Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Creationists Unswayed by Evolution Exhibition
They plan to become doctors, researchers and professors, but these students from Liberty University, an evangelical school, also believe that God created the Earth in a week, around 6,000 years ago.
Each year, a group of biology students at the Christian university based in Lynchburg, Virginia, travels to the Natural History Museum in Washington to learn about a theory they dismiss as incorrect - Darwin's theory of evolution.
Polls taken in the last two years found that between 44 and 46 per cent of Americans believe that the Earth was created in a week, somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. (photo by flickr user PsychoBauble) The young "creationists" examined a model of the Morganucodon rat, believed to be the first and common ancestor of mammals that appeared some 210 million years ago.
Lauren Dunn, 19, a second-year biology student, was unimpressed.
"210 million years, that's arbitrary. They put that time to make up for what they don't know," she said.
Nathan Hubbard, a 20 year-old from Michigan and a first-year biology major who plans to become a doctor, regarded the model with suspicion.
"There is no scientific, biological genetic way that this, this rat, could become you," he said, seemingly scandalised by the proposition.
Liberty University is the most prominent evangelical university in the United States, with around 12,000 students who adhere to strict rules and regulations regarding moral conduct.
Its biology curriculum includes a course on "Young Earth Creationism", which juxtaposes Charles Darwin's Origin of the Species with the Book of Genesis.
"In order to be the best creationist, you have to be the best evolutionist you can be," said Marcus Ross, who teaches paleontology and says of Adam and Eve: "I feel they were real people, they were the first people."
David DeWitt, a Liberty University biology professor, opens his classes with a prayer, asking God to help him teach his students.
"I pray that you help me to teach effectively and help the students to learn and defend their faith," he says.
Strongly expressed faith is not unusual in the United States, a country where 80 per cent of the population claim to believe in God and ascribe to established religions.
Polls taken in the last two years found that between 44 and 46 per cent of Americans believe that the Earth was created in a week, somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.
Creationism, an increasingly popular theory in the United States and elsewhere in the world, rejects Darwin's theory that all living species evolved over the course of billions of years via the process of natural selection.
The school of thought has adherents among Jehovah's Witnesses and some fundamentalist Muslims, but in the United States it has won the most converts in the evangelical Christian community.
Former president George W. Bush, a born-again Christian, is among those who say evolutionary theory does not fully explain the Earth's creation, though the ex-president also noted he is not a "literalist" when it comes to the Bible.
Creationist belief has implications for the way people understand a variety of fields, including biology, paleontology and astronomy, but also impacts questions about climate change and educational debates.
At the Smithsonian Institute, among crowds of weekend visitors, the Liberty University students visited the evolution exhibition,.
But Darwin's explanation for why giraffes have long necks - that they evolved over time so they could reach higher foliage - and displays of fossil evidence failed to sway them.
"Creationism and evolutionism have different ways of explaining the evidence. The creationist way recognises the importance of biblical records," said Ross.
He teaches his students that dinosaurs were wiped from the face of the Earth 4,000 to 5,000 years ago during the flood that Noah survived by building an ark.
He says carbon-dating techniques that have been used to suggest the Earth is in fact billions of years old are simply not reliable.
He doesn't reject one prominent theory that dinosaurs were wiped out by a massive asteroid that collided into Earth, but suggests the collision coincided with the biblical flood.
Though Ross acknowledges that the United States is among the most welcoming environments in the world for creationists, he said it can be difficult to convince people to take him and his beliefs seriously.
"The attitude is when you are a creationist you are ignorant of the facts," he said.
114 Comments so far
Show AllIt's easy to sneer at these folks but be aware that that just makes them hunch down deeper into their protective shells. Their "faith" isn't a belief as such. Rather it's a fundamental part of their identity and provides them with a sense of belonging and purpose.
I had a jewish friend some time ago who gave me some sound advice...never argue with a schmuck.
Incidentally, Richard Dawkins gave a talk at Liberty a while back and took questions from students and faculty. It available on Youtube. fascinating.
