Crowd at the Scopes Trial, 1925.
Posted on 07/27/2025 9:08:46 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Few events in all of history have been as maligned and misunderstood as the 1925 Scopes Trial, often called the most famous court trial in American history. The common view of the trial is that it was about religious belief pitted against scientific fact. John Scopes, as a teacher educated in biology, taught evolution [actually his major in geology with a minor in law]. His nemesis was William Jennings Bryan, whom evolutionists portrayed as an ignorant fundamentalist accepting every word of the Bible as literal truth. Bryan purportedly aimed to outlaw the teaching of science in public schools and advocated teaching what his critics called ‘Bible stories.’
The Facts
As the judge in the case made clear, and as the court transcript confirms, the sole issue at stake was whether John Scopes had taught human evolution, a violation of the 1925 Butler Act. Clarence Darrow, a prominent criminal lawyer and well-known atheist-agnostic, joined the case, viewing it as a golden opportunity to malign and discredit both theism and Christianity.[1] Darrow worked hard to turn the trial into what he viewed as a conflict between the Biblical teaching that humans were created directly by God, and what he considered the scientific view that humans descended from an ape-like ancestor. Furthermore, as Darrow and his supporters made clear, they confidently believed the evidence for molecules-to-man evolution was so powerful that it could only be termed an unequivocal fact.
A quick trip to the local museum, they argued, would be enough to prove human evolution as a fact. With few exceptions, the mass media—epitomized by the popular image of a caveman dragging his woman into his cave by her hair—conveyed the belief that human evolution was an undisputed fact. In their view, only ignorant, uneducated fundamentalist Christians reject science and cling instead to the Biblical account. In contrast, they argued that educated Christians realize the evidence for human evolution is overwhelming.
The problem is that nearly every claim made by evolutionists in the above scenario, although widely accepted and promoted by evolutionists—is either blatantly false or heavily distorted.
The facts are irresponsibly ignored and these myths are still widely repeated, even today. For example, in the December 2024 issue of the leading journal Science, the new book on the Scopes Trial, Keeping the Faith, was reviewed and a number of these myths were repeated.[2] Examples include the claim that the Butler Act prohibited teaching evolution. Actually, it only prohibited teaching human evolution. Bryan, likewise, was not concerned with the evolution of worms, snails, birds or crocodiles, but only with human evolution.
Crowd at the Scopes Trial, 1925.
The Science Presented in the Scopes Trial
Although evidence for human evolution was not part of the trial, the judge allowed the scientists that Darrow had hoped to call as witnesses to submit a written brief which was included in the official transcript. The brief included what the scientists believed was overwhelming evidence for human evolution. The main claims included the fossil record of man’s animal past including Neanderthal Man, Piltdown Man, Java Man, and Nebraska Man. It is ironic that all of the evidence they submitted in support of evolution has since been fully refuted. Piltdown Man has been exposed as a forgery.[3] Java Man was discovered by Dutch paleontologist Eugène Dubois, who named it Pithecanthropus erectus, a name still used today but more commonly denoted Homo erectus. This find, consisting of only a skullcap, a thighbone, and one tooth, is now acknowledged to be that of a human.[4] Despite Dubois’s claims that his find represented an important missing link, considerable debate persisted even in 1925 over whether Java Man was a transitional form between apes and humans, or fully human.[5]
The Issue at the Core of the Scopes Trial
The textbook that Scopes used to teach evolution was titled Civic Biology by Dr. George Hunter. A reviewer of popular biology textbooks written during the first part of the 20th century claimed that Civic Biology was the most racist biology textbook ever written in English.[6] Hunter included in his book an entire chapter on eugenics which was written by one of the leading eugenicists in America, the infamous Harvard University-trained zoologist Charles Benedict Davenport.[7]
William Jennings Bryan, by contrast, was unapologetically pro-democracy and anti-racism. In a definitive study on Bryan and racism in 1969, by W. H. Smith author concluded that Bryan believed democracy
is founded upon the doctrine of human brotherhood—a democracy that exists for one purpose, [that is, for] the defense of human rights. It would be extremely difficult to select from his political career, lasting from 1890 to his death in 1925, a concept which he emphasized more than this.[8]
Human evolution was Bryan’s chief concern because it negated the scriptural teaching that all people are descended from Adam and Eve. The theory of evolution rejects creation by a Creator, positing instead that humans evolved naturally from a common primate ancestor. The Creator Bryan referred to—the God of Genesis 1:1—stands in direct contrast to evolution.
