Friday, April 28, 2006
Defying Credulity
"As counterintuitive as it seems that a species could develop new physical traits simply because such a mutation might be advantageous (can we all learn to fly or to breathe underwater if we just wish to long enough?), it simply defies credulity to think that human beings not only physically evolved from ape-like creatures, but developed the ability to think rationally by a similar process," writes Greg Franke, a freelance writer in Portage, Ohio and former military linguist in psychological operations, in Human Events Online, the national conservative weekly.
Does Franke really believe that any scientist entertains the notion that wishing for adaptation might make it so, or is he simply so cynical -- contemptuous might be a better word -- about the mental powers of his creationist and intelligent design followers that he doesn't even bother with the truth? Liar or fool: it's not much of a way to go through life.
You might think Franke's piece would be an embarrassment to the egg-headed theorists who promote ID as pure science. Au contraire, Robert Crowther of the Discovery Institute published an approving post on the Evolution News and Views blog -- which actually cites the ridiculous passage above -- under the title of "The Dogma of Darwinian Evolution" this morning.
Franke's ludicrous piece, and Crowther's post, also link ID -- which remember we are told is nothing but disinterested science -- with far-right politics. It's not just scientists and educators -- Darwinists -- who are trying to stop ID. It's liberals.
If ID were to be taught in public schools, our children would not just get a heapin' helpin' of fundamentalist Christianity. They would also get the full menu of right-wing rhetoric jammed down their throats, as well.
When we read what passes for discourse on the radical right -- that adaptation is a result not of mutation and natural selection, but of wishing to "breathe underwater" -- we must conclude that human beings evolved from ape-like creatures. That is the only remaining option, because God would never have created anything that would write such a stupid, stupid sentence.
Evolved from an ape? RSR's mother would have said Franke doesn't have the sense God gave a goat.
Does Franke really believe that any scientist entertains the notion that wishing for adaptation might make it so, or is he simply so cynical -- contemptuous might be a better word -- about the mental powers of his creationist and intelligent design followers that he doesn't even bother with the truth? Liar or fool: it's not much of a way to go through life.
You might think Franke's piece would be an embarrassment to the egg-headed theorists who promote ID as pure science. Au contraire, Robert Crowther of the Discovery Institute published an approving post on the Evolution News and Views blog -- which actually cites the ridiculous passage above -- under the title of "The Dogma of Darwinian Evolution" this morning.
Franke's ludicrous piece, and Crowther's post, also link ID -- which remember we are told is nothing but disinterested science -- with far-right politics. It's not just scientists and educators -- Darwinists -- who are trying to stop ID. It's liberals.
If ID were to be taught in public schools, our children would not just get a heapin' helpin' of fundamentalist Christianity. They would also get the full menu of right-wing rhetoric jammed down their throats, as well.
When we read what passes for discourse on the radical right -- that adaptation is a result not of mutation and natural selection, but of wishing to "breathe underwater" -- we must conclude that human beings evolved from ape-like creatures. That is the only remaining option, because God would never have created anything that would write such a stupid, stupid sentence.
Evolved from an ape? RSR's mother would have said Franke doesn't have the sense God gave a goat.
