Posted on 11/20/2007 10:27:07 AM PST by CottShop
PBS Airs False Facts in its "Inherit the Wind" Version of the Kitzmiller Trial (Updated)
UPDATE: A tenth PBS blunder is addressed, where PBS makes the false insinuation that intelligent design is no more scientific than astrology. Scroll down to read more.
More than 50 years ago two playwrights penned a fictionalized account of the 1920s Scopes Trial called "Inherit the Wind" that is now universally regarded by historians as inaccurate propaganda. Last night PBS aired its "Judgment Day: Intelligent Design" documentary, which similarly promotes propaganda about the 2005 Kitzmiller trial and intelligent design (ID). Most of the misinformation in "Judgment Day" was corrected by ID proponents long ago. To help readers sift the fact from the fiction, here are links to articles rebutting some of PBS's most blatant misrepresentations:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/pbs_airs_its_inherit_the_wind.html
(Excerpt) Read more at evolutionnews.org ...
Please.
Vestigiality describes homologous characters of organisms which have lost all or most of their original function in a species through evolution... Vestigial structures are often called vestigial organs, although many of them are not actually organs. These are typically in a degenerate, atrophied, or rudimentary condition,Did I miss anything? This definition does NOT fit the human appendix. Read the CNN article. And thanks for the trip down high school biology BS memory lane.Wikipedia
"When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it's a wonder I can think at all." --Paul Simon
Please expound.
>> The fundamental problem with Behe’s definition of science is that it removes the necessity of falsifiablity from the process. <<
We all know that geologists, archaeologists and paleontologists have time machines to test them for falsification.
SETI is looking for a signal that has two attributes: the type is known to be a product of human activity; it has never been observed in the absence of human activity. If such a signal is observed, the first thing that will happen is that efforts will be made to find a natural, non-human cause. Pulsars are a case in point.
ID has no algorithm for determining that a finite string is the result of an evolutionary algorithm or the result of divine intervention or the result of intervention by space aliens. We could detect strings in a genome that are inconsistent with common descent, and I can recall a few years ago, seeing predictions made on these threads that such strings would be found.
In fact, the opposite has been found. Molecular biology has uncovered vast arrays of data consistent with common descent, and nothing indicating intervention to produce a species that could not have evolved via descent with modification. No pig genes in the asparagus.
***If the geological model is so wrong, it should be easy to disprove.***
And, why is that? Do you have a credible explaination as to why wrong theories, models, etc. are easy to disprove?
Besides, you completely missed my point. Just because something can predict something doesn’t make it right. Unfortunately, macro evolution is impossible to prove since you can’t replicate it in a lab and you won’t be around long enough to observe it in nature. In this regard, it is a dead science. Evolution is no better than any other of what we now regard as false theories, pseudo-sciences, etc. LIKE Astrology.
And, what many scientists today call micro evolution, is really an example of an intelligent design. Before you answer, see if you can figure out why I might say that.
Great illustration of elitist thought.
Funny how evolutionists get away with origins being outside the scope of evolution, yet use it as an atheistic evangelism tool.
>> Molecular biology has uncovered vast arrays of data consistent with common descent, and nothing indicating intervention to produce a species that could not have evolved via descent with modification. <<
Wow, you might want to enter the 21st century. That notion was struck down a couple of decades ago.
>> Oh, and string theory has made predictions that are testable. <<
Actually string theory predicts undetectable dimensions that when they are tested for with new machinery, are simply reworked to be smaller than the new detection methods can detect. The theory always runs just ahead of the experiment to prevent falsification.
I’m sorry, was that relevant to my post in any way?
You’re saying that ID is religion posing as science, while evolution is the same.
Nope, that wouldn't solve the problem at all.
Yes, ID is religion posing as science.
No, evolution is not religious.
Your first post is still irrelevant.
How could this have escaped the notice of the scientific community?? Please provide evidence.
Sounds about right.
>> Unfortunately, macro evolution is impossible to prove since you can’t replicate it in a lab and you won’t be around long enough to observe it in nature. <<
Sorry, but there are legitimate scientific endeavors that cannot be brought into a laboratory and tested. There are other methods to do science than laboratory falsification. Evolution and ID fall outside of direct falsification, as well as geology, paleontology, cosmology, archeology, and anything else that is too big, too far away, or happened too long ago to bring into a lab.
Unfortunately, both ID and Evolution proponents blindly accept Popperian falsification as the only legitimate scientific process out of ignorance. This only serves to muddy the discourse on the subject.
Its your religious belief?
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.