Bryan’s beliefs in democracy, racism and the humanity of all people, were over half a century ahead of the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement for Blacks. In the magazine he edited, The Commoner, Bryan frequently wrote about his strong support for Black civil rights. For example, in 1902, he wrote that, regarding
the legal rights of the black man… there can be no question. The negro is a citizen, and as a citizen is entitled to all of the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions. He has freedom to speak and to write; freedom of conscience and the right ‘to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ In these respects, there is no distinction between him and the white man.
Bryan added that, even in the Southern states, by law, Blacks also had all of “the guarantees enumerated in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights.”[9]
In the area of education, Bryan believed that
the Negro is entitled to all of the opportunities offered to the white man. The Negro must be educated; no community can afford to permit any portion of its population to remain ignorant …. The whites, for their own as well as the good of the Negroes, must see to it that the free school is open to every child, white and black.[10]
Although civil rights laws were often undermined by local resistance and lack of enforcement in the South, that does not negate the fact that these laws did exist. Well known personages like William Jennings Bryan and President Woodrow Wilson did far too little too late to fight for the civil rights of blacks. Conversely, they did far more than most influential leaders to change southern society which was for over a century very hostile to Blacks. Achieving true equality required a broader, more sustained movement beyond their individual actions.
Bryan championed human equality and civil rights for blacks, but Hunter, the author of the biology textbook Scopes taught from, promoted a racist ideology, asserting white supremacy and Black inferiority. For instance, referring to eugenics as applied to humans, textbook author George Hunter wrote:
If the stock of domesticated animals can be improved, …the health and vigor of the future generations of men and women on the earth might … be improved by applying to them the laws of selection.[11]
Media Perpetuates Stereotypes
Unfortunately, most articles and books about the Trial ignore the above facts, choosing instead to promote an inaccurate picture of what took place. This distortion has been quite effective in censoring creationism as can be seen by this quote from the book The Bible and Creationism, written by Catholic University professors William and Susan Trollinger:
Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species was published in 1859, and subsequent scientific research made the case that humans and other animals evolved from earlier species over millions of years. Many late-19th-century American Protestants had little problem accommodating Darwin’s ideas – which became mainstream biology – with their religious commitments.[12]
The Trollingers then bemoaned the fact that, even though the scientific evidence was very strong, “fully 1 in 4 Americans reject evolution a century after the Scopes Monkey Trial spotlighted the clash between science and religion.”[13]
Summary
Despite Clarence Darrow’s efforts to frame the Scopes Trial as a science-versus-religion showdown, the Trial was less a direct clash between science and religion than a conflict of worldviews. The Science article referenced above inaccurately called it ‘the 20th-century showdown between science and religion,’ overlooking its deeper focus on cultural divides and Bryan’s defense of ‘the Commoner’, meaning ordinary citizens. In reality, there is overwhelming scientific evidence against evolution, yet the mass media aggressively censors, or deliberately ignores, this fact.[14]
References
Click image for link to this book.
[1] Bergman, Jerry, The Other Side of the Scopes Trial, Wipf & Stock Publishers, Eugene, OR, 2023.
[2] Smocovitis, Vassiliki Betty, “Scopes Monkey Trial, in context. A writer reexamines the 20th-century showdown between science and religion,” Science 386(6726):1100, 2015.
[3] Weiner, J.S., The Piltdown Forgery, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1955; Smith, W.H., “William Jennings Bryan and racism,” The Journal of Negro History 54(2):127-149, p. 134, April 1969.
