Their Temples of Reason
It is usually no fun when people play the race card, but when evolutionists do it, the results can be highly entertaining, at least after a few million years.
My brother Gordon is Senior Fellow of Natural History at New St. Andrews. He was recently engaged to teach a one-off course in microbiology at the University of Idaho, which drew this protest, and then this one.
There is a kind of evolutionist who insists that his theory can only be falsified with rabbit fossils in the precambrian, and then rests easily in the full assurance that anything with a rabbit fossil in it can’t be precambrian by definition. This method works swell for them, and so they try to use a similar approach to journal articles, terminal degrees, and teaching slots. Creationists are clearly not equipped to be in the proximity of any of those things — for are they not all cornpones? — and so whenever they see a creationist they chase him out promptly, and then use his strange absence as an argument. His absence is an argument, and his presence is an outrage. What my net don’t catch ain’t fish, and if it does catch one on accident, we can always throw it back immediately and pretend it didn’t happen.
The second protest, the one from P.Z. Myers, was the more flamboyant of the two.
This post, coming from someone who is simply unwilling to engage an adversary straight on, supplies multiple opportunities for our continued diversion, provided we wish to go down that road. What is it with evolutionists and dates? For example, and this is just a suggestion, we could talk about how many NSA faculty have terminal degrees in 2014 instead of 2007. And where do these degrees come from? Do they fall out of the unaccredited sky onto our uneducated heads, or do we get them from places that Myers acknowledges as temples of reason?
But let us not get distracted. I mentioned the race card. In the course of his screed, Myers said this: “That’s right. The University of Idaho has just hired a young earth creationist, biblical literalist, and racist evangelical Christian to teach microbiology.”
Racist? Got that? My brother is a racist because he is related by blood to someone who thinks that race-based slavery should have been ended peacefully, instead of with a monster war. What is it with these guys and their monster wars?
Since Myers was kind enough to bring up the question of race in a discussion of evolution, let us see how it goes for us, and how quickly it gets there. Gordon and I are both young earth creationists, which means that we believe that all the races of men are cousins, branching out from one another at the Tower of Babel no earlier than 4400 years ago. In evolutionary terms, that’s a nanosecond. “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation” (Acts 17:26).
Myers, in the meantime, thinks that all of us are blood related to the lesser simians, and the biological odds are that some of us are significantly closer to the trunk of that particular family tree than others are. It is only out of politeness we will not enquire too closely as to what Darwin and all those Smart Guys thought about this subject — but I think it safe to say that they were the ones who produced the prayer book that the Grand Kleagle Wizard uses for his evening devotions.
Look. If I were an evolutionist, I would make a serious attempt to avoid talking about race at all for another couple hundred years. And if I had to talk about it, I most certainly would not have the effrontery to accuse creationists of racism. Fremdschämen is the word the Germans have for getting embarrassed on behalf of somebody else who does not know to be embarrassed for himself — as what happens when an evolutionist chides other people about racism.
The equality of the races before God is a creationist doctrine. We were not endowed by a blind, impersonal process with certain inalienable rights. Right? Those who claim to be following reason need to work a little harder at following out the premises their arguments.
No comments:
Post a Comment