creationism
pharyngula | April 8, 2006
(Since Kent Hovind is in the news for tax evasion again, I thought it would be nice to bring this article over here to the shiny new site.)
Ah, the continuing saga of Kent Hovind's criminal industries…Hovind is an inexplicably popular creationist who, in addition to his dedication to creationist absurdities, has this devout belief that as a minister of Jesus, he is a resident of a celestial, Christian nation independent of the secular government of the United States, i.e., he doesn't have to pay taxes. Ever. On anything. And little things like zoning laws? Pffft. They don't apply to him.…
pharyngula | April 7, 2006The Discovery Institute flailed about hopelessly trying to deny the value of Tiktaalik (which, as commenters pointed out, is kind of weird in itself—I thought ID didn't deny the facts of evolution, just the mechanisms), but what about those forthright creationists at Answers in Genesis? They also fall all over themselves to argue the bad, bad evidence away. Read the Lancelet's rebuttal to see Menton wrung out like dishrag.
The interesting thing about all this is that the Menton and Looy are simply pointing out that Tiktaalik has attributes of a fish, but doing nothing to dispute the observed…
pharyngula | April 7, 2006The poor babies in Seattle are in a state of denial.
These fish are not intermediates, explain Discovery Institute scientists I queried about the find. Tiktaalik roseae is one of a set of lobe-finned fishes that include very curious mosaics--these fishes have advanced characteristics of several different groups. They are not intermediates in the sense that they are half-fish/half-tetrapod. Rather, they have some tetrapod-like features. The anatomical characters of Tiktaalik and similar taxa were "coded" and analyzed by a computer program. Because of the presence of some advanced characters,…
stcynic | April 7, 2006Christopher O'Brien, an anthropologist from Cal State-Chico, picks up on my fisking of George Sim Johnston's very bad article about the Darwin exhibit at the AMNH and adds a bit more detail specifically concerning Johnston's claims about human evolution. I also came across an old post of his that contains a really great passage that I want to quote in full. I'll put the long quote below the fold and urge you to read it:
As Brown points out in response: "teach the controversy" is nothing more than "verbal ju-jitsu", playing on the sensibility of fairness. But science is not "fair" as Brown has…
pharyngula | April 7, 2006Eric Pianka is eccentric, opinionated, and outspoken; many people might disagree with specific bits and pieces of his position. But I don't think that he is a eugenicist, a hate-filled fan of the Third Reich, an advocate of planned genocide, anti-human, or a crazed scientist planning the death of humanity. Nick Matzke has compiled a list of the slander that's been aimed at Pianka. It ain't pretty.
Transcripts of his talks are beginning to emerge; he has given this same talk, "The Vanishing Book of Life", seven times now, and the only time it has received this level of vituperation is when a…
pharyngula | April 6, 2006I'm a Bill Nye fan, so it was good to learn that he's not reluctant to point out the foolishness of creationists.
The Emmy-winning scientist angered a few audience members when he criticized literal interpretation of the biblical verse Genesis 1:16, which reads: “God made two great lights — the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars.”
He pointed out that the sun, the “greater light,” is but one of countless stars and that the “lesser light” is the moon, which really is not a light at all, rather a reflector of light.
A number of…
pharyngula | April 6, 2006The Second Edition of the Darwin is Dead carnival is up. I think we can declare that the "Darwin is Dead carnival" is dead now. Orac seems to have had a little problem tallying up the entries, but out of 7 links:
Three are satires of ID and creationism.
One is a press release from the Discovery Institute.
One is more PR from the Institute for Creation Research.
One is PR from Answers in Genesis.
Precisely one is an actual blog entry from a sincere creationist (who, by the way, thinks "irreducible complexity" is a serious problem for molecular biology, and therefore has demonstrated that he is…
pharyngula | April 6, 2006Christian corruption at its finest: here's a Florida Republican working to give a money-making park a tax exemption.
A biblical theme park in Orlando where guests pay $30 admission to munch on "Goliath" burgers and explore reproductions of 2000-year-old tombs and temples could get a property tax exemption written into state law.
A Senate committee easily passed a bill that would grant theme parks "used to exhibit, illustrate, and interpret biblical manuscripts … " an exemption from local property taxes, like churches, even though the parks charge money.
It's sailing through without…
pharyngula | April 5, 2006Brian Alters, of McGill University, had a grant proposal turned down for an unusual reason.
In denying his request, the research council's peer-review committee recently sent Mr. Alters a letter explaining he'd failed to "substantiate the premise" of his study.
It said he hadn't provided "adequate justification for the assumption in the proposal that the theory of evolution, and not intelligent-design theory, was correct."
Oh, well…another researcher with a grant that hasn't been funded, trying to rationalize his failure. We need to see the whole letter—surely he must have just lifted that…
pharyngula | April 4, 2006
A reader sent me a note about this rather well known and deeply stupid poster from Jack Chick…I'd already seen it and addressed it some time ago, but I thought I'd bring back this old article.
