Three weeks ago, the New York Times carried an article by David Barash, a biology professor, about an introductory lecture he gives to his students: God, Darwin and My College Biology Class. He begins with this:
It’s irresponsible to teach biology without evolution, and yet many students worry about reconciling their beliefs with evolutionary science. Just as many Americans don’t grasp the fact that evolution is not merely a “theory,” but the underpinning of all biological science, a substantial minority of my students are troubled to discover that their beliefs conflict with the course material.
So he gives them what he calls “The Talk.” We didn’t blog about it because we rarely write about articles with which we agree. It’s much more fun to wait for the creationist reactions. But even when the Discoveroids posted their predictable response (At U. of Washington, Evangelizing Atheist David Barash Illustrates How the Scientific “Consensus” on Darwinism Is Maintained), we still ignored it.
We shall ignore it no longer. Today we have a reaction from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, famed for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG) and for the mind-boggling Creation Museum.
Ol’ Hambo’s article is Evolutionary Biologist Gets It Right (Sort of). Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
For years evolutionists have been repeating the famous mantra of “nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution” in one form or another. Evolutionary biologist David P. Barash is the latest to make statements of this kind.
Hambo quotes Barash a bit and then he says:
Now, something that Dr. Barash fails to mention in his article is that naturalistic evolution actually goes against a principal law of biology: the Law of Biogenesis.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! A biology professor is ignoring a basic law of biology! Well, actually not, because there is no such law. The irony here is that creationism recognizes no laws of nature, because The Man Upstairs can whimsically suspend them whenever a miracle is desired.
Yet creationists make a big point of defending the utterly fictitious Law of Biogenesis. That “law” is such a false, rotting, putrid clunker it’s amazing that anyone bothers with it. TalkOrigins mentions it in their Index to Creationist Claims, but they give it only a couple of sentences: Pasteur and other scientists disproved the concept of spontaneous generation and established the “law of biogenesis”. We have a brief section on it in our Common Creationist Claims Confuted. Let’s read on:
The biblical worldview doesn’t have this problem; the Law of Biogenesis is never violated because all life, including the original creatures God made to inhabit the earth, comes from the Life-giver, our Creator.
See? There are no rules whatsoever in creationism. Well, there is one rule: Thou shalt ignore reality! Hambo continues:
Also, when we look at nature we see animals reproducing according to their kinds. Dogs give birth to dogs, bats give birth to bats, and whales give birth to whales. However, biological evolution requires that one kind of creature gives rise to another — something that has never been observed. So evolution is actually going against observational science!
Jeepers, he’s right! No one has ever seen a squirrel give birth to a hippopotamus. Here’s more:
The observable evidence confirms biblical creation. Evolution is not fundamental to biology but, rather, goes against the evidence we see in nature.
No comment. Moving along:
Barash then states, “Although the natural world can be marvelous, it is also filled with ethical horrors: predation, parasitism, fratricide, infanticide, disease, pain, old age and death — and that suffering (like joy) is built into the nature of things.” He argues that evolution destroys the idea of a “benevolent, controlling creator.”
Here’s Hambo’s response to that:
I would certainly agree with him! If you believe that God used evolution to create, what you are really saying is that our all-wise, all-loving Creator used a wasteful process of death, suffering, and extinction to create life. This provides no answer to the question, Why is there death and suffering?
Suffering and evil is an ancient theological (not biological) problem, but Hambo has an answer — it’s because of Adam & Eve and their original sin.
Ol’ Hambo goes on a bit longer, then he wraps it up by urging his readers to pray for the professor, and he finishes with a pitch for the books and videos AIG has for sale. Hambo seems to have one constant operational imperative: Any pro-evolution article in the media is an opportunity to sell AIG’s merchandise. That ol’ Hambo is a smart man!
Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.