The belief in trickle-down economics is just as preposterous and much more dangerous.
Trickle-down economics is dangerous, but not as dangerous as one of these schmucks practicing medicine.
One certainly would not trust them to operate on you. I wonder what they would prescribe for the ill? Prayers and "faith" based healing.
'"The attitude is when you are a creationist you are ignorant of the facts," [Marcus Ross] said.'
Well, I can't argue with that!
Willful ignorance is epidemic in America. Just say no.
Agreed.
I know of no nation that can last long supporting willful ignorance.
The fundamentalist extremists have been planning and executing the end of reason for many years. I wonder if there anything we can be teaching our people to do to counter it.
No one is responsible for the persistent ignorance of another. They must come to certain realizations for themselves.
Agreed, but this is institutional education of ignorance that is going on - it is planned!
And, it isn't just in fundamentalist schools. Just have a look at Harvard business school and you'll see where our modern business wiz-kids are being educated. The same types that have driven this country into our current ditch. Not to mention the Chicago Boys and their shock doctrine. And let's not forget Yale's Skull and Bones...
This ignorance is being carefully, meticulously, purposefully planned and executed.
What kooks.
Besides religious nuttery, the belief in creationism has to be viewed in the broader context of the incredible lack of scientific and technical knowlege among USAns today. At risk of sounding like I'm digressing, I see this in various fora regarding those Toyota stuck throttles and what to do if it happens. People speed along at open throttle for 20 minutes, call the police on their cell phones (!!!), without ever thinking to put the car in neutral, or simply switch the engine off and coast to the side of the road. The police, responding to the call don't know what to do either. People, educated people, in the forums thinking that if the engine is shut off they lose steering and braking. And this is about something most USAs's use every day.
So, of cource they are clueless as to how a geologist knows something is 210 million years old.
I remain stumped, how in in a society where presumably most people use science or technology in their livlihoods, so many people (especially younger people) know so little about so little.
Wow. So, you just figured out that most Americans are stupid? I guess you just arrived in the country yesterday.
In fairness, we should give substantial credit to the Europeans. For several hundred years, every time they had some group of crackpot religious freaks, they chased them to North America where they could practice their basic beliefs (e.g., burning witches at the stake). We became a landfill for mentally disturbed Europeans. And they spent many generations inbreeding. So why are you surprised that such a large percentage of the population actually takes the preposterous nonsense in the Bible literally?
P.S. On another note, great drawing of the Messiah with Melvin, his pet Tyrannosaurus puppy.
" People, educated people, in the forums thinking that if the engine is shut off they lose steering and braking."
Well, when people turn the ignition switch ALL THE WAY OFF (they do that when they panic), the steering wheel locks. Heh, ya oughta see the expression on their face when *THAT* happens;)
Yes, but in every car I've seen, it takes deliberate turn past the first detent ("acc." setting) plus often pushing a button, or the key inward.
I drive mostly manual transmissions, and I coast in neutral, sometimes engine-off, down long hills to save fuel. They are older cars, though.
You said "simply switch the engine off." That is the worst possible advice!!! The steering wheel will lock if you do so! You shouldn't be defending that advice, you should be apologizing for it and denouncing it.
I don't want to be anywhere near a runaway car with a locked steering wheel.
The correct advice: shift into neutral, brake to a stop, THEN turn the engine off.
Well one could always practice these driving manoevers beforehand, no?
I mean pilots have to practice all sorts of emergency manoevers before they get a license.
try it out in an empty parking lot at slow speed, then on the highway. get used to doing it.
I have NEVER had the arm strength to steer a car when the power was off, nor the weight to make the brakes work!
Maybe it is hard when the car is stationary, but when the car is moving, the steering effort with power off isn't that high. And, for maximum steering component life, the car should be moving at least a little when turning the steering wheel anyway. If you re strong enough to walk up stairs, you have penty of strength to use the brakes with power off.
