What I found most offensive is the sinister use of rhetorical tricks to prove his point. It really is a form of propaganda. If he were just poking fun at goofy religious beliefs, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. If he presented a balanced view and was able to arrive at the same conclusion without the rhetorical tricks, I may have disagreed, but I wouldn’t have faulted him for it.

Pretending that he had a valid argument supported by solid evidence, however, kind of got me riled up. It was sort of like watching Colin Powell try to prove to the U.N. that Iraq had WMDs – I kept thinking, “If this is the best evidence he has to prove his point, he’s sunk.”

I, too, believe in evolution and believe that Adam (if he existed) was the “first man” in that he was either the first of his kind (the result of evolution), or the first to spoken to by God, or the first to be chosen for a particular task by God… or is simply a symbolic representation created by Moses (or whoever wrote those first chapters of Genesis) to explain symbolically the creation of man and his relationship with God.

And I consider myself to be very strongly religious and believe that science and religion can live together in complete harmony. So, would you recommend that I watch it? Do you think I’ll laugh more than I’ll be offended?