Up@dawn 2.0

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Group 1: Evolution and The Good Book

Q: What did the master say was the good in our nature?
A: Most people cannot bear to see the sufferings of others.  Sages 8:1

Q: What qualities preserved in his heart did the master say distinguished a superior man from others?
A: Benevolence and a sense of right.  Sages 13:1

Q: Who is the only true master?
A: Oneself.  Sages 17:11

I watched most of the Nye-Ham evolution debate.  I got kicked off several times towards the end, as #creationdebate was trending on Twitter and driving people to the Web site.  The debate was well produced as both sides presented their case.  My guess would be that many people tuned in to sincerely support the Creationist's position, and many tuned in just to watch Ham's Flintstone-esque spectacle.  For the sake of exposure, one could easily argue it was a success.

The tell-tale force and evidential sustenance for Creationism boiled down to this one question: What would change your mind about your position?

Ham: nothing.
Nye: evidence.

Ham will hold his belief no matter what the evidence shows.  You know the proverbial bullshit is getting deep when televangelist Pat Robertson asks Ham "not to make a joke of ourselves," referring to Christians in general.  (Robertson is the preacher who said gays cause tornados and the 2012 Haitian earthquake was cause by the devil.)

Although many atheists, scientists, and Christians were very critical of giving oxygen to Creationist nonsense, I would beg to differ.  I think some good can come from exposing bad theology masquerading as science.  We need to publicize  baseless assertions emanating from that cryptic corner of Kentucky, which closely resembles Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a dinosaur.  These laughable ideas are what is being taught under the guise of "home schooling" and in public schools right here in Tennessee.

Here's a photo from a display of Ken Ham's "museum" of a child playing around a dinosaur.

Exposure isn't always a good thing--just ask Ted Haggard,  Chris Christie or Shia LaBeouf.  That old worn chestnut that there's no such thing as bad publicity rings hollow.

I think bad ideas should be dragged kicking and screaming out of Plato's cave and into the light.  Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis (1856-1941) had similar sentiments when he quipped, "Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants."

Here's a video from the BBC where they ask: "Is it time for all religions to accept evolution?"

Late update: Dawkins' latest tweet supports my case.


  1. I agree with Dawkins in thinking it foolish of Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham for obvious reasons, but I’m still very upset that Dawkins himself refuses to engage in debate with Dr. William Lane Craig. Dr. Craig is a worthy opponent and could give Dawkins a run for his money in my humble opinion…

    1. Dawkins has already debated WLC once. I honestly don't see that he could possibly stand to gain anything from doing it again.

    2. Further, what Dawkins says in this article (link below) seems like perfectly solid reasoning for not debating Craig.