It is usually not lack of strength, it is lack of familiarity with the extra effort.
And now I AM off topic!
"And now I AM off topic!"
Yea, but since we're there I've recently learned that cars might now be "drive by wire" with the pedals merely pressure sensors unconnected to any mechanical components. At least my 20 year old unit doesn't work that way.
I agree with almost everything you said. I had the speeding accelerator happen to me in my Dodge Neon over the last two years. You CAN turn the engine off, you just can't turn it "completely" off, as it will "lock" the steering wheel. Of course you will not "lose" braking, you will lose "power assited" braking though. The best thing is first of all to "not" floor the pedal, and two, if it gets stuck reving high, just throw into neutral until you slow down.
Geologists did not and do not use carbon-14 to determine that the earth is billions of years old. Any college student who has taken geology 101 learns (if he or she is paying attention) that carbon-14 dating is useful only for events that happened less than about 80,000 years ago. For earlier events one must use isotopes with longer half lives like uranium-235, uranium-238, potassium-40, and rubidium-87.
Jim Shea
Yes, even the journalists who expose scientific ignirance aren't so up on it themselves. I would have at least expected better from a British journalist, though.
Of course, there are other lines of reasoning, that pre-date knowlege of radioactivity at all, that point to an ancient earth, notably stratigraphy and knowlege of erosion and deposition rates.
Hey Zeus's got rocks in his skull.
While this "creationism" hooey is being taught in such supposed institutions of higher learning such as Liberty University; do not be surprised to see this wacko crew first demand "equal time" with the teaching of evolution, then it superseding evolution entirely in public education courses. It has already begun in Texas in primary school biology textbooks.
Unfortunately, Texas has a lot of influence on textbooks that the rest of the nation's students use.
The Texas Board of Education has a lot of fundie members (appointed by fundie Rick Perry.) These assholes are not only pushing for creationism being taught as an alternative to evolution, they are re-writing the history books to make figures such as Joe McCarthy, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, and other "conservative" figure in history more prominant while dismissing or discrediting figures such as Franklin Roosevelt and his New Deal.
Because Texas's approved textbooks are used by all schools in the state, they constitute a huge market and thus they have a huge influence on what the textbook publishers publish for all students, not just Texas students.
Fortunately, a few of the more conservative and religious school board members have been recently replaced due to a public outcry against their religious influence on the board and in the state's educational curriculum. Unfortunately, the majority of the education board remains fundementalist and very "conservative." They want your children to learn that Fred and Barney are real, were both fundementalist Christians, and Dino was right there with them eating brontoburgers. Yabba dabba dooo!
There is indeed a difference between how 'evolutionists' (or scientific minded folk) and creationists view how the earth and life came to be.
The Creationist argues that 'gawd' waved his magic wand and 'poofed' the earth into existence, then 'poofed' all lifeforms into existence. Then after that wonderful act of magic, did nothing for the next 6,000 years other than having his son/himself tacked up on a cross to save us from the sins he damned us for...
The scientist has evidence that such magic didn't happen, and wasn't necessary.
Who would you rather be your doctor? The guy who thinks that god will wave a magic wand and cure you if you pray hard enough, or the one who knows how diseases work?
Good point, but in the US, there are plenty of MD's in all specialties who are creationists. Hard to believe, but true.
The creationists are right about one thing: we are damned. And we deserve it. After all, that airhead chick, Eve, had a conversation with a talking snake. It makes sense that we should all be eternally punished for that.
Hey, that must be what happened to all of the jobs. God waved his magic wand and *POOF*, no jobs.
We are being punished because we allowed a fascist socialist to become president!!!
Creationism is wrong scientifically, but that doesn't mean that random evolution is right. The creationists have a valid point, that the biosphere is too complex for things to have just evolved at random. But that's the only alternative presented to them. So they choose one of two partially right explanations.
