|
Details: Creationism is a story made up to protect kids from the truth of their REAL heritage. WE ARE ANIMALS!! No better or worse from the pets we house, the animals we eat, enslave, or hunt. That does not make us dirty, it should make us feel a kinship with our cousins from the animal kingdom (along with plants, fungi, bacteria, and protists). Why are humans so egocentric when it comes to our origens. The world in not 6,000 years old, we are not special, and our self-centered elistist Christian ideals will be the death of our civilization. Get over yourself!! |
|
Details: An odd little pamphlet, built on split-minded logic. Ankerberg and Weldon (A&W) try to recast "science" to their own literalist Christian ends, and seem to botch the job throughout. It's not fair to criticize without concrete examples, so: On pages 17-19, we're told (rather convincingly) that acceptance of a scientific theory by a majority is a poor reason for it to be held as absolutely true. Yet on page 33, A&W try to bolster their own arguments in favor of Creationism as science by referencing polls claiming that a majority of Americans want Creationism taught in public schools. Well, gentlemen ... is it a popularity contest, or isn't it? Further: Throughout the tract, A&W lambaste evolutionists for not adhering to the established rules of proper science; but on page 29, we read: "... there is nothing unscientific about [our Creationist approach]. The worldview of theism is just as adequate an explanatory framework for the scientific data as is the worldview of naturalism." Boom -- instant shift in the established rules of proper science, and it's valid because they say so, darn it. Most interesting is A&W's use of references and quotations ... 149 footnotes for a mere 39 pages of text. I was impressed, until I did a quick count. Well over a quarter of those citations come from the same three Creationists, one a lawyer, the second "with three earned doctorates in science" (social science? political science? A&W don't say), and the last identified as a "molecular biologist" ... no reference to an earned doctorate for him, though. There were several references to astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle, and those contained the only substantial attempt in the essay to refute an aspect of evolution: the mathematical improbability of life's spontaneous generation from inorganic matter. I had to wonder, though, whether the literalist Christian authors further agree with Hoyle's hypothesis that the organic grains of life came to Earth from outer space over 5 billion years ago, and then evolved from there. That makes him a rather strange bedfellow. Any port in a storm, I guess ... A&W have also penned pamphlets with titles like "The Facts on Halloween," "The Facts on Homosexuality," and "The Facts on Rock Music." Alas, I'll be skipping those pieces. |
out of 3 Reviews
