Devolution of the Evolution Debate
You know what I would love to see? The next time one of those talking head shows on CNN decides to have a “debate” over evolution vs. intelligent design, I’d love to see the designated scientist on the panel follow the Discovery Institute moron by grabbing an acoustic guitar and sing this song. If these people insist on thinking like children, they should be treated like children.
30 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Any singing evilutionists out there?
The Talent Show has a debate recommendation. I'm afraid I'm right out on this one.
Trackback by Pharyngula — August 25, 2005 @ 12:18 pm
FSM: Give us this day / our daily noodle
A roundup of devotional urls for Pastafarians. (1) It isn’t a real meme until Ze Frank weighs in. Link (2) BB reader WT Hellzatt says, This is a call to action. Everybody is to run out and get a newspaper (yeah, yeah I know dead medium) with today’s 8…
Trackback by Boing Boing — August 25, 2005 @ 2:09 pm
circular reasoning is not a good support for any argument.
Comment by matthew — August 25, 2005 @ 6:05 pm
Great song. But it might not be the best way to confront creationists :)
Comment by Kristofer — August 26, 2005 @ 12:23 am
Dam good posting.I read some of you’re articles and they are really nice.
I enjoyed reading them.
Comment by John — August 26, 2005 @ 4:25 am
It’s a scientific fact!
It’s a scientific fact that education causes a fragile woman’s uterus to fall out, just like a Jell-O mold.
…
Trackback by An Infinite Number of Monkeys — August 26, 2005 @ 4:57 am
Not very funny.
But I kind of hope that you are right. Because then, when your loved ones die, you’ll never get to see them again. And even using the word ‘loved’ ones would be incorrect.
I hope that you have a daughter or a son or a wife…. look into their eyes when they say ‘I love you’ and realize this Greg…. it means absolutely nothing.
At best; irrelevant epiphenomena the workings of the brain…
At worst; some selfish gene that really could give a damn about you, but saying it serves some adaptive function for it.
But regardless, the little ones really don’t love you… nor does the wife… nor do the parents… nor do you to any of them.
And as soon as they die -> nothing more.
Comment by Bill — August 26, 2005 @ 5:02 am
“It’s a Scientific Fact”
books
Trackback by callooh! — August 26, 2005 @ 5:56 am
But I kind of hope that you are right. Because then, when your loved ones die, you’ll never get to see them again.
So, Bill, I guess you’re a Christian, right? Nice sentiment you got there.
Comment by Bruce — August 26, 2005 @ 6:02 am
Chill Bill!
That makes no sense, the fact that love is an adaptive function serving nepotism does not invalidate it.
If anyone fancies a laugh read ‘The Case for a Creator’ by Lee Strobel. For anyone who reads philosophy (and I’m talking heavy linguistic philosophy, epistemology and ontology) its ideas are completely absurd, especially the idea that the soul is controlling the mind and that this can be proven by the fact that you cannot physically stimulate a particular area of the brain to bring about a specific thought! Can you stimulate a particular part of a circuit board to run a program? No, you’d have to stimulate many parts in a specific sequence at the right time in the right situation. The sources cited as ‘respected experts’ are most certainly not either.
And then there’s Richard Milton’s “Shattering the Myth of Darwinism” what a pile of poo! The figures are outdated and just plain false!
The intelligent design movement is full of prats who only learn one side of the argument and face the other with cognitive dissonance. I know, my landlord is one, he’ll happily quote Descartes but ignore any philosophy which does not support his views. He is, by the way, a very nice man (but that doesn’t make him any less wrong). People should let go of these childish fantasies learn how to get on as humans.
Comment by Art — August 26, 2005 @ 6:51 am
There’s something to be said for not lowering yourself to the opposition’s level… But it would be hilarious to see.
Comment by Raven — August 26, 2005 @ 6:51 am
Greg - do you happen to have the rest of the songs from that album or tell me where you got the song? I remember hearing that tape 20-odd years ago at Astronomy Camp. I loved “Gravity” and “Longitude/LAttitude”. Of course my son hates the Sir Isaac Newton song since that’s my last answer to his incessant “Why?” questions (Because Because Because! Sir Issac discovered his genius unconvered the nature of natural laws!). Great stuff. Please info on where you got this in mp3 format so I don’t have to try to digitize my old cassette lying around somewhere. Thanks!
Comment by Peter — August 26, 2005 @ 6:58 am
People waste a lot of time brow beating others into buying into their own belief systems. Resources could be better spent in our short time on earth making this world a better place to live, relieving poverty,injustice and suffering. But following these teachings of Jesus is a crackpot liberal idea.
