[ThinkPlease]

Yikes! Yup, those nasty Darwinists are right up there with fundamentalist Muslims who blow up things. Personally, I think they made a mistake of Falwellian proportions. Is this the sign of a healthy ministry?

I was rather disappointed in the factual mistakes in the article as well. Sputnik, for example, was launched in 1957, not 1945. And it's Ted Olson, not Tom Olson. A few minutes of fact checking might have saved them a few errors.

Here's what's the NCSE thinks of their comparisons:

National Center for Science Education

[ThinkPlease]

Big phat ICR bump!

[Wm Bach]

Ooof! A better comparison would be the creationists as the Taliban in the 70's, trying to reverse western influence.

[Da_Shrimp]

This Cumming bloke is completely off his rocker, not to mention morally reprehensible.

To compare an act of that resulted in so many deaths with a TV series is outrageous. It does show, however, how low the ICR are prepared to go in their desparate attempts to link 'Darwinism' with any possible kind of evil they can.

Loonies.

[wysiwyg]

That "article" needed a barf alert.

[Aquinasfan]

You're fighting the last war.

If you want to get up to date, check out Access Research Network

[kcpopps]

It is easy to be offensive. It is easy to be dull. This PBS series manages the much more difficult task of being both offensive and dull.

It is hard to imagine the average modern student sitting through a series controlled by nineteen fifties “gee whiz” scientism.

Sadly, Public Television which often imitates television evangelists right down to the pledge drives still does not get it right. Gantry was never dull.

[Junior]

You poor benighted fools.

My wife is joining my church (Roman Catholic) and I am attending classes with her as moral support. The sister who spoke last night pointed out one of the main differences between the Catholic church and some Protestant churches was in their interpretation of the Bible. The Catholics see the Bible as a message from God -- it cannot be taken literally when it comes to history or science. Many Protestants see the Bible as literal historically and scientifically -- even though such views are untenable, to say the least.

The above article strikes me as a desperate cry for attention from a scientifically illiterate perspective. When it comes to scientific understanding most fundamentalist Protestant Christians are indistinguishable from fundamentalist Moslems -- the only difference being the latter are willing to slaughter people to get their point across, whereas the former would simply like to outlaw anything which might contradict orthodoxy.

[donoterase]

This article is among the stupidest things I've ever read.

[dbbeebs]

I was touched to read: "Over half the student body and 35 members of the faculty supported their petition."

My comment is that science isn't decided by majority rule. If the creationists and IDers have alternate theories, they should publish them in peer reviewed biological science journals. They don't, because their ideas don't add up, and certainly don't supplant evolution.

[longshadow]

I was rather disappointed in the factual mistakes in the article as well. Sputnik, for example, was launched in 1957, not 1945. And it's Ted Olson, not Tom Olson. A few minutes of fact checking might have saved them a few errors.

Good catch.

Sloppy "facts" are a sign of sloppy thinking.

[BikerNYC]

Which makes for better trained students better able to compete in a global scientific market: Students who are taught and understand evolution or students who are not so taught because their parents believe it's the devil's work?

If I were a creationist, I would still be damn sure that my children were taught and understood evolution so that if they ever wanted to compete in the scientific marketplace (getting a job as a biologist, for example), they would be qualified and know how to do so.

[babble-on]

wacked right out of their gourds they are

[rwfromkansas]

While I agree that the PBS indoctrination video was wrong and extremely arrogant, I agree that ICR needs to get their facts straight before doing an article. It makes one doubt the other stuff they have then.