[4] Hetherington, Renée, and Robert G.B. Reid, The Climate Connection: Climate Change and Modern Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, 2010.
[5] Swisher, III, C.C., G.H. Curtis, and R. Lewin, Java Man: How Two Geologists Changed Our Understanding of Human Evolution, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 68-72, 2000.
[6] Shapiro, A., Trying Biology: The Scopes Trial, Textbooks, and the Antievolution Movement in American Schools, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 2013.
[7] Magat, R., “The forgotten roles of two New York City teachers in the epic Scopes Trial,” Science & Society 70(4):541, October 2006.
[8] Smith, W.H., William Jennings Bryan and racism, The Journal of Negro History 54(2):127-149, p. 134, April 1969.
[9] Bryan, W.J., The Commoner Condensed, The Abbey Press, New York, NY, p. 288, 1902.
[10] Bryan, 1902, pp. 288-289.
[11] Hunter, G., Civic Biology Presented in Problems, American Book Co., New York, NY, pp. 196, 261, 1914.
[12] Trollinger, William, and Susan Trollinger, The Bible and Creationism, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, The chapters from the book can be found here: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28285/chapter-abstract/214476571.
[13] Trollinger, William, and Susan Trollinger, The Conversation, 1 July 2025. italics added.
[14] Bergman. Jerry Censoring the Darwin Skeptics. How Belief in Evolution is Enforced by Eliminating Dissidents. Southworth, WA: Leafcutter Press. 2024. 566 pages.
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
and from the keywords, sorted:
I was raised Catholic and never had a problem believing in both evolution (in general) and creation. The big difference I see between fundamentalism and science is the timeline. The Earth is billions of years old, not 6000 years. But I also strongly believe that man, this earth and in fact the entire universe and all that’s in it was created by God. How He did it, I don’t have a clue. And I’m not about to tell Him how He should have done it.
Follow the money.
Agreed—evolution collapses under close examination.
That should not even be controversial—regardless of whether one is religious or not.
(Hologram theory is there for non religious people—since of course a hologram would still require intelligent design.)
We differ. I’m a strict evolutionist. Physics major at U of Chicago, computer science after that. Also raised Catholic but never remember any of the nuns expressing anti-evolutionary positions. Could have forgotten after 60 years and clearly there were quite a number of places where the nuns and I differed. But everyone comes to their own conclusions, and that’s what makes me intellectually comfortable.
But I’m also deeply respectful of everyone’s right to find a truth that differs from mine. I’m just not comfortable with people’s individual truths being taught in school. Sunday school, yes. At home, yes. Even in banners on the street, yes. But, for the time being, that’s this moment’s settled science I can see being taught. But I’ll always support your right to express your own beliefs and not see anyone telling you what you have to believe or not believe.
It is my opinion that Evolution is a theory and not a scientific law. It is not perfect and there are flaws as a result of our own imperfections and flaws as mortal men. When we study something like the evolution of humans we are in fact studying God’s work which is ultimately beyond our comprehension. To the degree that some aspects of the Theory of Evolution has some merits than those who totally reject the theory are in fact rejecting the works of God.
And let’s look at some of the very primitive creatures of millions of years ago that are supposedly some of the first ones we eventually evolved from. They had eyes and the ability to sense smell. Just how did this happen by pure accident way, way back then? The eyes and sense of smell are unto themselves very complex. And then the brains, as small as they likely were, had the ability to make use of what they saw thru the eyes.
There are so many things about earth’s creatures, in particular humans, that just could not have happened by pure chance.
I’m not sure where we disagree unless you mean “strict evolutionist” means no God. That, I don’t agree with.
I don’t know how God did it, why He did it or when He did it, but I know all of this miraculous stuff we see especially using the knowledge we gain from science, is no accident. I don’t know where matter came from, where energy came from, what was before space and time, and frankly, I don’t care if I ever know. I just know, it was no accident.
I’m always happy that people have strong opinions that bring them peace of mind.
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.