Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Creationists are Wrong: Period. End of Discussion.

I'm always open to a good debate. But when the proponent begins with a wrong premise entirely, how can you debate them? For example, I might argue that using vanilla and cream makes the best chocolate. You might point out that chocolate isn't made from vanilla and cream, but from cocoa beans, and so on and so forth. I might say "vanilla cream" is a "alternative" type of "white" chocolate. And that you are wrong for rejecting my belief in "white chocolate." But we all know that this premise is wrong, and so is not one we should waste time arguing against. What's peculiar to me, is that this simple logic escapes Creationists entirely.

At any rate, here is Eugenie Scott's presentation at the AAI 2009 Convention in Burbank, California. Scott is the head of the National Center for Science Education, which works to protect the teaching of Evolution in American schools. Visit http://ncse.com/

Enjoy!

 



Also, check out this wonderful National Geographic article on Evolution (it's a little dated but thorough): HERE after the jump.

3 comments:

  1. You're giving creationism too much credit. It's so ridiculous, it's not even wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  2. LoL. You're right. And it reminds me of the new Scrubs episode where Dr./Professor Cox points out that his grad student is sooooo wrong that they almost became right again. That always makes me laugh. Because it's true. If they could be any more wrong, they might just become right by sheer luck. Hahaha.

    It makes one wonder though, how can people be so unfounded as to not even be wrong that they can't see that they not mistaken apples for oranges, but rather, peanuts for octopuses. It's just bizarre, because most of these people swear that they have the capability to "reason" just like everyone else.

    However, I would say where the skill of discerning information comes in, they need more practice. Some of their ideas are logically correct, like the Wiki link says, but they're just not even right, so much so that the wrong answer would have a higher probability of being closer to the truth than the one they are offering.

    Creationism, however, has always been more of a political ploy in the U.S. for American Fundies to push Christian lobbyist agendas and get laws passed which would dictate that Creationist nonsesne be taught in public schools. This is a real worry, and even though they are wrong, they do have some political influence which can be abused by ignorant folks just wanting to do the "good Christian thing" and support their fellow "Christians." Even though many of the Christians who are more or less liberal would be horrified to find out exactly what the Creationist camp wants to be taught as "alternative" theories.

    I don't think I'm giving them too much credit here, because they have bullied their way into the lime light more than once, and they'll try and do it again. I don't want such blinkered thinking to spread to other countries though. That would be truly bad.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When I first started researching for my book, I started learning what creationism meant. Honestly, when I began to grasp that concept, I laughed out loud. I cannot believe that people adhere to this stupidity. Literally, a philosophical house of cards. However, what is frightening is that many people with many "screws loose" work very hard to get this idea onto public school curriculums. Just seems like the factor of natural selection and time goes over everyones heads.

    Tristan, if you are interested, PBS Nova did a really great documentary on how creationism and evolution went to the Supreme Court in Dover Pennsylvania. I would not worry about it getting anywhere because it has already been deemed unscientific, and they got nowhere with it. It is a great documentary, and you may like it.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/intelligent-design-trial.html

    ReplyDelete

Advocatus Atheist

Advocatus Atheist