Inherit the Wind scene, creationism vs. evolution

Stupid rednecks stick with the Bible's Creationism.

I may as well come clean, CP - my basic assumption, based on what I perceive to be the extreme improbability of a bio-friendly universe, is that the Universe was intended (designed) and that a God/Designer capable of making a Universe may be capable of intervening in the normal course of events (evolution). I don't really have any problem with evolution per se other than that it's a science and QT is indicating the boundary between science and metaphysics can sometimes look pretty arbitrary.

Sure. The observed evolution and the fossils showing the change over years is pretty good, but that is hardly all the evidence. Don't forget the ERV's and DNA that confirm common ancestry. Check it out if you haven't:

watch?v=i1fGkFuHIu0&feature=re lated
watch?v=-CvX_mD5weM&feature=re lated

Just skip the Neanderthal part. The second video is on summation BTW.

Eminently reasonable CyberP, but the flies and little fish notwithstanding this is still barely science pending convincing testing of the major predictions of the theory. Digging up evidence of this and that and piecing it all together may be good logic but not good science. There may be some other explanation; evolution may be to the next theory as Newton's physics is to Einstein's or to QT. Definitely there is evolution in nature but not so definitely is evolution the comprehensive answer.

Keep following the evolutionary patterns your ancestors more and more resemble the australopithecine of 2-3 million years ago. Now we see a form you could hardly call human. Sure, changes on the scale of 10,000 are unnoticeable, 75000 years it becomes noticeable albeit slight. 200,000 years it becomes obvious. After 2,000,000 years the differences become quite significant. Now considering life has existed for so long the branching off of species and slow changes would result in immense diversity

No comment on the fish speciation? Of course it can account for the diversity. We observe small changes all the time. Look at the skulls of homo sapiens about 50,000 years ago.. they are different from the modern human skull in the brow ridge and projecting facial profile. Not a huge different, but what is to be expected. Now go back 150,000 years and it is more so. They aren't that different from Homo heidelbergensis. Following this pattern 500,000 years back you expect some like Homo erectus.

Effecting minor genetic changes in fruit flies doesn't explain the diversity in speciation we find in the world; we make a leap of faith based on carefully engineered manipulation on a micro level that mere happenstance can account for this macro-diversity. Not good science. I'm familiar with theories re. self-organizing systems etc. and find them highly speculative at best. You reread 'The Tangled Bank', etc. and separate the science from the scientism if you can.

Evolution has been used to make predictions. It's been tested. Speciation has been observed in fish species known as cichlids and in fruit flies and other species. Irreducible complexity? Lol, no. Maybe if you read Endless Forms Most beautiful you can understand how things like, eyes, wings and such a developed and have a better understanding of evolutionary development which has become it's own science. Read Endless Forms, The Tangled Bank, or any decent book on evolution. Educate yourself.

Evolution isn't actually scientific any more than ID is. Both notions are based exclusively on inferences from already existing facts. Proper science is based on testable predictions from theory - which of the major predictions from Evolution have been tested? Also, how do you explain irreducible complexity? An eye has a specific function but a proto-eye would be unable to perform the eye function and would be of no survival value to its owner and hence would have no reason to persist.

"Inherit the Wind" is a masterpiece of propaganda - as is "Triumph of the Will". Nothing in ITW agrees with the facts. The lies and distortions that comprise the plot of this monsterpiece are so numerous it would take pages to list them. It's tragic that well-crafted art can serve the agendas of political entities like the ACLU and the Nazis so effectively. Anyone acquainted with the facts of the Scopes trial will surely find watching this movie, well-crafted though it is, excruciating.