PBS Offers Intelligent Design Documentary

CREATION - Evolution Headlines ^ | 04/28/2003 | Illustra Media/CREATION - Evolution Headlines

[Remedy]

According to Illustra Media, the Public Broadcasting System uploaded the film Unlocking the Mystery of Life to its satellite this past Sunday. For the next three years, it will be available for member stations to download and broadcast. In addition, PBS is offering the film on their Shop PBS website under Science/Biology videos (page 4).

The film, released a little over a year ago, has been called a definitive presentation of the Intelligent Design movement. With interviews and evidences from eight PhD scientists, it presents strictly scientific (not religious) arguments that challenge Darwinian evolution, and show instead that intelligent design is a superior explanation for the complexity of life, particularly of DNA and molecular machines. The film has been well received not only across America but in Russia and other countries. Many public school teachers are using the material in science classrooms without fear of controversies over creationism or religion in the science classroom, because the material is scientific, not religious, in all its arguments and evidences, and presents reputable scientists who are well qualified in their fields: Dean Kenyon, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, Steven Meyer, William Dembski, Scott Minnich, Jed Macosko, and Paul Nelson, with a couple of brief appearances by Phillip E. Johnson, the "founder" of the Intelligent Design movement.

Check with your local PBS Station to find out when they plan to air it. If it is not on their schedule, call or write and encourage them to show the film. Why should television partly supported by public tax funds present only a one-sided view on this subject, so foundational to all people believe and think? We applaud PBS's move, but it is only partial penance for the Evolution series and decades of biased reporting on evolution.

This is a wonderful film, beautifully edited and shot on many locations, including the Galápagos Islands, and scored to original music by Mark Lewis. People are not only buying it for themselves, but buying extra copies to show to friends and co-workers. Unlocking the Mystery of Life available here on our Products page in VHS and DVD formats. The film is about an hour long and includes vivid computer graphics of DNA in action. The DVD version includes an extra half-hour of bonus features, including answers to 14 frequently-asked questions about intelligent design, answered by the scientists who appear in the film.

This is a must-see video. Get it, and get it around.

---

Intelligent Design Gets a Powerful New Media Boost 03/09/2002
Exclusive Over 600 guests gave a standing ovation Saturday March 9 at the premiere of a new film by Illustra Media, Unlocking the Mystery of Life. This 67-minute documentary is in many ways a definitive portrayal of the Intelligent Design movement that is sweeping the country. Intelligent Design is a non-religious, non-sectarian, strictly scientific view of origins with both negative and positive arguments: negative, that Darwinism is insufficient to explain the complexity of life, and positive, that intelligent design, or information, is a fundamental entity that must be taken into consideration in explanations of the origin of complex, specified structures like DNA. The film features interviews with a Who's Who of the Intelligent Design movement: Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, Paul Nelson, Stephen Meyer, Dean Kenyon, William Dembski, and others, who explain the issues and arguments for intelligent design as the key to unlocking the mystery of life. The film also features nearly 20 minutes of award-quality computer animation of molecular machines, manufacturing plants, and storage libraries of elaborate information - DNA and proteins at work in the cell, climaxing with a dazzling view of DNA transcription and translation.
In his keynote address, Dr. Paul Nelson (who appears in the film), gave reasons for optimism. He said that Time Magazine, usually solidly Darwinian, admitted just last week that these Intelligent Design scientists may be onto something. U.S. News and World Report is also coming out with a piece on I.D. And Stephen Meyer, who also appears in the film, could not be at the premiere because he was on his way to Ohio (see next headline), armed with copies of the film to give to the school board members. Nelson said that scientists should not arbitrarily rule design off the table. "Keeping science from discovering something that might be true is like having a pair of spectacles that distorts your vision," he said. "It does profound harm to science." He described how Ronald Numbers, evolutionist, once told him that design might be true, but science is a game, with the rule that scientists cannot even consider the possibility of design; "that's just the way it is," he said. (See this quote by Richard Lewontin for comparison.) Yet design is already commonly considered in archaeology, cryptography, forensics, and SETI, so why not in biology? Apparently this arbitrary rule has become a national controversy. Intelligent Design, says Nelson, is finally removing a "rule of the game" that is hindering science. If the reaction of the crowd at the premiere luncheon was any indication, Unlocking the Mystery of Life has launched a well-aimed smart weapon at the citadels of Darwinism.

