AIG Reacts to “Cosmos” Episode 11

Earlier we posted Klinghoffer Reacts to “Cosmos” Episode 11. Now we have a response from the creation scientists at Answers in Genesis (ol’ Hambo’s online ministry), and the author is Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, a creationist gynecologist. Her article is Cosmos Review: “The Immortals”.

She’s writing about the 11th episode of Cosmos: A SPACETIME ODYSSEY, hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson, which aired on Sunday. Titled “The Immortals,” it was partly about the possibility of beings that live forever, with some talk about why civilizations perish, and some speculation about how life spreads from one planet to another.

Aided by her gynecological and scriptural expertise, Dr. Mitchell says, with some bold font added by us and her scripture references omitted:

“The Immortals,” episode 11 of Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey, exploits the metaphorical value of Noah’s Ark in a series of evolutionary themes while, not surprisingly, treating the biblical account as just a spin-off of the ancient Epic of Gilgamesh. Though admitting that evolutionists do not know how life could have evolved from lifeless elements through naturalistic processes, Cosmos host Neil deGrasse Tyson assumes that it did.

What a wild and crazy assumption! Then she says:

“Must we die?” asks Tyson as the episode opens. The opening words point to the motivation of Gilgamesh in the famous ancient Akkadian epic. Gilgamesh, the hero of the tale that includes one of the oldest flood legends to be written down, searches for immortality.

[…]

By understanding our true history we can understand the origin of suffering and death. God created a perfect world but warned Adam that disobedience would result in death. Man rebelled, and therefore we must die and face our Creator. However, eternal life is given to everyone who repents and trusts in the sacrificial death of God’s Son Jesus Christ.

Gilgamesh was a fool! And so is Tyson. Dr. Mitchell discusses the dispersal from the Tower of Babel, which Tyson somehow never mentioned, and then she tells us:

In the post-Flood world, the first cities were built in this region [Mesopotamia]. The people descended from Noah’s family were intelligent and literate. They left written records of their presence — poems, school exercises, trade notes, etc. Tyson claims ancient Mesopotamian places “invented” cities and writing. Yet only evolutionary thinking would deceive us to think that the pre-Flood people lacked intelligence, literacy, and complex social structure — yet Adam was even credited with a book that is mentioned by Moses.

Adam wrote a book? Dr. Mitchell cites Genesis 5:1 for that, but all it says is:

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

Well, who are we to disagree with a creation scientist? Let’s read on:

The Epic of Gilgamesh contains one of the hundreds of flood legends that abound in cultures all over the world. These legends are ubiquitous because all people in the world are descendants of Noah’s family, the only people to survive the global Flood.

We’ve written about that before, but it was ICR that made the argument that all flood legends are about the same Flood — see ICR: Even More Proof of the Flood. However, even ICR’s “research” shows that the various legends are all dissimilar, only a few have the survivors sending out birds, even fewer mention a rainbow, only one remembers Noah’s name, and there are other ancient societies — like Egypt — with no legend of a global flood. Also, the Epic of Gilgamesh is far older than Genesis. Let’s see what else the good doctor has for us:

Moses, inspired by God, wrote down the authentic account of the Flood, and it is preserved in the book of Genesis. Tyson asserts that the Akkadian epic, because it was written earlier than the Mosaic account, was the source of the Old Testament account. However, the source was the shared history of a real global Flood, not a shared piece of literature.

The biblical historical account, recorded under the inspiration of God by Moses, is completely believable in all its details. This genuine history in Genesis 6–9 and the distorted version adapted from Sumerian legends and preserved in the Akkadian Epic of Gilgamesh report on the same historical event. Therefore, the fact that there are some similarities is easily understood.

Yeah, right. Genesis came later, but it’s the real deal. She continues:

The capricious and unseemly nature of the gods in the Gilgamesh epic stand in sharp contrast to the just, holy, and merciful character of God in the authentic biblical account. There is no justification for supposing the true history in the Bible to be a spin-off of the Gilgamesh epic.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! God killed virtually everything on Earth! Very merciful. The creationist gynecologist goes on for several more paragraphs about Noah’s Ark, but we’ll skip over that to see if she says anything else about Cosmos. Ah, here’s more:

All living things use the same genetic alphabet and the same genetic language to store and transmit information in DNA. Evolutionists consider this to be a consequence of the common ancestry of all living things. However, in order for all the life God designed on earth to live and interact in the same biochemically uniform world, our wise common Designer, the Creator God, used the same code system to write the DNA blueprints for each living thing.

Hey — if you’re going to invent a designer, you may as well go all the way and invent his work habits too. Moving along:

An organism’s DNA contains the information needed to build that organism. Tyson says that, using this genetic language, “every living thing is a masterpiece written by nature and edited by evolution.” However poetic this may sound, nothing in the study of living things has ever shown that one kind of organism can through natural processes produce or obtain the information needed to evolve into a new, more complex kind of organism.

That’s just flat-out whacky. Another excerpt:

Tyson admits that evolutionists have no way to explain how nonliving elements could spontaneously become alive. He says, “The essential message of life has been copied and recopied for over three billion years, but where did that message come from? Nobody knows.” Tyson then tosses out several of the popular implausible possibilities …

She briefly mentions a few ideas that are under consideration, but dismisses them all. On with the article:

If evolutionists cannot get living cells to evolve from non-living elements through natural processes (this is called abiogenesis, which goes against the scientific Law of Biogenesis), [Aaaargh!!] their “story” is over before it starts. All their popular ideas about how life could have evolved from molecules fall far short of believable, even in the eyes of honest evolutionists.

