| | Subcategories | Decade (feature_three_browse-bin) | Grade Level (feature_five_browse-bin) | | Audio Type (feature_six_browse-bin) | |
|
|
|
Icons Of Evolution | 
 enlarge | Director: Brian Boorujy
Actors: Steve Meyer, Paul Nelson, Ken Miller, Bruce Chapman, David Berlinski
Studio: Randolph Productions Inc
Category: DVD
List Price: $24.95
Buy New: $10.62
You Save: $14.33 (57%)
Rating:  30 reviews
Sales Rank: 15675
Format: Color, Dts Surround Sound, Dvd-video, Full Screen, Special Edition, Ntsc
Language: English (Original Language)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 75 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
ISBN: 0972043314
EAN: 9780972043311
ASIN: 0972043314
Release Date: May 1, 2002
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: FACTORY SEALED. BRAND NEW. CHRISTIAN OWNED COMPANY. CHECK OUT OUR FEEDBACK HISTORY. SHOP WITH CONFIDENCE.
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Description
Are students learning the whole truth about Darwin's theory of evolution? According to a growing number of scientists, the suprising answer is no. They claim that many of the most famous "Icons of Evolution"-including Darwin's "Tree of Life," finches from the Galapagos Islands, and embryos that look remarkably similar-are based on outdated research and sloppy logic. They say students are being hurt by the failure to present both sides of an emerging scientific debate over Darwin's theory. Come explore this 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 contoversial issues in today's public arena.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 25 more reviews...
 very educational October 24, 2008
Barbara Ellis (New York)
This is a very informative and eduational book. It is presented from a science perspective and have some very important information about problems with explainations in science.
Worthwhile video for any youth group, Christian or non-Christian February 11, 2008
T. Beck
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
It is a shame that anti-Christian sentiment has become so pervasive that even legitimate scientific inquiry is suppressed when one objects to Darwin. The evidence is mounting that Darwinian evolution, in and of itself, is insufficient to explain our current observations about our origins. The hysteria surrounding the topic of the separation of church and state risks creating a repressive environment where disagreement with Darwinism is perceived incorrectly as coming only from Christians who are attempting to put forth a religious agenda. These questions are also being raised by non-Christian scientists, but our youth are not being allowed to hear the truth due to this conflict in the schools. In fact, the current defense of Darwinism is beginning to rival emperor worship in terms of our inability to speak against or question something that might just be wrong.
This video puts forth the true story of a battle in one high school where a science teacher was censored from presenting even non-Christian scientific articles from mainstream journals in an attempt to bring critical thinking into the classroom. This is a worthwhile video for any youth group, Christian or non-Christian where the topics facing 21st century scientists and science students need to be examined critically.
 Evidence against evolution but for Creation July 29, 2007
Chris Yarzab (Arleta, Ca USA)
2 out of 16 found this review helpful
Gods word hasn't changed but evolution theories continue to evolve as presuppositions about the origin of life baffles those who do not want God in their lives. The fool says in his heart there is no God.
A formidable challenge to Neo-Darwinism January 8, 2007
Sithara Batcha (Washington, DC)
11 out of 15 found this review helpful
ICONS OF EVOLUTION is a fascinating film which presents hard questions and troublesome evidence against the popular theory of evolution. Before judging the merits of the film, it is important to accurately understand the film's topic of criticism, which is the Neo-Darwinism. Neo-Darwinism is the theory that natural forces 'select' for organisms possessing certain phenotypic variations over others. Phenotypic variations are those that are `apparent-' for example, the neck length of giraffes. Therefore, Giraffes with longer necks are selected over those with shorter necks in an area with tall trees. Phenotypic variations arise from genotypic variations (variations in genes) caused by random mutations in the genetic code. (In this case, some giraffes have longer necks than others due to differences in their genes coding for neck length). Increased survival of an organism (or a group of organisms) as a result of selection by natural forces ultimately results in increased numbers of alleles coding for the 'selected' phenotype. Using the giraffe example, genes producing giraffes with longer necks are selected for,and will increase in number, in areas with tall trees, over genes producing giraffes with shorter necks.
The process above, which basically can be simplified to state that natural selection selects for certain random mutations in the genetic code, is used to explain important biological phenomena such as the tight adaptation of organisms to their environment, and the diversity of organisms present in the earth.
So that's Neo-Darwinism, the widely accepted theory that every biology student is taught, in a nutshell. ICONS OF EVOLUTION, by examining persistent, recurrent themes of Neo-Darwinism, convincingly argues that Neo-Darwinism is based on poor scientific evidence, misleading claims, and flat-out fraud and lies. Furthermore, it is propagated by a culture of heavy censure and intimidation. Here are the film's arguments:
Neo-Darwinism is based on poor scientific evidence:
Neo-Darwinism by its very definition cannot account for the origin of life, for the theory assumes the existence of genetic material. However, one cannot avoid the question of how life originated, so Neo-Darwinists explain the origins of life by noting that certain chemical reactions are favored by certain natural environments, and claiming that the primeval earth presented perfect natural conditions for life to evolve. The paradigm case is the Miller-Urey experiments. Miller and colleagues set up in the laboratory conditions supposedly similar to primeval earth, and found these conditions created amino acids and other organic molecules, the building blocks of life. Unfortunately, Miller had assumed primeval earth was nearly oxygen free, a key contention that is rejected by many geologists today. The presence of oxygen destabilizes organic molecules, making their creation and sustainability, (and thus life) much less likely.
