The Abstract Factory has posted an entertaining, if violent, fantasy of how a debate with a creationist might run.
Intelligent Design advocate: YEAAARRRRGGGHHHH! YOU BROKE MY KNEECAP!Scientist: Perhaps it only appears that I broke your kneecap. Certainly, all the evidence points to the hypothesis I broke your kneecap. For example, your kneecap is broken; it appears to be a fresh wound; and I am holding a baseball bat, which is spattered with your blood. However, a mere preponderance of evidence doesn't mean anything. Perhaps your kneecap was designed that way. Certainly, there are some features of the current situation that are inexplicable according to the "naturalistic" explanation you have just advanced, such as the exact contours of the excruciating pain that you are experiencing right now.
I should point out, for those that may be unsure, that I am not advocating breaking the kneecaps of creationists, even those masquerading as scientists under the guise of "intelligent design". The exchange is not as absurd as it seems at first glance, however — but it's actually aimed in the other direction in real life. Creationists may not want (for the most part, some Jehova's Witnesses excluded) to be directed to a prayer center instead of a hospital when they're injured, nor do they want faith-based auto repair, but they're perfectly happy assaulting something that doesnt seem at first glance to be directly necessary to their lives, even when the immediate casualty will be the very science that provides them with medicine and functioning automobiles.
They are, in a very real sense, coming after our already feeble education system with baseball bats, and I'm not sure how many more hits it can take. In 2002, 36% of our high school seniors were illiterate. I've been told that in Louisiana, where I am currently, over 40% of the population is functionally illiterate, unable to read a newspaper or fill out a job application form.
And then people come after science. They're so unabashed about it that their major defenders are willing to admit in a courtroom that they want to redefine "scientific theory" to be so broad as to include astrology... and by doing so, remove all science from the term. There are people out there right now disguising their religious affiliations and attempting an ambush on the only thing that allows our society to move forward.
And that's enough to make you want to hit someone with a baseball bat.
Hat tip to Pharyngula.
That's all very well but...
Over here in Europe (the Old World) nobody gives a fig about the creationalists and any suggestion of changing the curriculum is met with the polite derision it deserves. I read quite a lot of criticism of these people in US based blogs and while I'm in no way supportive of their flat-earth polemic what puzzles me is the silence on the "God promised us that land" brigade who read from the same kooky book. Is it that you are too chicken to face up to them? Or is it that Americans just don't mind genocide and land-theft but bad science is just too wrong to take in silence?
Huh?
I have absolutely no idea where you are coming from. Nobody uses the "God promised us that land" line to justify genocide and land-theft anymore, so there's not much point in railing about it. Nowadays it's "spreading freedom and democracy" that's used as justification, and most of the same people who are opposed to the destruction of science are also opposed to wars of aggression.
This is something you should be able to see evidence of on this very blog, if you cared to look.
I see
Sorry to have disturbed you from your slumber, I gathered by the quality or your articles that you were well educated. I'll go post elsewhere. Some interesting stuff here though, keep up the good work. I was not attacking you, I was trying to gird you into action because I think you are right but have not joined all the dots. We are currently reliving a 600 year old argument, go to the history books my friend. Its all there.
Try not to be offensive
Implying cowardice, approval of genocide, land-theft, and now lack of education or awareness are, in fact, attacks. If you want to discuss a specific incident of modern theocratic colonialism in the western world, you'll need to be, well, specific (and ideally, a little more polite). I am, however, not particularly inclined to prioritize the correction of 600 or even 60 year old injustices when there are more current ones to worry about.
"Manifest destiny" is, as far as I know, dead for now (and if you think otherwise, your cause would be better served by noting an example than by insulting strangers). If it gets resurrected, there will be people who attack it. Expansionism and religious hubris are dangerous enough on their own merits without forcibly conflating them.