• Icons of Evolution, Run Time: 75 minutes
• Unlocking The Mystery Of Life, Run Time: 65 minutes
• The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe, Run Time: 60 minutes
• Metamorphosis, Run Time: 64 minutes

Icons of Evolution. Explore the fascinating new conflict over evolution in the classroom-a conflict based on science, not religion. Learn about the controversy that engulfs one town when a teacher actually tries to tell students that some scientists disagree with Darwin. From the Galapagos Islands to China, Icons of Evolution will take you on a fast-paced, fascinating journey into one of the most controversial issues in today’s public arena.

Unlocking The Mystery Of Life. Unlocking the Mystery of Life is the story of contemporary scientists who are advancing a powerful, but controversial, idea—the theory of “intelligent design.” It is a theory based upon compelling biochemical evidence. Through state-of-the-art computer animation, em>Unlocking the Mystery of Life transports you into the interior of the living cell to explore systems and machines that bear the unmistakable hallmarks of design.

The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe. The conditions that allow for intelligent life on Earth also make it strangely well suited for viewing and analyzing the universe. But is this correlation between the existence of complex life and our ability to make scientific discoveries simply a coincidence or the result of blind chance? Or does it point to a deeper explanation?

Metamorphosis. Throughout history, butterflies have fascinated artists and philosophers, scientists and schoolchildren with their profound mystery and beauty. In Metamorphosis you will explore their remarkable world as few ever have before. Spectacular photography, computer animation and magnetic resonance imaging open once hidden doors to every stage of a butterfly’s life-cycle. From an egg the size of a pinhead to a magnificent flying insect. It is a transformation so incredible biologists have called it “butterfly magic.”

• Can you help me with an effective outline to communicate the evidence for Intelligent Design to others?
• Does the fact that some planets and moons rotate and/or orbit in a clock-wise direction, and others in a counter-clockwise direction invalidate any of the evidence used to support the theory of evolution?
• Is there a workbook available for The Privileged Planet?

Download and Listen

Download and Listen

What I find difficult to believe is these men are lending credibility as Christians, as believers in God, to Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Charles Darwin was a racist and sexist. Darwin said, “Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.” Darwin had a bulldog that popularized his notions, Thomas Huxley. Huxley had the temerity to say that the Negro stock would not “be able to compete successfully with his bigger-brained and smaller jawed rival, in a contest which is to be carried on by thoughts and not by bites.”

As far as sexism is concerned, Charles Darwin was clear, just read his works. He once said in his book The Descent of Man under the subheading “Difference in the Mental Powers of the Two Sexes,” that “the chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn [sic] by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman.”

It’s one thing for Giberson and Falk to say that they believe in evolution, as believers in God, it’s another thing to say that they believe in Darwin and want to save Darwin. Why save the racism and the sexism? My goodness, we live in an age of scientific enlightenment.  

They go on to say, “Darwin proposed the theory of evolution in 1859 in On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. This controversial text presented evidence that present-day life forms have descended from common ancestors via natural selection…Christians hoped the advance of science would undermine Darwin’s novel theory, which threatened their understanding of traditional biblical stories such as Adam and Eve, and the six-days of creation. In the years since, Darwin argued natural selection was the agent of creation, the evidence for evolution has become overwhelming.” Earlier in the article he had said that “evolution is as well-established within biology as heliocentricity”

What do they give as this overwhelming evidence? They say, “The fossil record has provided evidence of compelling transitional species such as whales with feet.” This is his overwhelming evidence. Now of course the Bible says that living creatures produce according to their kinds (Gen. 1:24). This doesn’t take anything but reading the Bible for all it’s worth, that’s clear and consistent. It’s incontrovertible. That’s what the Bible teaches. This is in stark contrast to the evolutionary hypothesis. Where is the evidence in the book of nature for common descent? Scant fossil evidence is around for the notion of common descent or for one kind evolving into another kind, a hippo evolving into a whale.  

Furthermore, in an age of Scientific Enlightenment there is molecular evidence that contradicts fossil evidence. To go from a hippo to a whale requires the stretching of credulity beyond the breaking point. It means that it would require: changes in the skin to make it impermeable to water; an eye protective system that would require massive alterations of brain; diving/emerging mechanisms and a respiratory system so that the whale doesn’t contract the bends; the lactation system; not to mention the existence of sonar. In other words, to believe that hippos became whales takes a lot of a faith. Not faith in evidence—faith in blind faith—not at all faith in reason! This isn’t reasonable faith.

In the article, they continually make a false dichotomy between faith and reason. As though the scientist has reason, the Christian has faith, so let’s all get along and dance and be happy and sing. The truth is that the Christian believes in faith founded in a reputable fact.

I’m still amazed, quite frankly, that USA Today in the Forum would publish an article like this. Again, it’s one thing to believe in evolution, it’s another thing to blame God for it. But in the worse of all cases, you have these guys not only believing in evolution, blaming God for it, but then defending Darwin’s 19^th century view of evolution as if it is now proven to be true. If you’re going to laud Darwin, don’t forget what I said earlier, he was a racist and a sexist.