Perhaps the most prominent Neo-Darwinist icon is the elegant evolutionary tree. The tree lays out neatly how major species present today all evolved from common ancestors, often starting at the very beginning from a single cell, laying out multiple stages with transitional forms (such as the archaeopteryx) in between. Unfortunately, scientific evidence challenges such neat evolutionary pathways. For example, during the Cambrian Period an explosion of new life forms emerged which do not have ancestors in the fossil record. Other than upsetting the neat tree, such sudden appearance of life in short periods of time poses problems for Neo-Darwinist theory which claims the slow transformation of organisms due to the accumulation of adaptive genetic mutations.
Neo-Darwinism is based on misleading claims:
A key evidence for Neo-Darwinism is the evolution of Galapagos Finches. Supposedly different finch species evolved from a common ancestor when they were dispersed on different islands due to different food sources being present on different islands. The main difference among these finches is their beaks, which adapted to their different diets. Modern research, however, has found that Galapagos finch beaks change size and shape with the change of seasons! So, in the dry seasons, the beaks get larger and when it is rainy, they often revert back. The lack of permanence of these changes does not fit well with Neo-Darwinist theory.
Another misleading claim by Neo-Darwinists has to do with homologous structures. It is claimed that the since the bone structures of the arms of humans, wings of birds, and the fins of whales are similar, this suggest common ancestry. However, while the bone structures (phenotypes) are similar, the genes coding for them (genotypes) are completely different in different species. Thus, it's not possible to infer common evolutionary pathways using a Neo-Darwinist mechanism using forelimb homology.
Neo-Darwinism is based on fraud and lies:
A vast majority of biology textbooks present as evidence of evolution drawings of embryos from different species. The point is that since the uterine environment is supposedly similar among different species, there are few selective forces favoring differentiation. Unfortunately, these drawings, originating from one Ernst Haeckel in the 19th century, are admitted fakes. Real embryos of different species DO look quite different from each other. Darwinists admit this, but many texts continue to present Haeckel's embryos as evidence for evolution.
Another example commonly found in biology texts are the famous English light and dark peppered moths. The claim here is that before the industrial evolution, most peppered moths were light, and were able to blend well on trees with light trunks common in the British Isles. However, increased pollution resulted in trees being covered in soot. Mutant dark moths were now better camouflaged on sooty barks, escaped predation, and increased in number. Unfortunately, further investigations found that neither light nor dark peppered moths actually rest on tree trunks. Those famous pictures? They are a result of light and dark dead moths being pinned onto tree trunks to `illustrate this point!' Again, Neo-Darwinists admit the pictures were staged, but they continue to be found in texts as they do nicely illustrate Neo-Darwinist evolution.
Neo-Darwinism is promoted by censuring theories and ideas that contradict Neo-Darwinism, and by intimidating those who make trouble for the establishment:
This is perhaps the most serious and to the extent true, frightening criticism made by ICONS. The film presents the case of Roger DeHart, a high school biology teacher in Washington State who wanted to supplement biology classes by presenting recent evidence contradicting Neo-Darwinism. However, the school board, frightened by threats of lawsuits from organizations defending Neo-Darwinism (ACLU for example) repeatedly prevented him from doing so. It is understandable if they squashed the teaching of fringe theories such as Intelligent Design or Creationism- however, they prevented DeHart from teaching evidence troublesome to Neo-Darwinism appearing in mainstream science publications, and even papers such as the WALL-STREET JOURNAL! They even prevented him from presenting a paper by the famous Neo-Darwinist Stephen Gould, in which he admitted that Haeckel's embryos should not appear in biology texts. The given reason? High School students are supposedly not capable of evaluating claims from cutting-edge research and should be taught simplified science. Needless to say, a number of students were offended by such a conclusion.
The film understandably claims that case of DeHart is the famous Scopes trial turned upside down: In the 1925, biology teacher John Scopes was censured from teaching evolution in classrooms by hostile creationists. Today, biology teachers such as DeHart are censured from criticizing evolution by hostile Neo-Darwinist Evolutionists.
While watching the film, one must keep in mind that the film is not balanced (it clearly has an agenda, and majority of the experts are critical of Neo-Darwinism- a number of them are proponents of Intelligent Design). Despite its bias, one cannot deny that the film is very reasonable. It does not present, much less push, alternate theories, not even Intelligent Design. Rather, it presents solid evidence against Darwinism, evidence that is accepted by Neo-Darwinists. It also asks hard, troublesome questions. But isn't that what science all about- to ask those difficult questions, and follow the evidence wherever it leads?
 Good Presentation December 27, 2006
Norman Hechavarria (Fort Wayne, IN USA)
7 out of 10 found this review helpful
The Icons of Evolution is a well put together critique of the teaching of evolution. I like that they kept any mention of Intelligent Design or Creationism out of it. I have often wished they would tell students of the many anthropological and archeological finds that flat out contradict the accepted view of the history of life on this planet. This video is a good starting point for good constructive and mind opening discussions on the strengths and weaknesses of the theory of evolution as it stands today. As supporters of Intelligent Design I think the makers of this DVD should be commended for keeping this video an honest critique of what is being taught in science classes here in the US and not a propaganda piece pushing their take on biological history.
For those of you interested in reading more on the archeological and anthropological finds that contradict the accepted view of biological and anthropological history I suggest you take a look at a book called Forbidden Archeology. Good stuff and it's all verifiable. The authors were nice enough to site all the finds they detail.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
