Pharyngula

Darwin’s Deadly Legacy: what tripe.

Well, I just watched the much-ballyhooed Darwin’s Deadly Legacy, with D. James Kennedy. Here are a few quick comments.

  • The opening scene was perfect. Kennedy walked onto a stage decorated with flasks and beakers and graduated cylinders full of brightly colored water. One had a small flame going under it; the graduated cylinder was bubbling. It was practically an admission that all of the science in the show was going to be fake.

  • In a show purportedly about science, how desperate do you have to be to give Ann Coulter that much face time? Triple points for irony, though, when Coulter calls Eugenie Scott a “hack.”

  • The first half was all Nazis and Columbine. No mention of Hitler’s Christianity, of course, everything was driven by “Darwinism.”

  • The second half was all about the “crumbling theory of evolution.” All the old chestnuts were tossed out. We got “just a theory”, 747s being spontaneously assemble while monkeys write Shakespeare, Behe babbling about “molecular machines,” Strobel saying there were no transitional fossils, Nebraska Man, teach both theories, and that famous paleontologist, Ann Coulter, telling us that all forms of life suddenly appeared in the Cambrian explosion…and did you know you’ll get sued if you mention the Cambrian in a classroom?

  • Francis Collins is still in the program, in the second half. His contribution was to help Kennedy argue that evolution is inadequate, that “man is a special creature,” and go on and on about how complex the genome is. Collins is back on my shit list. He may not have supported the Hitler connection, but he is a creationist dupe arguing against scientific theories.

  • There were a couple of times when the collection plate was passed. Kennedy offers a copy of Tom DeRosa’s book, Evolution’s Fatal Fruit, for any donation. Go ahead, give ‘em a dollar and tell them to mail it to you. The address is:
    D. James Kennedy
    Box 555
    Ft Lauderdale, FL 33302
    Or call them toll free at 1-888-334-9680.

It was a truly vile exhibition, the fans of this kind of crap will eat it up, and man, is it ever easy for these guys to lie.

Comments

  1. #1 Ted Bowman
    September 14, 2008

    “claims that directly contradict established scientific theories” is an interesting play on words. How, exactly, does a theory become “established” while still a theory, supposing, of course, a theory is still an unproven guess? The need to prove a point, evidently moves even the brightest of thinkers to hypothetically impossible conclusions. Why not admit going in, my evolutionary friend, you rule out from the outset anything other than random chance as the only acceptable explanation for the existence of plant and animal life. PS: I intentionally mispelled several words to see if you can resist attacking me instead of the simple argument I post.
    One last query: Why is it, evolutionists consistently fail to differentiate between microevolution (which no one can deny-the English spotted moth being an excellent example) and macroevolution (which would suggest the English spotted moth, having changed color from white to black, is now, somehow something other than a moth)? Just curious.

  2. #2 blf
    September 14, 2008

    How, exactly, does a theory become “established” while still a theory, supposing, of course, a theory is still an unproven guess?

    Theory of Gravity? “Theory” does not mean what you are supposing it means.

  3. #3 Owlmirror
    September 14, 2008

    One last query: Why is it, evolutionists consistently fail to differentiate between microevolution (which no one can deny-the English spotted moth being an excellent example) and macroevolution (which would suggest the English spotted moth, having changed color from white to black, is now, somehow something other than a moth)?

    Because the planet on which evolution has been occurring is 4.5 billion years old. Given that there are only about a few hundred genetic mutations per generation, we would actually expect that it would take many, many generations in separated populations before the accumulated mutations in each population was sufficient that the two populations would have become different species.