Creation/evolution documentary airs tonight on U.S. television

February 10, 2014 • 2:09 pm

Reader Joyce called my attention to Neil Genzlinger’s review in the New York Times  of a t.v. show that will be shown tonight on HBO (Home Box Office). I present the review in its bizarre entirety:

“Questioning Darwin,” a documentary on Monday night on HBO, starts out with a refreshingly unusual approach to a polarizing subject, then finds a way to deepen it.

The film, by Antony Thomas, traces Charles Darwin’s personal evolution as he slowly formed his theory of evolution, fleshing out the portrait with excerpts from his writings (read by the actor Sam West). These biographical segments are juxtaposed with comments from creationist Christians, presented nonjudgmentally. Mr. Thomas for the most part lets these opposing worldviews speak for themselves.

This type of Christian, holding to a literal interpretation of the creation story and the rest of the Bible, might be expected to be camera shy, since these beliefs are so often mocked. But Mr. Thomas gets an array of them to speak forthrightly by treating them respectfully. Even viewers who feel these people are living their lives with blinders on might admire their conviction.

But the film works its way around to a weightier type of compare and contrast. Some of the creationists interviewed are undergoing personal crises that would try anyone’s faith. One family is shown reciting hymn lyrics at the bedside of a teenage girl who was severely injured in a car accident.

Darwin, too, had his trials. The film focuses in particular on the death of one of his daughters in 1851. “This was a watershed, because Darwin no longer felt it possible afterward to believe in a good, loving, Christian God,” says James Moore, author with Adrian Desmond of “Darwin’s Sacred Cause: How a Hatred of Slavery Shaped Darwin’s Views on Human Evolution.”

Whether either belief system offers meaningful comfort in the face of calamity is left for us to ponder.

That review suggests the film is fairly evenhanded, although I have to admit that it’s not a great review. How, for example, can evolution be called “a belief system”? And even an evolutionist like me can’t credibly claim that evolutionary biology offers meaningful comfort. Interesting employment? Yes. Truth about the diversity and change of life over time? Certainly. Awe and wonder? Yes, if you’re the type who gets that from science. But “meaningful” comfort (I guess that differs from “meaningless comfort”)? Naah.

***

Now go over to Slate and read a review of the same show by Mark Joseph, a piece called “The Cruelty of Creationism.” Reading that piece next to Genzlinger’s is a Rashomon-like experience. Here’s Joseph’s take:

. . . it’s the terror of doubt that fosters the toxic, life-negating cult of creationism.

That fear is on full display throughout HBO’s new documentary Questioning Darwin, which features a series of intimate interviews with biblical fundamentalists. Creationism, the documentary reveals, isn’t a harmless,compartmentalized fantasy. It’s a suffocating, oppressive worldview through which believers must interpret reality—and its primary target is children. For creationists, intellectual inquiry is a sin, and anyone who dares to doubt the wisdom of their doctrine invites eternal damnation. That’s the perverse brilliance of creationism, the key to its self-perpetuation: First it locks kids in the dungeon of ignorance and dogmatic fundamentalism. Then it throws away the key.

And that dungeon is much darker than most Americans realize. The creationists interviewed in Questioning Darwin—including their abominable doyen, Ken Ham, a wily businessman who is already fundraising off his ill-conceived recent debate with Bill Nye—returned again and again to the same depressing subjects. Death, suffering, pain, sorrow, disease: These, creationists inform us, are what await any skeptic, anyone who questions the word of God. Pastor Joe Coffey neatly sums up their objections to natural selection. .

And so on and so on and so on. Joseph isn’t so much reviewing the show as fulminating about creationism. And that’s fine, for his article’s title implies it’s an attack on that delusion, using the HBO show as a platform. But Joseph doesn’t say anything that we don’t know already: creationists are ignorant, they poison their children’s minds, they’re in an intellectual prison, etc. etc. Anybody who’s read an attack on creationism will know this stuff already, and that includes the readers of Slate. His review is “politically correct” to those of us who accept evolution and fight creationism, but his review also fails to live. It’s much more educational to read some thoughtful analysis of creationism, like the kind you can find in Jason Rosenhouse’s book, Among the Creationists.

While I suspect I’d agree more with Joyce than Genzlinger, who has pulled his punches in his review, I’m just bored with straight ranting against creationism. Maybe I’m too close to the topic. Or maybe I now see religion as a far more serious problem—the root cause of creationism, but of more debilitating results as well .

If I had HBO (I’m a poor cable-less boy) I’d watch the show, for it’s always interesting to see creationists display their full plumage. I’d urge readers, then, to watch it and report back here. The show, again, is on HBO, and airs tonight, Monday, at 9 pm Eastern and Pacific times, and 8 Central time. Let your kids watch it, too, and see how they react.

Angry birds!

February 10, 2014 • 12:07 pm

To continue our theme of birds defending their noms, reader Stephen Barnard sends us yet another food-related alteraction.

