When Evolution Went to Court - The Scopes Trial Explained

Here's the story of the trial/publicity stunt that pinned Darwinists versus fundamentalists- The Scopes Trial. All images found in the public domain. Music by Electric Needle Room. Produced by Matt Beat.
I also released a podcast about this event: • The Scopes Trial - Mr....
#apush #1920s #evolution
Once upon a time an English naturalist and geologist named Charles Darwin came up with the theory of evolution. Evolution, now widely accepted as a theory, used to be very controversial. It rocked the entire world, as matter of fact. It argued that all life had a common ancestor and that all life with better genetic traits adapted and reproduced so that those better traits would live on. Hey, go easy on me, I’m not a science teacher. This theory holds that humans share a common ancestor with apes and chimpanzees, and many Christian fundamentalists, who believed the Bible was literal, just couldn’t accept that explanation. Throughout the late 1800s and into the 1900s, Darwin’s theory of evolution pinned religious fundamentalists against modernists, or those who were sympathetic to the Enlightenment and a interpreting the Bible using reason.
On March 21, 1925, the Butler Act was passed, a Tennessee law prohibiting public school teachers from teaching about evolution and denying the Biblical account of the origin of human beings. It was named after John Butler, a farmer and head of the World Christian Fundamentals Association, who helped get the law to pass. In response, a new organization called the American Civil Liberties Union got a dude named John Scopes, a Tennessee high school science teacher, to break the law. Scopes was charged on May 5, 1925, for teaching about evolution.
Scopes got a pretty good and well-known lawyer to defend him named Clarence Darrow. An even more famous lawyer named William Jennings Bryan led the prosecution. The two lawyers were quite different. Darrow went around questioning the existence of God, while Bryan was a devout Christian who was troubled by Darwin’s theory of evolution. Oh yeah, and Bryan was also a three-time presidential nominee and former Secretary of State for crying out loud.
The trial took place in the small town of Dayton, Tennessee, for 12 hot days in July, and it was pretty much a publicity stunt. The press came out in droves, and so did thousands of spectators. It was a carnival-like atmosphere where vendors sold hot dogs, soda, and even Bibles. Every single trial update was on the front page of tabloids across the country, and it was the first trial to be nationally broadcast on the radio.
The trial judge prevented the defense from using scientists as witnesses. In response, the defense team decided to call William Jennings Bryan himself to testify as an expert on the Bible. Most would conclude that Clarence Darrow made Bryan sound like an idiot on the witness stand that day, as Bryan stumbled over words as he tried to justify the Bible.
Scopes was found guilty, but his only punishment was a fine of $100. However, the conviction was thrown out by the Tennessee Supreme Court on a technicality. In 1968, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Epperson v. Arkansas that anti-evolution laws violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Bryan may have won the case, but Darrow won the war. Bryan died just five days after the trial was over.
The Scopes Trial showed that, although the majority of Christians said evolution was wrong at the time, there was a growing divide among Christians about finding the truth, one of fundamentalists, who believed in a literal reading of the Bible, and Darwinists, who believed in applying modern science. In the end, it helped promote the idea that laws should respect academic freedom, even if ideas clash with mainstream religious beliefs.
#apush #ushistory #americanhistory

[@alg11297]

Scopes was not a science teacher. He was a part time substitute and coached the h.s. football team. His arrest was arranged by the town's officials who invited the local newspaper to photograph it in a local drug store. (I got the wrong idea from Inherit the Wind too)

[@PhilipDeLong]

My grandfather covered this trial for the United Press-- I might have seen him in the background. You said "The End" at the closing of the video, but you might as well have put an question mark instead of a statement. The Fundamentalist movement had started to organize around the turn of the century in opposition to liberal theology. The beatdown they received in the court of public opinion with the Scopes Trial meant that it would be many years before they would try to enter the political sphere again, but they would in the 1980s and we are still seeing the effects today.

[@jettforpresident3428]

Mr. Beats, what is your view on the idea of evolution? Do you support evolution or creationism?

[@iammrbeat]

I usually go with the humble experts, so evolution.

[@joshua.johnson]

@@iammrbeat so you are choosing to go to Hell when you die?

[@UniversalPRR]

@@joshua.johnson fucken dumbass sped shut yo ass up

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

@@iammrbeat there’s Christians who are humble experts.

[@l_ndonmusic]

@@joshua.johnson “if you don’t believe the exact version of Christianity that I do, you’re going to hell!!!!!”

[@AdamSmith-gs2dv]

I have actually driven through Dayton Tennessee many times and had absolutely no idea that this happened there

[@siamiam]

Science ftw :D

[@iammrbeat]

+siamiam Woot!

[@jakubpociecha8819]

Dr. Fauci ftw

[@ljack-dr7kx]

Do a video on the Cuba Emmy fadel carsto

[@iammrbeat]

+Jack That's a great idea!

[@DefensoresdelaFe]

Scopes was NOT a science teacher, and he couldn't recall what exactly he had taught from the famed textbook when he was substituting at the school.

[@theparadigm8149]

You learned that from Hip Hughes, right? 😏 It’s ok! Hughes is great

[@DefensoresdelaFe]

@@theparadigm8149 Not really, I don't know who Hughes is, but I will search for him...

