Re: [asa] CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS

Yes, it was well worth watching and the video can be seen at the link you provided. It was a program that left no doubt where its sympathies lay but its reporting of what happened seemed to coincide closely to what first-hand watchers like Ted Davis reported on this listserv. My sense was that the ID version portrayed was very much the YEC-tainted version of ID and there are better articulations of ID but this is the version that Dover dealt with.

The graphics were very good and many of the side stories of items like the chromosome fusing and the transitional fossils were very well done.

The sad part was that, as accurate as it was, the face of Christianity did not fare well. Most of us consider what was shown to be an aberration and not the true gospel but for most of the non-Christian public, this was the face of Christianity. They did admit that two of the Dover folks opposing the insertion of ID were church attending people so there was some attempt to portray another side. I can't help but feel that the whole Dover episode served to harden positions on both sides. It may have slowed the encroachment of ID/creationism into public schools somewhat but it isn't clear that it helped anyone understand the issues. Perhaps the best part is that this program did explain some of the science of evolution rather well.

Randy

P.S. Ironically, the mutation of "CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS" from the original "CDESIGN PROPONENTSISTS" has established an ASA-mutation on the phrase which can serve as a marker for future reference. Could be useful for tracking! and for explaining genetic markers.
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Jack
  To: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:05 AM
  Subject: [asa] CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS

  I do not know if this is old news or not, but did anyone see Nova last night? It was a short documentary about the Dover trial.

  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

  It is worth watching if and when they broadcast it again.

  One of the more illuminating and ironic segments regarded the different drafts of Pandas and People. The lawyers for the plaintiff were trying to prove that ID was just a repackaging of what had previously been called creationism. One of the pieces of evidence was text from comparing pre and post Edwards editions of Pandas and People. After the Edwards decision the editors wanted to take "creationism" out of the book. One of the witnesses for the plaintiff found a couple of example where creationism/creator was changed to ID/design, with otherise identical wording. But the most humorous and ironic example was an attempt to remove the word creationist with the words design proponents. But something went wrong in the editing, and the actual wording in the post-Edwards draft was cdesign proponentsists. So, unkowingly, they created a "transitional form", and clear evidence that the authors of Pandas equate ID with creationism.

  I had never heard that little detail before, and thought it was worth mentioning here.

  I think CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS would make a great bumper sticker.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 14 19:57:55 2007