We found a pro-evolution article in the Daily Reveille, a student newspaper at Louisiana State University (LSU) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. It’s titled Professors should teach evolution theory as provable fact.
We weren’t going to blog about it because — although it’s unusual to see anything like that coming out of Louisiana — we all pretty much agree with what it says, so there’s nothing entertaining about it. But then one of our clandestine operatives (code name “Armadillo”) informed us of a companion piece in that same newspaper: The theory of evolution is not infallible. Ah — that one is worth discussing. We won’t name the author, but she’s a 20-year-old English junior from Baton Rouge. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
Evolution should be honestly presented as a possible but still unproven explanation of life origin — not the only explanation.
Evolution isn’t about the origin of life, but what’s the student’s explanation — aliens from Uranus? We shall see:
Observational science uses observable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable information to understand how nature commonly behaves. Scientists can’t directly observe, test, repeat or falsify a singular past event like the origin of life. Instead, they must interpret the evidence.
Aaaargh!! That’s the same madness we see routinely spewed from Ken Ham’s website. See the section about “Operational” science vs. “Historical” (origins) science in our post on Common Creationist Claims Confuted. Let’s read on:
Evolution has several meanings, so to clarify, when I use the term “evolution,” I am referring to macroevolution — the idea that all life originated from a common ancestor due to a combination of natural selection and mutations.
Lordy, lordy — it’s the Micro-Macro Mambo. That too is discussed in the post to which we just linked. We continue:
Scientists and teachers who dare to even consider other theories such as “intelligent design,” or ID, are ridiculed for being unscientific or stupid, and they risk losing their jobs.
Yeah, yeah — that’s the theme of Ben Stein’s trashy “documentary” — Expelled. Here’s more:
But no theory that claims to explain life’s origin can be proven accurate since no human was there to record the events.
Aaaargh!! Evolution is not about life’s origin, and again we see another of Ken Ham’s creationist debate techniques — Were you there? This column is a compendium of creationist coprolites. Moving along:
Take the age of the earth, for example. Observational science has proven that sedimentary rock layers can be deposited slowly by rivers. This may support the idea of an extremely old earth. The same form of science has also proven that rock layers can be formed quickly in natural catastrophes, such as floods or volcanic eruptions. This would support the idea that the earth is young.
Aaaargh!! Now it’s the Deluge! And we’re only about half-way through this thing. It goes on to mention the Cambrian explosion, the absence of transitional forms, “missing links” are fake or wrongly interpreted, etc., We’re not going to bother with those — we’ve rebutted that junk too many times in the past.
It ends up with this familiar creationist demand:
Textbooks, teachers and scientists should truthfully present all the facts and interpretations of scientific theories, including data that contradicts the most popular theory. Anything less is oppressive indoctrination.
Is there any hope for Louisiana? Maybe, but we don’t see much cause for optimism.
Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.