[@theparadigm8149]

@@DefensoresdelaFe kzbin.info/www/bejne/raDMnIRjmN-YoLs

[@jakubpociecha8819]

Scopes was a PE coach who was also a substitute science teacher, and we only know that the textbook mentioned evolution as a theory, not much else

[@Stevecurtis2112]

Jennings bryan just up an died 6 days later

[@San_Deep2501]

Rip

[@theoptimist4771]

2,271th view!!!!!

[@tulayamalavenapi4028]

"In the end it helped promote the idea that laws should respect academic freedom." So ... But science is never challenged to be non- academic, whereas a spiritually based teaching is always challenged to be non-academic. THERE NOW are more court cases than ever wherein the "spiritual academia" is accused of being injurious to the consciousness of young students. When or if I were a lawyer or a judge, I would throw out all these cases because both sides are practically incompetent to be authoritative. The religionists are divided, as they have multiple interpretations, and the evolutionists are not 100% in agreement either. America is great, and as long as there is a God, Americans will have the good fortune to be able to work through differences.

[@mikeiswhite3]

What have you been reading to give you the impression that "'evolutionists' are not 100% in agreement"??

[@suzanneemry5770]

*One side interpreted The Bible literally while the other side used reason.* Whether a writing is literal or figurative according to these "reasonable" people is determined by rules of literary categorization in every document EXCEPT The Bible. If, within a Biblical book, or section of a book all the literary devices used put it in the literal, not figurative, genre for the culture then it is literal UNLESS if it were literal it would disagree with those things those people choose to believe as unquestionable fact. When a passage in The Bible disagrees with current findings and/or currently popular theories it must be classified as figurative. If those who believe in evolution truly believe it to be a THEORY then the fact that someone else does not believe in that theory is not a threat and therefore there is no need to either blatantly or by inference dismiss them as "not using reason" for any reason but especially not if their "choosing not to use reason" is proved by their applying the same rules to decide whether something in The Bible was either literal or figurative as are applied to all other literature. Claiming that a writing is literal is not equivalent to claiming it is true. There have been many literal accounts that were completely fictitious and many that were written with the sincere belief that they were accurate that were full of errors. A person can believe that a writing is literal without believing anything that writing says. BTW, "A scientific fact is the result of a repeatable careful observation or measurement (by experimentation or other means), also called empirical evidence. These are central to building scientific theories." Therefore any fact on which the theory of evolution is based must be REPEATABLE, and when repeated must be carefully observed and measured. Anything that was not observed when it originally occurred is not repeatable (the speculations and conjectures of what happened might be repeatable but not the actual event and therefore is not a fact) and therefore not acceptable evidence for the building of scientific theories. I wasn't there when the universe came into existence so I cannot say as a fact that either account is true. One presents itself as a religious belief and fits the criteria of a religious belief. The other presents itself as a scientific theory and I have yet to see a single piece of evidence that is presented for it that is repeatable (in other words what actually happened when the universe came into being was observed and is now being repeated (not an event someone speculated happened and then can repeat the event they speculate happened) and therefore until I see further evidence, reason tells me that said believe does not meet qualify as a scientific theory.

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

William James Brian was not the best person to be representing Christianity. And how do you defined religion, just curious, because I tend to not like using the word religion and I try to avoid it, because it is a very subjective term.

[@j.a.martir6438]

@@pleaseenteraname1103 It happens so often, that poorly prepared truths lose against well prepared lies. Christians are to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves, And so much BETTER prepared to defend ourselves with the truth!

[@brendanpatrick6670]

What people forget is that Darwin said his theory was fake beforehand died

[@NeedyChihuahua]

He didn’t say it was fake since that doesn’t make sense. It was alleged that he said “How I wish I had not expressed my theory of evolution as I have done”. This was denied by his own children including his daughter who was present at his deathbed

[@aaronTGP_3756]

And we can't forget that even if you cut away Charles Darwin, the theory of evolution doesn't fall. After all, much, much more research was made by many, many evolutionary biologists, all independent of Darwin. Darwin merely was the initial spark for the theory of evolution to take off.

[@acasualcactus5878]

So he just magically imagined something which science would prove correct?

[@gentrismoore7566]

Darwin was under a lot of pressure to go against these heavily influenced and socially constructed norms. Sir Isaac Newton's scientific works also upset religious ideology. As a result, proper burial would not be granted.

[@johnstuartson2379]

I liked mr beat when he wasn’t terribly biased

[@bensfixitpage341]

In order for evolution to be true one has to believe all life started from nothing all on its own. Is this what you beleive?

[@fartboy3824]

nerd

[@joshua.johnson]

Fundamentalists are the only Christians. You cannot deny God created humans and call yourself a Christian!

[@woodswitch23]

On the stipulation that he used evolution as his method.Otherwise enjoy your fairy tale.

[@joshua.johnson]

@@woodswitch23 don’t send yourself to hell...

[@woodswitch23]

@@joshua.johnson I gave up hell with the easter bunny,Maybe you should study some real science,(not based on the bible),and give up threatening enternal damnation because I hurt republican Jesus's feelings.

[@joshua.johnson]

@@woodswitch23 I am not threatening, it is the default position we, as fallen humans, get. The only way to receive eternal life in Christ is to repent and turn to the ways of God. We must ask Him for forgiveness for the wrong things we have done and pledge our life to serving Him

[@woodswitch23]

@@joshua.johnson Try reading Dawkin"s "Greatist show on earth".If you want to believe in a god personally,I do not hold it against you,but when any religion thinks it should dictate other peoples mores,they can go jump- in a lake.