For me, I reject “intelligent design” for the same reason I reject the theory of evolution as a whole. Simply put, the physical evidence for evolution does not exist. Evolution, whether through God’s guiding hand or through random natural selection over eons of time, is a theory without a foundation of fact.
Don’t get me wrong; there are evidences for evolution, by which I mean change, for all sorts of species within their own gene pools. “Micro evolution,” such as variations in, say, canines, wolves, dogs, foxes, coyotes, I can buy.
But “macro evolution,” that fish can become mammals, canines can become felines, reptiles can become birds, is a huge leap of faith over an incredibly empty chasm, filled with all sorts of theory devoid of substance. In short, there are no transitional forms, no intermediates, no “missing links.”
To help silence critics such as myself, the supporters of Darwinism have used the powerful weapon of smearing their opponents as kooks, wacko fanatical Bible thumpers, who are totally irrational, untrustworthy and mentally unstable.
The classic example of this is the Hollywood version of the famous Scopes Monkey Trial, the movie “Inherit the Wind.” In it, the calm, rational science teacher and his highly logical attorney are victimized by opponents who, aided by a bigoted judge, exclude all evidence, rig the trial, rant about God and the Bible and threaten to tar and feather anyone who dares question the biblical story of creation.
This propaganda piece has been used repeatedly through the years as an historically accurate portrayal, shown to school children and all sorts of audiences as an example of the kind of people who support evolution and the kind who don’t.
Fortunately for the historian, the trial has a written transcript and, not surprisingly, the Hollywood story is yet another example of the BIG LIE.
Examples: In the movie, the prosecution (the loons) seek to block the defense’s efforts to introduce Darwin’s texts as evidence. The bigoted judge agrees and excludes them. The prosecution, led by William Jennings Bryan (different name in the movie) is shown as completely unfamiliar with Darwin’s famous works, notably “The Origin of Species.”
Fact: It was Bryan himself who introduced Darwin’s works into the trial. He was in reality very familiar with them, and quoted extensively from them both in court and in his writings. This man, portrayed as a nut-case Bible-thumper, was in fact highly educated on the issue and was a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
In the movie, Bryan says, “The way of scientism [a deliberately mangled word to make him look even more backward] is the way of darkness.” What he actually said in the trial was “Give science a fact and it is not only invincible, but of incalculable service to man.”
In perhaps the grossest distortion in the movie, the judge refuses to allow any of the eminent scientists the defense had brought to court an opportunity to testify.
In fact, Clarence Darrow, the most famous attorney of his day and a militant atheist, was allowed a whole parade of prominent scientists as witnesses. Their testimony alone takes up 54 pages of the transcript. However, when Bryan sought to cross-examine them, Darrow objected. His witnesses were never subjected to cross-examination; Darrow had them instead make written affidavits for submission to an appeals court, thus avoiding cross-examination completely.
In the movie, Darrow subjects Bryan to a withering cross-examination, which is accurate. What is not shown is that Bryan did so on the understanding he would then be allowed to do the same to Darrow. Darrow successfully avoided this by a clever trick, as you’ll see.
In the movie, the meek science teacher and his attorney sit on pins and needles awaiting the jury’s verdict. Gloom settles in when the “guilty” verdict is read, while the fundamentalist prosecutors rejoice.
Fact is, Darrow himself, after his cross examination of Bryan, had his client change his plea from not guilty to guilty thereby ending the trial and avoiding at all costs any cross examination of himself by Bryan.
This is just a small sample of the differences between the truth of the trial and the Hollywood smear job against Christianity.
“Inherit the Wind” and Darwinian evolution actually have much in common. Both are highly popular but when you dig in and see the actual facts after sifting through the mountains of rhetoric surrounding them, discover they both are built on foundations of sand and wishful thinking. “Inherit the Wind” is a deception, a hoax, a crock, guilty of the very crime it is supposedly about, suppressing evidence harmful to one’s pet cause.
The bigger question: If evolution is so irrefutable, why all this effort to block and censor views or theories to the contrary?
Ira Hansen is a lifelong resident of Sparks and owner of Ira Hansen and Sons Plumbing. You can reach him at irahansen@sbcglobal.net.
Post a Comment