I think that all beings, from single-cell organisms to humans, help direct their own evolution toward more complex and skilled states, and affect their own DNA. Evolution is not random but is actively being managed by all beings. But this is not the way evolution is taught.
Scientists need to know more about how evolution works. The field is only 150 years old.
-...not random but is actively being managed by all beings.-
What support can you bring?
- But this is not the way evolution is taught.-
That may be because your premise has been found to be wrong. Again, what support can you bring?
I'm not offering any support. Science is a method, not a collection of facts. Far too many people believe science is only what has already been demonstrated.
I'm simply saying that I believe evolution is more directed than scientists tell us, even though we don't have evidence for it yet, and I understand why this view is attractive to people already committed for other reasons to a creationist religion. And by the way, I am scientifically literate.
"I'm simply saying that I believe evolution is more directed than scientists tell us, even though we don't have evidence for it yet, and I understand why this view is attractive to people already committed for other reasons to a creationist religion."
Well SR,
"Directed" by what?
We have a name for your "belief" that evolution is "directed", it's called: SUPERSTITION.
su·per·sti·tion (spr-stshn)
n.
1. An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.
2.
a. A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.
b. A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality.
c. Idolatry.
superstition
noun
1. unfounded belief Fortune-telling is an art surrounded by superstition.
2. myth, story, belief, legend, old wives' tale, notion The phantom of the merry-go-round is just a local superstition.
Quotations
"Superstition is the religion of feeble minds" [Edmund Burke Reflections on the Revolution in France]
"Superstition is the poetry of life" [Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Maximen und Reflexionen]
Collins Thesaurus of the English Language – Complete and Unabridged 2nd Edition. 2002 © HarperCollins Publishers 1995, 2002
Translations
Select a language:
-----------------------
superstition
n superstition [suːpəˈstiʃən]
1 (the state of fear and ignorance resulting from) the belief in magic, witchcraft and other things that cannot he explained by reason.
2 an example of this type of belief There is an old superstition that those who marry in May will have bad luck.
adj superˈstitious
superstitious beliefs; She has always been very superstitious.
adv superˈstitiously
Science does not accept "feelings" or "beliefs" into it's body of knowledge. The "scientific method" does not permit an unfounded speculation such as creationism founded on nothing but fairy tales.
scientific method
n.
The principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
scientific method
n
a method of investigation in which a problem is first identified and observations, experiments, or other relevant data are then used to construct or test hypotheses that purport to solve it. UNQUOTE
The "randomness" of evolution is just semantic in the context of human perception. You may well be right that greater forces act on the outcome of evolution, but until you submit a detailed process of how that works and peer scientists can independently reproduce your results, it is not something that can be taught as science.
"Directing" sounds to me like mindless religion; which is the attempt to dupe others into believing in supernatural forces which the purveyor of the deception claims magical insight into.
There's no other way to say it. Science and Superstition do not mix. Science is known reality. Religion and Superstition are FAITH.
The two things don't go together and the latter category certainly doesn't belong in government or education.
TJ
P.S, SR, At the dawn of the enlightenment in the 1700's, the birth of science, the father of Biology: Jean-Baptiste Lamark believed as you do:
"I think that all beings, from single-cell organisms to humans, help direct their own evolution toward more complex and skilled states, and affect their own DNA. Evolution is not random but is actively being managed by all beings. But this is not the way evolution is taught."
However, his theory, "the Inheritance of acquired characteristics" has been shown as untrue. His belief in "spontaneous generation" matches what you believe, and is false.
"Today we know that this explanation is incorrect, because only those traits that are influenced by genetic information contained within sex cells (eggs and sperm) can be inherited." Then it goes on to debunk his belief that a giraffe can stretch her neck in her offspriing because she needs to. - "Essentials of Physical Anthropology" - 2009 by Jurmain, Kilgore and Trevathan - p.22
and, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarck
Now if you're saying there's a individual force to select DNA, that's been disproved as well. Most variation in offspring follow predictable percentages in inherited traits or diseases for example. Actual facial feature occurrences are very predictable like cleft chin, "Dracula eyebrows", Attached ear lobes, Widow's peak hairline, freckles, Blue eyes, Cheek dimples, Hitchhiker's thumb, dark eyes, mid-digital hair, Left-thumb crossover and ability to roll tongue just to name a few. Unexpected mutation (genetic or chromosomal) is the big driver of aberrational variation and hence, Natural Selection.
