Posted on 06/09/2003 6:07:51 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
In the years that BreakPoint has been on the radio, I've had some strong words about our nation's public television broadcasting system, PBS. Two years ago, for example, I criticized PBS's airing of a deeply flawed series on the theory of evolution. That series was inaccurate and one-sided, leaving out any mention of the scientific evidence that supported the theory of intelligent design.
But today I've got good news about PBS to report. And this is news where you can make a real difference.
Over the past few weeks, here and there around the country, some PBS stations have been broadcasting the one-hour science documentary "Unlocking the Mystery of Life." This program tells the story of the biological theory of intelligent design. Using interviews with scientists and philosophers, computer animation, and location footage -- from such sites as the Galapagos Islands -- "Unlocking the Mystery of Life" describes the emergence of an alternative theory to strictly naturalistic evolution.
Naturalistic evolution, you see, credits all the amazing diversity and complexity of life solely to mindless natural causes, and that's how PBS science programs usually explain biology. That's "usually" as in "the sun usually goes down at night." You'd search fruitlessly if you tried to find PBS presenting the scientific case for a different viewpoint than Darwinian. And so airing "Unlocking the Mystery" points to a significant breakthrough.
The documentary tells such a good scientific story that, earlier this year, PBS made the program available to all of its national affiliates. Local stations could download the program from a satellite link, and -- if they so decided -- put it into their schedules.
Stations in Oklahoma and Michigan have already done so, and in a couple of days, PBS affiliates in Maryland, Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania, and Texas will broadcast the program as well. You can contact BreakPoint (1-877-3-CALLBP) for the days and times of these broadcasts.
Airing "Unlocking the Mystery" on taxpayer-supported public television is great news for intellectual freedom and openness in science. Most Americans learn about new developments in science from TV -- shows like the long-running PBS series NOVA. A well produced TV documentary can take complicated scientific theories and make them accessible and easy to understand -- even fun to watch. For young people, science that might be boring in the classroom becomes fascinating when presented imaginatively on television.
But TV can also exclude scientific ideas if they're deemed too controversial or likely to upset the scientific establishment. Challenges to Darwinian evolution have been seen just that way, religiously motivated and therefore suspect. But science suffers as a result, because there is plenty of evidence that does challenge Darwinism, and the public needs to hear both sides.
So here's what you can do. Call your local PBS station if it hasn't scheduled "Unlocking the Mystery," and encourage it to show the program. Send them an e-mail. If they've already shown it, let them know you appreciate their willingness to present alternatives to Darwinian evolution -- and that you'd like to see more of such programming in the future.
So it would seem. However, Darwinian evolutionary theory ain't hardly cheyne-stoking out just yet because of a few tv shows.
The simple mans idea of science.
What a relief that anyone without an education can claim understanding of that which they have no idea about.
ID
The way by which speaking in tongues and snake handling can finally be explained.
ID
down near dinosaur state park?
Creation "evidence" happens to be about as convincing as evidence for flying saucers and extra sensory perception.
LOL
That's the one.
If he didn't use such big words I could really understand him.
The way by which speaking in tongues and snake handling can finally be explained.
So accurate, so politically-Freeping-Incorrect.
Prepare for the Flames of the Ignorant!
If evolution is true, why do so many parents behave like they think their children are worthless? Since producing children capable of survival is the end goal of evolution, and humans represent the intellectual pinnacle of evolutionary development, why aren't more human parents more deeply concerned about the welfare of their children?
How does an evolutionary drive explain the human propensity for self-destruction and the destruction of one's legacy: drug addiction, homosexuality, abortion, suicide, child abuse, spousal neglect? According to evolutionary theory, these things should not be social problems. According to evolution, organisms are biologically programmed to seek survival and reproduction -- not self-destruction.
In other words, evolutionary theory is like communist economic theory. It works great on paper. It doesn't explain how society really works.
Whatever you can say about speaking in tongues (which I don't do) or snake handling (which I regard as silly), they are not as irrational or as widespread or as destructive as these ills of secular society which I have ennumerated above. Explaining the existence -- and widespread popularity -- of the phenomenon of Self-Destructiveness is a real problem for evolutionary theory.
It seems to me that the Bible has a better explanation for this modern phenomenon which might be called the Destruction of Personhood -- in that humans are spiritual beings and there is something deeply flawed in our spiritual natures -- ie, a lack of love -- which comes from our alienation from the God who is the true source of love.
And the theory of evolution, which denies not only God but love itself, is only the path to greater alienation and ultimately the very acts of self-destructiveness which deny the intellectual validity of evolutionary theory.
You failed to distinguish between young-earth and old-earth creationism in your criticism. I agree that young-earth creationists are unconvincing. Old-earth or progressive creationism is well-documented, both Biblically and scientifically. Failing to distinguish between them is an inadequate argument.
I'm so sick of you calling us stupid. Put up or shut your piehole. Where did you get your doctorate?
Ever heard of the late Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith? He studied natural sciences at Oxford, earned his first doctorate (Physical Organic Chemistry) at Reading University, his second doctorate at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, and his THIRD EARNED doctorate at the University of Geneva. Oh, and he was a creationist. Is HE stupid?
Your opinion isn't even worth a lengthy rebuttal. Go live in your fantasy world where everyone who agrees with you is a genius and those who don't are stupid.
Instead of ridiculing those with a different view, maybe you should re-examine your own position and realize that the your position is founded on assumptions whether your want to admit it or not (hmmm... like the false claim that there is no God, need I go on?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.