Video Review Guide

In the Beginning...

1994, Color, 2 parts, each 50 minutes, written and narrated by Randall Balmer, WTTW-Chicago

Summary

In the Beginning... chronicles the recent history of the Evolution/Creation debate. Randall Balmer, a religion professor at Barnard College, first reviews the fundamental positions of both "sides." He starts at the museum of the Institute for Creation Research and discussions with Henry Morris. A major tenet of creationists is the idea of a young earth, with the solar system less than a million years old. The centricity of the flood as a major catastrophe is clear, in that it explains the fossil record and stratigraphy. Science is criticized for its belief in such fossil specimens as Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man (the former was a fossil pig's tooth that almost no one accepted, the latter, a hoax that took almost 40 years to set right).

Steven Jay Gould presents the views of evolutionary science noting that it is entirety consistent with evolutionary sequences. He contends that the fossil record is good, and that there are major important evolutionary sequences where transitional forms are quite evident. He notes that just because creationists make a lot of noise, it doesn't make their beliefs true. One impact of having to deal with creationists is that many scientists waste valuable research time responding to their claims.

The controversy shifts to the local level where a groups of evangelicals have taken over the school board in Vista, California. A creationist policy for challenging evolution was passed in August ,1993. Several school board meetings and interviews with the antagonists are presented. Vista is one of 2,200 out of 16,000 local boards where creationists have taken control. The whole issue is attached to a question of a return to "family values," a national cause promoted by the Christian Right, but fought on local levels. Key elements in the approach are evolution, sex education, and secular humanism.

The second video begins at Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights, Illinois, looking at core beliefs as taught in the school and its correspondence courses. A key element is that creation is essential to salvation. The reasoning goes something like this: If one believes in evolution, one believes there is no purpose. With no purpose, sin is a fiction and people are responsible to no one but other people. There is then no need for salvation. Evolution is a rebellion against God.

There is also a look at the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study of the National Science Foundation. It does address the issue of intelligent design, but not to address the the issue of a creator. Also interviewed is Dr. Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center For Science Education. She contends that scholars must address the creationists. Failure to do so can be disastrous for American science education. She also notes that creationists contend that they are a minority fighting for rights, but the reality is quite different. For example, the NCSE has only 3000 members while the Center for Creation Science has more than 100,000 members.

One interview is with Philip Johnson, a law professor at the University of California, a man who wishes to bring back theistic research questions to college campuses. He wishes to make evolutionists declare their assumptions of philosophical naturalism. He sets this up as a straw man, even to the point of there being a conspiracy of science. Countering him is a biologist who readily admits these assumptions. He contends that evolution is humbling and challenges the ego by challenging the centrality of humanity, much as the Copernican revolution challenged the centrality of earth. He notes that if you do science, you must assume a naturalistic position. He also contends that evolution is not a myth because myths are immutable. A function of scientific investigation is change. He contends that many creationists are culturally racist.

Balmer concludes by saying that the dispute is important, and one that results from our society being culturally pluralistic.

Questions

  1. What do you think about the nature of the evidence presented by both sides?
  2. What are the major beliefs of creationists?
  3. How do creationists tie together morality and evolution? How is it related to salvation?
  4. What are the connections of the debate to American politics?
  5. Should scientists confront creationists?
  6. What is philosophical naturalism? How is it used as a straw man by Philip Johnson?
  7. Is creationism culturally racist? Why or why not?
  8. Balmer seems to be neutral in the debate. Is he? Why or why not?

 


| Main | Outline | Brief | Brief Schedule | Debunking Tools | Video Guides | Projects | Final |


larry-zimmerman@uiowa.edu
University of Iowa Anthropology

08/18/98