The following is a table which helps to show how Evolution
portrays both the supporters and opposition to evolutionary theory.
As seen, every individual who opposes evolution is a Young Earth Creationist
(YEC) and in all cases but one, that person is somewhere along the series
explicitly portrayed or described as anti-intellectual. In reading
the testimony of students who support evolution, they are portrayed as
very intellectual, and a common theme in their testimony is that they don’t
want to be associated with opposition to evolution which they characterize
very strongly as anti intellectual. Students hearing this testimony
from very intellectual-religious students would feel very compelled to
follow in their footsteps and believe in evolution to be more intellectual
and appear “sheik” to the world. In the 3 cases (#2, 19, 26) where
there is interaction with opposers of evolution in an intellectual manner,
these people are somehow qualifed–either by the narrator or by the depiction–as
psuedo intellectual or psuedo-anti intellectual as these individuals are
also characterized in some way as anti intellectual. In cases 2 and
26 their arguments countered by the narrator or other purely intellectual
supporters of evolution who are interviewed.
portrays both the supporters and opposition to evolutionary theory.
As seen, every individual who opposes evolution is a Young Earth Creationist
(YEC) and in all cases but one, that person is somewhere along the series
explicitly portrayed or described as anti-intellectual. In reading
the testimony of students who support evolution, they are portrayed as
very intellectual, and a common theme in their testimony is that they don’t
want to be associated with opposition to evolution which they characterize
very strongly as anti intellectual. Students hearing this testimony
from very intellectual-religious students would feel very compelled to
follow in their footsteps and believe in evolution to be more intellectual
and appear “sheik” to the world. In the 3 cases (#2, 19, 26) where
there is interaction with opposers of evolution in an intellectual manner,
these people are somehow qualifed–either by the narrator or by the depiction–as
psuedo intellectual or psuedo-anti intellectual as these individuals are
also characterized in some way as anti intellectual. In cases 2 and
26 their arguments countered by the narrator or other purely intellectual
supporters of evolution who are interviewed.
|
|
Support? |
Scientific/ Religious? |
|
Earth Creationist) |
as intellectual or anti intellectual? |
| 1. Scene: High Mills Church Congregation |
Oppose | Religious | Opens with prayer. Then singing and clapping in church about doubts of evolution, giving money to hear creationist speaker, creationist speaker. |
Yes | Anti intellectual– depicted singing their doubts of evolutionary theory |
| 2. Scene: Creationist Ken Ham |
Oppose | Generally religious– he makes one scientific statement saying there’s evidence for flood. This is immediately countered by switching scenes to a Wheaton geology class discussing evidence for old strata ages. |
Preaching to church–though logical, some of what he says seems hard to follow |
Yes | Psuedo-anti-intellectual. He’s not looking stupid, though his preaching in church is certainly not portrayed in a way to make him look intellectual. Treatment of his scientific statements seem to cast doubt on his intellectual credibility |
| 3. Interview: Creationist Ken Ham |
Oppose | Religious | Talking about if the Bible is trustworthy. If the Bible gets its science right and its implications for morality. |
Yes | Psuedo-intellectual, but immediately called a “defender of faith” after interview–perhaps an anti intellectual connotation. |
| 4. Scene: Wheaton Geology class |
Support | Scientific | Explaining to a student scientific method for dating a rock layer. |
No | Intellectual–shown discussing geological explanation of rock strata. |
| 5. Interview: Nathan Baird, senior Wheaton College earth sciences undergraduate. |
Support | Scientific | Talks about how his indoctrination with creationism as a child and why he now believes in evolution. |
No | Intellectual |
| 6. Scene: Baird Family dinner |
Both | Both | Father and son are discussing over family dinner whether son should believe in and investigate evolutionary ideas. |
Both. | Both |
| Nathan Baird |
Support | Scientific–says evolution is best fit to data |
Talking to dad, defending his belief in evolution |
No | Intellectual, says Christians should understand evolution and not run at the sight of it, which is what he says happens a lot. Says he wants to have beliefs which hold up in the world. |
| Mr. Baird (Nathan’s Father) |
Oppose | Religious–makes no scientific arguments. Says Darwin’s theory was meant to be an assault on Genesis |
Talking to son, trying to tell son why he shouldn’t believe in evolution |
Yes. Says he believes in “Day Creation.” |
Makes some cogent arguments but overall portrayed as anti intellectual. Says man’s wisdom is foolishness so evolution is wrong. Uses very unscientific words such as “slimy thing,” and then appeals to mother while stumbling for words. |
| 7. Interview: Nathan Baird’s mother, Patti Baird |
Oppose–afraid evolution will cause her son to lose faith |
Religious | Talking about Nathan, saying she likes her church because pastor preaches Word of God and that’s why church is growing. |
Yes | Pseudo-Intellectual, but Nathan (strongly intellectual) describes her as afraid of evolution and she appears anti intellectual |