I suspect that we are all scientifically illiterate in different areas. Evolution is an area which I am fairly well-versed and recent genetic discoveries have validated beyond any doubt Darwin's Natural Selection mechanism.
And just how are you directing your own evolution toward more complex and skilled states, and affecting your DNA?
I'm afraid you don't understand how evolution works. It is not random. There are two forces working to produce change: mutation and natural selection. Mutation is random, but natural selection is not. It weeds out unfavorable mutations through differential rates of reproduction. Creationists often characterize evolution as random, thereby angering those who care about exact definitions and tightly reasoned arguments.
Your view also is teleological--that is, you insist organisms evolve to achieve a purpose. This manner of thinking is not scientific since you must overturn a sacred principle of science: the past, not the future, determines the present. Indeed, if the future did determine the present, what good would that "insight" do us? It would be like Intelligent Design, just writing off what we don't understand, attributing it to the supernatural or to some unseen influence from the future. It isn't science, that's all.
Additionally, it is a misconception that evolution is this "ladder" of greater complexity and intelligence - with humans at the top rung. That may have been true into the paleozoic, but once large vertibrates were developed, it was just varying adaptations with an occasional bizarre statistical outlier. Human intellignece is just such an outlier, and if the whole thing were re-run, some other kind of adaptation would develop that would work for the conditions early humans faced.
The popular paleontologist Steven Jay Gould explained this well in one of his books - but I forgot the title.
Even SETI promoters, seem to be clinging to the ladder-misconception of evolution when they claim that human-like intelligence is likely widespread in the galaxy. In reality, the human-style technology-making adaptation may be vanishingly rare in the universe - maybe once in a whole galaxy every billion years.
This realization of our rareness leads me to dearly wish we could do a hell of a lot caring for each other and our home planet. That so many western religions prohibit such imaginings is their most horrific aspect.
I agree that intelligent life may be exceedingly rare in the universe. Gould thought so, too. His argument is that human intelligence came about through a unique thread of history, one that could have been cut off any number of times through catastrophes--collisions with asteroids and the like.
if we are the example of intelligent life, and we must be, that we would be a rarity would be easy to understand...
we self-destruct before we get very far...
how long do we continue to label ourselves as intelligent?
sexy may be our best quality...
Actually, not even anything that dramatic. Homo erectus left Africa and wandered into east Asia and, for some reason, oblivion. Neanderthals has bigger brains than us and may have had mental powers we can only imagine, yet they died off too.
"Homo erectus left Africa and wandered into east Asia and, for some reason, oblivion. Neanderthals has bigger brains than us and may have had mental powers we can only imagine, yet they died off too."
I suspect in both cases, Congo Capitalism had a lot to do with it...... ;-)
Neanderthal vs. NeoCon?
Not Good!
Homo Erectus vs. NeoCon?
Even more problematic!
Homo Sapiens: "Hello, We're from the Central African Government, and we're here to Liberate You!"
(of your land and resources that is...)
Social and political evolution probably work in a manner closer to that of Intelligent Design. The plutocrats (the Designers), who make the human laws (legal and social), make sure conditions are hostile to the survival of unfavorable ideas, i.e., the ideas they do not favor, through differential rates of publication, promotion, and dissemination (and a bit of censorship on the side). And Citizens United will make that all the easier. We do live in the most perfect of all possible worlds!
Perhaps there is an 'order' to energy or energetic interaction that cannot be measured on the micro scale, though the micro would certainly reflect it. Hegal might say that intelligence arose from 'logical necessity.'
