Evil Evolutionism!

[silversolitaire]

Okay, I've seen this site before and I've already made fun of it, but I just happened to surf by again and I don't remember having seen this bullshit before. That's one thing I just don't get about religious nuts. I don't blame anyone for truly believing in God and Jesus. I'd never. If someone really believes in Jesus' words it only makes sense to live after them. So, it might sound odd to us to hear people say that this or that is wrong and you should always do this etc. but at least these people stick to their rules. It's not for me to question those. What I do question is people who just follow blindly, who have had it drilled into their heads that something is evil because the Bible says so and they just go along with it. That's what annoys me. When someone didn't take an active choice to believe into something but just accepts it as true because others say so.

Eh, I've digressed. Anyway, my point is, I don't get about religious nuts, CHRISTIAN religious nuts how they can so openly reject clear and present facts.

Example: The sad tale of Professor Giraffenstein and his little buddy Pepper the moth!

Fun Fact #1:
Moth: Hey Professor! Haven't dinos been extinct for million of years?
Prof: Wrong litte buddy... Dinosaurs still walk on the land and swim in the seas! And the Earth is less than 10,000 years old!

Okay... so, they ignore basically all the facts that are generally accepted by geologists, historians and a bunch of other academics. And to make it even worse they teach their children that and back it up with this hilarious site. What is this, The Lost World, part deux? And where did they nab those pictures from? Jurassic Park? How come they didn't even manage to take a decent camera with them when they supposedly saw real dinosaurs and had to resort to this pathetic doodle and why has the press never reported about this, if it happened last year? But wait, there's more!

Fun Fact #2:
Moth: I saw in a Secular movie that T-Rex was a vicious killing machine. Is this true?
Prof: No, Secular movies lie! T-Rex was a herbivore, its sharp teeth used to shred plants. The Ark's passengers were safe from harm!

This... is just... URGH! There's no animal on this world that has sharp and pointed teeth like the Tyrannosaurus Rex and is a herbiwore! It totally contradicts biology! How would the T-Rex have managed to shred plants with those teeth? And "secular"? WTF? First when I read this I was wondering why the hell people would feel the need to lie at children about that, until I read that Ark bit. And isn't this just painfully stupid? Does that mean that there weren't any carnivores in the Ark at all? So... what about lions and tiger and bears, oh my? Okay, not bears, but you get the drift.

Oh and the Bible (and our friends here) apparently endorse incest! Refer to Fun Fact #6.

And this one's my favorite...

Fun Fact #8:
Moth: My friend Bomby the bombadier beetle can shoot boiling-hot toxic chemicals out of his butt. Why?
Prof: God gave your friend that ability for defense against evil and as a testament against the false doctrine of Evolutionism!

That's RIGHT! Got nothing to add to that, thank you.

Comments

[andrewwyld.livejournal.com]

They're coming through slowly ... it'll probably filter through over the next forty-eight.

The pepper moth, incidentally, has its pepper pattern to enable it to blend with tree bark, etc.  After the industrial revolution filled the nation's skies with beautiful, black smoke, and several hundred tonnes of picturesque coal-dust joined them, the pepper moth darkened rapidly to a uniform black.  It is now returning more or less to its former colour.

From what I recall of the more enlightened creationist arguments, they probably use the pepper moth to accept the existence of limited-level evolution, while denying the existence of speciation (the key point at which a single species of organism becomes two or more species incapable of interbreeding -- actually, horses and donkeys can be bred to produce mules, but mules are sterile, in other words, the interbreeding process is either imperfect or completely non-functional).

It has been argued that speciation has never been observed, and therefore, that there is no scientific evidence for it.  It may be that horses and donkeys are actually in the process of speciation, so perhaps mules will become an impossibility at some future point; however, seeing that we don't have a complete manifest of all species on earth, we may never be able to tell when a new species comes into being (unless it be from a well-known population of one species which has already been studied).

[silversolitaire.livejournal.com]

Oh! Oh! Oh!!! That is the Pepper Moth! Then I know it! Just not under this name! I heard about it in my advanced biology class as an example for natural adaption. Is that the one that used to be white and sat around on birch trees and then the industrialisation made the bark go black and thus the ones that had the mutation of being black had an advantage to the white ones and so they won over by natural selection. Survival of the fittest par excellence.

You're right, that is rather odd. Then again, according to them, God is SO SMART so why shouldn't he just make a new moth when he realizes that the old one can't live in these times? ^_~

*rolls eyes* Of course we can't have clear evidence for speciation unless we lock all species everywhere into pens so we can watch then 24:7 and even then we probably won't be able to have them all in view either -.-. And you could have the same arguments against God as well. Catholics can say what they want, I don't believe in any of these supposedly documented miracles performed by our latest additions to sainthood. And ignoring the human aspect completely there will NEVER be an evidence for God's deeds unless we believe one or two weirdoes who claim to have seen / experienced it. A religious belief per se is build up on the will to believe something nobody will be able to prove to you most of the time. So it's really rather hypocritical to reject something because they don't have visual proof.

[andrewwyld.livejournal.com]

If you locked all species into pens, evolution would progress in a slightly different manner.  Would you give predators access to prey on a time-slot basis?  What about diseases, which can out-evolve any of us?

Of course, if you believe that God created everything then the existence of trees, plants, diesel oil and marshmallows are all evidence of God; however, they could all be evidence of something else.  In the end, the only important miracles take place inside people's heads; the only pattern you can discover in the gospel to Jesus's willingness to perform miracles (or unwillingness to perform like a trick monkey with @signs@) is that the recipients of the miracles really needed them -- they aren't supposed to be some kind of proof ....

[silversolitaire.livejournal.com]

Darn it, you, there goes my brilliant plan! :-P

As for miracles, they are meant as some kind of proof when taken as the justification to canonize someone. Since, even though it may not seem like it anymore, three miracles or more are still a prerequirement for sainthood. So, the Saint Factory, oops, the Vatican has a great interest in being able to prove miracles. Advocatus Diaboli and all that. But God himself is not supposed to have to prove his existence, yes. What would be the point of a dogma then.

[andrewwyld.livejournal.com]

It's a given that the absence of miracles is not proof of the absence of sanctity.

[silversolitaire.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, how else would you prove that a normal human being deserves the status of a saint at all, if not through normal worldly proof? To me, personally, it's easy. There is no proof. I don't believe in humans ever being able to reach the stage of sainthood, so I think all of this is rather otiose.

But yes, just because the lightning bolt doesn't crash down right in front of you doesn't mean that Zeus hasn't been aiming at you the entire time ^.~.

[andrewwyld.livejournal.com]

It's a point, I suppose.  But if someone did attain that state, would they tell you?