If there is one thing the folks at Answers in Genesis do not like, aside from evidence, naturally, it is being mocked or having their positions laughed at. But they just make it so darn easy to stand back and laugh, long and uproariously, whenever they talk. This week, their opinion voiced by the estimable Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, whom we've encountered before on this blog, AiG takes issue with the Doonesbury comic mocking the Louisiana Science Education Act, allowing the teaching of "evidence contrary to evolution" or "problems with evolution" or other such rot that has more basis in fundamentalist ideology than it does in evidence and science.
Dr. Mitchell (a medical doctor, not a PhD scientist, I hasten to add), is furious that not only were they mocked but they claim that their positions are "distorted." The teacher in the comic "delivers a series of erroneous and misleading statements." For instance, the character claims creationists say the earth is 5,700 years ago, when ever good creationist knows that it is over 6,000 years old. How stupid can Garry Trudeau have been to miss several centuries of "biblical chronology?" As if this wasn't bad enough, the character believes that Noah took microbes on the Ark but forgot the dinosaurs. Mitchell quickly corrects him, saying that dinosaurs were on the Ark, but not microbes. So, I guess Noah must have bleached the entire Ark down, to get rid of all the microbes that he wouldn't even have known existed, right? Trudeau may have "failed to do his homework about the Ark," but Mitchell forgot to do her homework on microbes, apparently. She also refers to how he "misrepresents" theology about God's judgment and his wrong idea that this law forces teachers to serve up creationism as an "alternative" to evolution. Along the way, evolution is referred to as a "fairy tale" which "lacks testable scientific evidence to support its contentions...", no surprise there, and that students are "indoctrinated" into evolution.
"Why should the scientific problems with these ideas be concealed from students?" Mitchell wants to know. Because there aren't "problems" in the sense that creationists mean, and high school students aren't ready, generally, to discuss other proposed mechanisms for evolution besides natural selection (whose proponents, like Lynn Margulis, accept evolution but propose different mechanisms as a substitute for or in addition to natural selection). There just isn't time in the science classroom. Mitchell also repeats the creationist mantra that evidence is interpreted through one's worldview. That has some basis in reality, but not when it comes to the evolution-creation "debate." Evolution speaks of evidence; creationism speaks of authority and belief. Evolution presents the evidence; creationism denies the evidence while presenting none of their own.
Radioisotope dating speaking to millions of years? Denied by creationists.
No evidence of a global Flood in the fossil record? Denied by creationists.
Numerous transitional fossils speaking to long evolution? Denied by creationists.
Evidence of evolution in the order of fossils? Denied by creationists; order a product of Noah's Flood...somehow.
The reaction of Answers in Genesis, making minor corrections in the comic as to the exact years of the young earth or the exact organisms on the Ark is just laughable. Imagine someone telling you that they believe unicorns exist, even though there is no evidence for such a hypothesis and they provide none. Then when you tell them you don't believe there is a red unicorn standing there, invisible to the observer's eye, the claimant gets exasperated and tells you that you've got it all wrong; the invisible unicorn is white, not red!
Even more odious, as is their standard tactic, Mitchell sternly reminds us that the comic isn't funny at all. "Misinformation which can lead people to laugh their way into decisions with disastrous eternal consequences is not funny." You don't have to be a theologian to know she's talking about hell, because of course all those who accept evolution are atheists, and accepting evolution based on the great strength of the evidence gets you a one-way ticket straight to hell. And Answers in Genesis is calling Doonesbury dishonest?
The only response to creationists at times like this is to laugh. Just laugh at them, at their silly little delusions and their petty grievances against a comic strip, their notion that "believing" in evolution will get you to hell. They are, certainly, one of the best unintentional comedians of our current age.
By the way, Answers in Genesis believes unicorns existed.
Dr. Mitchell (a medical doctor, not a PhD scientist, I hasten to add), is furious that not only were they mocked but they claim that their positions are "distorted." The teacher in the comic "delivers a series of erroneous and misleading statements." For instance, the character claims creationists say the earth is 5,700 years ago, when ever good creationist knows that it is over 6,000 years old. How stupid can Garry Trudeau have been to miss several centuries of "biblical chronology?" As if this wasn't bad enough, the character believes that Noah took microbes on the Ark but forgot the dinosaurs. Mitchell quickly corrects him, saying that dinosaurs were on the Ark, but not microbes. So, I guess Noah must have bleached the entire Ark down, to get rid of all the microbes that he wouldn't even have known existed, right? Trudeau may have "failed to do his homework about the Ark," but Mitchell forgot to do her homework on microbes, apparently. She also refers to how he "misrepresents" theology about God's judgment and his wrong idea that this law forces teachers to serve up creationism as an "alternative" to evolution. Along the way, evolution is referred to as a "fairy tale" which "lacks testable scientific evidence to support its contentions...", no surprise there, and that students are "indoctrinated" into evolution.
"Why should the scientific problems with these ideas be concealed from students?" Mitchell wants to know. Because there aren't "problems" in the sense that creationists mean, and high school students aren't ready, generally, to discuss other proposed mechanisms for evolution besides natural selection (whose proponents, like Lynn Margulis, accept evolution but propose different mechanisms as a substitute for or in addition to natural selection). There just isn't time in the science classroom. Mitchell also repeats the creationist mantra that evidence is interpreted through one's worldview. That has some basis in reality, but not when it comes to the evolution-creation "debate." Evolution speaks of evidence; creationism speaks of authority and belief. Evolution presents the evidence; creationism denies the evidence while presenting none of their own.
Radioisotope dating speaking to millions of years? Denied by creationists.
No evidence of a global Flood in the fossil record? Denied by creationists.
Numerous transitional fossils speaking to long evolution? Denied by creationists.
Evidence of evolution in the order of fossils? Denied by creationists; order a product of Noah's Flood...somehow.
The reaction of Answers in Genesis, making minor corrections in the comic as to the exact years of the young earth or the exact organisms on the Ark is just laughable. Imagine someone telling you that they believe unicorns exist, even though there is no evidence for such a hypothesis and they provide none. Then when you tell them you don't believe there is a red unicorn standing there, invisible to the observer's eye, the claimant gets exasperated and tells you that you've got it all wrong; the invisible unicorn is white, not red!
Even more odious, as is their standard tactic, Mitchell sternly reminds us that the comic isn't funny at all. "Misinformation which can lead people to laugh their way into decisions with disastrous eternal consequences is not funny." You don't have to be a theologian to know she's talking about hell, because of course all those who accept evolution are atheists, and accepting evolution based on the great strength of the evidence gets you a one-way ticket straight to hell. And Answers in Genesis is calling Doonesbury dishonest?
The only response to creationists at times like this is to laugh. Just laugh at them, at their silly little delusions and their petty grievances against a comic strip, their notion that "believing" in evolution will get you to hell. They are, certainly, one of the best unintentional comedians of our current age.
By the way, Answers in Genesis believes unicorns existed.
At least they aren't rioting over the cartoon like a certain other fundamentalist group. Still pretty ridiculous though.
ReplyDeleteSad that this cartoon upsets them so much, when they are a joke themselves
ReplyDelete