| 8. Interview: Nathan Baird, Wheaton College student |
Support | Scientific | Talking about his dad at home |
No | Wants his dad to have an open mind |
| 9. Interview: Nathan Baird’s Father |
Oppose | Religious | Talking about son at home |
Yes | Anti intellectual. Sounds more articulate than in the dinner. says Nathan shouldn’t investigate creation because you can’t understand miracles |
| 10. Interview: Emi Hayashi, Wheaton college biochemistry major |
Support | Scientifc / Religious |
Says in high school they discounted Bible, and at church they discounted evolution. Says she defended evolution because YEC’s said it “HAD” to be that way, and she wanted it to be more of an intellectual debate |
No | Intellectual–studying to be a veterinarian, bio major |
| 11. Scene: 5 or 6 Wheaton College Students at table |
Support | Scientific | Students talking about beliefs about the nature of adam within an evolutionary paradigm and discussing their beliefs |
No | Intellectual |
| 12. Interview: Walter Hearn, biochemist |
Support | Scientific | Talking about how when he said people should consider that natural processes could have produced adam and eve. Tells how conservative Christian paper stirred up trouble after he spoke |
No | intellectual–the scene shows clips from the paper with clips from “fundamentalists”…this opposition in the paper is completely religious |
| 13. Scene: Keith Miller lecture |
Support | Scientific | Giving keynote address on symposium on fossil record and geological history. Shown talking about fossil record–narrator says his message is that “all the evidence … compels us to accept the evolutionary theory in full” |
No | Intellectual |
| 14. Interview: Keith Miller, scientist, Kansas State University |
Support | Scientific | Shown talking about how he was asked to come to Wheaton to give his strong support for evolutionary theory as an evangelical Christian. |
No | Intellectual |
| 15. Scene: Female student at Keith Miller Lecture |
Questioning | Religious question |
Shown asking what it means to be made in image of God. |
?? | Intellectual, but she’s stumbling with words |
| 16. Scene: Female student at Keith Miller Lecture |
Questioning | Scientific/Religious question |
Asking about how God made Adam human. |
?? | Intellectual, but she is chewing gum and looks very casual, not articulate |
| 17. Interview: Derek Chignell, Wheaton professor |
Support | Scientific | Said it was great that Keith Miller supported evolution. |
No | Intellectual |
| 18. Interview: Emi Hayashi, Wheaton college biochemistry major |
Support | Scientific | Says it’s great that you can believe in evolution but doesn’t want to be labeled a liberal–says she came to Wheaton so she could think, implies you can’t think. Says science can’t have that many idiots. Says it’s laughable when a Christian laughs at scientists who believe in evolution. Says you should take data first and then interpret it in light of Bible. Says its expected at Wheaton that you believing 6 day creation. Says most Wheaton people believe that because sunday school teachers say evolution is bad and of the devil so they don’t believe it. Narrator says Biblical literalism no longer defines her faith. |
No | Intellectual–studying to be a veterinarian, bio major |
| 19. Interview: Peter Slayton |
Oppose | Scientific / Religious |
Explaining his views. Does say he hasn’t yet been convinced by the evidence. But also says that says he accepts YEC only because it’s wha the grew up with: “If I had to pick a side I’d probably pick young earth creationism just because that’s what I grew up with that’s what I’m comfortable with and so far nothing with evolution has been able to convince me, like soundly, that this is the way it happened.” lose lose–you can’t win because if you accept evolution, you look bat to YEC’s, if you accept creation, you look less in eyes of world. |
Yes | Intellectual / Anti intellectual. He says his views are based on evidence and wha the’s comfortable with. He’s described as an anthropology major, but also singer, YEC, and “Texan born in Bible Belt.” He is repeatedly shown singing throughout episode. Should be called psuedo-intellectual. |
| 20. Scene / Interview: Beth Stubing, Wheaton college student; daughter of missionaries |
Support | Scientific / Religious |
says she’s bugged by people who don’t know much about the issues threaten her by saying she doesn’t believe Bible if she believes evolution. Says she didn’t grow up with baggage of 6 day creation |
No | Intellectual–called a premed student |
| 21. Scene: Wheaton students sitting in a room |
Support | Scientific | talking bout views–Nathan Baird and Emi talk |
No | Intellectual |
| 22. Scene: Ken Ham and singing leader looking at Noah’s Ark model in a church |
Oppose | Religious | Yes | Anti intellectual: Narrator says that for Ken Ham “frequently repeated fundamentalist expression still holds true: ‘God said it, I believe it, that settles it'”. |
|
| 23. Interview: Creationist Ken Ham |
Oppose | Religious | Says he’s concerned about implications of evolution for how students think–says it takes purpose and meaning out of life |
Yes | Intellectual |
| 34. Interview: Clare McKinney, science teacher at Jefferson High School |
