A Politically Incorrect History of the Evolution Debate

The Generic Theater is presenting "Darwin in Malibu," March 26-April 18, 2010, and in honor of the play is proud to present this whirlwind tour of the modern Evolution vs. Creationism/Intelligent Design controversy. In 1860, mere months after The Origin of Species was published, scientist Thomas Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce had the first-ever "creationism vs. evolution" debate. In one of the most famous moments in British history, Wilberforce asked Huxley "So, was your ape ancestor on your grandmother's or your grandfather's side?" and Huxley replied, "I'd rather be an ape than a Bishop!" And here we are, 150 years later, still having the same argument.

At least, that's the way the *story* goes. Find out the far more interesting truth in Generic's play--
http://www.generictheater.org

Video clips are used under Fair Use copyright law, are not for profit, and fall under both Educational and Critical Commentary uses.

Music is by Colorpulse (http://www.colorpulse.com) and used with permission.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• creationism
• intelligent design
• theater
• darwin

[tekproxy]

@benthemiester I never implied natural selection would weed out primitive religion. I said, in fact, the exact opposite and gave clear reasons why. I was explaining how natural selection was consistent with your observation that there are many more religious people than nonreligious people.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy When I said that per capita atheist regimes were more violent and oppressive I was referring to the historical record and again it was in response to the question of why natural selection would not weed out primitive religion as you implied. I was trying to show that in terms of self preservation it wasn't that simple an argument. I do admit these are complex dynamics and all sides should be considered.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy Let me correct myself again. I mean unbiblical and un Christian in terms of the New Testament.

It may have worked for the pre Christian tribes of Israel but would not work today.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy I understand u wanting to defend your views but u have to remember the initial question was based on the dynamics of natural selection & self preservation concerning faith in a God head etc. & that is why I used the atheist regime analogy in re to your re based on that statement. Yes I admit it was a loaded statement, & yes my point is extremism is extremism in any shape or form, including Christianity. In fact in my opinion a theocracy is not only unbiblical but not even Christian.

[tekproxy]

@benthemiester This all got started when you mentioned it was atheistic groups that did a lot of bad stuff, as if it was the mere fact they were atheist. Now you've clarified and you're saying it was taking something to an extreme, and I'm fine with that. An atheist world society isn't necessarily better or worse--people are still people. I don't even think it's possible. It's like a world without emotion or without running. It's built in.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy "Atheism was inconsequential compared to these influences. You can disagree with me there, but at least I know you understand what I'm saying. Can we get back to the fact of evolution now?"

I said extremism is extremism no matter what your world view, and I was speaking of deaths and intentional murders by the state per capita.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy cont..Please read my responses carefully. I would also urge you to try to understand the distinction between people dying in wars even for the secular ideas cited, (which was a response in context to your statement on religious atrocities) and the systematic slaughter of ones own people based on extremist views.

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy cont..... In this case people who thought an atheist state and society was a superior society. I don't know how you feel but there are many who feel that an atheist world society is superior society, and many of these people are very popular among atheist. The question is how far will one take it? If it results in at least fifty million dead then yes, this is extremism. Were going to have to agree to disagree. If you want to speak on the topic of evolution please feel free.

[tekproxy]

@benthemiester Ah there you go! You just said what I've been saying "by secular ideas like Socialism, Nationalism, Communism, Nazism and Fascism" That's it, that's all there is to it. Atheism was inconsequential compared to these influences. You can disagree with me there, but at least I know you understand what I'm saying. Can we get back to the fact of evolution now?

[benthemiester]

@tekproxy "Sure, extremism like what you're talking about is bad but extreme atheism technically just means "really really does not believe the positive claim god exists".

If someone tried to slaughter you and your family for your beliefs, would you really care about technicalities?The real world does not work like that.