Posted on 02/10/2006 10:18:17 AM PST by SirLinksalot
Screening airs evolution versus intelligent design debate
By Alvin Powell
Harvard News Office
This just in from the front lines of the battle between evolution and intelligent design: evolution is losing.
That's the assessment of Randy Olson, a Harvard-trained evolutionary biologist turned filmmaker who explored the debate in a new film, "Flock of Dodos: The Evolution - Intelligent Design Circus," which was screened Monday (Feb. 6) at the Harvard Museum of Natural History.
Evolutionary biologist and filmmaker Randy Olson greets audience members before the screening of his film. Featuring Harvard faculty as well as scenes shot within the museum, the 90-minute film strikes a humorous tone as it explores the debate, poking a bit of fun at both intelligent design and the scientific community.
Though Olson is obviously on the side of evolution, he exposes the shortcomings of both sides. He portrays intelligent designers as energetic, likeable people who compensate for their shaky theory's shortcomings through organization, personal appeal, and money. Scientists, on the other hand, squander their factual edge through indifference and poor communication skills.
But Olson said there's something deeper than the surface face-off between those on the front lines. The efforts to teach intelligent design in the schools is backed by media-savvy, well-financed organizations like the Discovery Institute that aren't afraid to hire high-powered public relations firms to advance their cause.
And, though the position of evolution supporters has been upheld by the U.S. courts - most recently last year in the Dover, Penn., case - Olson predicted that the battle isn't over.
"What's going on is not being called 'a culture discussion,' it's being called 'a culture war,'" Olson said in a panel discussion after the screening.
The film is centered on the debate over teaching evolution in the schools of Olson's home state of Kansas and also covers the Dover, Penn., case.
Despite his scientific background, Olson handles intelligent design proponents gently throughout the film, giving them a chance to air their views. He offers some anti-design examples, like the fact that a rabbit's digestive tract is designed such that vegetation breaks down in a portion that comes after the part that absorbs nutrients, forcing rabbits to digest their food twice to get any value from the food. Rabbits do this by eating pellets that they've excreted to pass them through a second time, prompting the film to ask, "Where's the intelligent design in this?"
But rather than offering a detailed explanation of evolution or a point-by-point rebuttal of intelligent design, "Flock of Dodos" probes how it is that, 150 years after Darwin published his theories and 80 years after the Scopes Monkey Trial, a debate over evolution is raging in this country.
Though he concludes that intelligent design is a theory that has stalled at what he calls the "intuition stage," Olson says in "Flock of Dodos" that it still appears to have the upper hand.
The movie includes several shots of the inside of the Harvard Museum of Natural History, most recognizably the whale skeleton hanging from the ceiling, complete with remnant pelvic bones attesting to a time when the whale's ancestors had legs.
The movie also includes several Harvard-trained scientists, as well as faculty members Karel Liem, the Henry Bryant Bigelow Professor of Ichthyology, and James Hanken, professor of biology and director of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
Olson received his doctorate from Harvard in 1984 and was a professor at the University of New Hampshire from 1988 until 1994, when he left the university shortly after receiving tenure to attend film school at the University of Southern California.
Olson participated in a panel discussion after the film with James McCarthy, Alexander Agassiz Professor of Biological Oceanography, and New York Times science writer Cordelia Dean. The panel was moderated by Douglas Starr, co-director for Boston University's Center for Science and Medical Journalism.
Dean said the debate has remained alive because the scientific community has failed to make the case for evolution to the ordinary person. That is at least partly due to neglect, she said.
"They often see no necessity to do so, and our society as a whole suffers for it," Dean said.
McCarthy said that may be because of the nature of the scientific subculture itself. Scientists are discouraged from drawing too bold conclusions from their research and from not mentioning sometimes multiple caveats on their findings, traits that make it difficult to craft and deliver a clear, persuasive message to the public.
"It's so counter to our training as scientists to give a flip answer or to give an answer without all the caveats," McCarthy said.
as to seeing a UFO, so one account seems to have little value scientifically. It can not be reproducibly observed by independent observers.
Hey, the nerlings were real enough!!! I can prove it!! I have their fingerprints on the Reese's Pieces.
but David was so BIG, I never had a chance. Yeah right.
Gotta sling the right song. Actually, give Goliath so drugs. Then he's more apt to get stoned.
Is that your proof intelligent design?
I didn't know his name was intelligent design.
Him to another--"Please, DO try and keep up with the adults. If you don't try, you'll never grow up."
Heck I like it better that way.
Get enough of these replicators to band together and you have the beginnings of a metabolism and "life".
They were a formidable foe to the Goa 'ulds.
Evolution is the hairbrained theory of a disgruntled Theology student with NO solid evidentiary support.
Believing in Evolution is much more a leap of pure Faith than is believing in God and His Son, Jesus... whose proof is everywhere you look.
;-/
If evolution didn't do it, I can't think of any other cause!
I believe there are certain aspects of evolution that are true--even ID necessitates that. I do believe that something was behind it all though. I can't explain it or "prove" it, but I can believe it. I do believe that there were dinosaurs and other fossil life forms, but to what effect it "all" happened I don't know and "how" it happened I don't know exactly. But I'm comfortable with that. It's the "future" that counts more anyways.
I can't think of any other cause!
We homeful hoboes need help. How about that cause?
Perhaps you could explain what is wrong with the theory of evolution rather than just making empty assertions.
Since I'm not on the Baal, maybe I'll take another Loki at the situation. Maybe it could be someone Hera or O-Thor one. Maybe Isis just anyone, by Jupiter.
ather than just making empty assertions.
What if they were full?
Thanks for the explanation.
But, as it is, the assertion was completely empty, devoid of any evidence or rationality.
It was a "designed" response.
How does one even begin to talk with someone who says such things as the above?
As the saying goes "Never argue with a crazy person". My advice is to just let 666 talk to himself.
And just when I thought I was going to get some credit arond here, you had to throw in that last sentence. Thanks for nothing!!!!!!
Wow. That whole posting is taken staight from the Creationism Handbook of Catch Phrases.
That was your implication with this scintillating statement...
Uhhh - nope, that implication was merely your assumption. And what is more amazing, when I corrected you, you make the same mistake - of assuming again. I hope you realize that in a given situation there is often other explanations beyond your original assumption (thus my pointing out your need to get outside the box).
So would you like a final try? I'll give you 2 hints.
1. I have a high regard for pharmaceuticals (so..not a Scientologist).
2. Try re-reading your post #20.
And if you've lost track, my original point it was in reply to your post #20:
"The most ignorant statement made at FR today."
Hopefully this helps...
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.