the science education free from it. But it's completely okay for me if there's a different class for these issues. Maybe they should teach philosophy more and religion, and combine ID into that? I believe in open education and that things are not taboo, but it's also important to separate the subjects by their defined context. Looks like we're on the same page with that. I guess my thoughts were different than what I typed. I think you're on to something with putting some of this stuff into a philosophy class. Hell, why not just offer a general religion course? It probably wouldn't fly with all of the separation of church and state stuff that goes on, but it would be optional, and it would give students a chance to learn the basic foundations of ALL religions. My only fear would be that certain religions would be taught in a negative light depending on the world culture, such as Islam being subtly bashed due to the "war on terror". Also, on the same line of thinking, I wonder if a general religion course would maybe find some acceptance if there was some enforcement of a rule which stated that no one religion would be subject to any focus, and that significant religions from past to present would be covered. When I took an ancient history class in college I was fascinated by what we learned about the religions from those time periods. If it was presented correctly, it might even open the eyes of students who have been lead to believe that there is only one correct religion (i.e. the one they were raised into)! But then...that might wind up starting a new controversy. For some scientists that do believe in Evolution and ID there's no problem. They just know that they can't prove ID. It's like that guy that used to lead the human genome project and then became Christian (whatever his name was - to lazy to look up), he believes Evolution is a true and real science, but that there's a designer behind the system. So yeah, it can co-exist, I think even Behe one of the strongest scientists behind ID also believes in Evolution to 99.9%! It's only misinformed Christians that take the arguments and run with them. Just like the philosopher Anthony Flew that used to be a strong atheist, and became a Deist. Those examples are precisely what I was thinking of, and fall into line with what I have felt about the two topics for many years. Even as a Christian I had a very hard time accepting the idea that the world is like 10,000 years old. I mean, how can Christianity simply dismiss the fact that there are dinosaur bones embedded inside layers of rock that is undoubtedly millions of years old? God put them there to test us? I guess you're referring to the wedge document. It shows how dishonest many leading Christians are. To them, Christianity is not a faith or a belief, but a political agenda. Total opposite to what I grew up with. If I still were a Christian, I'd say they are the false ones. Yes! The wedge document. What an appropriate name. That weasel of a man who was behind it just didn't sit right with me each time they showed him on the program. And your comment about using it for political purposes is so true. Sad, really, that a religion that is supposed to be based in the teachings of a man named Christ has come to such lengths to impose it's will upon the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Scott, it seems like HanSolo has covered the ID vs evolution question, and besides, I'm no good at science. As for religious studies. I don't know what is offered in the public school curriculum in Michigan but in some schools it is common to offer courses on various world religions. These include Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism etc. On the college and university level one can do degrees in religious studies. Thus, the information is out there for those who are interested. Grandpa Harley of these forums has posted some on my website (click on my sig) in case you need a place to start. There's some really interesting finds in the History of Christianity section. This index might also get you started on various topics. Or you can just google the name of a religion that interests you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott_In_Michigan Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Scott, it seems like HanSolo has covered the ID vs evolution question, and besides, I'm no good at science. As for religious studies. I don't know what is offered in the public school curriculum in Michigan but in some schools it is common to offer courses on various world religions. These include Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism etc. On the college and university level one can do degrees in religious studies. Thus, the information is out there for those who are interested. Grandpa Harley of these forums has posted some on my website (click on my sig) in case you need a place to start. There's some really interesting finds in the History of Christianity section. This index might also get you started on various topics. Or you can just google the name of a religion that interests you. Sorry RubySera, I guess I should have been clearer about what I said regarding classes covering world religions. I was specifically talking about the high school level. I was able to get some religion in a few classes I took in college, like you mentioned, but nowhere was it covered in high school. I suspect it never will be. It looks like I've taken the thread on a bit of a tangent. Sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 HanSolo, no worries about coming off as an asshat. You didn't at all. I'm right there with you about keeping the education system free of the things you mentioned (astrology, I.D., etc.). The point I was making in the paragraph that you quoted was that I'm just surprised that none of the pro-I.D. people have tried to make the case for the co-existence of I.D. and evolution. I'm not necessarily agreeing with that view though...my personal stance on evolution and I.D. is still up in the air after having just recently deconverted. What did you think about the guy who had penned that plan to push I.D. into the public school system as part of a Christian effort to "fix" problems? I wanted to reach into the TV and ring his neck. Well, I can't name anyone off the top of my head, but I think there are some more "liberal" IDers who are basically theistic evolutionists. They just think that there is scientific evidence that an intelligent being HAD to have created the universe, too... while most theistic evolutionists stick to the evolution and just admit they personally think a god started the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Those examples are precisely what I was thinking of, and fall into line with what I have felt about the two topics for many years. Even as a Christian I had a very hard time accepting the idea that the world is like 10,000 years old. I mean, how can Christianity simply dismiss the fact that there are dinosaur bones embedded inside layers of rock that is undoubtedly millions of years old? God put them there to test us? They claim the dinosaurs lived at the same time as Noah, and the methods to measure the age is faulty. There are some artifacts from ancient cultures where dinosaur like creatures are depicted, so they claim those urns, drawings and statues proves that dinosaurs lived side-by-side with humans. I bring this up a lot, but the best contrary evidence I know of to show that the Universe must be older than 10,000 years is the Supernova 1987A. The time for the light to reach Earth was 150,000 years, and regardless of how you try to explain it away, the formula always comes out to around that time. The only way to explain away that is to claim that God created the light effects of the supernova event in mid-flight, basically God intentionally created a false image of the universe and of it's age. It basically means, God either doesn't exist and science is right, or God is a lying SOB who intentionally deceive us... or the last option, the Bible should not always be taken literally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I mean, how can Christianity simply dismiss the fact that there are dinosaur bones embedded inside layers of rock that is undoubtedly millions of years old? God put them there to test us? During the last stages of my Xianity before deconversion this is what I believed. That God made the universe "old" so all the evidence would point to an old universe and earth in order to test real faith. Yeah, scary. I didn't even consider that this was pretty underhanded and deceitful since it would not allow people such as scientists to know God since the evidence led away from him. Nor did I consider the fact that if God made the universe with a pre-existing history he very well could have created the universe 5 minutes ago and simply implanted all of our memories up to this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts