World's Fair

Dignifying Creationism

I’ve long thought it odd that so many of us spend so much time elevating the public presence of creationism and intelligent design (as I am doing at this exact moment) by discussing them ad nauseum. Generally for the purpose of denouncing it, mocking it, or denigrating it and its adherents in some way, we go on and on. Here’s the search return for “creationism” at scienceblogs: page 1 of 76 pages, the first 15 of 1136 posts. Search return for “intelligent design”: p. 1 of 93, 1-15 of 1387 entries.

What would happen if we all just ignored them, didn’t mention them, and thus didn’t allow them to interfere with the science discussed in the other thousands of posts at these blogs? Anyone reading the posts either already believes in the point being made (that ID and Creationism are bunk) or jumps in to somehow, for some reason, defend them or feign to offer nuance. In both cases, nobody’s changing their mind. (To clarify, saying this is not meant to put The World’s Fair on a pedestal; clearly we’re in on it too.)

So, I’ll dignify ID one more time with this post. I can’t really call it “one from the vault,” having now abused the concept over the past two weeks, but will do so anyway and hope nobody cares — because in this case I’m merely reposting a column Dave and I put up only two months ago. Not many of you read it, but we liked it. So here it is again. Maybe read it this time, ‘kay?:

“The Intelligent Design Biotech Corporation.” Reposted below the fold; originally here.

Then let’s see what anyone thinks about a moratorium on ID or Creationist discussions.

Mission Statement, 2007

“At Intelligent Design Biotech Corporation, we work around his watchmaker’s clock to pursue biotech solutions to those improbable imperfections of his work here on earth.”

Okay all IDBC Employees:

Let’s go let’s go let’s go. IDBC is finally on its legs. We’re trained, we’re hyped, we’ve got that sharp-eyed Focus on the Family Approved ID curriculum. We’re big time primed to speak for and as God. So let’s make it happen, show those soon Left Behind what education is all about. God up people, let’s go, God up.

As you know, we’ve got work stations for everyone. God-stations, more or less. So we better all of us get acquainted with the guys we brought on board for this venture. From the front, then, a quick review of the acolytes at the top. If you will. And so on and so forth.

Mark will be up front, persuasively deep in analysis. He’s already one of our finest biochemists, a high level amino-proselytizer. Master of the grant proposal. He’s isolating a therapeutic from tissue obtained from our most devout. It’s blasphemously technical, true, but we believe in results people. Results. We’re gonna be using an Acts 2:17 protocol, and if it’s slow going, we’ve got like 6 kegs of Holy Water in the back. You never know with these things, is our point.

Behind Mark is John. He’s new too, but just as amped up and highly touted. He’s organizing our human cloning project. Not for the faint of heart. Or public release. Keep a lid on it for now, ‘kay? John was telling me before, this thing about how human cloning is somatic cell something nuclear transfer, which, I don’t know what it means, but he was real confident when he said it. It’s like, it’s when what the heathens call “DNA”–secular speak for the watermark of God–is taken from human tissue–secular speak for the Kleenex of God–injected into an empty egg cell, and then into a host mother’s uterus. Jeepers, right? I mean, and it only gets more complicated after that. All I’m saying is if you want to know more, just open your pocket King James to that long boring part in the middle. It’s basically all there.

I know, you’re thinking maybe it’s a bit too resurrection-like. But in the face of God, lo, and we are fearless, or something like that. It’s in Revelation, no? You gotta know that any human clones we get out of this won’t technically be the same individual, even if genetically identical. They still grow and age; still have their own experiences and memories, their own Church Camp hook-ups. I mean, Cain and Abel were different? You feel me? So let’s us rest assured–and we have to make this point clear to the biblico-investors–making a clone of the deceased is, in our faith-based opinion, not at all like resurrection. (Though, we were riffing in the break room, me and Damian–it might make a pretty good practical joke. You know, “SURPRISE! I bet you thought I was dead!” That would be funny. Jesus loved jokes. On a more serious note, though, this is why we’ll have a Pastor on staff 24/7.)

