The BBC is getting excited about Darwin's 200th birthday with a whole series of programmes on Darwin and evolution. Although a national broadcaster, there doesn't seem much attempt at balance, preferring for instance to talk about creationists rather than talk to creationists. This was the case with the Beyond Belief programme broadcast last night on BBC radio 4 - 5th Jan 2009 16:30pm Beyond Belief in which three Darwinists were brought on from Judaism, Islam and Christianity to tell us what they think creationists and intelligent design supporters believe (again - intelligent design is lumped in with creationism).
Alister McGrath spoke for the Christian faith, informing us that Protestant creationists were in a sort of holy huddle mentality afraid of the light of the Darwinists and circling with their wagons. Other Christians, he commented, were in a state of disbelief that such people might still exist. Much as I respect and like Alister, and have valued some of his books, this programme did come across as ever so slightly pompous. If the BBC wants to know what creationists believe then why not ask them straight, instead of talking about them and treating them as some sort of laboratory rats to be examined by sociologists.
So why do creationists reject Darwinism? It cannot possibly be that creationists have actually looked behind the Darwinian curtain, examined the evidence in depth, and found little to get excited about? Could that be possible? The Darwinists have got it so ingrained into their minds that creationists are stupid and mentally weak that they fail to see that their own position is built on a mutually supporting, back-slapping, paradigm with no pressure to test the evidence in depth. For creationists, Darwin's theory is like the small Wizard of Oz - a small guy with a big megaphone. In other words, there is some truth in Darwinian claims, but Darwinism is not a universal explanation, instead it is limited in scope to change within created kinds. It would be nice for the Darwinists to acknowledge that creationists and intelligent design supporters have principled and well thought through objections to Darwin's theory based on logic and evidence.
Alister McGrath spoke for the Christian faith, informing us that Protestant creationists were in a sort of holy huddle mentality afraid of the light of the Darwinists and circling with their wagons. Other Christians, he commented, were in a state of disbelief that such people might still exist. Much as I respect and like Alister, and have valued some of his books, this programme did come across as ever so slightly pompous. If the BBC wants to know what creationists believe then why not ask them straight, instead of talking about them and treating them as some sort of laboratory rats to be examined by sociologists.
So why do creationists reject Darwinism? It cannot possibly be that creationists have actually looked behind the Darwinian curtain, examined the evidence in depth, and found little to get excited about? Could that be possible? The Darwinists have got it so ingrained into their minds that creationists are stupid and mentally weak that they fail to see that their own position is built on a mutually supporting, back-slapping, paradigm with no pressure to test the evidence in depth. For creationists, Darwin's theory is like the small Wizard of Oz - a small guy with a big megaphone. In other words, there is some truth in Darwinian claims, but Darwinism is not a universal explanation, instead it is limited in scope to change within created kinds. It would be nice for the Darwinists to acknowledge that creationists and intelligent design supporters have principled and well thought through objections to Darwin's theory based on logic and evidence.
Andrew S
No comments:
Post a Comment