Inherit the wind (DivX) Eng-Fre.avi (Size: 867.93 MB) (Files: 1)
Inherit the wind (DivX) Eng-Fre.avi
On a programming note, kindly note that our Rumpole series will continue mid next week until we have the four volumes for Seasons three and four launched for you to share. We intend to also rack "Rumpole of the Bailey", the so called "lost episode" from what was the pilot episode of the series as we located the disc luckily in town at a rental shop. We ask for your on-going seeding support for all our movies and British programming torrents as everthing we do is intended to promote cultural awareness leading to better standards of articulating and in fact existing for that matter. Merci
We now being you an excellent quality conversion of "Inherit the wind" at 640 X 480 video and with dual audio in both English and French. If interest is indicated, we could launch an English Spanish version however there would need to be seeding support for it I would think. Despite all the great features of our offering, our file size is only 168megs larger than the 700 Meg alternative now floating on the Internet that comes in at only 480 X 288 video by comparison and is inadequately sized to do justice to this great work of the motion picture industry, albeit in black and white as that is the only version we are aware of that is available since we don't think they are likely to ever colorize this movie, although who is to tell, after all. We also found that the 700meg version was encoded in such a way using older technology that we had to reconvert to standard DivX 6 level to have it display on our equipment at home.
This is "hands down" the best possible offering for you here today.
As to the content, the movie is focused on what were referred to as the "monkey trials". The question to be decided is whether it is legitimate in the sense of the observance of law, and in addition, moral indeed to be preaching alternatives to the biblical version of how creation unfolded on our planet at the outset in any event.
The theories being advanced are those in particular of Charles darwin" who thought that man evolved from a lower order of species, that all forms of life on earth evolve from other forms etc. Those that preach the "big bang" theory suggest that all that is on earth came out of no where, and indeed Darwin's suggestion that "the survival of the species" came from the notion of "survival of the fittest" is just as speculative in a moral sense as the former is scientifically.
St. Thomas Aquinas was a great thinker involved with the church while active in the practice of philosophical argument and published his views that are taught at most universities today in this area of continued speculation and debate. He advances several important arguments to negate any notion for a rightly thinking man to accept that something came from nothing in what the world is today. after all, as the theory goes, if you take a hundred pieces of metal and throw them together repeatedly, they will never collide in such manner as to form a precision watch (in the form of an accurate timepiece) since that would be beyond reason to expect. You would have to design the outcome and go about bringing your results to fruition methodically in this respect. Those who teach the "big bang" theory, therefore are simply those that choose to reject a notion of a creator with nothing more than an obvious inanity fit for their needs but is just as incredulous as anything you could imagine in the way of an explanation for how we came to be, in a world with so much order and obvious evidence of having been built to a design of a creative force as it were, no matter what you understand it to be.
The again those that seek to relate man to ape, are no doubt bringing about as notion that if that is our roots, then perhaps we are entitled to return to them in some way, in such a way as to perhpas pursue a parralel existennce even as we are made inhuman form and nothing more than that makes us a different form of being. This to me is equally incredible to suggest although there is some physical resemblance that is a bit of a stretch to take too far, let alone suggesting that one form of being led to the other by some form of miracle. It is idle speculation of a mind that seeks comfort in such ideas as they tend to lower the playing field in our expectation of what makes man truly better than that.
that all said, the movie is very much telling us that religion practices it own form of repression, of cruelty of the inane that follow in a way that is blind to the spirit of those that would preach the bible, as we are told in what the movie is about. If religion is used to stifle the real spirit of what a loving existence of right minded folks should be based on our own faculties to reason (contemporary philosopher Walter Stace says that if you think that god is dead and that you therefore don't have to be moral, then you aren't genuinely civlized)then it isn't being practiced by certain folkin a way as to do justice to what should have been intended when it was considered a reasonable way to pursue the best possible aims. Is the alternative a rejection then of religion, and if so, should we altogether negate allthat would be sane to think, by such flights of idle fantasy as is taught by "big bang" theorists? Or Darwins ideas in addition?
Id like to think that man will find that he can be a moral person by "looking within" as is Immanuel Kant's teachings on the matter. And if so, he may stray from religion and he mat reject "darwinism" even more, while still being able to call himself morally upright and correct in his dealings and aims in his terrestial walk among men.
I personally suggest that the measure of any society is its ability to treat well those spirits that are sensitively and genuinely Christianly and in need of right care to survive and flourish. The character played by Ms. Donna Anderson in the movie is constantly being cruelly mistreated by a bigoted mindset that fails to see the real reason you would want to preach anything at all. It is to see that loving people get their due. As such I say that both sides of this debate fail in the most fundamental test of what they exist for, as is the message of this movie for us all.