This is really raw, primitive creationism. But what did we expect? It’s AIG. Does she say anything else worth mentioning? Not really She dismisses the concept that life could have arrived on earth from meteorites that contained microbes. How? By saying:

This scenario also begs the question of how life could have ever evolved in the first place. It also posits a history of earth featuring a speculative timescale and a physics-defying formative mechanism. Furthermore, no space debris has ever been found to contain microbial life.

We’re only about two-thirds through her article, but we’re done with it. There’s nothing here that we haven’t seen before. Read it all if you like. It’s possible that we missed a gem or two.

Copyright © 2014. 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

15 responses to “AIG Reacts to “Cosmos” Episode 11

  1. “yet Adam was even credited with a book that is mentioned by Moses.”
    I just love the way these religious nut jobs make up crap as they go along.

  2. There is one thing that the AIG and the Discoveroids share – both assert that science has all the answers that will ever be known to any question. If a scientist says “I don’t know”, it proves that there is no solution to the question, and therefore god-did-it. Doc Liz brings this up over and over – scientists don’t know how life originated, proving that what is written in our ancient book is true. (And not someone else’s ancient book, but only our ancient book)

    Doc Liz predictably focuses on the ark, because of course that is AIG’s reason for being. For the AIG, it’s all ark, all the time. On the other hand, Casey seems to have focused mainly on Tyson’s speculations about Panspermia, which is probably a better criticism of the show. Oh, and Hitler. (I presume we’ll get a review of Casey’s response tomorrow?)

  3. What the gynecologist has done here is what AiG normally does – demonstrate that they actually are not paying attention to the news.

    The evidence for why and how of abiogenesis is getting stronger. A recent discovery that certain cell structure organization is a faster way to dissipate heat (rough memory description) explains why a cell might organize to begin with – a result of heat dissipation. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/22/physicist-says-hes-solved-the-big-mystery-how-life-came-from-matter-and-he-may-be-right/

    AiG is a group of professional idiots.

  4. Mark Joseph

    Addy Pross’ book What Is Life? subtitled “How Chemistry Becomes Biology” is a great read an a truly important step toward showing how abiogenesis works. It’s new, so I doubt that the creationists have had time to interact with it yet.

  5. Charles Deetz ;)

    They can’t trust scientists who have yet to screw up their interlocking lies of evolution, yet they can’t even get a coherent game of connect the dots with the world’s different flood legends, other than they involve water. WHY DON’T ALL THESE STORIES ALSO MENTION NOAH AND GOD??? Did everyone forget who did it until Moses wrote it down? For realz? Sheesh.

  6. waldteufel

    As she progresses through the Cosmos series, our creationist gynecologist goes deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole of insanity. One can only wonder how Hambo recruits his little pet “scientists” and “doctors” into his side show operation.
    Obviously, knowledge of the real world is not necessary to join Hambo’s coterie of creationist cretins.

  7. Did it bother anyone else that this episode began to do the “calender of the future” and never got past like 40,000 years? I was really hoping to see some stuff about the heat death or Big Bounce or any of those far-future cosmological theories but he just brings us to star trek and leaves off there. Maybe he’s saving that for the next episode, I didn’t bother to watch the preview.

    Glad they put their top creation scientist on this one! Her arkload of knowledge is such a clear light in these dark times

  8. treating the biblical account as just a spin-off of the ancient Epic of Gilgamesh. Though admitting that evolutionists do not know how life could have evolved from lifeless elements through naturalistic processes …

    Damned! I Looked in my New American Heritage Dictionary and a picture of that was right next to the entry for “non sequitur”!

  9. Well she has a point in that we haven’t found microbial life in any meteor.

  10. Our Curmudgeon instructs—

    “Hey — if you’re going to invent a designer, you may as well go all the way and invent his work habits too.”

    More than that, you can also invent his motivations and methods — and indeed anything else about him that you may need.

    Dr Mitchell, the gynaecological exegete, effluviates—

    “This scenario also begs the question of how life could have ever evolved in the first place.”

    (Emphasis added.)

    This is a semantic error that makes me grumpy. It should be “raises the question…”. To “beg the question is to commit the cretinists’ most favoured fallacy, the one that gushes forth in great floods.

  11. Our Curmudgeon writes

    Adam wrote a book? Dr. Mitchell cites Genesis 5:1 for that, but all it says is: “This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him”

    But that ‘book’ goes on to state, a few verses later (Gen 5:5), “And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died”–but somehow, if Adam is the author here, he managed to posthumously carry on scribing down a catalogue of his own descendants over all the intervening centuries to Noah.

    Attributing to Adam himself authorship of Genesis is as well founded as claiming that the following document–which I have just now ‘found’ on the internet–was written by none other than our Sensuous Curmdugeon himself!

    This is the Book of the degenerative practices of the Sensuous Curmudgeon, the notorious corrupter of public morality and regular indulger in the unspeakable practices of [edited out], [edited out], and full-frontal [edited out] with malice aforethought &c. &c.

  12. “Adam was even credited with a book”; the “book of the generations of Adam” is the catalogue of his descendants; no way Adam could have been described as the author. And the Hebrew word sefer could be (should be here, obviously) taken to mean account or narrative.

    What’s this woman’s reading age?

  13. Megalonyx describes a book:

    which I have just now ‘found’ on the internet–was written by none other than our Sensuous Curmdugeon himself!

    Being the universal model of charity, I shall overlook his misspelling of Curmudgeon as I inform you of his extensive scholarly works. Whenever Olivia and I learn, via the news, of some particularly heinous and bestial crime, she is certain to murmur: “Megalonyx wrote the book on that.”

  14. Sadly, I cannot claim to be either of the two editors of The Encyclopedia of Social Deviance, who hail–interestingly enough–from Louisiana and Alabama, respectively. Make of that what you will…

  15. Adam writing of his death is more than hilarious, This discoverroids keep us entertained.