Judgment Day - Intelligent Design on Trial

I've just finished this video and as a Christian I have to say I was embarrassed by the case presented by the school board. This is a video more on how not to present your case. This is a partial review and I'm still thinking over what was presented. The video is very good, definitely one sided. There is one point where they use the example of a mouse trap for disproving "Irreducible Complexity". They show the mouse trap as it was intended to be used, for catching mice. The point being a mouse trap only works if it's made all at once. One scientist in an attempt to prove this to be false, removes parts and says it can also be used as a tie clip. That's true, but then it wouldn't be useful for what it was designed to do....to catch mice. Some systems cannot evolve, they have to work from the beginning.Something that caught my attention was the judgement against the school district. The parents and lawyers who sued the district were awarded over $1,000,000 in damages and legal fees. They won their right to ban intelligent design, but at the cost of taking money away from the school district. Thomas More Law Center, lawyers for the school district did not accept any fees, but the parents who sued and the ACLU got paid. Was it really worth the cost of suing?

Dover, PA, is a quiet town that could describe Anywhere, USA. Persons unknown burn a school mural, a labor of love from an artistically gifted student showing the evolution of man from ape to human. The town elects a new school board led by two creationists who have less than stellar interactive skills. They attempt to introduce intelligent design (I. D.) into the science class first through a book and through a statement to be read by every science teacher. When science teachers rebel and the school board meetings turn in to shout fests, it doesn't take long for both sides to line up for a legal battle that will attract observers from around the world. Both sides are confident they will prevail.Since television cameras were not allowed in the courtroom, Nova recreates the testimony of several witnesses for both sides. The complainants must prove that I. D. is not science and must also prove that the intent of the board was to introduce creationism to the classroom. The defense will attempt to prove that intelligent design is a scientific theory just as evolution is, and has nothing to do with God or creationism.The viewer also gets a rudimentary education in Evolution and Darwin's theory of natural selection through photos and graphic illustration. (Science class should have been this interesting)! Proponents of intelligent design have their advocates who are interviewed. Their main claim is a concept called "irreducible complexity," which they attempt to explain through an example of the mechanics of the flagellum. They argue that the flagellum is such a complex structure that it could not have developed by evolution but by an intelligent agent. Eliminating any of its parts renders it useless.The case for the defense soon falls apart for a number of reasons: Only three of their eight witnesses eventually show up because of dissension over how the defense should be argued. Fossil remains of an animal in transition from the sea to land are found, thus blowing the suggestion that evolution has unexplained gaps or lacks "transitional" fossil evidence. One witness disproves irreducible complexity, and the defense's star witness, Michael Behe has to concede that his own definition of science could include astrology. Worse, school board witnesses contradict themselves from their depositions to their testimony, and demonstrate no knowledge of intelligent design or evolution. The smoking gun is found in documents from the company that produced a book based on I. D. called "Of Pandas and People." Whole passages of the book are shown to have remained the same, with intelligent design substituted for creationism shortly after a landmark case of 1987 threw creationism out of the classroom.The town has been polarized with relationships strained or friendships broken. The town votes the entire school board out of office four days after the trial ends. Lauri Lebo, local journalist, follows the trial and is firmly opposed to I. D. while her father is in favor of it. He will die three weeks after without reconciliation with his daughter regarding evolution. William Buckingham returns to his characteristic lack of composure over the judge's decision accusing him attending "Clown College" and missing the Constitution when it was taught in law school. Buckingham lacks even a college education. The judge suggests the district attorney investigate Alan Bonsell and William Buckingham for perjury. Death threats are made against Tammy Kitzmiller and Judge Jones. He finds that the complainants have proven all of their allegations and other communities that planned to introduce I. D. into their curricula will put that decision on hold. However, the very teacher-popular "dragonfly" biology book, so named because it has a picture of one on its cover, will limit the mention of evolution in subsequent editions. The town of Dover will have to heal from the fissures of opposing beliefs, and intelligent design will look for new challenges and victories somewhere else, somewhere Dover the rainbow.Nova, a program of the Public Broadcasting System, brings you a factual account of the events without speculation or favoritism. It is what some of us wish that more of television would become, something that entertains and informs.This is highly recommended. You might say this program actually gets better over time.P. S. The United States of America is the only civilized nation in the world where evolution is considered a matter of controversy. One third to almost one half of Americans believe in creationism and reject evolution.P. P. S. Most creationists believe that evolutionists are atheist. This is a myth. To William Buckingham this was talking out of both sides of their mouths. It was a paradigm he could not resolve.P. P. P. S. Charles Darwin was born February 12, 1809, the same day as Abraham Lincoln. When he started his discovery at age 22 he was a firm believer in the creation. Few people have had such profound influence on knowledge: Aristotle, Kopernik, Gallileo, Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein. Darwin is one of them.

