Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial is an award-winning NOVA documentary on the case of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, which concentrated on the question of whether or not intelligent design could be viewed as science and taught in school science class. It first aired on PBS in November 2007 and features interviews with the judge, witnesses, and lawyers as well as re-enacted scenes using the official transcript of the trial.

In April 2008 the documentary won a Peabody Award. It won the 2008 Science Journalism Award presented by the American Association for the Advancement of Science to honor excellence in science reporting.

The documentary was praised by Nature, and described as accurate by the National Center for Science Education. Variety magazine also gave the documentary a positive review, and said it was one of the year’s most important television projects, that “should be shown not just in every U.S. high school but in houses of worship as well.”

In contrast, creationist and intelligent design supporters have criticized the documentary. The Discovery Institute produced a website critical of the broadcast,^[8][9] while Answers in Genesis stated the evidence for evolution presented by scientists in Judgment Day was fallacious. The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) also claimed the film was not balanced.

WKNO-TV, the local PBS affiliate in Memphis, initially decided not to air the documentary because of the “controversial nature” of the subject, but later reversed its decision.

If you thought Orly Taitz was a raving loony, Wendy Wright proves Orly doesn’t hold a candy to a classic evolution denier. Here’s the first video in a series of seven where Richard Dawkins interviews her.

There’s so much epic stupidity and unjustified arrogant smugness from her I wanted to reach through the computer screen to punch her in the face numerous times. This interview proves once and for all that Richard Dawkins is the most patient man alive!

But there were perhaps two bits here that bothered me the most. The first was Wright’s insistence that the mere fact that scientists like Dawkins aggressively criticize the evolution denial position is somehow proof in and of itself that there is something to the deniers’ position. There is not. She used this as a platform for characterizing the position of scientists like Dawkins as being one their entire mission is just to silence legitimate criticism of evolution only to then repeatedly asking why Dawkins, et al care about what they’re doing at all. Unfortuntely, I think Dawkins didn’t adequately address this ridiculous argument here.  So I will. Dawkins is a scientist and an educator. That means it’s his job to seek out new knowledge and teach that knowledge to the next generation. And like historians who have to combat Holocaust deniers and Moon Hoaxers, etc., when ignorant fools like Ms. Wright who do have agendas organize to form movements that spread misinformation through propaganda campaigns, it becomes absolutely necessary for those who are experts in the material to aggressively combat those campaigns with the truth.

The other bit that bugged me was in the fourth video in the series where Wright starts trying to criticize Dawkins’ rejection of the soul concept with her stupid, dismissive giggles that she used when she failed to be able to provide an actual criticism. It’s REALLY NOT THAT FUCKIN’ COMPLICATED, WENDY! If someone shoots you in the head and damages your brain, you no thinky the same anymore. If your brain is damaged or drugged or lobotomized, your entire personality or your “soul” can be radically transformed. And without a functioning pre-frontal cortex, you may either not have a sense of right and wrong anymore or you might just not care about right and wrong anymore. Again, it’s not complicated!

Case in point, a new study from researchers at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London have found differences in the brain that could provide a biological explanation for psychopathy:

The research investigated the brain biology of psychopaths with convictions that included attempted murder, manslaughter, multiple rape with strangulation and false imprisonment. Using a powerful imaging technique (DT-MRI) the researchers have highlighted biological differences in the brain which may underpin these types of behaviour and provide a more comprehensive understanding of criminal psychopathy.

Dr Michael Craig said: ‘If replicated by larger studies the significance of these findings cannot be underestimated. The suggestion of a clear structural deficit in the brains of psychopaths has profound implications for clinicians, research scientists and the criminal justice system.’

Suck on it, Wendy! In second thought, let me guess. You find the evidence unpersuasive.

via skepacabra.wordpress.com

June 30, 2009 – Thunder foot makes an invitation to Ray Comfort in this video and calls him out on his earlier reply.

“I will be over in the LA region sometime over summer and extended the invitation to Ray for a discussion. Not a debate I find those to be kind of pointless summaries of two positions. A discussion allows individual points to be pursued to a logical conclusion.
It also allows it to become clear when people are evading answering the question.” – Thunderfoot

July 03, 2009 – Thunderfoot confirms that Ray has accepted the invitation to debate.