Comment by Becky — August 26, 2005 @ 7:07 am
Bill -
Believing that this life is the only one we have makes my loved ones MORE precious to me. It makes life MORE sacred. It makes it MORE important to treat each other decently, and MORE important to do what we can to make the world a better place to live. Correcting injustice NOW, in the world, is MORE important, because I do not believe that anyone is rewarded or punished after they are dead.
How you get no soul & no afterlife means love is a sham is totally illogical to me.
Comment by Dave — August 26, 2005 @ 9:22 am
Whether I’m christian, agnostic, muslim, jewish…
Doesn’t matter.
I really don’t care. One thing should be obvious. From my above post it should be at least pretty clear I’m not very christian.
Do I believe something more is out there? Probably not. Am I happy about my agnosticism? nope. I can present arguments in support of it… but at the end of the day it doesn’t matter any more. If there is nothing else out there… if we are the product of the blind processes of randomness/chance and natural selection (I understand that there are some views of a guided evolution still incorporating these ideas of RM & NS) none of this matters.
It doesn’t matter in the least. Any grand argument you make in support of atheism… who cares? You’ll be dead, your offspring will be dead… your ideas will eventually become lost.
Your memories you have that you think hold some value… really don’t. All of the support and backpatting you get from others on these blogs… doesn’t matter.
I’m the 1st to admit that I’m agnostic (not quite atheist) and I see the worthlessness of all of this. Because even if it carries value (the arguments against theism) for a period of time spanning thousands and thousands of years. It will eventually not mean anything. We will be gone without a trace.
Thankfully I have no one in my life. That’s the one ‘blessing’ I get: I am a bitter, not too attractive person, that usually grates on people enough that they eventually leave my life anyway. So I don’t have to go through the heart break of becoming close to someone else… only for all of that meaning to be wiped out. To never have had meaning to begin with.
I would hate to have a little kid and have that kid ask me, upon my death, if he/she would ever see me again. Or me to them.
So way to go. Support the arguments that you put forth like it really means something. Like it really matters if you have a better argument for the non-existence of God. Then go home at the end of the day…. look at your children, wife, parents and please realize that the 70+ years you might live (if you’re lucky) lose all meaning at death.
Comment by Bill — August 26, 2005 @ 9:30 am
Hey Bill - I went through that, too. Despair at the thought that there is no point. But you know what? I kept on living and felt better, and I got stronger for it.
I hope you do find happiness. Just because things may be temporary doesn’t mean that they are meaningless.
Hang in there.
Comment by Dave — August 26, 2005 @ 11:05 am
Peter — the other songs on that album, and the other albums in the series, are up for download at http://acme.com/jef/singing_science/ .
Comment by Taper — August 26, 2005 @ 12:14 pm
That’s odd - how did one of the nihilists from “The Big Lebowski” get on the internets ?
Comment by Sean M — August 26, 2005 @ 12:33 pm
Good stuff, if you keep calling it a fact over and over it will eventually become true! Also, if repeating the word “fact” doesn’t persuade the idiot creationist (and we all know only creationists question evolution), make sure to compare it to a well observed yet unrelated scientific fact like gravity to try and bolster the validity of the “fact” in question.
Comment by sean S — August 26, 2005 @ 1:23 pm
HAHAHAHAH! I’m just wondering why I never have heard creationists say that yes, evolution is a fact, and god created it. Of course, I don’t believe that. I believe that the flying spaghetti monster created evolution. How else do you explain pasta salad?
Comment by Angelica — August 26, 2005 @ 6:08 pm
I see a lot about this so-called “flying spaghetti monster” on the internets these days, but I don’t know what people think they’re trying to prove by it. Everyone knows that creation is all about the pixies, with a little help from the fairies and the elves.
And Sean: I’ve never seen gravity. What does it look like? I know we stand up, and that the chairs don’t go flying off, but I don’t see anything holding them down. Except in my Mom’s house, where she uses a lot of velcro to hold things down, since she’s a lot less sure of gravity the last few years since my Dad disappeared.
Comment by Bob Davis — August 26, 2005 @ 8:16 pm
Thanks Taper. You so totally rock. As do these tracks.
Comment by Peter — August 26, 2005 @ 8:20 pm
Angelica,
Yes, but the real question is who created the flying spaghetti monster?
Bob,
Your pixie theory is just a flying spaghetti monster in a cheap tuxedo. I would give you a longer answer but I am to busy writing book reviews on amazon.com. I am hoping people might actually visit my blog after they see them.
