Now on ScienceBlogs: The Galaxy's Biggest Valentine
Thoughts From the Interface of Science, Religion, Law and Culture
Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.(static)
Ed Brayton also blogs at Positive Liberty and The Panda's Thumb
« Holder Maintaining Bush Positions. Again. | Main | Obama's Drug Czar »
Posted on: February 20, 2009 9:30 AM, by Ed Brayton
This one cracked me up:
Yes, and every time we launch a space shuttle that's a "thumb in the eye" to geocentrists and flat earthers. And every time an illness is successfully treated by a physician, that's a "thumb in the eye" to those who believe that illnesses are caused by curses, demons or spiritual conditions. My heart bleeds for all of these poor people and their perpetually thumbed eyes.
PoliticsOrac 02.13.2012
Tim Lambert 02.01.2012
Tim Lambert 09.12.2011
ERV 11.26.2011
Orac 02.09.2012
Comments
Sooo...all those government recognized birthdays JC has had over the years are no big deal but recognizing Charlie's is a big problem?
Posted by: Hypatia | February 20, 2009 9:37 AM
Of course I gave 'em the thumb.
Who'd want to go to the pub with a cretinist??
Posted by: kamaka | February 20, 2009 10:04 AM
Shouldn't they have evolved thumb-proof eyes by now?
Posted by: Squiddhartha | February 20, 2009 10:36 AM
And every airliner following a great circle route ... and every oceangoing vessel following a great circle route ... it's thumbs-in-the-eyes all the way down.
Posted by: CRM-114 | February 20, 2009 10:42 AM
If only Jesus had said "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, but that doesn't mean you should act like idiots and whine about persecution just because people disagree with you."
Unfortunately, he left off the last part.
Posted by: Tom Jackson | February 20, 2009 11:16 AM
Science is about the pursuit of knowledge, not a popularity contest. These embarrassing anachronisms need to get over it, because if they're free to believe their religious dogmas, we're just as free to celebrate scientific discovery. I really don't know what they're complaining about, since most news organizations in America hardly mention Darwin Day. Maybe the creationists are pissed because the rest of the world has moved into the 21st century.
Posted by: Raymond Minton | February 20, 2009 11:18 AM
Ed:
This is OT but if you're using Neil Young's "Rocking in the Free World" for your radioshow, you might want to try this version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTTsyk-pyd8&feature=related
Posted by: democommie | February 20, 2009 11:34 AM
After all, creationists have been completely civil in this debate. They would never say that evolution has caused all the evil that men do to their fellow men, or that people who believe in evolution have no morals, or, oh .... nevermind!
Posted by: KeithB | February 20, 2009 11:54 AM
There is a digit on my hand that I would give them, but it's not the thumb and not necessarily in the eye.
Posted by: Budbear | February 20, 2009 11:55 AM
Shouldn't they have evolved thumb-proof eyes by now?
Only the Lamarckians among them.
By the way, Creationist Day falls on April First again this year.
Posted by: kehrsam | February 20, 2009 12:09 PM
Based on my own upbringing, I can tell you that these types of Christians really can't compute with the idea that they were just being ignored. God is everything, you're either for God or against God, and therefore anything you believe that doesn't comport with their religious notions is rebellion against God. There's no difference between ignoring God and deliberately disobeying him - it's all rebellion and you chose to do it.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | February 20, 2009 12:23 PM
The credulous has feelings and we must be careful with them.
Posted by: Janine | February 20, 2009 12:39 PM
Personally I dislike the constant association of Darwin with evolution. (Yes, I know he articulated it better than others and figured out how it worked.) I got a lot of emails from the Center For Inquiry about "Darwin Day" too. I am not saying we should appease the religious nutcases, but using the name "Darwin" instead of "evolution" or "science" implies that some people worship Darwin.
Or are some religious people unable and/or unwilling to grasp that some people really do believe that we live in an impersonal universe?
Posted by: Blue Nine | February 20, 2009 12:52 PM
Sorry BlueNine, but, if dolts wanna take it that way, they can take it as a message that they could be worshipping something/one better too.
We are happy to not lick arse at all.
Posted by: eddie | February 20, 2009 1:04 PM
One of the few times I celebrated a WorldNutDaily headline.
democommie - great link to Neil Young. I've always found him to be a standard-bearer on how to grow old. His acceptance of grunge is also what got me interested in that genre. His work with Lionel Trains is one of the coolest ways I ever saw a celebrity give back, I actually did some pro bono consulting for them just because of Young (I got some autographed CDs so it wasn't completely pro bono).
Posted by: Michael Heath | February 20, 2009 2:05 PM
I don't know about you people, but I've been walking around jabbing creationists in the eye with my thumbs all month. I wasn't supposed to do that?
Blue Nine: It seems to me that when evolution supporters allow creationists to label them as "Darwinists" they're playing into their hands. Having said that, I don't see why any of us should be ashamed of thinking Darwin did a good job stating his theory and arguing for it persuasively.
Posted by: Julian | February 20, 2009 2:13 PM
Well, we know that creationists are blind to the evidence...
Posted by: JakeS | February 20, 2009 3:19 PM
Sorry, Ed--if I'm getting your point right, I disagree with it.
