Thursday, May 27, 2010

Ready and wilig

Wilful ignorance.

Just let the meaning of those words sink in for a moment.

Wilful = intent on having one's own way; headstrong or obstinate, intentional.

Ignorance = The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. Lack of knowledge, information, or education; the state of being ignorant.

Thanks for indulging me. It makes sense of what I'm about to say. You see, starting from today I will no longer pander to the self-stylings of creationists and the proponents of so-called 'intelligent design'. From this day, anyone with the audacity to suggest that I ignore the weight of scientific evidence in favour of a woefully inadequate cocktail of pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo and mythology is officially among the ranks of the wilful ignorant.

Harsh? Maybe. But I, for one, am fed up with wiligs - that's what I call them now - leaving half-baked attacks and ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims on my blog as 'comments'. If you want to make a case for your belief system guys. please do. Happy to hear it. I'd welcome the discussion. But you never do, do you? Instead you simply tell me that I'm wrong and leave some steaming, usually inaccurate, 'proof' on my blogging doorstep like a stool in a lit paper bag.

The sort of 'proof' I'm talking about consists of 'experts' like Ken Ham who denounce the usual explanation for the fossil record by claiming that all fossils were deposited during the Great Flood. Ham says that, 'If there really was a global flood, you would expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the Earth … which is exactly what you do find!' Ha! he caught me there with his rapier wit. But wait ... we do indeed find 'billions of dead things' but they are arranged in a way that defies a global flood, which would have mixed up the fossils giving them no recognisable pattern with which to formulate an evolutionary theory. The fact is that they are layered, each layer bearing the fossils of increasingly complex organisms. The obvious explanation for this is a slow evolution over millions of years. The wiligs claim that the very visible sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon are Flood deposited ... but they contain no dinosaurs. They are in the Mesozoic rocks, which are stratigraphically above the Grand Canyon layers. How did the dinosaurs survive to this point? And what about the mammals? In Ham's global flood model, there should be an even mixing of fossil types; dinosaurs with mammals and humans and trilobites etc. This isn't anything like what we see (my thanks to Greg Nyman at the very sane and welcome Answers in Creation site from which I adapted these last two paragraphs). What we see here is a typical example of wilful ignorance; a deliberate refusal to accept irrefutable fact because it doesn't suit. Incidentally, the allegedly scientific has this to say about dinosaurs:

'All over the world people remember the dangerous dragons of old. But they slowly went extinct. Men feared and hated them. Stories of ancient encounters with dinosaurs/dragons are found in China, Thailand, including other parts of Asia, and in Roman, Russian, Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, North, South, and Central America, and across Africa too. Are we so much smarter and more academically inclined than all of our ancestors that we should reject all of their historical records - just to prop up temporary evolutionary theory?'

Dinosaurs and dragons were the same thing? Folktales and myths are 'historical records'? I had no idea. Let's read on, shall we?

'Carbon-14 dating of carbon buried in the same layer with dragon bones helps to confirm that they are really only thousands of years old. The myth-ions and myth-ions of years never happened; only in the past 200 years has it become fashionable to forget our true ancient history (of thousands of years) in favor of God-hating (or: 'bumbling-inherently-weak-god') evolution. Evolution requires the belief in long epochs of supposed time and chance improvements. Dragons and sea monsters have become mostly extinct prior to our modern era. By the way, there is evidence that they grew much larger prior to the Great Flood. Just as humans lived much longer (Genesis records ages of some people to have reached over 900 years!) so a reptile ... living much longer then could have grown much larger before the Flood - which is indeed what we see in the fossil record of the pre-Flood world.'