Support | Scientific | Says she grew up believing Bible was word of God, and as a teenager she became interested in science and didn’t believe Bible stories she grew up with. Said taking on the curriculum will cause no one to come out a victor. Says students who question evolution and promote evolution don’t understand difference between science and non-science, says that she didn’t do a good job showing that you can’t discuss a supernatural creator in science class. Says students don’t understand. Says its hard for students because they’re dealing with faith issues, and that its hard for them to deal with parents because parents don’t even want them to listen to it. Says evolution and religious are complementary and fit together for her. Says students need people who will listen to them. Says she wouldn’t teach if she couldn’t teach evolution because evolution is a major pillar of biology and couldn’t in good conscience not teach evolution to her kids in science classroom. |
No | Intellectual |
| 25. Interview: Stephen Randak, Jefferson High School staff |
Support | Scientific | Says students who oppose evolution don’t understand difference between science and non-science. Says they were good students. Says this could be the new creationists gameplan–they use students to get evolution out because they can’t in the courts. Said he spoke with Eugenie Scott for help, and Scott said this probably hadn’t happened b4. says he’s afraid it will happen elsewhere and teachers may feel sympathy and creation science gain ground. Says students don’t understand science classes–and that science must be supported by evidence, accepted by peer review, must be testable and repeatable. |
No | Intellectual |
| 26. Scene: Jefferson High school students talk around a table |
Oppose | Scientific / Religious |
Say there’s scientific support for special creation (no arguments actually given). Some arguments are religious–one girl says she believes in evolution because she knows Bible is Word of God. |
?? — opposition partly based on “Word of God”, but no one explicitly YEC. |
Intellectual / Anti intellectual. They are speaking eloquently, but one boy is depicted saying he grew up hearing word of God after narrator explains that upbrining in Sunday school affects what these students believe. One girl says she believes in Bible simply because somehow she knows its true. |
| 27. Interview: Eugenie Scott, director of National Center for Science Education (NCSE) |
Support | Scientific | Talking about what creationists say, says evolution and science can’t say anything about whether or not God did anythin. Says evolution can tell us what happened, says evidence is strong that universe, earth, and life evolved. Says that Justice Brennan ruled that you can teach any scientific views. Tries to imply all theories of creation aren’t scientific by saying, “one reason creationist have worked so hard to present their theories as scientific is so they can duck under 1st amendment” |
No | Intellectual |
| 28. Scene: Jefferson high school students take on science curriculum at school board meeting |
Oppose | Scientific | Students talk about their views. Talks about underlying assumption. Says that evolution should be taught, but alongside special creation. Says they should be taught facts, but on their own. Narrator then says: For these students, it isn’t about science vs. the Bible, but which views on science should be taught. Says MOrris’ Genesis flood was an “inspiration” to creationist that uses carefully selected scientific evidence. Board says that creation science doesn’t fit definitions of biological science curriculum. Narrator says decision preserved “integrity of science curriculum”. |
?? | Intellectual–students making very cogent arguments. Of course this is countered by interviews from teachers who say they don’t understand nature of science. |
| 29. Scene: Footage of Louisiana Senator passes law to promote teaching of creation science if evolution taught |
Oppose | Scientific | Shows Senator saying that creation science is pure science and just as unreligious as evolutionary science. Narrator says Louisiana legislator passed law over opposition from educators and that Supreme Court rules teaching of Creation science is violation of 1st amendment separation of church and state. |
Yes | Intellectual–though his legal arguments are countered by narrator |
| 30. Interview: Stanley Jones, Wheaton professor |
n/a | Religious | Says its good to teach evolution and you can’t create a place which isolates you from evolution because you have to exist as a Christian in the real world and deal with real ideas. |
?? | Intellectual |
| 31. Interview: Emi Hayashi, Wheaton college undergraduate biochemistry major |
Support | Scientific | People look at Christian and say you’re ar religious fanatics. “I don’t want to come across as that, I want to be educated, I want to be intelligent, I want to have answers that someone can say , I can respect that … and also to be able to argue some answers without God. 0 I mean I know that almost sounds sacrilegious but I want to be able to reason some things without necessarily having to bring GOd into the picture, and I want my life and how i live it to reflect GOd |
No | Intellectual |
| 32. Interview: Beth Stubing, Wheaton college undergraduate |
Support | Scientific | Says that religious and science aren’t’ tin conflict and believe in evolution doesn’t mean you’re throwing out God. |
No | Intellectual |
| 33. Interview: Nathan Baird, earth sciences undergraduate at Wheaton College |
Support | Scientific | Says when he heard a God-fearing man saying I believe in evolution did wonders for him and it allowed him to see God bigger than he had before |
No | Intellectual |