Posted on 08/27/2006 9:39:31 AM PDT by IpaqMan
This groundbreaking documentary from Dr. Kennedy and Coral Ridge Ministries, looks into the chilling social impact of Darwin's theory of evolution -- and the mounting evidence that Darwin had it wrong on the origin of life.
This 60 minute special featuring Ann Coulter, author of Godless; Richard Weikart, author of From Darwin to Hitler, Lee Strobel, author of The Case for a Creator; Jonathan Wells, author of Icons of Evolution; Phillip Johnson, author of Darwin on Trial; Michael Behe, author of Darwin’s Black Box, and Ian Taylor, author of In the Minds of Men will show why evolution is a bad idea that should be discarded into the dustbin of history.
I scanned the show quickly to see if my recording was okay and saw many segments of Ann Coulter commenting on evolution and its problems.
If you miss the show, the Coral Ridge Ministries is offering DVDs and VHS tapes of the show.
There are podcasts from the past couple of weeks that comment on this topic in detail.
They do a good job showing the current problems with Darwinism especially for up and coming scientists.
I was flipping by and I saw the Ann Coulter bit. Science nowadays begins with one "fact": God does nor exist.
In Annie's book she goes into great detail on the whole evolution issue. About 3 or 4 chapters at the end of the book.
Thanks for the link.
Evos seem stuck in their paradigm and will scream loudly at anyone who dares attack their institutional shibboleth.
Bump.
The blind leading the blind. I'll make a point to miss it.
Watched this today. Really an excellent program. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it.
Well, you have already missed the point.
Though the eye suddenly appears in the fossil record too.
There's a point to this? I guess you could call pimping DVDs a point.
I love it how IDers say they only want to promote "alternatives" to evolution. Yet all the primary bankrollers of their efforts are theocrats. There's no alternative they want tought other than the one that is blatantly obvious to them.
Coulter used to be good for conservatives. Now she just goes into every book thinking "OMG Malkin is getting more press than me. How can I top myself so the attention comes back to MEEEE!?!?!?!?"
This theocrat thing is a Democrat smear-word If you and they want to see real theocrats just look at the guys in the mid-east. Falwell et al. just want to
return things to where they were a hundred years ago, with a Protestant Establishment in charge of the country. The guys in the middle-east want to turn back the clock to the 7th Century.
Oh believe me, I would much rather live in a world run by Jerry Falwell than Ahmaninejad. Doesn't mean I can't pick a third option and doesn't mean that "theocrat" isn't a technically correct term.
Theocrat "technically" means a government like that of Israel under the "judges" or under the priests and religious leaders of the Jews after the return from exile, or it could mean something like the extreme claims of the medieval popes, or a place like Zwingli's Zurich or Calvin's Geneva, or "the Puritan Oligarchy" of New England, or Utah under the Mormons. In each case, the relgious order is the dominate power, both spiritually or materially. Just look around you and say that the power and wealth of the "religious right" is comparable. It is as laughable as pretending that George Bush is the second coming of Oliver Cromwell.
Very well. What term would you use for the type of government advocated by what I deemed "theocrats"?
From what I can tell it would be the government of the United States as it existed in the time of Tocqueville. I am not going to coin a name, but it is the government described not only by Tocqueville but by Mr. Justice Story. In his
"A Familiar Exposition of the Constitution of the United States. "(184O) It is a view that Ed Meese applauds in his foreard to the 1997 Regnery edition. But I will venture a name: a Republic-- of a type unknown to European liberalism, one in which religion and government existed in harmony.
Hmm. Since I have a short attention span, I did not finish Tocqueville in college. I have something to read now.
But this is off track. All I can say is my 'faith' in Ann Coulter took a nosedive with Godless. She is more interested in making headlines than delivering strong arguments. She is not fit to hold Thomas Sowell's water.
I caught part of the show last sunday.
On Monday the Springdale, Arkansas newspaper had an editorial racking this particular program over the coals.
*** She is more interested in making headlines than delivering strong arguments. ***
I love the sound of Liberals screaming in the morning. Sounds like....victory!
Ad hominem, and just plain incorrect. Whatever floats your boat, pal.
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.