Skip to main content

The Glazed Eyes of Delusion

As intellectually harmful as it is sometimes to listen to proponents of Young-Earth Creationism, it can often be instructive. Having read more articles from Answers in Genesis and listened to more YEC babbling than is healthy for a sane person, at the least I believe I understand how they operate. One such example is the look some creationists get when confronted with the "just one piece" of evidence for evolution. It is the look of a mind going right into autopilot, the glazed eyes of delusion.

You can see an example of this process in Richard Dawkin's documentary series "The Genius of Charles Darwin" when he interviews Wendy Wright (both the clip from the documentary itself as well as the full interview can be found on YouTube). "Show me the evidence," the President of Concerned Women for America says; when Dawkins responds with evidence, she pleads for "just one" fossil, one "carcass," in her words, that shows the transition from one species to another. All the while, she keeps a bright but suitably engaged smile on her face as her eyes start to glaze a bit. It's the look of a mind going into autopilot.

It is a remarkable process to watch. The mouth keeps moving but the mind has walled itself off against all opposition. "Teach the controversy" comes out (as if there really were one, in the scientific community at least) and the "problems of evolution" are trotted out (not as big or as problematic as the creationists would have you believe). But nothing is allowed to circumvent the wall of creationist logic. It cannot; no matter how many respectable scientists are brought to bear, no matter the parade of fossils, the importance of the genetic code, for most Young-Earth Creationists there is no openness of thought, no self-reflection that the reason most scientists accept evolution isn't because they hate God but because they love the truth.

Watching a mind close is a sorry sight, once the initial humor of it passes. A mind closed is a stagnant intellect, a tragic waste of potential. The evidence for evolution is readily available to anyone who truly wants to know. The evidence is unequivocal. Open your intellect and witness the wonder of one of the greatest ideas in the history of science.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...