We highly recommend this film. Copies are just now becoming available for $20. Visit IllustraMedia.com and order it. View it, and pass it around. Share it with your teachers, your co-workers, your church. You will have no embarrassment showing this high-quality, beautiful, amazing film to anyone, even the most ardent evolutionist.

 

 

[Doctor Stochastic]

Your point?

An anti-Darwinist had Darwinists executed; do you have a problem with that? You are the one who brought up Stalin.

[Not Insane]

"Perhaps you could point out how I might test for the existence of this designer? A phone number or e-mail address, perhaps?"

Nope. Sorry. I go back to the "light and dark" analogy.

Nobody can be "convinced." That's just not how it works.

[Axolotl]

sorry

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Not so. While the capitalist system is a good argument for micro-evolution (changes within the system), the communists believe that the capitalist system will be replaced by communism (changes without the system - social darwinism so to speak).

[balrog666]

PBS is WAY overrated.

Agreed. In fact, I think it's total crap and should get zero public funding.

But I have 7 Discovery channels, The Learning Channel, Two History channels, Biography channel, 2 Arts channels, etc - all commercial enterprises that beat PBS cold.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Simple placemarker.

[balrog666]

ask Rene' Descartes if he used math science, or pure logic when he proved, using logic, that God does exist.

Oh, really? Which one?

[Not Insane]

"Mostly the ID'ers just claim that processes that they themselves cannot understand need intelligence. We must assume that the ID'ers cannot grasp these processes because again, they themselves say so. "

In the meantime, so-called evolutionists claim that all can be known and explained therefore it couldn't possibly be just "created."

A question. If we eventually know literally every single thing there is to know about life, right down to how the first strand of DNA came to be, will we have answered this question: Why?

That question is the realm of Christianity. The "how" is just a fun side topic, like trying to figure out the solution to a rubics cube.

[Axolotl]

But my entire point was that socialists tend more towards the Darwinian point of view, while capitalists do not.

That is simply not correct. If anything, capitalists have picked up Darwinism more than anyone. Check out any edition of the Journal of Evolutionary Economics.

[Dimensio]

But my entire point was that socialists tend more towards the Darwinian point of view, while capitalists do not.

Except that you only supported your point by pointing out some socialists who, at most, twisted and distorted a biological process in an attempt to force it into a social design. You've not provided evidence that capitalists do the opposite.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Of course the capitalist system doesn't have a designer (aka Central Committee) but the communist system does. Capitalism forms random structures (vide Adam Smith) as opposed to the carefully planned (every 5 years!) communist system.

[Not Insane]

Yes, I've seen enough of those to wholeheartedly agree.

[Aric2000]

My point was this, The last half of the post that you so cavalirly blew off as childs play.

If evolution is true, therefore creationism is false, if creationism is false, gensis is then questionable, if genesis is questionable, then what else in the bible is questionable? It proves that the bible is NOT perfect as fundamentalists claim.

Perfectly logical progression, and explains why fundamentalist MUST fight any theory that disproves creationism and gensis.

Nothing childlike about it.

And yes, the NOT being removed was a veiled insult, only because your response to me was one as well.

[BMCDA]

Heck, and I always thought it was the other way around e.g. the monolith from "2001: A Space Odyssey" and an average rock.

[Dimensio]

But my entire point was that socialists tend more towards the Darwinian point of view, while capitalists do not.

Let's go back to the original comments.

You said

I've never met an evolutionist argument yet that didn't start with the assumption that the basic arguments for it are true and beyond argument.

I replied, quoting ONLY that and asking

Could you be more specific, or are you just going to assert this without evidence?

I didn't ask for evidence regarding your claim about evolution and socialism. You made an assertion regarding arguments for evolution and I requested that you support that assertion. Pointing out Hitler, Stalin, Pal Pot and the others does not address that question at all.

[Aric2000]

That question is the realm of Christianity.

Now that is arrogance in the extreme.

I like this much better.

That question is the realm of religion/phylosophy.

To say that Christianity is the only realm for that question is arrogant beyond belief.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

The same can be said (with more justification) about those who believe evolution but reject ID. In such a case, not only is evolution not falsifiable, it cannot even be tested.

[Dimensio]

In such a case, not only is evolution not falsifiable, it cannot even be tested.

Why not?

[Axolotl]

In such a case, not only is evolution not falsifiable, it cannot even be tested.

Evolution is falsifiable and can be tested. Now the absence of a designer can't be tested (maybe that was your point), evolution simply does not require one to explain the diversification of life on earth.

[Dimensio]

I must have missed the proof as well. If Descartes proved that a specific God existed, then I would love to see the proof.