House Finches [Haemorhous mexicanus] are quarrelsome birds. They bully the much prettier Goldfinches and Chickadees and fight among each other. Maybe they’re pissed at having such a prosaic name.

The second shot is special, I think. The primaries are vertical to minimize drag on the upward thrust of the wing.

[From a subsequent email]: I forgot to mention that I like the peek-a-boo photo-bomb effect of the  female in the first photo.

RT9A9805

RT9A9907

Still more religious craziness at British universities

February 10, 2014 • 9:55 am

The battle against the incursions of faith is leavened by moments of delicious irony. This is one of them, related to the London School of Economics’ banning of Jesus and Mo tee-shirts. According to reader Grania, who sent the link from Politics.co.uk, there’s been yet another incident of censorship involving putative offense to religion.

Yes, students at London’s South Bank University—in particular the South Bank Atheist Society (SBAS), have had a poster removed from their stall at a fresher’s fair last week. (The Jesus and Mo incident also occurred during a fresher’s fair.) The removers were authorities of the student union, and the excuse was that the poster was “offensive to religion.”

Here’s the poster at issue:

580_Image_FSM

Yes, you’ve seen it: it’s His Noodliness creating humans using His Noodly Appendage. The Union censored the Flying Spaghetti monster as being anti-religious! Do they not realize that the Church of the FSM is a religion? It’s been so recognized by several countries that allow people to wear the symbol of their religion—a strainer—on their heads in driver’s license photos.

Moreover, the Union officials were disingenuous about their actions:

Union officials at the London South Bank University removed the posters from the society’s stall overnight and then barred representatives from printing off more, citing the visibility of Adam’s genitals as offensive.

But when society members offered to blur out the genitals, they were told the problem with the poster concerned religious offence.

The stall was removed by the student union authorities the next day.

The to-and-fro verbiage:

“This silliness is unfortunately part of an on-going trend,” British Humanist Society Andrew Copson said.

“In the last few years we have seen our affiliated societies in campus after campus subjected to petty censorship in the name of ‘offence’ – often even when no offence has been caused or taken.

“Hypersensitive union officials are totally needlessly harassing students whose only desire is to get on and run totally legitimate social and political societies.”

Barbara Ahland, president of the London South Bank Students’ Union, said: “The Students Union has been made aware of an alleged incident that took place at the Refreshers’ Fayre last week. We are taking the allegation very seriously and an investigation is taking place.”

“Very seriously”? Really? They cannot tolerate a bit of gentle spoofing?

I don’t understand why this hypersensitivity is taking place in England, a country supposedly far less religious than the U.S. Were this poster displayed at a public university or in a public space in my country, its removal would be forbidden under the First Amendment. Although Britain doesn’t have a constitution mandating freedom of religion and freedom of speech (note to Brits: get one ASAP!), they are also supposed to be less protective about religion.

And you can’t blame this one on Islamic sensitivities, as it’s not explicitly anti-Muslim. Unless, that is, the meatballs contain pork.

Great news: I’m the Discovery Institute’s “Censor of the Year”!

February 10, 2014 • 6:59 am

I have more substantive things to post today, but stuff like sick kittens, and now this Big Announcement, keep getting in the way.

In this case I’m so proud I could bust a button! Reader Doc Bill just informed me that I was selected from a field of stiff competitors (including anticreationism activist Zack Kopplin) to be the Discovery Institute’s (DI’s) “Censor of the Year.” They even made a cool poster of me!

censor-of-the-year-6.1

Senior Liar Fellow David Klinghoffer wrote the encomiums at Evolution News & Views, although he somehow fails to grasp that such a prize really is an honor, coming as it does from an organization devoted to spreading lies to schoolchildren (all bolding is from the DI announcement):

Let me make clear at the outset: In naming University of Chicago biologist Jerry Coyne as “Censor of the Year,” we at the Center for Science & Culture are not bestowing an honor. While the idea of giving out a “prize” for something so malignant as censorship may sound like a lark, it’s not. As CSC associate director John West points out, “This is very serious business. Censorship retards the search for truth and hurts innocent people.”

And says Dr. West, “Among die-hard defenders of evolutionary orthodoxy, it’s now standard operating procedure.” This is how the scientific “consensus” against Darwin skeptics and intelligent-design advocates is maintained — by fear.

The “award” will be distributed this Wednesday, February 12, for Darwin Day.

I hope the prize includes money: it’s cassoulet season and I’m hankering for a good French meal. If not that, then I’d really like a copy of the poster shown above.

The achievements which garnered me this prize appear to consist solely of helping stop Dr. Eric Hedin from pushing religion in his physics and astronomy class at Ball State University in Indiana. So I’m a wee bit hurt that the DI didn’t also laud me for getting the “Creatures of God” plaque taken down at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History. The fact that they left out that signal achievement shows that what they’re really peeved about is having Intelligent Design expelled from a university. As Klinghoffer notes, it’s also about my using the power differential between Hedin and me to “bully” him:

Coyne was pivotal in stampeding Ball State University president Jo Ann Gora to issue a campus-wide gag order on teaching about intelligent design in science classrooms. This involved intimidating and silencing a young Ball State physicist, Eric Hedin. That’s censorship. But something that really stands out about Coyne’s effort is the power differential between himself and his victim.