Actually, no. I have challenged the site to point me in the direction of ANY scientific research that has shown 'dragon bones' to be just a few thousand years old. They have yet to provide any but claim that there's 'a lot'. No actual names and places on their site either, I note. I also challenged the use of the term 'God-hating' as I find it quite offensive. I don't hate their god or any god. I don't believe there is a god but I won't abuse anyone for believing or tell them that their faith is misplaced. We all have freedom of choice. No apology forthcoming as yet, however. As for evidence of 900 year old humans, the proof is in the Bible, apparently. So it must be true. By the same logic, talking anthropomorphic trains exist on the island of Sodor because they're in the Thomas the Tank Engine books written by a man of God - the Rev W Awdrey. Let's read on, shall we?

'Humans and lions live on Earth at the same time today. But we live in different places. Porpoises will ram sharks that come into their waters. So naturally then they also live in different places - while living at the same time. Why couldn't humans and dinosaurs have lived at the same time? They'd probably keep mostly separate and then get buried separately if there was a catastrophe, but this could be theoretically possible, correct? There are at least two places known today with human and dinosaur tracks in the same sedimentary layer: one is in Paluxy, Texas, the other in Eastern Turkmenistan. Plus we have the legends, from all inhabited continents mind you, which should not be automatically discounted.'

This, I'm afraid, is the kind of 'evidence' I have thrown at me, a bunch of opinions and ideas that offer no proof but merely try to tear down the reality of scientific discovery. I'll end with a few choice statements from their FAQ. I implore you not to attack what they have written but look at their evidence and proof dispassionately.

'Q: Isn't the crux of creationism: 'God said it, I believe it, that settles it'? A: For some folks it is, yes. But in turn couldn't one state that for most people the crux of evolutionism is: 'Scientists said it, I believe it, that settles it'?'

'There really is no good scientific evidence supporting evolutionism at all and there is no way that the Earth could be over 10,000 years old.'

'The largest dragon (i.e. dinosaur) eggs that we've found to date are about the size of a football. One could fit, for example, a dozen brachiosaurus eggs in the trunk of a car, with room to spare! This also means that recently hatched dragons were not very large. Noah's mission was to preserve each kind of animal. You don't need to find the biggest of each kind. And you don't need each sub-divided species either. The 3-story Ark was plenty large enough to handle the variety of animal kinds plus lots of food for them.'

'The fossil record still shows a distinct lack of transitional forms. Sure, every generation of evolutionists have a few new ones, but none of them have stood the test of time so far. Lately they're trying real-hard-like to claim that 'dinosaurs grew feathers' to validate temporary evolutionary theory. This will fall flat too. Wait and see. They have good artists though, don't they? They've got great illustrations of 'probable' interim forms, without the slightest bit of scientific evidence to back them up. It's sad what they're doing to the children with such propaganda.'

I'll leave it to you to decide the merits of their version of the truth. In the meantime, I'll ask you politely to please only leave comments on my blog if they (a) don't attack my beliefs and (b) provide something more than a rebuttal of my beliefs. Show some faith in what you believe, people. I do wonder how many of you are comfortable and confident enough to write 'creationist' on a CV or job application. I'm happy to write 'liberal humanitarian' and/or 'atheist' on mine. Maybe you coud use 'wilig' instead? Feel free. I'm going to try to get it into the Oxford English Dictionary.

Want to read more about my views on the Flood and Noah's Ark? You fools. See here. For more about Creationism and ID click on the links. And for my extended essay on faith, please see here. This essay received favourable comments from the likes of Stephen Fry and Dave Gorman.


Ray Garton said...

Bravo, Stevyn! An excellent piece. I couldn't agree more. This willful ignorance is killing us, and I'm not exaggerating. The "wiligs" -- I love that word! -- are working very hard, especially here in America, to eclipse science and knowledge with belief and superstition. They are determined to overthrow this country by rewriting the constitution and making this a "Christian nation" -- something it most definitely is not, although they continue to insist that it is.

There is a big difference between "tolerance" and rolling over to allow stupidity to prevail. I'm glad to know that you are adding yourself to the growing number of people who refuse to roll over. I'm glad I found your blog and will be checking in regularly!

Ray Garton

liam said...