Comment by Sean S — August 27, 2005 @ 11:14 am
Sean-
The pixie theory is no cheap-tuxedoed-spaghetti-monster. Nay, it is the very best of new theories based on theories prevalent during the middle ages. The flying spaghetti monster has better press, true, but does it have pixie dust? Does it have 16 tiny pillaries in the eyeball? I think not. But the pixie theory does. It is good, this pixie theory. In my collection, I have the 1833 version of the pixie theory, the 1992 version, as well as the latest 2004 souped-up version.
As for amazon.com reviews, those are good too. I too used to write those, but they took too much time, and I wasn’t getting any free books, so I gave it up.
Comment by Bob Davis — August 27, 2005 @ 5:36 pm
HAHAHA, this is a hilarious series of posts! Not intending to stoop to anyone’s level, but “even a child” should be able to see the difference between a fact and a theory. The song is about facts. The dust-cloud/big-bang/whatever-the-going-theory is only a theory. I am the only one reading this who is intelligent enough to see the difference between fact and a theory?
Comment by Walker Hall — August 28, 2005 @ 4:34 pm
this one goes out to Bill
one thing I’ve always found useful to get a new perspective on a question is to turn it around and try to ask the question behind the question.
Death seems to rob everything of its meaning for you: because life is temporary, not lasting, it’s meaningless…
my counter question is: what would pass your test? If life was eternal, would that make it meaningful?
If the answer is ‘not really’ - then what gives meaning? What possibly could be meaningful?
…and to whom? Are things meaningful on their own, or do you need an interested observer to see the meaning? If they are meaningful in and of themselves, without someone to assign meaning, what is that meaning? If things are only meaningful *to somebody* then who is that somebody? You? Why not?
ric
Comment by Richard — August 28, 2005 @ 6:32 pm
I really think you guys are fooling yourselves.
If there was a God would life have meaning? Sure why not. If I think that there’s meaning in being able to see my mom again (who died at a very young age)… or my sister (younger age)… then yes. Life would have meaning. It would hold some value if I could be with them forever. If there was a God that really loved us? You’re f’ing right I think life would have meaning.
I wish I knew, but I don’t, and I don’t think it’s likely.
I have friends that are silly little idiots like Angelica who think it’s so neat to rub it in the face of those who believe that there is nothing. Snubbing the meaning that atleast they perceive. If I could live in ignorance of the fact and go on believing I would definitely do it.
It would be much more worth it.
yeah, we don’t believe in God… and when we die that’s it. Yippee!!!!!!!! And all the people you think you have something meaningful with.. great. Make yourself believe that it still holds meaning even if you believe there is no God. That fraud of love you hold exists for less than a blink of an eye on a cosmic scale. Even more disheartening is that it seems so real.
Label me a nihilist. I really don’t care. You’re a fake for thinking that something still matters when we are the products of chance and necessity.
But I won’t have kids or a wife. And if you do, and you share my beliefs…. you’re lying to yourself if you think any of it actually matters if God doesn’t exist.
Comment by Bill — August 29, 2005 @ 9:08 am
Riddle me this, god-man. Do you know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis? If not, then it seems that the joke is on you, sir.
Comment by greg — August 29, 2005 @ 10:57 am
Ok, here goes. Religion basically makes it seem ok to die. It is not! When you die, there is a chance that your counsciousness ceases to exist. Religion is trying to stop our science from reaching its full potential, which is Immortality.
Instead of wasting all this time IMAGINING there is a GOD and praying/going to church/ or whatever mental hang-up you go through to make you feel better, why not actually contribute to curing or fixing the thing that killed your loved ones?
Example: Mom dies of liver cancer. The church tries to squash the possible cure (stem cells) which could probably be developed in a very few years. But a group of delusional people insist they are all-knowing about a group of cells in a petrie dish, therefore thwarting the advancement of science and contributing to the killing of millions of people. This is why people hate Christians. So everytime you wonder why, now you know.
When sceince can (and it will) do everything you imagine your God can do, why would you need that God anymore? Religion cannot survive; it can only hamper the scientific process in hopes to buy a little more time.
Regards
Leon
Comment by Nano Leon — August 29, 2005 @ 10:23 pm
I don’t see how that follows. But then, I don’t really understand what ‘meaning’ is supposed to be in this context, nor why its presence or absence should dictate whether or not I choose to enjoy existence.
If God gives meaning to the Universe, the question becomes: what is the meaning of God? And if you feel that a god can arbitrarily bestow meaning on things, why can’t you do the same? The important thing is that your loved ones are significant to *you* because *you* choose for this to be the case. And the fact that this love is confined to a certain time is what makes it so intense and precious. If we had eternity to love one another, we’d probably never get around to it.
Comment by Pacian — August 30, 2005 @ 5:33 pm