NOVA | Intelligent design on trial 5 - 12

Intelligent design on trial

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• evolution
• creation
• Darwin
• God
• Bible
• intelligent
• design
• transitional
• form
• natural
• selection

[somberlight]

Discovery institute is nothing but a christian front supporting wedge-terrorism so your fantasy is wrong by default. its been proven that they do not have an actual theory yet, so calling their fictive thinking research is a damn travesty and mud thrown to the face of real science. ID not science, its just a bunch christians trying to use a lot of blanket-excuse to eject their mindrape to american kids head.form a testable theory, win an instant nobel and then we can return to the question.

[jaggo84]

I wonder how many creationists argued that the Tiktaalik fossil was placed by the devil, so it could be found by those heathen scientists and deceive people of weak faith...

[jfoxbuddy]

I feel that most every one on here is very closed minded.... and not willing to hear or see any other theory beyond what they want to believe. intelligent design while from this point of view hard to accept for people that believe only in science and what they can handle or touch. why do so many people especially scientists are not willing to consider something more then what they see or touch. ask with true intent to know if god is real and he will answer.

[Lennon4ever1]

Ken Miller is the only theist hero that i have at the moment! -Go ken!!

[funkyleaf]

I have a feeling the next part is gonna be good !

[influenza99]

"...it's clear the judge was interested in the science."

It's easy to be interested in the science when you have teachers like Miller and Padian.. I wish they were my teachers in grade 9.

[GermanChocolateCake]

@TheBereangirl "In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?"

Are you referring to the supposed creation scientists? If so, I highly recommend that you review some of the "leading" creation "scientists" credentials before sticking to that conclusion. Ken Ham for example.

[TheBereangirl]

@GermanChocolateCake exactly my point. The evil Catholic church exerted great power over science re:Galileo & Newton, now ironically it's the reverse. Wow, I thought this video's spin WAS the proof creation scientists are inept & junk scientists. In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?

[macgeek2004]

Man...it's weird to think that such a retarded thing was so big so few years ago...

[GermanChocolateCake]

@TheBereangirl I think if you read the Galileo affair a little closer you'll see that his opposition largely came from the church and organizations with political and philosophical positions tied to it like the Jesuits. Newton hid his religious beliefs out of fear of persecution for having beliefs that were controversial, even heretical in the church's eyes (particularly regarding the trinity).

But all that aside, any evidence for your claim that modern science black lists opposing views?

[TheBereangirl]

@GermanChocolateCake yes it's unfortunate that modern day scientist only parrot eachothers "scientific findings". I don't need to take a college course to see that modern science black balls anyone w/ a different scientific view that conflicts w/ the charished status quo, this has always been the case, just ask Galileo, Newton & any other scientific boat rocker from history's pages. I found a book about Louis Agassiz and Charles Lyell, I'm reading them now, creation was in vouge in their day=)

[GermanChocolateCake]

@TheBereangirl "Peer reviewed to me means "cronies", not real objective these days, its hard to find scientists who are. "

That's unfortunate. I have to wonder what experience motivated you to such a cynical conclusion. that kind of thinking walks dangerously close to "judging a book by its cover", i.e. making baseless conclusions because it just "seems right."

I'd HIGHLY recommend you take some college science courses, and learn how science actually functions before assuming you're correct.