Skip to main content

Don't Underestimate the Fool

In the years I've spent watching the walking, babbling idiocy that is young earth creationism, I have learned never to underestimate what they will do, never to be surprised at what they claim, and certainly never to think that most of those who believe this way will be open to reason. No claim is too absurd, no denial of reality too patently ridiculous for the proponents of a literal Genesis. Belief is a powerful thing, especially a belief that refuses to see objective evidence, and such are the beliefs of young earth creationism. Whether it is Ken Ham or Eric Hovind, they are united in their conviction that true Christianity requires that the Bible be taken literally, especially the creation myth of Genesis. Further, they believe that to accept, as many Christians do, that evolution is reality is to join the ranks of the compromisers, and to risk eternal damnation.
 
While there is no debate among scientists as to the fact of evolution, this has no meaning to the creationists. While Darwin's theory was at first opposed within the scientific community, acceptance of the theory by scientists today is total, and the evidence in support of it is beyond overwhelming. The evidence is powerful, but the belief of a creationist and their stubborn denial of reality is more powerful still. So to see no less a person than Richard Leakey say that critics of evolution will soon be silenced is somewhat dismaying. I've immense respect for Leakey, for both he and his parents have made discoveries crucial to advancing our understanding of the human past, but in this instance I must conclude that this notion is nothing more than wishful thinking. After all, at this point there is surely evidence enough to convince anyone with even a modicum of an open mind that evolution is historical fact, and while not every detail is clear (and scientists may quibble about certain aspects of the idea), there can be no doubt that evolution is reality, not a wild conjecture. If there remain those unconvinced that evolution is true, it is not for lack of evidence. While I wish that just one more discovery would be enough, the many discoveries that have already been made, and the stance of creationists, do not make me especially hopeful in that regard.
 
Leakey made the statement that, were all the hominid fossils lined up, "even a fool" could establish their relatedness. Never underestimate a fool, Dr. Leakey, for in discussing what you had to say the great fools at Answers in Genesis proclaimed yet again that there are no transitional fossils because creatures don't evolve into different "kinds," whatever that means. Whatever else they are, the people at Answers in Genesis are not going to be moved by the evidence; this is a matter of faith to them, and no amount of evidence will overturn their cherished convictions, especially as they seem to think that evolution is Satan in disguise trying to lure them into hell. Give a creationist that "just one transitional fossil" they always demand, and they'll simply deny it. That's what they've done thus far.
 
So why even bother then? If the diehard creationists will never be swayed, why try, and why spend time writing something like this? Simply put, of all the people who believe that the world is only six thousand years old, not all are of the same caliber as the Answers in Genesis charlatans. For many, a lack of understanding as to what evolution really is stands between them and reality. Anyone who has even a modicum of an open mind may yet be saved from ignorance. I should know: I used to be one of them.
 
To hope that young earth creationism will be eradicated is unfounded wishful thinking. At best, we may hope for and work towards their increased marginalization, so that the court cases and school board battles become a thing of the past. To imagine that this strand of denial will go extinct when more evidence is found is not at all realistic. In this battle, though, achieving the complete irrelevance of the creationists is a goal we can achieve, and, as Leakey believes, it is a goal that we must achieve if we are to face the perils that humanity must confront to survive.

Comments

  1. It doesn't help that the way they perpetuate this nonsense is lying to children through completely ridiculous explanations of evolution that no sane human being could believe. If only children were taught what evolution really is.... oh wait they already do that in many public schools, and creationists are trying to take that away too.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

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 ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...