Creationists are at it again...
Nov. 23rd, 2004 10:35 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenSo, an ABC News brief popped up about people who want to leave the US because it's not the country of freedom any more (people from mild-mannered college professors to a woman managing a gay/lesbian wedding planning/vendor site who's received so many threats she's already moved twice). This was great...then I saw what's really ticked me off: an article titled "Conservatives Demand Changes at Nation's Parks."
At first, it's irksome, but, I think, fair, that Reverend I'msuchagoodperson wants there to be footage from pro-life, anti-gay marriage protests shown in with other protests that have been held at the Lincoln Memorial Plaza...if there were any. The Park Service grumbles about changing the video, but, in the spirit of fairness, if...and this is a pretty big if...if there were such protests, they ought to be included. There will be no left-wing revisionist histories at public places any more than there will be right-wing histories. However, if that Holier-than-thou idiot insists and WINS the right to remove footage from the tape shown at the memorial because it shows pro-gay marriage, pro-choice marches, I'll scream. He wants one scene in particular removed: the one of a gay man holding a sign saying "The Lord is my Shephed and knows I'm gay." I can see why that might upset his carefully constructed gays=the antiChrist stance, but fair's fair, and that guy definitely was at the Memorial. When Mr. Preacherman can bring up the dead baby proof, he can have some time, too. It's just that the Lincoln Memorial has historically attracted the oppressed--you know, like the Jews were under the Pharoah in the O.T.? Or like the draftees in Vietnam? Or gays?
What really, really pissed me off was the inclusion of "The Grand Canyon: A Different View" at the bookstore associated with that national park. This is written by an author who's declared himself born again and says that there's no way the geological record can possibly be right because the Grand Canyon--in fitting the the Biblical timeline--is only a few thousand years old. He prefers to believe that the Grand Canyon was caused by the Biblical flood, the one with Noah and the ark and all that, which he believes because he met the Lord...those are his words, too.
The Park Service, to their credit, are bristling, as the stated purpose in their mission is "to promote the use of sound science in all of its programs, including public education." This isn't the freakin Galapagos Islands. Hell, this isn't even Hawaii with its convergently evolved spiders and their similar webs. This isn't supposed to be an evolutionary debate, just a "HOW OLD IS THIS BIG CRACK?" (he he). The fact that someone, despite accepting physics and chemistry, the less 'controversial' sciences, can then sit back and say the findings using applied theories of those disciplines (carbon dating, other forms of radioactive decay, etc etc etc to age rock however they do it) are bullshit....God, it makes me SO mad.
Why? Why is it that the Earth can't be older than the Bible? That one has absolutely ZERO Biblical support. In the beginning, as the story goes, the Earth was a dark planet devoid of life....kinda like rocks. Rocks don't need the breath of God to crack, break up, build up, crumble, or turn into mountains. People can, even from the Creationist viewpoint, still be only 4,000 years old (if they spontaneously pop into being as Adam and Eve and get started from there) even if you admit the Earth is older. The Earth's natural formations could and did occur for millions, even billions of years before lightning zapped primitive molecules into being RNA, then DNA, and so on upwards. Why does it have to be man-made? Or, rather, God-made directly? There's no Biblical evidence that God wanted anything to do with the Earth until Genesis, so therefore nothing could happen? GROWL...
And they're selling this asshole's book next to LEGITIMATE SCIENCE BOOKS. So, someone's going to pick it up expecting "The story of the Grand Canyon dates back the first fissures some 1,000,000 years ago, in the such-and-such period," and get "OMG GOD MADE THE WORLD AND MAN AND EVERYTHING!!! IF YOU BELIEVE OTHERWISE YOUR GOING TO HELL! THE GRAND CANYON CANT BE OLDER BECAUSE GOD MADE IT!!! AND THE BIBLE SAYS ITS NOT THAT OLD!!!!!" (punctuation errors are intentional--I doubt that anyone who can't trust geological time could find the marks on the keyboard--he's probably still writing in manuscript form because the electronic word is the Devil)
At first, it's irksome, but, I think, fair, that Reverend I'msuchagoodperson wants there to be footage from pro-life, anti-gay marriage protests shown in with other protests that have been held at the Lincoln Memorial Plaza...if there were any. The Park Service grumbles about changing the video, but, in the spirit of fairness, if...and this is a pretty big if...if there were such protests, they ought to be included. There will be no left-wing revisionist histories at public places any more than there will be right-wing histories. However, if that Holier-than-thou idiot insists and WINS the right to remove footage from the tape shown at the memorial because it shows pro-gay marriage, pro-choice marches, I'll scream. He wants one scene in particular removed: the one of a gay man holding a sign saying "The Lord is my Shephed and knows I'm gay." I can see why that might upset his carefully constructed gays=the antiChrist stance, but fair's fair, and that guy definitely was at the Memorial. When Mr. Preacherman can bring up the dead baby proof, he can have some time, too. It's just that the Lincoln Memorial has historically attracted the oppressed--you know, like the Jews were under the Pharoah in the O.T.? Or like the draftees in Vietnam? Or gays?