This is an exceptional and engaging 2 hour dramatization (+ interviews ) of the debate over ID in a high school in Dover Pennsylvania. For those who have seen the 8 hour PBS series Evolution, this is a nice companion piece, and much more riveting than the final disc of that set which explores the same controversy regarding the topic of 'equal time' for non scientific explanations or the origins of life in a HS science class.I had heard quite a bit about this trial and read Miller's book 'Finding Darwin's God' before coming to this video, but was still unprepared for many aspects of the ID camp revealed here.Throughout the course of this film it becomes increasingly clear that ID is nothing more than a rewording of Creationism (CDesign Proponentists)and the Discover Institute (who Michael Behe is intimately associated with)nothing more than a think tank for pushing their cultural agenda.My opinion about Behe changed considerably upon seeing this film, and I have difficulty understanding how the Discovery Institute differs significantly from well-scorned groups like the Institute for Creation Research. This documentary could have been greatly improved with the input of members of the Discovery Institute or Michael Behe, but neither of them appear (in fact, the whole ID side is mostly unrepresented in the film.) Is NOVA simply too liberal or biased a program to appear on? Given that ID has been touted as such an important new theory, ready to usher in a new paradigm of scientific thought; it seems remarkable that none of these scientists are willing to come forth on a program that does a good a job as possible at being even handed.I return at last to that question of Behe...and I guess I am more concerned about this matter than the other. When I visit local bookstores, I can find scattered about the science section several anti-evolution, anti-science books that are in general not written by scientists. Behe seems the one person to not fall into this camp--seemingly an honest scientists who just can't see how Evolution can explain all the data (a legitimate sort of claim for an honest scientist to make); and here is where the film is most condemning, since it becomes impossible to perceive Behe like this anymore. Those who are finding his books convincing (and we trust the scientific communities to honestly interpret the otherwise inaccessible body of scientific literature for us), should pay special attention to this film because it gives evidence for ulterior motives that are hard to dismiss.When all is said and done, 'Judgment Day' is a strong documentary that touches on much more than science. It is about the people of Dover, it is about the way certain organizations try to change culture, and it also makes for a great story....and one glance at the Discovery Institutes's web site tells us with certainty that Nova will have a sequel on their hands shortly.

Creationists who complain that 'Inherit the Wind' distorts the Scopes vs Tennessee trial will have nothing to complain about in 'Judgment Day's account of Kitzmiller vs Dover. Here is a concise, accurate, and vastly entertaining account of the trial, using news footage, interviews with the key players [most of the ID crowd opt out], and re-enactments of actual courtroom scenes (a la Scopes) with actors who bear more than passing resemblance to the principals. High points include the leading ID-creationism expert denying (thrice) the mountain of evidence on the evolution of the immune system piled before him on the witness stand, to the tune of 'It's not good enough for me.' We see as well Ken Miller's reducibly complex mousetrap / tie bar, the Dover school board perjuring themselves to cover up their religious motivations and behind the scenes scheming, and Judge Jones point by point demolition of the legal pretense that ID is anything other than old-time creationism backed by a lot of special interests.The DVD will be useful to secondary and post-secondary teachers of history of science and current events classes that want to "teach the controversy," the controversy being between those who want honest science education in the US, versus those who don't. Supplement with Kenneth Miller's book 'Only a Theory' and Humes 'Monkey Girl'.Someone should write a play about the collapse of ID, perhaps with a title from Luke 14: "For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, saying This man began to build, and was not able to finish."