From the 7 Hermetic Principles:
The Principle of Correspondence
“As above, so below; as below, so above as within so without!.“
Life is a constant MOVEMENT that reflects this, and thus is not likely to be completely random. It does NOT necessarily follow that everything is predetermined, but only that interactions must be confined within certain parameters, some of them quite broad.
When the vessel was ready, the clay was Breathed Upon.
Evolution and, then, the God-Infusing Act, ensouling human bodies with ... us/spirits. Thus, encarnation.
By the way, Jesus of Nazareth himself never claimed to BE GOD, because he knew it wasn't true. This has never happened in the Throughout Of Being and it never will.
If this had taken place, he would have died instantly and for eons would not have known that he existed.
Nevertheless, he was made foolish beyond belief during his life.
In his body, male and female were made one.
Jesus is purported to have said:
I am the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father except by me
What if he had really said:
"I have found the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father except by that way, truth, and light."
Does that mean that Jesus came to a realization like the Buddha and others? If so, he was really teaching that anyone could come to that same realization.
Given the level of scientific understanding of that day, it is unreasonable to conclude that Jesus would not accept the theory of evolution, if he cared about it at all, and that the word "Father" (if he really even used that word) simply meant the greater whole.
The creationists don't believe that theories can be taken as absolute truth. By the way, you touched on another theory: the theory that says Jesus actually existed. This one is different, because unlike most other theories, there is absolutely no evidence that this guy ever lived. None.
First of all Creationism is not a "theory", it is a belief! A theory is based on research and facts, nothing in the "Bible" purports to be based on such...Secretarybird took the quote I was going to hightlight, but she/he did a masterful job exposing this idiots' ignorance!
Has anyone told the US creationists that Genesis story is Babylonian in origin? Which means in modern geography, that the Genesis story comes from Iraq. The very same nation Americans, including a lot of creationists, decided to attack, occupy, and in large part destroy.
Jehovah's Witnesses do not affirm the 6,000 year old creationist dogma.
The creationist are a sect themselves and do not speak for the Bible.The Hebrew word for "day" in Genesis can mean epic geological time periods and not just 24 hours.A passage in Psalm says a day for God is 1,000 years.God also told Adam that in the 'day' of him eating the forbidden fruit he would die and Adam went on for many years.
Many of the other doctrines of the Jehovah's Witness ARE fairy tale bogus like Jesus second coming in the year 1914 "invisibly".
In America, creationists do believe that a certain form of evolution has taken place.
They believe that a swarthy, middle eastern man living in Palestine 2000 years ago, and who probably looked like a 5 foot tall Yasser Arafat, was able to evolve into a 6 foot tall, blue-eyed, sandy blonde European with an Anglo-Saxon nose. Of course, maybe it wasn't evolution. It could've been a miracle.
So, if dinosaurs existed before the flood, where are the stories about them from before that? There are stories of people and animals before the flood, why are there NO stories about the giant lizards that could eat a person with one bite? Where are the stories about the oddballs who had them for pets? Where is there ANY biblical evidence of dinosaurs AT ALL?
This is stupidity for the SAKE of stupidity. And it's gotten a huge foothold here because we have politicians who think that brainwashing people to make them easier to control regardless of how much it hurts both them and the country. This nonsense got a real start with Reagan's "education czar", William "I'm a degenerate gambler and drunk" Bennett. W just drove the nail into the coffin of sanity and forward thinking in this country.
I can't stand those who are ignorant and WANT to stay that way. They will fight you every step of the way, and it's just amazing to me that people are so satisfied with BEING STUPID! But then, it seems to be a serious case of brain malfunction, and it affects a pretty large segment of society.
It's this kind of bullshit that makes me want to move to Europe, somewhere. I'm a jazz player, and they would love that. I would probably enjoy being in a country of intelligent, forward thinking people. I wonder if I can find one, or if the nut job "conservatives", who don't want to conserve ANYTHING, have ruined it there, too.
Try Bolivia!