You probably remember our recent post about the work done by Herbert Wilf and and Warren Ewens. They developed a mathematical model showing that There’s Plenty of Time for Evolution.
This “plenty of time” argument must be driving the creationists crazy, because now we have a reaction from Answers in Genesis (AIG), one of the major sources of young-earth creationist wisdom. It’s the first item in AIG’s News to Note, December 18, 2010 — “A weekly feature examining news from the biblical viewpoint.”
They start out discussing the work done by Wilf and Ewens, but you’ll be better off skipping their description. Instead, read the link we gave you to the University of Pennsylvania’s article. Here it is again: There’s Plenty of Time for Evolution.
Then they give the same, tired old objections that have been aimed for years at Dawkins “weasel” program. It’s interesting that Behe and AIG think alike on this. Interesting, but not at all surprising.
Ordinarily, AIG’s insipid and very predictable rejection of the latest work wouldn’t be newsworthy to us, because we had already posted about the identical response from the Discoveroids. But then AIG surprised us by saying something else which was quite unexpected, and that’s why we’re posting about this. Here it comes, with bold added by us:
Besides, we often make the point that even if evolution had no theoretical difficulties — even if it were entirely “plausible” — that does not indicate that it actually occurred and the Bible clearly states in Genesis that God created everything by His Word in 6 days. Simply put, “could have” does not mean “did”!
What? They “often” make that point? No they don’t. If they did we’d have seen it. In fact, we doubt that they’ve ever made that point before.
Until today their entire argument (other than scripture) has been that evolution is flat-out impossible. They claim that what scientists say occurred as a result of evolution must have occurred by miraculous means.
Evolution is impossible, they say, because: “There’s not enough time for evolution, the odds are against it, there are no transitional fossils, design requires a designer, mutations are always destructive, micro-yes, macro-no, etc.” Those are the points they often make.
Did they think no one would notice that they’re moving the goal-posts again? Oh yes, they’re chanting “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia,” but it’s glaringly obvious that they’ve suddenly retreated to fallback position #69, which is this: “Even if evolution really is possible, so what? We deny it anyway!”
Hey, let’s give them credit for being honest — but just this one time. They’re finally admitting what creationism has always been, right from the beginning. There isn’t any science there, folks. It’s pure reality denial.
If you have some more time to kill, the next item in AIG’s “News from the biblical viewpoint” is their discussion of the Fermi paradox. Your Curmudgeon’s brain can only deal with one quantum of AIG-think per day, so we’ll pass on that one — but not without giving you a teaser. They say:
The consequences for the evolutionary worldview of not finding extraterrestrial life are far more severe than the consequences for the creation worldview of finding extraterrestrial life.
Yes, a day without ET is like a day without Darwin. Or so they claim. Go ahead and read it. Then let us know what you think.
Copyright © 2010. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.