Here’s Coyne, comfortable as could be in what sure sounds like an easy yet highly prestigious position at the University of Chicago. His workload is evidently so light that he has time to blog at Why Evolution Is True what seems like around the clock about frivolous pet topics. While he’s ostensibly a scientist, his main passion is bashing religion. Coyne is protected by tenure. He’s safe.

On the other hand we have Eric Hedin, at a state school, Ball State in Indiana, with considerably less cachet. Hedin is actively publishing in his field, unlike Coyne, but he is not tenured, and so his professional future is really on the line. His prospects are now far more fragile, thanks to Professor Jerry Coyne. Frittering away time blogging about cute animals and posting cartoons insulting various religions — as Coyne does — was not, I’m fairly sure, something that Dr. Hedin would have felt free to do if he was (highly unlikely) inclined to do it.

So we have the powerful, prestigious and above all safe Jerry Coyne, swooping in from the next state to rile up Hedin’s employers, Ball State’s administration. Why? Because Hedin included a bibliography in an interdisciplinary class that listed some books that were favorable to intelligent design (and others that were critical of it).

Coyne was not only successful in shutting down Hedin, and getting intelligent design shut down on the campus as a whole. He was also a bully, exploiting the difference in power to tyrannize and dominate a vulnerable younger scholar.

Perhaps I’m being churlish at this wonderful moment, but I would like to correct two things. “Easy yet highly prestigious position” is not quite an accurate description of my job. I write on this site between 6 and 8 a.m., before work hours (posts are spread throughout the day), devoting the rest of the time to academic duties and writing a book. And I work 7 days a week, certainly more than the “scientists” at the Discovery Institute do. Finally, I am deeply grieved if Dr. Hedin feels “tyrannized,” though somehow I think that’s a bit of DI hyperbole. Nevertheless, I’m proud to be disseminating kittens rather than lies.

But really, Discovery Institute: you like me! Right now, you like me!  And honestly, while I’m the recipient of this honor, many of us share in this victory, for my tyranny could not have been successful without the help of many others. In particular, I’d like to thank the anonymous student at Ball State University, who, filled to the craw with Hedin’s Jesus talk (“No Hindu monkey god could do that”), reported Hedin’s shenanigans to another anonymous informant, who brought them to my attention. I’d also like to thank the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and especially staff attorney Andrew Seidel, for calling Hedin’s behavior to the attention of the President and academic officers of Ball State University. And, most of all, I’d like to thank Ball State President Jo Ann Gora (now retired) for taking a stand against teaching disguised creationism at her University. In fact, Gora deserves this award far more than I do, for she is the one who took action and took an uncompromising stand against ID nonsense and in favor of real science.

Thank you, Dr. Klinghoffer—the award is even more meaningful coming from a fellow Jew—and thanks to all the people at the Discovery Institute. I will cherish this honor immensely, and will put it on my desk right next to my “Emperor Has No Clothes Award” from the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

My people have already issued a more formal thank you, but you’ve made my day!

Jerry Coyne (the cat) is ill

February 10, 2014 • 5:48 am

Reader Gayle Ferguson, who has adopted an abandoned litter of kittens, named the sole male (a ginger tom) Jerry Coyne.  Unfortunately, Jerry was too greedy in drinking his milk, and appears to have aspirated some into his lungs. That caused an infection, which worried me no end. But Gayle, who took him to the vet (her vet bills must be huge!), reports that things are looking up, and she enclosed a picture of my namesake:

Jerry Coyne has a respiratory infection. I gave him a dose of antibiotics at 5pm and another at 8pm and he seems less lethargic and more playful again.  It is awful to hear him sneezing and coughing and rasping when he purrs—hopefully that will be on the mend tomorrow.  I attach a new photo of him.

IMG_2439

Ham/Nye debate archived

February 10, 2014 • 5:27 am

Reader Verotchka informs me that, if you missed the live debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye last week, it’s been archived here in high-def, so you can watch in full screen and even download it. (You have to identify yourself as a human by typing in the code they give you, but that’s no problem.)

On the other hand, if you missed the debate originally you probably had a good reason, and won’t want to watch it now. And I must admit that the thought of Ham’s face filling my 30-inch screen makes my stomach quail. Still, for the record. . .

Hili dialogue: Monday

February 10, 2014 • 4:05 am

Hili’s incursion into philosophy was short lived: she’s back to her narcisissim:

Hili: The picture of me should be made bigger.
M: There is no picture of you here.
Hili: That’s why I can’t see it!
(Photo by Sarah Lawson)
1798289_10202719071485233_476303904_n
In Polish:
Hili: To moje zdjęcie trzeba powiększyć.
Małgorzata: Tu nie ma twojego zdjęcia.
Hili: To dlatego go nie widać.