Okay. Luke is our creative one. Curly hair, has those denim shorts, still drives a Chevy. He’ll be leading our third start-up project. Yep, he’s the microscope guy you prayed for. We all read about that “Face of Jesus” he found on a mammary tissue slide. It’s hands down miraculous! For us, it means the product line opportunities coming from Luke’s station are endless. Beaucoup evangi-customers. I just made that up, you like that? Evangel-customers, evangi-cust, evangelimers. I’ll work on it. Anywho. We’re not talking Virgin Mary potato chips or grilled cheese Messiahs or shower door stains looking like Moses parting the Red Sea. We’ve got high quality techno-theistic stuff, the kind you’re not gonna get from those Fortune 500 secular humanist labs. Oh, and we’ve got that shipment of myrrh stain arriving from the Kansas office to help clarify these images.

At the back here is Matthew. His workbench’s kind of set away–say what up Matthew!–but he is probably our best shot for some buzz from the PTL Weekly Business Report. Matthew’s working on our B.M.L.G. gene therapy initiative. This one changes a guy’s genetic code, so that he or she–”he” mostly, let’s be real here–can actually “Be More Like God.” Marketing guys coined that. Pretty sweet, eh? In truth, our Numbers guys are saying this’ll be our most popular service. Lord knows the fourth-quarter projections put it at 37% of gross revenue. We’re giving our clients the option to be all knowing, to be all powerful, to alter reality, create essences, and all that crap. Cha-ching.

It’s true, yes, in the beta testing we only put out some minor God-like emulations. By playing with testosterone levels, more or less, fidgeting with the patriarchy, if you will. Made real progress with anger-creation, deeper booming voices, all that lush facial hair. So yeah we’re not starting floods or locust swarms or winning playoff games or that jazz, but our clients can at least look and sound good trying.

Anyway, that oughta bring y’all up to speed. I’m serious, and this isn’t just me saying, this is the entire Board and all the investors and Gideon’s, Inc. and on, we have a golden opportunity here. A cash cow. Me, and we, just wanna say how very excited we are about the entire lab and all our potential. Dogma will pay the bills, God willing. Now let’s be safe out there. And an Amen to that.

cohen/ng ’07


Incidentally, there’s a Seed-related backstory to this piece that has Seed print editors fearing offending their audience. But this post is so overpacked already, we’ll leave that for another time.

Comments

  1. #1 Jonathan Badger
    July 20, 2007

    If the there’s a possibility of more discussion about actual science, absolutely a moratorium on discussing creationism would be useful. However, there’s a reason that a lot of science blogs (particularly ScienceBlogs) focus on creationism and religion in general — these topics simply generate more responses than postings about scientific research.

    The typical article about phylogeny or something gets one or two “Gee, that’s neat” responses, but posts about the latest diatribe from the Disco Institute or the Pope get hundreds. Without these threads, page hits (and ad revenue) would go down.

  2. #2 J-Dog
    July 20, 2007

    THis was great the first time youposted it – it’s well-worth re-posting.

    Regarding why? I second Jonathan Badger’s post and thoughts, and would add that if we DON’T care about the ID BS research, we won’t have any REAL science to blog about or talk about. “goddidit” is kind of a science stopper.

  3. #3 matt
    July 20, 2007

    What makes you think we didn’t read it the first time?

    I’d certainly be delighted to see an ID/creo moratorium — that stuff is depressing, repetitive and distracting. Perhaps ignoring it would be head in the sand behaviour, but I prefer to think of it as depriving the motherfuckers of the oxygen of publicity. As you say, no-one on either team is going to be swayed a single nanometre in their position.

  4. #4 Jeff
    July 21, 2007

    For what its worth, the “denouncing it, mocking it, or denigrating it and its adherents in some way…” was actually what made me start looking at ID in the first place. Any publicity is good publicity I guess.