January 8, 2016::End of the day round-up

Pondering

In concluding his 5-part presentation on the Arrogance of Creationism, KC highlights a point I will be making in Pt-2 concerning the Junkyard analogy when I discuss the "apologistic agenda"

What many people, religionists and non-believers, don't fully grasp is the importance of the Theory of Evolution and why some Creationists or IDers cling so tightly to their refusal to accept science.

Simply put, eliminate the Creation mythos you eliminate the authority of the "church".  As I have noted before, "It's all about manipulation and control.  Without Genesis, the creation narrative, there is no Christ and he becomes just another myth."  But there is a deeper level to the controversy.

In an article titled "Were There Dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark?", Jeffrey Goldberg writing for The Atlantic spoke with Ken Ham and Terry Mortenson of AIG.  The gist of both men can be summarized by the following.

When Ham was asked, "Why it is important to convince individuals that Genesis is a book of history?"  He replied, "There’s a slippery slope in regard to authority. If you say that the history in Genesis is not true, then you can just take man’s ideas as true. When you go outside of Scripture, why shouldn’t you just reinterpret what marriage means? So our emphasis is on the slippery slope regarding authority.”

KC in part 3 talks about how Creationists love to use vague and misleading terminology which leads to equivocation and moving the goal posts.  This equivocation, as KC explains is due to that same view concerning authority that both Ham and Mortenson both have, "in the case of most creationists it is because of a dogmatic adherence to a literal interpretation of their sacred texts,,,.  Discourses in science are not centered around learning but to rationalize that which they adhere to as unquestionable." [paraphrased]

In other words, we have one big circle-jerk: 1] the Bible is inerrant and authoritative in all things (science included); 2] this leads to equivocation and shifting the goal-posts; 3] in order to rationalize their dogmatic adherence the the Bible.

What people need to keep in mind is what creationists (ie. Ham) mean by "authority" and how and where it is applied.  In the Christian theocratic mind-set, that authority is their particular simplistic interpretation of what the Bible states devoid of any actual hermeneutical principles.  They are biblical "letteralists" and nothing, including irrefutable scientific evidence, will change their mind. (KC highlighted this point by including a clip of the Ham-Nye debate where Ken  basically said "I have this book you see.")

An interesting discussion arose concerning the following, centered around the whole of the notion that many of us interpret the Bible as stating "to respect your leaders" or "render unto Caesar."  But an apt reader noted:

Actually, one of the central themes of the old testament is the stealing of land.  The bible was the main excuse for what my Native European ancestors did to my Native American ancestors.

Still thinking along the lines of a "manifest destiny" theme, my reader responded,

Realizing that Abrahamic religions were another from of Imperialism is one of the many facts that helped me to become an atheist.   You can't be a good Christian, biblical speaking, unless you are actively working to spread the word of god.  The way I read the bible, it's more than their destiny. The bible demands that Christians subjugate the world.

In other words, dominionist and theocratic ideology taken to its logical conclusion

Ammon Bundy: Bible Supports Militia's Seizure Of Federal Land

He explained that the federal government is wrongly prohibiting economic development on the property he seized, insisting that God would rather have the land be developed: “We read in Genesis where God gives the earth to man, he did not give it to government, he gave it to man to care and to cultivate, and that means to take care of it and to use it. That is necessary and that is what the Lord has done.”
 
Bundy went on to say that the government is violating “scriptural” precepts by controlling land, before arguing that his militia needed to use “shock and awe” to “remove the chains of tyranny and the chains of oppression so the people can regain a hope.”

This Georgia School Wants To Be A Safe Space For LGBT Students

A new private school in Georgia that wants to provide a safe space for LGBT students, Pride School Atlanta, will open this fall. It will be the first school of its kind in the state and models itself after the Harvey Milk school in New York, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The K-12 school — founded by Christian Zsilavetz, a trans teacher with 25 years of experience in the classroom — will serve both LGBT students and cis straight students who may feel out of place. It’s an especially important resource given its location, according to some LGBT advocates, because LGBT youth living in the South and the Midwest often feel like they won’t be able to find support in their hometowns.

As a former member of the Texas BoE this woman assisted in determining the content of the textbooks used throughout Texas schools and by default the textbooks available throughout the nation's public schools. This is the battshittery that AronRa fights against.

Cruz Virginia Campaign Leader Rails Against 'Socialized Education System' And Homosexuality's 'Prevention Of The Seed'

“I believe it’s a crucial issue for several reasons,” she said. “One, it’s what I call the seed policy, if you think about it, every major social issue you’re encountering as legislators actually directs back to what it talks about it in Genesis, ‘if I would put enmity between you and the seed of the woman.’ Because what happens, what is abortion? Abortion is the destruction of the seed. What is homosexuality? It is the prevention of the seed. And what is education? It is potential deception of the seed.”

“And so when we have 88 to 90 percent, which is approximately the number of the students that are being educated within our socialized education system, effectively indoctrinating our children with our own tax dollars, guess what?” she asked. “We lose every other issue. We lose life, we lose marriage, we lose all of it. So I think this is the linchpin issue.”

Creationists and Academic Freedom

As Matzke and others have pointed out, creationists strategies have evolved. Their first strategy was to ban the teaching of evolution. This was eventually declared unconstitutional. Next they argued for equal time for creationism and evolution, and this too was struck down. Then they tried to rebrand creationism as Intelligent Design, but this failed 10 year ago at Dover.

Now their strategy is to make the same tired and refuted creationist arguments under the guise of academic freedom. They cannot mandate the teaching of creationism in public schools, so instead they write laws saying that teachers can use supplemental material. The DiscoTute then helpfully provides supplemental material that consists of the same anti-evolution arguments and lies that creationists have been peddling for a century.

Swords and sophistry: Questionable archaeology to the hilt

The problems with this claim are many and various. Once certain knowledgeable people started looking at it, the story turned odder and odder. Let’s unpack why this hyped Boston Standard story is doubtful.

The problems with this claim are many and various. Once certain knowledgeable people started looking at it, the story turned odder and odder. Let’s unpack why this hyped Boston Standard story is doubtful.

First, note that Pulitzer is not a professional archaeologist. He called himself “a leading visionary in the world of marketing, product development, and entrepreneurship”. Jason Colavito looks more closely into Pulitzer’s claims that he is a “Smithsonian Laureat”. Colavito finds that the claim made about the Smithsonian is not quite right. That is, the truth looks to have been a bit extended to supply him more personal accolades. His reputation is… hmm, what is the opposite of “stellar”? He likes to threaten legal action against people who are critical of his stuff – a common tactic for those who can’t back up their claims with evidence, so they go the intimidation route we’ve seen lots of times before. Not cool.

Many who tout “extraordinary” discoveries in archaeology aren’t qualified themselves to make the claims but they sometimes recruit others with credentials to help. The news story said that a report was forthcoming with more information about the sword.
,,,
Such finds, whether they be shocking artifacts, fossils, lost cities, or remains of Amelia Earhart, are the rightful domain of experts who have studied the literature, the body of work, and proper methods of retrieval. Not treasure hunters or TV crews. It’s not that someone COULDN’T stumble on a fantastic find but this should only be trusted (and publicized) when it’s been examined and investigated by people who can determine how it fits into the story of the world.