Poor old Mr. Darwin has been the target of attacks from religious zealots for a century and a half now, when all he did was come up with a rational explanation for how all the complex life forms on the Earth came to be. While his original theories had some holes, the basic tenets have in fact been proven time and time again. Scientists watch things evolve all the time. But if you want to argue whether there is enough evidence to truly demonstrate evolution is and has been working on things as complex as man, go right ahead. I disagree, but skepticism is the core of good science so doubt away.
What drives me ape-shit crazy is the Creationists and backers of Intelligent Design attacking evolution, Darwin, and scientists using a logic system that is truly cringe worthy. The theory of evolution is not anti-religion or anti-faith. It provides a rational framework that one could easily believe a benevolent deity would put in place to bring about mankind. Just because something is not in the Bible does not mean it doesn't exist. Penguins are not tricks of the devil either.
Similarly, creationism is not "the other side" of the issue. One is a scientific theory demonstrable through experiment and one is philosophy/religion, revealed to us by God and requiring Faith. You do not teach them side-by-side as competing theories. Might as well complain geology is being taught without a proper mention of mythological volcano Gods. I am not saying this to demean the beliefs of creationists, but to select an example that shows how apples and oranges the two things are. You can't have a scientific argument that goes: You say lava is molten rock heated by the mantle of the Earth, but that cannot be because Vulcan would not intrude into the domain of Pluto, Lord of the Underworld. Both are accurate statements, but setting them counter to one another makes no sense. Knowing about Vulcan and the Greek/Roman pantheon is enriching, but it will not in any way help with the predictions of volcanic eruptions.
So what started me on this mini-rant? This YouTube video from the teen actor Kirk Cameron, famous for his stint on the sitcom "Growing Pains" in the 80s and fervent evangelism. To summarize for those unable or unwilling to watch the video, the big idea is to counter-attack all the media hoopla over 150 years of Origins of the Species by printing their own version of it, complete with a 50 page introduction giving the creationist argument. They will give the book away for free, bing bang boom, everyone will start attending a mega-church.
Because I am a glutton for punishment, I leafed through the introduction to the special Origin of the Species book, available here. Sit back, maybe get yourself a caffeine-free root beer and let me help you savor a fine piece of creationist propaganda:
It starts with 3 pages of introduction stolen from what I can only assume was a grade school book. Certainly not as sophisticated as wikipedia. The type size looks like 15 point Times New Roman. Then it spends another 3 pages giving you the timeline of his life, which they have unashamedly stolen from a Darwin 200th year celebration website (they cite it, but not sure if that forgives a full 3 pages of plagiarism). So yes, they summarize his life in 3 pages and then repeat the summary using a timeline for 3 more.
It is at this point I imagine most young readers would drop the book or skip over the introduction altogether. For those with stronger constitutions, they next start discussing DNA and how complicated it is, quoting scientist after scientist who die a little inside each time their own words are so mangled and misused. They then move on to how 4% similarity to chimps is not a big deal, before we hit the real meat: the section on transitional forms.
Again, I only skimmed this whole "Intro" (although it does not take long to read thanks to the giant type; 50 pages my ass) but this is the most effective section. Eight pages listing evolutionary hoaxes and failed attempts to identify missing links. Obviously there is some gross misunderstanding of what the fossil record tells us, but at least this attacks the scientific theory in a scientific way. From there they start to drift off into chicken and egg issues (which came first, heart or blood) and how darn complicated and interconnected the eye is, both of which I find to be very weak arguments, but at least it is still sorta attacking the theory. Finally we get a confused page on vestigial organs demonstrating that they don't really understand evolutionary theory (duh) -- somehow having extra organs we don't need is not an increase in complexity but a devolution? 29 pages in, 20 pages attacking evolution, the theory. That is all we are going to get.
Now comes the good stuff. A page calling Darwin a racist and a sexist, followed by a zen poem (not really, but it almost reads like one) about how man can not make one blade of grass. Seriously random digression. Then we finally get Darwin directly connected to Hitler. The section is entitled "His Famous Student" as if Darwin knew the man and hadn't died 7 years before Hitler was born. This is mostly 3 pages of Hitler quotes where Hitler uses the term evolution. Most of these passages out of context make little sense (I think they made little sense in context, too) and many are not even particularly ominous -- They are just an opportunity to italicize that Hitler liked using the term evolution in Mein Kampf. For instance:
In our case this term has no meaning. Because everyone who believes in the higher evolution of living organisms must admit that every manifestation of the vital urge and struggle to live must have had a definite beginning in time and that one subject alone must have manifested it for the first time. It was then repeated again and again; and the practice of it spread over a widening area, until finally it passed into the subconscience of every member of the species, where it manifested itself as 'instinct. -- Adolf Hitler, Mein KampfThen we get a Hitler Hit List (Hitler should have been a Top 40 DJ), where he organizes the races of the world into their various levels of ape-ness. Hint: You want to be Nordic or German. 36 pages in and I am now strongly offended.
At this point the "Intro" goes off the deep end and becomes a Born Again Christian tract. 3 pages on how Darwin was not an atheist, two pages on how Pen Jillette (!) once wrote how he could understand evangelism if a person truly believed in a Hell, then 10 pages about a choice between the original Mona Lisa (it was important not to get a copy), the keys to a new Lamborghini, a million dollars (in cash), or a parachute. Somehow that was directly translatable into a choice between the four major world religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and Christianity.
Oh, and we are being pushed out of a plane, so don't even try to hang glide using the Mona Lisa because that frame is old and will not withstand that kind of stress.
Important to this discussion is the fact that on February 24, 2005, nine-year-old Little Jessica was kidnapped, brutally raped, and then buried alive clutching a stuffed toy. Yes, this crime is horrific and would normally be obscenely out of place discussing the great world religions (were we discussing world religions?), but it is important because it demonstrates that there is a Just God. Somehow.
Mix in hellfire, a random selection of sins from the ten commandments, condemn homosexuality (always important), and then ridicule and demean Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims by summarizing their faiths with single paragraphs based on the writer's in depth knowledge of similar single paragraph summaries he read ten years ago, before ending with the declaration that therefore, obviously, Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation.
------
That.... Is a big waste of money.
They have somehow deluded themselves into believing that this will counter the big, bad secularists with this book giveaway.
1st of all, 18-21 year olds is hitting the issue a bit late. Especially for getting people on board the gospels.
2nd, Origin of the Species is not exactly Robert Ludlum. Most of those kids are not going to even crack the spine of that baby, especially with all the other stuff they have to read.
3rd, Mainly, they are opening themselves up to ridicule. This reads like propaganda. College students love the feeling they are being manipulated by clumsy, transparent propaganda.
I am sure some confused young people might latch onto it as the truth they half-believed already, but I think it is equally likely a similar number will be convinced the other way by the multiple controversies/debates this will spark if anyone actually notices this going on.
---
But Kirk Cameron actually looked pretty good. He is almost 39 years old.
Clean living, I guess.
