[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[antiRepublicrat]

The Wedge Strategy by the book in its religious mission to bring more people to God, specifically “Phase II. Publicity & Opinion-making,” subsection “Publicity Materials.”

They are going nowhere in the science circles, but the propaganda aspect has been in full gear over the last few years.

[allmendream]

There is no hostility inherent against the Bible among those that accept the scientific theory of evolution by means of natural selection of genetic variation.

Is the Pope against the Bible? According to your nutball source he is.

“This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.” Pope Benedict XVI

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

As if atheists cared about science.

[steve-b]

Tyrannosaur 'Missing Link' Among New Dinosaurs From China

[stormer]

Wow! Fifty-two minutes of Tee Vee certainly ought to be able to shift a 150 year old scientific paradigm. Speaking of which, I took a look at the trailer, and the production (of it, at least) appears to be fairly well done. Funny though, no where in it do they mention that it's not a straight history, but instead an insidious attempt to advance religious propaganda - typical creationist deceit.

I would certainly be the first to say that poor Charles made a few mistakes along the way, but the overarching fundamentals of his work are still relevant and have provided the foundation on which some of the most civilization's most profound science has been built. But need I point out that other advancements have had similar trajectories - the Wright brothers come to mind.

[Vaduz]

Charles Darwin’s footsteps lead to UFO ...

[Non-Sequitur]

A new movie is intended to shake large numbers out of their evolution-based complacency and hostility toward the God of the Bible.

So....then it's a comedy?

[Constitution Day]

Thanks for the heads up, I’ll be sure to avoid this flight of fancy.

[edweena]

There is a simple requirement to be met for the theory of intelligent design to drive out the theory of evolution as the working hypothesis for those doing scientific research.

Scientists who believe that the intelligent design theory is correct must come up with hypotheses based on the tenets of intelligent design that advance our knowledge beyond the current limits and prove these hypotheses are true with repeatable experiments. It’s not enough to argue that our current knowledge can be explained by both theories, nor is it enough to pick holes in the theory of evolution. They need to show the superiority of intelligent design in expanding scientific research beyond the limits imposed by the theory of evolution.

For working scientists, one theory or the other is just a handy perspective. If you can show them how intelligent design is holding them back from advancing their understanding of their discipline, they will be happy to adopt a new frame.

[tacticalogic]

Is this thread what we might expect a science classroom discussion of the “strengths and weaknesses of the theory of evolution” to look like?

[Radix]

I saw a program a couple of weeks ago on ABC. I was not home, and the television there in this work environment was simply on with nobody watching it.

There is a show that is animated that is clearly designed for a child audience.

The characters in this cartoon were completely disrespecting the notion that there is any possibility of Intelligent design.

I did not know the name of this cartoon, and I had no idea that such Programs were actually being broadcast so blatantly. This was a Saturday.

It was actually outrageous. I saw about 10 minutes of this children directed propaganda.......

[Glenn]

Fools.