With all due respect to Darwin's accomplishments and influence, the enthusiasm surrounding his bicentennial had less to do with him as a scientist than with a heart-felt and well-deserved expression of Screw you, your church, and the herd of swine you all rode in on (1) to the anti-science crowd.
Stunned as I am to be agreeing with the World News Daily (or at least, the headline you provide), there it is.
(1) . . . and practice animal husbandry on at night when you think no one's looking.
Posted by: Molly, NYC | February 20, 2009 3:21 PM
Huh???
You're going to have to spell that out Molly. And provide some evidence.
Posted by: plum grenville | February 20, 2009 4:46 PM
Molly, NYC
I couldn't disagree more strongly.
I'm celebrating Darwin because at 48 years old, I've only begun to realize over the past couple years how our entire culture has disrespected one of our greatest scientists. Consider how we treat his legacy relative to that of Newton, Da Vinci, Galileo, and Einstein; how often are we confronted with ad hominem attacks on those scientists when their name is dropped? There is a tidal wave of people who now refuse to keep the real Darwin in the box, especially given how his legacy has been mistreated by social conservatives.
The thumb in the eye is real, but it's a peripheral benefit to giving Darwin his due.
Posted by: Michael Heath | February 20, 2009 5:32 PM
I was in 7th grade when someone got around to teaching me about evilution. I already knew the gawd stuff was nonsense, OOS gave me the explanation I was looking for.
Reading Darwin as a kid was a very liberating experience. I have great admiration for the man.
Damn straight I got together with the godless and drank a toast to him on his 200th.
And if that aggravates the godders who thought indoctrinating me as a kid was a good idea, that's just a bonus.
*thumb/eye* Liars.
Posted by: kamaka | February 20, 2009 5:40 PM
Darwin really doesn't measure up to the god treatment, so that's just silly.
Livia Drusilla, on the other hand, made a kick-A goddess in her time. She was sometimes equated with the goddess Ops, who ensured the harvests of grain and grapes. I know which one I'm worshiping tonight.
Posted by: kehrsam | February 20, 2009 6:12 PM
Molly - I also disagree. The anniversary of Darwin's birthday happens every year. The reason people are making a big deal this year is because it's the 200th anniversary. When it's the 200th anniversary of Einstein's birth (2079) or the 400th anniversary of Newton's (2043), people will also make a big deal without the ulterior motive of insulting idiots.
Posted by: Taz | February 20, 2009 7:13 PM
Michael Heath:
Darwin, otoh, was not threatened with excommunication or death by the Vatican, like Galileo. But other than that I pretty much agree with you.
In a sense, being a fan of Darwin is not a whole lot different than being pro-choice. I'm not a person who likes the idea of abortions, but I am a person who hates the idea of someone other than the woman who owns the uterus conflating pro-choice with "murder". Fuck those clowns.
Posted by: democommie | February 20, 2009 8:10 PM
democommie -
Wow, I don't see that at all. Darwin was the main originator of an important scientific theory. I'm a fan of his in the same way that I'm a fan of Einstein's, Newton's, Galois's or countless other scientists/mathematicians. It has little to do with any personal failings they might have had, and nothing at all to do with any political considerations arising from their theories. And it's unaffected by the opinions of the superstitious idiots who railed against them.Posted by: Taz | February 20, 2009 8:38 PM
I'd initially thought that it was a little odd to treat Darwin with the sort of reverence I've seen this month, despite it being the big round anniversary. Then I remembered that 2005 was the "World Year of Physics" because of the centennial of Einstein's big Nobel-winning paper, that I own a t-shirt to that effect, and participated in multiple events dedicated to modern Physics and Einstein's life and findings. If people were regularly accusing Physicists of worshipping Einstein, I imagine we'd have the same gut reaction we have when Darwin gets the same kind of much-needed recognition.
Also, shouldn't it be "Darwin Day opposable thumb-in-the-eye to Creationists"? Just, you know, to underscore the point.
Posted by: Tom Foss | February 20, 2009 8:49 PM
"Darwin Day opposable thumb-in-the-eye to Creationists"?
*opposable thumb/eye*
-Fixed-
Posted by: kamaka | February 20, 2009 10:15 PM
The term "thumb in the eye" was actually written for USA Today by Dan Vergano in this article.
Vergano writes:
"So, part birthday bash, part thumb-in-the-eye to creationists, part opportunity for publishers rolling out Darwin books like sausages — who and what are evolution's fans celebrating?"
I suppose there may be an element of that in the USA, though elsewhere the creationists are so far outside the mainstream that their presence is unlikely to be acknowledged.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | February 21, 2009 1:43 AM
Taz:
Sorry, I wasn't being clear. I meant how such a stance appears to the beGODded. That's what happens after I skip my evening tea in favor of a coupleapints.
Posted by: democommie | February 21, 2009 5:23 AM
Plum Grenville, it wasn't the herd of swine you commented on (as in, fuck you and the pig you rode in on,) but you must revere one magnificent sow, the Empress of Blandings!
Bob
Posted by: Bob Carroll | February 21, 2009 7:55 PM