Well, this is an okay documentary. On the one hand, it does go in depth into the science of evolution and the science of intelligent design. On the other hand, I can observe a clear bias against ID. If it acknowledged it’s bias, that would be acceptable, but really this documentary presents itself as if it were objective, which it clearly isn’t.

Personally, I find the idea of putting evolution or intelligent design on trial to be very offensive. A court is not an empirical or rational device, it’s a state system. You don’t appeal to a church to decide whether grass is green or not. The grass is green because of it’s physical makeup in relation to my sensory apparatus, not because a man in a dress decides that it is.

Is evolution supported by evidence? On one hand, traditionally scientists attempted to prove evolution with the fossil record, which would be an inferred conclusion which is based on logic, not observation and is not science. On the other the genetic evidence certainly seems to suggest a lineage. It’s murky because you can’t observe evolution directly, except in the way that Darwin did, and that only demonstrates what ID terms “micro-evolution” or changes within species. You can’t directly observe “macro-evolution” or change from one species to another, so you have to use instruments and that is based on intent.

Is Intelligent Design science? Yes, it’s been posited in a scientific way, and experiments can be run to test it. Is there evidence for it? No there is not, but that doesn’t mean much. There wasn’t evidence for evolution until there was. Science should not be dismissed just because it contradicts the status quo. There should be no status quo in science, come to think of it.

Science itself is based on the reasoning that empiricism, or sensory data, can create knowledge. Knowledge means an idea about reality that corresponds with reality. This is the philosophical foundation of science, and like all philosophy it is subject to epistemological nihilism. There is no foundation for any line of reasoning, because any proof of one’s reasoning will rely on more reasoning.

So, it seems that some scientists who aren’t philosophically educated have invested faith in empiricism, in the conclusions of scientists following the scientific method. This is called materialism, it’s a philosophy.

What I see, is two groups of people with opposing belief systems, both believing themselves to be right, pushing their faiths on each-other. What else is new?

The real tragedy is the state, with it’s ridiculous court systems and it’s monopoly on the school system. That is the basis of this documentary is it not? People fighting over what will be taught to their children in the state education camp? That’s the tragedy. People fighting each-other, rather than fighting the system that has created the conflict.

Good documentary, it is slightly biased but rightly so. Intelligent design seems to be the religious community desperately trying to shoe-horn their beliefs into a scientific framework. It was roundly de-masked as trying to do such in a righteous judicial decision.

The documentary is worth watching. Over all, it is something I side with (be warned it is biased in favour of Evolution).
ID is not a science, and although I do see the want to have options in a school, the options are there. Science class is there for science to be taught. It is widely accepted that Evolution is a theory, not a theorem, law, or any of the other absolute terms. Chruches are the schools of creationism, are they not? If they want ID to launch, if they want it to be widely accepted, make a church or a group, or whatever all the other creationism people are doing. ID is creationism, evolution is science. If you want your kid to have options, send them to a church and tell them you are educating them and there are options, do not broadcast it in a science class. After all, you don’t read fiction books to cite when writing an essay in school.