After a Thunderfoot’s trek across the United States which he documents here he has posted the debate which follows, enjoy.

Discussion between Thunderf00t (Physical Evidence and Reasoned Logic supporter (Pearlist)) and Ray Comfort (Creationist Christian).

Journal entry 22nd July 2009. (relevant bit, whole entry is too long for rest see beautyintheuniverse)
Up with dawnpeckish so found mcdonalds for breakfast. Back to Rays place where I had about 4 hrs to kill before our meeting at 11ish. Started adding placemarkers to the bible at the interesting bits I had found. By the time I had finished there was a lot of blue post it notes sticking out the bible. It has now also become clear to me that while my preferred modus opperandi has been in the defense of science, I have now read enough of the bible that I could utterly shred this shepherds myth. Its an interesting question should I set all the time I have spent going through the bible in detail to naught and just let Christianity have its peace, or should I actively engage in its demise. When the ministry opened at 9ish I went and introduced myself, and they gave me a rather officious line about not doing anything till the appointed time. No big deal for me, I put some effort into ordering the car and mending some bust electronics (resoldering wires etc). Stuff that had been put on the back burner for expediency on the road, but a more ordered man would have taken care of he went along. Saw Ray arrive by car, which raised an eyebrow as the 60 minutes thing said he cycled to work. Probably just he didnt want to cycle if he was going to be on camera. As a cyclist myself something I could empathize with. Ray is a small man, but chirpy and polite. Surprisingly Ray now informed me that there was no problem in me filming. Hmmm wtf?, but my only care at the time was the original deal was being honored. Shortly after he invited me in it was a little intro and pretty much straight down to business. The consequence of which was I only had a few minutes to brief him on points I wanted to raise. A point which I was keen on doing as I wanted the point I was making to survive robust scrutiny, and not to survive simply as they were bought up in real time (catching someone on the hop). The moments that raised an eyebrow for me was how quickly ray picked up on me lying to him, as an example of how religions are created an propagated. (by mechanism of the almighty Tod!) I am a poor liar. Its amazing though, how well even folk like ray can pick up on the bodylanguage. On watching the video you can see it all. How he gets uncomfortable and starts shuffling. I cant remember too much of the details (it was too much of a manic day) but I do remember seeing Ray being troubled by some of the points I was making. I could see the doubt of a man challenged with a concept altogether new to him. I could see it in his bodylanguage of his eyes. After that we went to lunch ray was buying. We took the camera man too who is obviously a hovind fan. Systematically I went through his points one by one and in the most mild of demeanors academically shredded them. The shame being that noone else at the table, other than myself would have been able to assess the academic veracity of my arguments. Ray offered to help me out by putting me up in a motel for a night (after a fashion). The offer was sincere and I think somewhat precipitated by rays sympathy for what he perceived as my hardship. I graciously thanked him for the offer but turned it down in that I like rough life in the wide open space. After lunch ray gave me a tour of the ministry. The place clearly oozes with money. Rays artifacts are very coy (a skeleton for the cupboard etc) He also has a collection of fake hominids not something to inspire someone with confidence about ones academic footing.
Then had a long chat with the camera man about the history of the earth (using the correlated history of earth poster). One by one I cut down the hovind arguments, and eventually all he had left was to simply say there are both sides of the argument.
Its amazing testament to the feedback mechanisms of the mind, that even after the foundations of his belief had been systematically and academically removed till none remained that he was still sure that there was two sides to the argument. Then had another chat with ray, which I wish I had recorded.. mostly about the bible. The things I really remember was that Ray believes in witches, wizards, demons and sorcerers. Hmmm thats usually a end of conversation type moment. He also thinks that the holocaust was gods way of punishing the jews. I told him very clearly that that was not going to make him very popular if he voiced such opinions in public.
Ray left and I spent an hour talking with his graphic design man. He clearly wasnt greatly interested in talking about points of contest, and we got on very well. He was a model maker and pilot. We talked teccie for an hour or so. A good guy!

[Update]

Yup too much stammer. However I had to cover a wide range of topics, while all Ray had to say was ‘I know God dun it’.
Anyways, yes, I was far too stuttery, stammering.
Having said that I kept my side of the deal and uploaded the lot… warts and all.
I’m actually uploading this from within sight of the Hooker telescope (I’m in the observation gallery)