What really, really pissed me off was the inclusion of "The Grand Canyon: A Different View" at the bookstore associated with that national park. This is written by an author who's declared himself born again and says that there's no way the geological record can possibly be right because the Grand Canyon--in fitting the the Biblical timeline--is only a few thousand years old. He prefers to believe that the Grand Canyon was caused by the Biblical flood, the one with Noah and the ark and all that, which he believes because he met the Lord...those are his words, too.
The Park Service, to their credit, are bristling, as the stated purpose in their mission is "to promote the use of sound science in all of its programs, including public education." This isn't the freakin Galapagos Islands. Hell, this isn't even Hawaii with its convergently evolved spiders and their similar webs. This isn't supposed to be an evolutionary debate, just a "HOW OLD IS THIS BIG CRACK?" (he he). The fact that someone, despite accepting physics and chemistry, the less 'controversial' sciences, can then sit back and say the findings using applied theories of those disciplines (carbon dating, other forms of radioactive decay, etc etc etc to age rock however they do it) are bullshit....God, it makes me SO mad.
Why? Why is it that the Earth can't be older than the Bible? That one has absolutely ZERO Biblical support. In the beginning, as the story goes, the Earth was a dark planet devoid of life....kinda like rocks. Rocks don't need the breath of God to crack, break up, build up, crumble, or turn into mountains. People can, even from the Creationist viewpoint, still be only 4,000 years old (if they spontaneously pop into being as Adam and Eve and get started from there) even if you admit the Earth is older. The Earth's natural formations could and did occur for millions, even billions of years before lightning zapped primitive molecules into being RNA, then DNA, and so on upwards. Why does it have to be man-made? Or, rather, God-made directly? There's no Biblical evidence that God wanted anything to do with the Earth until Genesis, so therefore nothing could happen? GROWL...
And they're selling this asshole's book next to LEGITIMATE SCIENCE BOOKS. So, someone's going to pick it up expecting "The story of the Grand Canyon dates back the first fissures some 1,000,000 years ago, in the such-and-such period," and get "OMG GOD MADE THE WORLD AND MAN AND EVERYTHING!!! IF YOU BELIEVE OTHERWISE YOUR GOING TO HELL! THE GRAND CANYON CANT BE OLDER BECAUSE GOD MADE IT!!! AND THE BIBLE SAYS ITS NOT THAT OLD!!!!!" (punctuation errors are intentional--I doubt that anyone who can't trust geological time could find the marks on the keyboard--he's probably still writing in manuscript form because the electronic word is the Devil)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 01:52 pm (UTC)And most of the sites I find are about the battle between creationists and geologists on this point. Even the scientific articles I found at least make passing mention of creationist theories!! What the hell is with these people? It probably isn't productive to say they should shut up and go home, but they should shut up and go home.
I'll add that no one anywhere else in the world believes in any of this sort of shit. I remember hearing once about a column were Stephen Jay Gould talked about having to explain about creationism and how he had to spend too much time defending against it to European scientists who'd never even heard of it. I'm not particularly enamored of most of the rest of the world, but it's one (more) place where it's a total embarrassment for the USA.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-23 02:39 pm (UTC)I hate that we're so Puritan. Wasn't the whole point of this country to escape religious oppression? Isn't that what we're supposed to be commemorating Thursday? Or was it just that the most asshole-y uber-religious nutjobs got kicked out of England?
I'd watch the news over Thanksgiving if I were you people. See what they try to turn *that* holiday into. I think I might really enjoy or REALLY REALLY DETEST this holiday season. If, as I suspect, the uber-right tries to re-write the first Thanksgiving as triumph of religion over paganism versus the search for freedom of expression and brotherhood with your fellow man (no matter how many feathers are in his cap), I fear for this country more than I already do. On the other hand, THanksgiving's story might put a well-needed kick to the right, reminding them that we are a free people first, and a Godly people on our own damned time as we see fit. Christmas should continue the joy? Does the Christian Right seriously expect it to be any less crass and commercial this year now that "The Passion" is on DVD and Dubya holds court in DC? Bullshit. I'm going to enjoy the umpteenth repeat of "Dominic the Christmas Donkey" and "The Chipmunks Christmas Album" a lot more.
*THAT* is what the stupid religious right should worry about--they preach too had and they'll find even the religious among the left leaning back just to spite them. Let's spite the right! Everyone vow only to sing songs about Santa this Christmas!
no subject
Date: 2004-11-24 03:04 pm (UTC)