Jack Chick, the author of the infamous Big Daddy anti-evolution tract, has an amusing poster he's peddling.
(click to view in a larger size)
It purportedly illustrates a series of frauds in the reported evolutionary history of human beings. The text is too tiny to read at this size, but it's listed at Chick's site, and I reproduce it below, along with my response.
Chick's claims
My response…
pharyngula | April 4, 2006Many people have been writing me to tell me that the last episode of The Sopranos had an interaction between Tony and a creationist (hmmm…which is worse, a mobster or Kent Hovind?), but I only have basic cable so I haven't seen it. Fortunately, One Good Move has the clip. It's nice to see we've got the Mafia on our side.
(via Majikthise)
stcynic | April 3, 2006Mark Creech, head of the Christian Action League, has replied to an article in Seed Magazine about the Clergy Letter Project and continued to spread the nonsense that I fisked a few weeks ago. In fact, some of it is even worse. He also defends the DI's infamous list of scientists, most of whom are not in relevant scientific fields. He writes:
Moreover, West argues the single largest group of the signers was biologists (154 of the 514). He adds: "Of course the list also includes many scientists specializing in chemistry, physics, engineering, mathematics/statistics, and related disciplines.…
pharyngula | April 2, 2006Just a few more examples: David P. Wozney, who doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed, and Tom Ritter, a Pennsylvania school teacher who wants to have a debate.
I just can't keep up with them all.
pharyngula | April 2, 2006I'm getting some email requests to state my opinion on some claims by Forrest M. Mims. Mims attended a talk by Eric Pianka, in which he claims Pianka advocated the "slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings." I wasn't there, and I don't know exactly what was said, but I will venture a few opinions and suggestions.
Read Wesley Elsberry, who does know Pianka's work and has his own take on the interpretation of the talk.
I assure you that biologists do not have a secret plan to deliberately murder nine-tenths of the planet's human beings in order to make room for more bacteria.…
pharyngula | April 2, 2006I have to visit Loudon, Virginia someday. It's where Corsair the Rational Pirate lives, and I think the streets must be humming with dancing clowns and village idiots twirling and a marching kazoo band. I've seen stupid creationist arguments before, but these, that were actually published in his local paper, take the cake.
John Miller has an amazing argument from probability and relativity and the fact that the laws of physics don't evolve that has to be seen to be believed. Here's just his conclusion.
You cannot have randomness. If you do, you can never science (know) a subject because there…
pharyngula | April 2, 2006…but I'm not going to bother linking to his long-winded pompous tripe. Just read Wesley, who has the measure of the man and also has the facts in hand.
pharyngula | March 31, 2006Hmmm. That creationist who emailed me a question the other day has sent me another. It's like feeding raccoons—pretty soon they get the idea they should hang out in swarms around your house, they're digging in the trash, and they're pooping all over your lawn. Oh, well, one more time:
Here is another question for you kind consideration:
There are a very large number of species on earth; so many that no one has
been able to count them. Many of them are much older than humans, yet none
of them - not even one of them - evolved to a level comparable to that of
humans? What stopped them? Or,…
pharyngula | March 30, 2006Jonathan Witt of the Discovery Institute has lost it. The string of defeats for the cause of Intelligent Design creationism has had its toll, first Dover and now the Ohio ID lesson plan, and the poor man is clearly suffering from the strain, as you can tell from his latest hysterical screed.
First we get evolution compared to Castro's newspapers, with no criticism allowed; then the defense for including ID in Ohio is that there is a 3:1 margin of popular support. Two fallacies in one paragraph! Sorry, Jonathan, hyperbolic comparisons to communism and an appeal to popular opinion on matters of…
pharyngula | March 30, 2006Nick Matzke has unearthed a treasure: an article from the Interdisciplinary Bible Research Institute that uses "Intelligent Design theory" to explain such phenomena as parasitic ichneumonid wasps and the panda's thumb. You'll be able to get an idea of the nature of the explanation from the title alone:
"Rumors of Angels: Using ID to Detect Malevolent Spiritual Agents."
It's serious, not a joke.
The point to be made here is this: organisms which possess incredible complexity beyond what natural selection could "design" from the available offerings of chance, and which also seem to be clearly…
pharyngula | March 29, 2006
I throw away a lot of creationist email; most of it is ranty and weird, or pious and dull, so it isn't worth dealing with. Every once in a while (but sadly, not that often) one is polite and asks a simple question, and then I feel compelled to reply. If it's short and sweet, I'll just fire off a one-liner—for instance, when I was asked why I reject Intelligent Design creationism, I could simply say that I haven't seen any evidence for it.
Some are a little more persistent, requiring a little more effort to answer, so they get posted here. I'll answer this one to some degree online, tell the…