If you don’t think that ideas have consequences, just think back to eugenics. For eugenics to succeed, it is crucial that the unfit die, as the fittest survive. If the unfit continue to survive indefinitely, they would infect the fit with their unfit genes, and evolution wouldn’t take place. So eugenics took Darwin’s theory of evolution to its logical conclusion. That’s why they took the unfit and sterilized them, or as it unfolded in the Nazi’s death camps, they exterminated them. All done in the name of Darwinian evolution! I think it’s about time we woke up in this age of scientific enlightenment and realized that Darwin was anything but enlightened, and the Bible is anything but obscurantist. This doesn’t mean that we have to allegorize the Bible. It means we have to read the Bible for all it’s worth.

In this article, they set up straw-man after straw-man. The straw-man is always you people that don’t believe in theistic evolution, you try to shoehorn humans and all of human history into only having been around 10,000 years. They attack this straw-man as if this were the only option provided in the Christian community.

There are many in-depth resources of both books and DVDs on this topic. I would recommend checking out the resources we recommend at our Website at www.equip.org, included in this is a book I wrote about the subject entitled Fatal Flaws: What Evolutionists Don’t Want You to Know.  

It’s one thing to say that he believes in evolution, as he does in the article, it’s another thing to say I’m a great fan of Charles Darwin. Darwin was a racist! Darwin said, “The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.” ^[2] In other words, evolution is not about equality it is about inequality. Evolution by definition is about inequality. The only reason that an evolutionist can say today that men are created equal is the power and presence of a lobby group. It’s popular to say that, but it’s not based on biblical principles. Biblical principles say everyone is created equal, evolutionary principles say that there is no such thing as equality.

Evolution at its root is based on inequality. That is why Darwin can say that he is sexist in so many words. In his book The Descent of Man under the subheading “Difference in the Mental Powers of the Two Sexes,” he attempts to persuade his followers that “the chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn [sic] by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman.” ^[3] Again inequality!

At least Darwin was being consistent with his own ethic and telling us flat out what he thinks, but in the 21st century to have a Presbyterian pastor say, I’m a big fan of Darwin is to say in essence “I’m a big fan of philosophical naturalism,” or at least “methodological naturalism.” More consequences for society hinge on the cosmogenic myth of evolution than any other.

This Presbyterian pastor went on to say, “Science is truly godless.” ^[4] In other words, according to Brinton, everything is directed by purely natural processes reducible to physics and chemistry. In other words, you can’t appeal to God to explain the information in the genetic code or to explain irreducible complexity in biochemical systems, or for that matter consciousness itself, or even for the origin of life from non-life.

He then says, “Science answers the questions of how life has evolved on earth, while religion answers the questions of why there is life.” ^[5] This, at its root, is a false dichotomy. Science and religion are overlapping interlocking domains. Christianity makes factual claims about the universe and so does science. For example, we say God created the universe ex nihilo or out of nothing. 19th century science says the universe always existed. The question now becomes what is true truth? Was the 19th century idea really true? Well, today we know on the basis of science, as well as Scripture, that this is patently absurd not just false. Christianity says living things reproduce after their own kinds; evolution says kinds produce other kinds. In other words, cows turn into whales, and dinosaurs evolve in birds. All you need is a lot of time. Scales, if you give it enough time, eventually become feathers.

Now it is absolutely mind boggling that a Presbyterian pastor living in the 21st century would be as benighted as to think such a thing. I can only imagine that when he was writing this article he lost his brains in the narthex of his church and forgot to reinsert them. Christianity says non-life cannot produce life. Evolution says life came from non-life and the life that came from non-life produced morals. Christianity says nothing comes from nothing and nothing ever could. Philosophical naturalism the worldview that under girds evolution says nothing created everything.

Brinton wants Obama to now use his “considerable rhetorical skills” to advance one of the goals of his inaugural speech: “to restore science to its rightful place.” ^[6] And what is that according to Brinton? At its base, this would be the elimination of Intelligent Design and the elevation of God — however you define him — who guided unguided natural processes. This is as silly as saying that God can create a squared circle. God can do anything that is logically possible, but God cannot create a triangle with two sides or squared circle. That’s not logically possible.

It is high time that Christians, particularly Christians sitting in the pews of pastors that are making these kinds of false dichotomies, were equipped to say, “Wait a minute pastor, don’t we live in an age of scientific enlightenment?” “Why makes this false dichotomy between science and scripture based on 19th century science?” “Why be a fan of Charles Darwin?” I think it would be better to be a fan of Abraham Lincoln who was born in the same day.

In order to help you equip yourself, I talked about this and many other things with my guests Dr. Jay Richards, Dr. Jonathan Wells, and Dr. Stephen Meyer on the February 12th and 13th editions of the Bible Answer Man broadcast, which you can access off our Website at www.equip.org. I also recommend the following resources which can be purchased as a package at our Website or by 1-888-700-0274, these resources are

Fatal Flaws

The Case for a Creator DVD

The Privileged Planet DVD

Icons of Evolution DVD