Atheism and the Creation Museum:
A Match Made in Heaven
Continued from the front page
by Michael Patrick Leahy
August 2007 online edition
 Atheist, activist, and author Chester Smalkowski (on left) at the Rally for Reason site outside the Creation Museum. Smalkowski says his 17 year old daughter, Nicole (right) is the plaintiff in a Federal lawsuit he has brought in Oklahoma on the issue of separation of church and state in the public schools. DEFCON is not the only secular humanist group that delights in the easy target presented by Ham and the Creation Museum. Bill Maher, noted liberal, atheist, and comedian, surreptitiously snuck into the Creation Museum in April, and snagged a 15 minute filmed interview with Ham, who apparently was clueless as to Maher's identity, and fell for the ruse Maher's team made up to gain access to him. Apparently Maher's film crew misrepresented themselves, and, at a crucial moment just before the requested interview with Ham, distracted an Answers in Genesis staffer, and opened a back door where a gleeful Maher lay in wait. It's rumored that Maher plans to skewer Ham and his fellow creationists in an upcoming documentary or HBO special. The Creation Museum will open its doors to the general public at 9 am Monday morning, May 28. When it does, members of DEFCON, several local Christian preachers, and a rag tag group of atheists who seem to be lost in the 1960's will mount their own protest against the "faux science" of the Museum. Ham makes a point of thanking the secular humanists and atheists who opposed his organization's zoning request to build a museum in the area back in 1996. The opponents succeeded in stopping plans for a 25,000 square foot museum. Answers in Genesis kept trying, and later secured a better location, got the zoning clearance, and went on to build an even bigger and bolder facility. The trouble the Creation Museum creates for the future health of Christianity is that by replacing the scientific method with word for word Christian Biblical literalist theology, it makes all Christians who don’t accept evolution look stupid. In doing so in such a publicly visible way it undermines the credibility of all Christians, especiallly those who are researching alternatives to Darwinian evolution using the tools of the scientific method. It also gives the growing movement of militant atheism, as exemplified by the works of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett, an easy opportunity to misrepresent all Christians as “irrational”. The mainstream media are only too happy to lend assistance to this misrepresentation. Most Biblical literalists belong to the “Old Earth Creationist” school of thought, characterized by the research of Dr. Hugh Ross’ Los Angeles based Reason to Believe organization. With a Phd. in astronomy from the University of Toronto, Dr. Ross embraces the scientific method, and in fact, is using it to test the “Old Earth” theory, which is part of the scientific mainstream in that it accepts the 4.5 billion years age of the earth assertion. Ross differs from evolutionists in that he believes that while adaptation within species occurs, species themselves were created fully formed. Not a hypothesis that most of us theistic evolutionists accept, but one that is, in fact amenable to scientific testing. His organization is currently testing the Biblical account of Adam and Eve as the first two humans by looking at the origins of human DNA structure. Their theory is that modern human DNA began in a localized area from a very small population group. Empirical evidence that supports this theory would also tend to support the Adam and Eve story from Genesis. I’m not holding my breath that the results of the study will confirm the hypthesis, but you certainly cannot fault the methodology of the study as being “unscientific” or “irrational.” Other anti-evolutionists are part of the “Intelligent Design” school of thought, which argues that the complexity of life is so great that it must have been created by an intelligent entity. Biblical literalists and non-believers alike can be found in this school of thought. This group delights in pointing out the flaws in the traditional Darwinian evolutionary theory (species have not evolved in the kind of slow linear progression Darwin’s theory would predict, but rather in a “punctuated equilibrium” of long periods of stasis followed by short periods of rapid change). However, to date, no one from the movement has set forth a testable hypothesis that can be subjected to empirical observations and repetitions consistent with the scientific method. The mainstream media have done a disservice to the public dialogue on this matter by publicizing the smallest and most ridiculous group among Biblical literalists, incorrectly lumping the scientifically based literalists with them, and then setting up a public dialogue between the Flintsones, on the one hand, and Professor Peabody on the other. Chris Mathews dropped a “Yes or No” pop-quiz earlier this month on the Republican Presidential contenders as to their acceptance of Darwin’s theory of evolution. Three candidates (Brownback, Huckabee, and Tancredo) answered no to this question, and the mainstream media, the Los Angeles Times included, was quick to portray these men as dogmatic and irrational “Young Earther Creationists”, even though all three could be described more accurately as “Intelligent Design” or “Old Earth Creationist” proponents. The Los Angeles Times misrepresented their positions as follows in a May 24 opinion piece titled “Yabba Dabba Science”. “Three men seeking to lead the last superpower on Earth reject the scientific consensus on cosmology, thermonuclear dynamics, geology and biology, believing instead that Bamm-Bamm and Dino played together” This is a false characterization of their beliefs, and a false characterization of many Christians who are Biblical literalists. Huckabee, for instance, later elaborated: "I believe that the creation has a creator. I believe there is a God. And I believe God put this whole creative process in motion. How he did it and the time frame in which he did it, I honestly don't know." The Los Angeles Times “Yabba Dabba Science” editorial correctly points out that “ Religion and science can coexist.” The trick here for the Times, and the bulk of the mainstream media, is to give a fair and accurate account of the public dialogue on issues where religion and science intersect. While it plays to the Los Angeles Times editorial board’s sense of intellectual superiority to pit the “caveman and dinosaur” crowd against the learned professors, it is not an intellectually honest way to cover the scientific and political debate surrounding the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution. The rational Christian who considers himself or herself a theistic evolutionist, intelligent designer, or Old Earth Creationist, finds himself in the uncomfortable position of waiting for one of two miracles to occur, neither of which are likely to occur without divine intervention. The first of these two miracles would be to receive fair treatment in the mainstream press, not being lumped into the same intellectual trash bin as Young Earth Creationism. The second miracle would require a road to Damascus type lightning bolt to jolt the Answers in Genesis crowd to abandon their "dinosaurs co-exist with men" lie and after applying reason, logic, and common sense, rejecting the Young Earth Creationist school of thought in its entirety. It's more likely we'll see Lazarus rise again before either of these two miracles occur. Past issues - Print edition - Media Kit - About Christian Faith and Reason ©2007 Christian Faith and Reason
Join our Email List |
   A two-day weekend event designed specifically for 7th to 12th grade girls and moms. |