Creationism

Part I.

(a) First off the Judeo-Christian views of creation were slowly changing even before Darwin came along. Although his discoveries and theories did go along way in changing peoples views. Judeo-Christian views revolved around the “Garden of Eden” idea. That the universe had one creator and he formed all of the earth and the living organisms that live on it. Never did it cross their mind that it is possible for organisms to change over time or become extinct. Even to this day a lot of creationists feel and try to show how there was no need to change traditional belief. The changing force in their thought-process was the fossil record undeniably showed that older forms were going extinct while newer forms appeared.

(b) The work that Darwin and Wallace did went strides to prove their beliefs, and it also proved to be a very challenging idea to take in physiologically for some religions. They proposed that the change in organism’s fossils could be explained in terms of differential reproduction that was based on heritable variations (i.e., natural selection). A fully natural explanation for nature’s diversity was now available for consideration. To some, this meant that God was no longer required to explain the formation of new species. Most disturbing of all, God was not even required to explain the formation of humankind.

Part II.

1.

(a) On March 22nd, 1925, Tennessee passed the Butler Act, making it unlawful in public schools "to teach any theory that denies the story of divine creation as taught by the Bible and to teach instead that man was descended from a lower order of animals.” The Tennessee law was part of a national legislative campaign fathered by three-time losing presidential contender William Jennings Bryan. Within a decade a pair of court cases overturned the "equal space" law, as well. But the modern assault on evolutionary theory pretty much started in the Tennessee legislature on this date, March 22, back in 1925.

(b) The circumstances revolving around the act being passed was the willingness of teachers to accept and teach the ways of creationism from the bible. Parents were not happy this was being taught and neither were the school boards. This became apparent to the public forcing schools and state legislature to take action. Thus making the act and then later passing it.

2.

(a) Scopes who was voluntarily arrested for teaching evolution became nationwide news. The reaction to this surprising publicity showed that many Americans felt the basics of their religious beliefs were at stake in this battle. To some, the trial was seen as a means of either confirming or denying their understanding of the Scriptures. Clarence Darrow is credited with having outmaneuvered such intolerance when he set for his expert witnesses to give their scientific evidences for evolution to the news reporters covering the trial. By this, Darrow managed to have the theory of evolution circulated to the farthest limits of the civilized world. Just as significantly, this was accomplished without any arguments against evolution being mentioned. Thus evolution appeared to be based on undeniable evidence.

(b) The participants in the 1925 trial were (1) John Scopes, a high school football coach and substitute science teacher, (2) William Jennings Bryan, the great fundamentalist orator and three times presidential candidate, who prosecuted the case against Scopes, and (3) Clarence Darrow, the eminent trial lawyer, who defended Scopes. (4) The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit, challenging the constitutionality of the Act.

(c) The atmosphere of the town was not very good, and people thought that if the good publicity got out about the trial that the excitement along with the population might go up again whose population had fallen from 3,000 in the 1890's to 1,800 in 1925.

Part III.

4. Scientific creationism differs from conventional science in numerous ways. One obvious difference is the way scientists and creationists deal with error. Science is committed, at least in principle, to the evidence. Creationism is connected to principle, as evidenced by the statements of certainty essential by various creationist organizations and the professions of faith made by individual creationists. Because creationism is first and foremost a matter of the bible, evidence from the natural world can only be of secondary importance. Controlling systems like creationism tend to encourage in their adherents a strange view of truth. Many well-known creationists apparently have the same view of truth as political radicals: whatever advances the cause is true; whatever damages the