As promised, here’s part 2 of my responses to 22 creationists who were interviewed by Matt Stopera following the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debate. Matt’s original presentation is here on Buzzfeed. The first part is here.
I honestly get sad when I see some of these, it’s disturbing how ignorant some theists are about the world around them and how poor their education into the sciences actually is. I’m sure we can blame a lot of this on private and home school educations. You people need to get your nose out of your Bibles and put it into science books. So without further ado, let’s get started.
I haven’t got the slightest idea what that even means. Of course, coming from a theist, that’s hardly surprising.
Metamorphosis? I’m assuming you mean the biological process by which an animal physically develops after birth or hatching and not the 1915 Franz Kafka book about the cockroach, but you never know. I don’t know that biological metamorphosis really has a lot to say about evolution. It is a method of changing in form over time from neophyte to adult, most often in insects, amphibians and fish. Hey, maybe she was talking about the Kafka book!
You haven’t the slightest idea what a scientific theory is, do you? A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. This does not describe creationism at all. In fact, if you were going to describe creationism in any meaningful scientific way, it would be a failed hypothesis, an idea that failed to conform to testing and was therefore rejected as worthless. Evolution is a fact. There is no question whatsoever that evolution did, and continues to occur in the real world every day. The Theory of Evolution is an attempt to explain exactly how it takes place and the explanation may be revised as new information becomes available. That doesn’t change the fact that evolution has been repeatedly observed to occur and is among the most well supported ideas in all of science, unlike creationism, which is a joke.
You need to go talk to the guy above you, you both need a very basic education.
Genetic mutation and replication errors demonstrably produce an increase in genetic information as genes may reproduce with errors, giving new information that was not available before. There are many different examples of this, among the best known, and most likely to piss off creationists, is the ape to human transition. When the common chimpanzee genome was published in 2005 and compared to human genes, only 1.23% of genes differed by single-base substitutions. Of these, only 1.06% is thought to represent fixed differences between the chimpanzee and human, the rest are most likely variants in individual chimps or humans that do not represent actual differences in the genome itself. Of course, you don’t know this unless you actually have a clue what biological science says.
There is no inherent purpose to life. As I said in the last post, you are responsible for coming up with your own purpose for the life that you live. It doesn’t come from any imaginary friend in the sky, it comes from within you. If you refuse to acknowledge this and pretend that some invisible guy makes you the way that you are, that’s your loss.
We’ve actually found lots of bits and pieces, but fossilization is rare and there are plenty of creatures, including many species of dinosaurs, that we may have only a single example, or even just a few bones. Of course, Lucy, found in 1974 by D. Richard Leakey, is hardly the only one. For a quick list of the extensive fossil finds we’ve made in the human evolutionary tree, see here.
There’s no need to have faith in things that you can actually find objective evidence for. Faith, at least blind faith, is for those things which you cannot demonstrate are actually true. You know, like your religion. Edwin Hubble discovered in 1924 that there are many galaxies outside of our own that are moving away from us. If they are moving away from us, they must at once time have been much closer to us. His observations were borne out in the 1960s by two radio technicians, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who discovered that no matter what way they pointed their radio telescope, they could detect a consistent background radiation signal, just a few degrees above absolute zero. There are many lines of evidence that support the Big Bang Theory, unarguably the best supported theory in Cosmology. In fact, we just got our first pictures of Dark Matter which even further solidifies the Theory. Look for yourself:
It’s quite easy if you actually care what’s real and what isn’t. You’d rather have this emotionally comforting, ego-stroking belief than deal with the reality that there’s no evidence of a creator whatsoever. This is why people like Ken Ham lose so pathetically all the time, they’re not worried about the facts, only how their beliefs make them feel. Maybe you ought to give it a shot.
It wasn’t a star, which, unfortunately, betrays your ignorance of the data, but we’re not surprised at that at all, are we? There is currently a limit to how far back we are able to look, essentially Planck Time, which is the amount of time it takes light to travel 1.61619926 × 10-35 meters. Whether or not we’re ever able to see further back than that minuscule amount of time we don’t know, that still doesn’t give you license to just make stuff up because it makes you feel better.
Yes, I know that’s a really, really stupid question but I’ll give it a shot. Humans did not come from monkeys, both humans and apes descended from a common ancestor and took divergent evolutionary paths. The chimpanzee–human last common ancestor (CHLCA) falls between 7 and 8 million years ago, we have fossils that approximate such an ancestor, such as Ardipithecus kadabba, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, and Orrorin tugenensis, but there is a very real possibility that there isn’t a single CHLCA because different genes changed at different times, a species doesn’t have an offspring with and entirely different genome fully formed. I know that confuses most creationists because they seem to think that’s how evolution works, but it just betrays their ignorance of the subject matter.
I’d like to thank Matt Stopera for taking these pictures and to all of those who participated. Unfortunately, I cannot say I am at all impressed by the complete and utter lack of scientific knowledge of these creationists. They really ought to be ashamed of themselves for being so ignorant and for apparently being proud of remaining so. This is why people keep doubting reality, they’re much happier believing things for which they have no evidence because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside. Reality isn’t warm and fuzzy, it’s raw, real and is the one thing that remains after you stop believing in it. Accepting reality as it is, whether it makes you feel good or not, is an important part of the maturation process. I think these people have a fair bit of maturing still to do.