I am amaze of how some people have the energy and patience to debate or discuss evolution to demented religious fanatics - these dorks are not interested or doesn't have the mental capacity to understand the topic anyway. Pero ayun, nagta-tyagang makipagusap pa rin at ituro ang ebulusyon.
OK… maybe they thought that talking or debating with them might enlighten them somehow. Suntok sa buwan yan. I remember reading an article how Prof. Richard Dawkins avoid discussing or debating Creationists for the reason that these Creationists are really not interested in an intellectual exchange. They are just looking for a "soap box" - Someone that they can use to spread their religious agenda. Even if they look stupid, bad publicity is still publicity. The late evolutionary biologist, Stephen Jay Gould also avoided debating Creationists for the same reason. Just look at what happened in that debate between Christian/Creationist Ken Ham and Science Educator Bill Rye.
That's the same thing with Creationists here in Facebook. I remember seeing how a rabid Facebook creationist been dismantle right before my very eyes when he was invited by Mr. Don Paez in a night friendly dinner. Yero lang ang naging katapat ng usapan, and after that dinner, the Creationist left the group and was never been heard again. So, it is quite obvious that these evolution deniers are only brave behind the computer monitor, but when it comes to an actual debate, outside social medias… BOOM! BASAG!
Like their cousins the Flat-Earth believers, evolution deniers are only good in copy-pasting quotes and links from Christian (or Islamic) creationists sites that makes fun with evolution. Links that are mostly been rebut by legitimate biologists yet they (the Creationist keyboard warriors) know that in social medias like Facebook, most of those that will see their links are ignorant with the issue - Naman! Most users of Facebook groups are there just for fun. Don't expect them to have read science journals and text books about evolution.
Notice that these Creationists mostly post memes and photo quotes. Wow! You expect that to destroy the theory? They don't, but they know that only few people have the mental capacity to see through the picture. I remember this evolution denier posting a picture about the cell as an example of a "irreducible complexity" without noticing that the picture he posted have refuted his own claim.
It's really easy to detect that evolution deniers (specially here in Facebook) doesn't even know anything about evolution, which makes me wonder? "How can you refute something that you do not know in the first place?"
OK, there's the usual stupid question from stupid people - "If humans came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" Now, why will you waste your time explaining phylogeny to a guy who cannot even distinguished the difference between an ape and a monkey?
There are also those folks who can't distinguished the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. My Golly! College na, hindi pa rin alam yan? If I will get a dollar in every time I see a post about "Evolution is only a theory" I will be a millionaire by now.
When we state something is a scientific theory, such as evolutionary theory, atomic theory, or the theory of gravitation, we are not suggesting that it as a "haka-haka" (a more popular use of the word “theory” in an evolution denier's vocabulary). Instead, we are talking about a scientific hypothesis that has been tested repeatedly and has stood the test of time without being rejected.
Talking about evolution, it's not even just "a single theory." The Theory of Evolution consists of different theories: The theory of descent with modification and the theory of natural selection from Darwin, and there are the sub-theories - Gould's punctuated equilibrium, Fisher and Haldane's mathematical theory of population genetics, evolutionary game theory, allopatric speciation, theory of phyletic gradualism, theory of balance polymorphism, r- and K-selection theory, evolutionary niche theory, Kimura's neutral theory of molecular evolution, and many more. So if an evolution denier would like to "destroy" evolution, feel free to destroy all those theories mentioned.
In the first place, the issue about evolution is not even religious. As Evolutionist Professor Douglas Futuyma have explained, like other sciences, evolutionary biology cannot be used to justify beliefs about ethics or morality. Nor can it prove or disprove theological issues such as the existence of a deity. Evolutionary biology only provided natural, material causes for the diversification and adaptation of species, just as the physical sciences did when they explained earthquakes and eclipses.
Then there is this guy who will post mix-up, jumbled words and phrases making it look like "scientific" kuno and will claim it as an "explanation" refuting evolution - but with careful scrutiny all you get is an inedible salad of words, quotes and phrases.
And there are the usual "assholes" who are too sure of themselves and believed that they can "destroy evolution" by asking one or two questions. OK, give the benefit of a doubt - let these nincompoops ask their question...
"Where does life began?"
"My gulay?"
Does this guy knows that evolution has nothing to do with the the question regarding the origin of life? Evolution is about change (in the population) of species, not where life comes from. Geeez!
Now why will I wait to see the next question if he cannot even make the first question fit the topic?
In the book Defending Evolution: A Guide to the Creation/Evolution Controversy (2011)Brian and Sandra Alters have pointed out that for many people, religious beliefs take precedence over scientific evidence, especially among people who believe that their fate for all eternity depends on adhering to their belief system. That's it. Discussion about evolution versus creationism (AKA Intelligent Design) is not a scientific issue. It's about religious faith - the belief that if you accept materialistic, worldly science (like evolution) you will go to hell. As Barbara Forrest and Paul Gross emphasize in Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design(2004), this movement aims not merely to establish "intelligent design" along with evolutionary theory in the classroom, but further, to replace naturalistic scientific methodology with a religiously framed version of science. No amount of intelligent explanation will enlighten a person clinging to an after-life of immortality. So way waste shit?
The good thing here in the Philippines is that the issue regarding Creationism is trifling. We don't teach it in public schools, universities and museums all over the Philippines. We only get them on Christian-owned Grade schools and High schools, theological universities and inside Evangelical Christian churches. We don't use creationism (Intelligent-Design) in the study of medicine, nursing, pharmacology, agriculture, engineering, chemistry and other biology-related subjects. Remember, these Creationists cannot compete. They can have their belief in heaven and their faith, but they can't get our universities, museums, our educational system and force them to accept their religious agenda.
Hanggang sa church, temples, mosque at Facebook lang sila.
No comments:
Post a Comment