This is the most interesting audio I have heard in a long time! The hearings contain many PhD level scientists, doctors, biologists, teachers, philosophers that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are gaping holes in the theory of evolution.
The lawyer defending the side of evolution does not dispute one single fact... he simply degrades and belittles the witnesses. If anything, regardless of your opinion, there is an amazing wealth of rational inquiry and scientific testimony.
There may be debate over the origin of man, but after listening to these testimonies, there in no debate over the faltering, weak and withering theory of Darwin's evolution.
An entertaining attempt to add Creationism into the Kansas school system. It would be tougher to stomach without the knowledge that the school board members were later replaced by rational adults and the decisions eventually overturned.
The hearings were overseen by Connie ("I feel bad for them when they face God on Judgment Day") Morris, Kathy ("It is a serious offense to mock God") Martin, and Steve (I can't find a decent quote for this guy, but I'll keep looking) Abrams.
John ("Just because I don't hold a Kansas bar license does not mean that I can't come into Kansas and practice law") Calvert led the fight for Intelligent Design, and the unpronounceable Pedro Irigonegaray acted as the lone voice of reason in this kangaroo court.
Most spent their time trying to discredit the Theory of Evolution (which was consistently referred to as Neo-Satanism--no waitasec--Neo-Darwinism) and its supporters. For instance, we don't have a fossil record for pre-Cambrian complex life. Oh no! The entire Theory of Evolution is thrown into doubt! And what the heck was up with the squirrel thing? Two groups of squirrels on opposite side of a canyon may or may not be different species. Well, the question was asked, why didn't the scientists just try breeding them to find out? BAM! Evolutionists, and by extension, Evolutionary Theory have been discredited. (if they had bothered asking, a scientist might have told them that different species can be capable of breeding, but separated into different reproductive groups by different mating seasons, or geography; like, I dunno, a big canyon!)
What this hearing comes down to is an example of human ideology superseding evidence based research. It's worth noting that with all of their praising of empirical science, not one shred of real evidence was presented for Intelligent Design during the four days of hearings. Not very intelligent in my opinion.