Creationist Wisdom #246: Incredible Research

Today’s letter appears in The Advocate located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. It’s titled Defense of intelligent design. One of our clandestine operatives told us about it. We’ll give you a few excerpts, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, and some bold font for emphasis. As we usually do we’ll omit the writer’s name and city. Here we go:

The letter-writer begins by referring to this earlier letter: Science belies intelligent design. That one was written by William Pryor, described as “emeritus Boyd Professor and first director of the Biodynamics and Pennington Biomedical Institutes.” It says:

Intelligent design asserts, by faith in the Bible, that God created the Earth and humans a few centuries ago, whereas science, using the scientific method, shows that evolution explains the origin of all species over eons and the Earth is millions of years old.

In righteous response, today’s letter-writer says:

It is astonishing to read that a man so accomplished in the scientific field can be at the same time so blindly misinformed in regard to the theistic side for the creation of the Earth and the universe itself.

Blindly misinformed! It gets better:

I first take issue with his incorrect assertion that intelligent design dictates the Earth was created only a “couple of centuries ago.” What he refers to is a belief held by young-Earth creationists, not those backing intelligent design.

Right. Those intelligent design types say they’re not young-earth creationists, so although they still reject evolution and the whole enterprise of naturalistic science, that somehow means they’re not creationists. The letter continues:

The overwhelming majority of Christians recognize this group and their beliefs to be without any scientific basis, and ultimately dismissed by anyone attempting to be intellectually honest. Intelligent design, on the other hand, finds its roots in the theological argument for the existence of God and appeals to an evidence-based explanation for the origins of life in our universe.

Hey, life exists, and there are theological argument for the existence of God. That means intelligent design is evidence-based! By the same reasoning, so is the theory of Apollo’s sun-chariot. Let’s read on:

Pryor continues his letter by asserting “religion and science cannot correct each other.” Here again it is painfully obvious that Pryor is unaware of the incredible scientific research available for the defense of basic religious doctrines.

“Incredible” is the operative word. We continue:

Take the big bang theory, for example. According to the theory, all matter and energy, even physical space and time themselves, came into being at the big bang event more than 14 billion years ago. Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity led to discoveries which found that the universe was not static as once believed, but ever-expanding. … This had huge implications for both science and theology.

Wow — he mentioned Einstein! This is serious stuff. Hey, get this:

Now, given that whatever begins to exist has a cause, there must be some transcendent cause for the origin of the universe. Theists call that cause God.

Then he quote-mines Stephen Hawking — as if Hawking gives any comfort to creationists — and here’s how he wraps it all up:

What proponents of intelligent design want is a balanced curriculum that includes the many different ideas concerning the origins of the universe and life within it. Intelligent design is not Bible study; it is a different conclusion based on the same set of scientific facts. Students should be exposed to both.

Yes, a balanced curriculum — one with equal amounts of science and Oogity Boogity! That’s reasonable, isn’t it?

Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

3 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #246: Incredible Research

  1. “What proponents of intelligent design want is a balanced curriculum…”
    Then please propose classes in (and budgets for) comparative religion, theology, philosophy, etc.

    “…that includes the many different ideas concerning the origins of the universe and life within it.” Great. I’m all for multi-cultural mythology being taught, even at the earliest grade levels.

    This letter eloquently demonstrates what others have correctly pointed out, “the controversy” is inter-religious, not science vs religion.

    @SC
    ““Incredible” is the operative word.” Good catch!

  2. Spector567

    I should note I’m all for a balanced curriculum. Equal time for equal effort. Something most people agree too.

    Of course there is next to no scientific effort or proof in creationism so to be fair they het one word per semester.

    Creationist never like to here that. Yet they can’t. Argue against it.

  3. @Spector567
    “so to be fair they het one word per semester.”
    They should be allowed a whole sentence like “Creationism and its spin-off, intelligent design, are faith-based or religious concepts which are not testable or provable using the scientific method and therefore have no place in science, including our science classroom.”

    Perhaps we should welcome the stealth ID bills, since they necessarily allow teachers to address the fallacy of “scientific” ID without requiring a quantitative “equal time” component. Honestly addressing the ID side of “the controversy” as scientifically invalid might eventually nip this nonsense in the bud (in schools, which is the concern). Of course, the creationists “warriors” will hatch another scheme, but appear more ridiculous with each new , desperate ploy.