Evolution v. Creationism: the Politics, the Science, the Debate (1 of 3)

A panel discussion exploring the politics and science surrounding the evolution v. creationism debate, presented by the American Humanist Association.

The panel features renowned experts leading the discussion:

Eugenie Scott, Ph.D., executive director of the National Center for Science Education and author of Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction and co-editor of Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design is Wrong for Our Schools,

Barbara Forrest, Ph.D., professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University, expert witness for the plaintiff in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, and co-author of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design,




and

Kenneth Miller, Ph.D., professor of biology at Brown University, lead expert witness for the plaintiff in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, and author of Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution and Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul.

Fred Edwords, communications director of the United Coalition of Reason and former editor of the Creation/Evolution journal, moderates.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• evolution
• creationism
• science
• education
• Darwin
• humanist

[TheScienceFoundation]

It's only really a matter of the politics, because the science only supports one side.

[redfeather09]

I thought this was a joke until I saw Ken Miller on the list. How can anyone seriously consider debating this???? Science is empirical, God is metaphysical. You can't prove anything metaphysical, so it needs to remain in the realm of theology and philosophy...end of story.

[GnosticHumanist]

Starts at 7:00.

[Johnf85]

@Mogley52 keep up. Sub atomic particles appear from nothing for no reason. Einstein wasted the last years of his life because he couldnt cope with quantum mechanics. This is over 50 years old. Why are you still blabbing on about this? The beginning of the universe coming from nothing is as plausible as the notion that sub atomic particles come from nothing, which they do.

[Mogley52]

SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)

[Mogley52]

INTELLIGENT DESIGN MISUNDERSTOOD: If you discovered a sand castle on a lonely beach, you can’t prove someone made it. You didn’t see someone make it. Either it was designed or the random forces of wind and waves made the sand castle. Sand castle didn't have fingerprints.. The wind wiped away the fingerprints? How can you prove there were fingerprints in the first place? By chance or design? Both sides should be free to present their case!

[Mogley52]

Popular evolutionary scientists Dawkins and Hawking refuse to debate with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at ICR, The Institure for Creation Research. They only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, and WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.

[Mogley52]

NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their reproductive system and other vital organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.