Abiogenesis

Back in 2005, Stephen Darksyde published a fantastic article here at UTI called "Ancestral Magnitudes". It used the metaphor of the "generation", and colorfully described human evolution in terms of our ancestors.

[DarkSyde] If the idea of a flat-earth or the Sun-god is a part of that faith then you either ignore the science and live in willful ignorance-at least in regard to that conflict-and trust to faith, or you adjust your theology. Those really are your only two choices as far as I can see.

What your objection more than likely reveals is that you don't like the idea of being the product of 'random' physics and biochemistry, that you feel there is no room for a Creator in such a scenario. I cannot imagine greater natural evidence for the Brilliance of a Creator than complex process unfolding over billions of years through countless steps in exquisite order spanning the entire Cosmos. The technical skill and artistic vision of such is to be admired in awe, and in that context evolution should be worthy of your devotion, not your disdain.

I encourage you to read the whole thing if you haven't already. It'll blow your mind.

A few days ago, Xavier Onassis from the blog "Doubting Faith" published the same sort of mind-blowingly cool article about our universe, and it puts our place in that universe into stark, unflinching perspective.

[Xavier Onassis] Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that a universe this vast, and this spectacular could not be a random occurrence. Personally, I don't have a problem with it being one big coincidence. But, let's just say it's not.

Do you really think that a hypothetical all-powerful, all-knowing God, responsible for the creation of EVERYTHING in this incredibly vast universe would really give a flying fuck how you voted in the last election? Whether or not a couple of gay guys get married? Whether or not you keep Kosher or go on The Hajj?

Get over yourselves. You're not that fucking important. You need to look at the Big Picture and put things in perspective.

Just excellent. Highly recommended. Great job, Xavier.

Roy Abraham Varghese, theistic apologist and god-bothering author from the "Institute of Metascientific Research", was recently interviewed by the Dallas Observer. Varghese is widely credited as "the man who won over Anthony Flew", and is now currently working on a book called "There Is A God" with Flew.

Varghese is an interesting character because his contention is that without a meta-intelligence, all science devolves into incoherence if you drill-down deep enough, or pull back far enough.

It's a lot of pseudo-scientific nonsense of course, a philosophically slick update to the theistic evolutionist's mantra.

More below the fold...

Well, shoot. There's 2 minutes and 5 seconds of my one and only life I'll never get back. I could almost feel my brain cells atrophying as I watched this. Creationist Chuck Missler takes evolution-denial to a hilariously all-time low.

I sure hope that we make it through the next few years because shit like this is just depressing.

Les over at Stupid Evil Bastard seems to attract the creationist morons like a flame attracts moths. He has had a hilarious, but frustrating email exchange with an ignorant youngster named "Paolo" who seems to suffer from uncontrollable creationist cut-n-paste syndrome.

It'd be funny if it weren't so depressing.

In any case, one of Les' commenters, a person using the handle "Mayo", came up with a fantastic idea for a gritty new creationist crime drama. You think Fox's new faith-based TV network will pick it up?

[Mayo] Here’s a typical T.V. detective movie in Paolo's world.

Detective- We found your fingerprints all over the murder weapon.

Criminal- Did you actually see me use it?

Detective- No....but the prints are undeniable.

Criminal- You have NO PROOF. You saw nothing.

Detective- Look fella...your semen is all over the place. We’ve matched your DNA.

Criminal- If you didn’t actually observe the semen leaving my body....what you’re spewing is just a theory. YOU HAVE NO PROOF!

Detective- What about these footprints which perfectly match your highly rare shoe type?

Criminal- Did you see me step there?

Detective- Not exactly.

Criminal- You’ve got no proof then. You’re just guessing.....badly.

Detective- You have blood which matches the victim all over you. How do you explain that?

Criminal- Did you see this blood get on me?

Detective- No. The spray pattern and condition of the blood all point to the fact that you must have been in the path of the bleeding artery at the time and place where the victim was killed though.

Criminal- More guessing. Is there anything else you’re any good at? You may want to consider a new line of work.

Detective- I guess you can go now. Sorry to have bothered you. Roll credits.

Duane Gish, VP of the hoary old ICR trotted out the same, tired creationist apologetics at a church fundraiser in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania that he's been bleating about for years.

[link] Gish said the fossil record also corroborates creation instead of evolution. In the Cambrian strata, no ancestors or transition forms of living organisms could be found. "You ought to find billions of ancestors and intermediate stages, but not one has been found," Gish said. Living organisms were "created fully formed, just like the Bible says."

Holy crap, Gish, give it a rest already. Why keep spewing this already-debunked hogwash?

