Science on TV Evolves : Intelligent Design Hits Prime Time

BreakPoint ^ | 9 June 03 | Chuck Colson

[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.

[Last Visible Dog]

The real difference between the creationist and the evolutionist is that one admits he's not a scientist, and the other pretends he has no faith.

Well put!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Has anyone posted the definition of "irreducible complexity" yet? The flagella example seems to have played out.

[Last Visible Dog]

Your posts would be much stronger if you actually presented sourced positions of the ID community. You have gone to great lengths to berate us for making incorrect assumptions about ID. How about you posting the basic tennants of ID, as you understand it?

Next time read the thread before posting.

I have said about 6 or 7 times now I am not arguing for ID (nor do I plan to) – I am arguing against close-minded knee-jerk evolutionists.

[Last Visible Dog]

The Big Bang can be explained as a stable quantum fluctuation (IIRC). It need not have a supernatural cause.

Can you prove this? No. Therefore using Aric2000's logic, your statement in nonscience - until you can prove or disprove this statement - it ain't science (using Aric2000's logic)

[Aric2000]

NO, because it is OBVIOUS that you are clueless.

If a theory is nonfalsifiable, it cannot be scientific.

You cannot tell me whether an ID'r exists or not, you cannot tell me for certain that certain organisms are irreducably complex, these are the basic assumptions of ID.

Evolution says, this little critter looks pretty complex, so how did it get here from there, and it looks for the answers, but is NOT afraid of saying, "I don't Know, yet."

Whereas ID, irreducibly complex, OK, goddidit, thanks, have a nice day.

You need to get a grip, you have twisted and played enough.

OK, you are SO positive that ID is somehow scientific, then prove that it is scientific.

I have shown my case, and it is very clear cut, just because you choose to ignore it, does not mean that it does not exist.

So, instead of me trying to cinvince you that I am right, convince me that you are correct.

Prove to me that ID is scientific, go ahead, give it your best shot. I'll be here later to see how you respond.

[Aric2000]

Can't say that I have seen that yet.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

It just seems like we've been here before and didn't get an answer last time.

[Last Visible Dog]

Energy (and therefore matter) is a product of the expansion of the universe. Physicist can explain this far better than I can, however there is still no need to invoke a supernatural explanation.

So you have faith in science – even in your absence of knowledge.

I have yet to find a theory of origin that does not start with a miraculous supernatural occurrence – but unlike Aric2000 I do not claim to be the arbiter of all things scientific.

[Aric2000]

Excuse me, I never said NOR meant any such thing.

It can be a hypothesis, but that hypothesis must be at least somewhat based on scientific evidence and observation, there will be SOME assumptions with ANY hypothesis, but those assumptions can be proven in a scientific manner.

Nothing Unscientific at all about what Junior said.

You are reaching, BIG time.

[Aric2000]

LVD just likes to claim that philosophy belongs in the hard sciences, I have yet to figure out why.

That's why it's called philosophy, but he will just not let go of that for the life of him.

[Rudder]

Why make such a silly request?

Reminds me of Billy Preston's song: "Does it go 'round in circles?"

You asked me to be more specific when I said that until ID produces data supporting its "theory" it will not be recognized as science by scientists.

BTW, my personal opinion is that ID will have very tough time generating rationale and testable hypotheses.

[Last Visible Dog]

Ah, but electricity has a natural cause. So does the origin of species. ID is a supernatural cause, regardless of how you attempt to package it.

But wait. Electricity was considered supernatural at one point therefore all things supernatural could one day be part of what we consider natural.

The origin of matter does have a supernatural cause therefore the foundation of all theories is supernatural (beyond our current understanding of nature).

THIS IS MY KEY POINT. You evolutionists defeat ID with arguments that defeat ALL theories of the origin of matter.

[Aric2000]

There is NO scientific theory of origin, HELLO, Earth to LVD, there is NO SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF ORIGINS OF LIFE.

There are hypothesis based on observance and evidence, there are guesses by others, but there ARE NO SCIENTIFIC THEORIES ABOUT THE ORIGINS OF LIFE.

Man, you are confused.

[Last Visible Dog]

If anyone opposes their viewpoint, they quickly tag an offensive label on them so they'll shut up.

Distract distract distract, get away from the core issue, which is the fact that they believe this infinitely complex universe happened by sheer chance.

MississippiMan, you are a wise man. (must be something in the water - my father was from Mississippi)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

It's the worldview thing again.

"Render to Einstein the things that are Einstein's; and to God the things that are God's." ;)

[Aric2000]

HELLO LVD!!

Earth to LVD, the ONLY Scientific theory that I know that tries to explain the origin of matter is the Big Bang theory.

And we have yet to figure out EXACTLY how it ALL started, but NO where, and I MEAN NO WHERE, does the big bang theory say, then "a miracle happened", or "goddidit", no where in the theory of the big bang will you find either of those 2 phrases, you may see "we don't know yet", but no where will you see "goddidit" or "a miracle happened".

If those 2 phrases are anywhere in that theory, I would love to see you point them out to me.

[Last Visible Dog]

We may not know the answers to all your questions at the moment. This does not mean that answers will not eventually be forthcoming. And, if history is any indication, the answers will not be of a supernatural nature.

Funny, things like man flying, space travel, electricity, bic lighters would all be considered supernatural at one time. I think history proves that many things we think are supernatural today will be part of what we consider natural in the future.

[Aric2000]

LOL, indeed, OK, I am out of here, got 2 appointments, and then a sales meeting tonight, so be back around 9 or so.

Buh bye..

[RightWhale]

why aren't more human parents more deeply concerned about the welfare of their children?

Not that the chiidren are wind-up machines, wind 'em up and let them go, but don't bother too much about where they go 'cause most of it is where you went before; but the state has taken over most responsibility for schooling the children and made natural parents next to useless [just pay your taxes, no comment is necessary.] Simple social Darwinism.

[Aric2000]

He twists, he turns, but he'll be damned if he'll admit he was wrong.