Ah. Now I get it. P.T. Barnum was right; A sucker is born every minute. The quote below is from the comments to this story in the Lancaster Online:

[link] I agree with you, there are just too many unanswered questions when it comes to evolution. I think evolution does a pretty good job of describing how environmental conditions effect biological changes but doesn’t definitively describe how life was formed from a collection of chemicals. By what mechanism did these early groups of chemicals become self propagating? Very primitive organisms still exist, why didn’t they move up the evolutionary latter, how is it possible that these primitive organisms were not challenged by the environment during 5 billion years of existence?

More below the flip...

Tom Ritter is a high school chemistry teacher with a dilemma. How to reconcile his duties teaching public high-school students chemistry and physics when those fields depend so heavily on evolution?

Did I mention that Professor Tom is a creationist? And that he has issued a $1000.00 "challenge" to "evolutionists" to debate him in mid-May on the topic; "Is evolution the only rational explanation to explain life and the existence of modern organisms?"

Apparently, Tom Ritter is Lebanon Pennsylvania's rather shopworn version of Dr. Dino.

Ritter, a chemistry and physics teacher, is astonishingly ignorant when it comes to evolution.

[link] “Personally, I don’t have much interest in evolution, creation or ‘intelligent design,’” Ritter said. “I’m interested in science. I believe teaching evolution as fact perverts science. You could teach evolution as a theory, and I’d have no problem with that.

Evolution is both a fact and a collection of theories. The fact is that evolution occurs. No sane person would even think of denying this. The theories are attempts to best explain how evolution occurs. A science teacher who doesn't understand this should be fired. It's inexcusably ignorant - willfully ignorant.

Gary Nelson, a columnist for the Arizona Republic, is an old-earth creationist. That is to say that he believes that our universe was set in motion, or created, by an intelligence of some sort. (I suspect that he would probably say "God" was the intelligence behind it, if pushed, but maybe he has been Touched by His Noodly Appendage. Who knows?)

However, Gary's reasoning is off-base, to say the least.

Update: I have discovered a couple more gems from Specialist & "Director Of Equipping", Lane Palmer, Super-Duper Evolution Fighter. The first is another rant against reality evolution called "From the Goo to the Zoo to You!" that simply must be read to be believed, and the second is "My Difficult Friend" which is a guide on how to witness to atheists, agnostics, and "evolutionists". Heh.

Christian Post columnist Lane Palmer is a "Youth Ministries Specialist" and the "Director Of Equipping" for Dare 2 Share Ministries in Arvada, Colorado, where he works with youth leaders and students, equipping them to be effective in sharing the gospel.

Hmnn. I don't see anything about him being a biologist, or holding any sort of scientific credentials... So, I am a little confused as to how he can make a statement like this in regards to the evolution/ID conflict.

[link] It seems to me that that the real issue here is less about the weight of evidence, and more about the weight of the implications. [...]

For example, if it is a core belief of mine that I exist because of a series of fortuitous desultory accidents (i.e. from the goo to the zoo to you and me too!), then I have set myself up for a serious identity crisis! In this scenario, on what exactly am I to base my value and worth? What kind of feeling does it give me knowing that if I go far enough back in my ancestral chain, I find a relative who was at the bottom of the food chain?

No, sorry, Lane old pal, it is not about the implications at all. It is all about the evidence. You see, evolution doesn't care about the implications. It just happens, regardless. Evolution - and indeed science in general - is wholly impersonal. It doesn't give a whit for your feelings, your emotions, your confusion, your religion, or your sincerely-held beliefs and desires.

It rolls on, heedless.

Thanks to Pharyngula, UTI has discovered that President Bush, speaking to reporters in Texas on Monday, said that he believes schools should discuss "intelligent design alongside evolution when teaching students about the creation of life."

We are so screwed.

[link] I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas; the answer is yes."

Well hully-gee, Mr. Bush! I agree completely! Let's expose our kids to a bunch of "different ideas"! How about the Japanese (Shinto) creation myth? I mean, as creation myths, ahem, I mean "theories", go it's certainly more fun to read than that dry old boring Discovery Institute crapola. And, it has just as much evidence supporting it as ID does:

[link] Before the heavens and the earth came into existence, all was a chaos, unimaginably limitless and without definite shape or form. Eon followed eon: then, lo! out of this boundless, shapeless mass something light and transparent rose up and formed the heaven. This was the Plain of High Heaven, in which materialized a deity called Ame-no-Minaka-Nushi-no-Mikoto (the Deity-of-the-August-Center-of-Heaven). Next the heavens gave birth to a deity named Takami-Musubi-no-Mikoto (the High-August-Producing-Wondrous-Deity), followed by a third called Kammi-Musubi-no-Mikoto (the Divine-Producing-Wondrous-Deity). These three divine beings are called the Three Creating Deities.