Creationists
are often called crackpots, nuts, and wackos. A usual theme in the
insults is that we're “science haters” or believers in
“pseudoscience.” I've commented before that many evolutionists
are completely unable to carry on a rational discussion without
resorting to insults but my usual response is to ignore them. If I
bothered to respond to every insult directed at creationists, it
would consume my entire blog. And I think a blog that posts nothing
but answers to insults would be about as interesting as listening to
a 9 year old saying, “Nuh uh!” Having said that, though, I came
across an article that casts a new light on these types of insults.
While
doing my usual research (I like to call surfing the net, “research”),
I came across a survey
from 2008
that discussed public attitudes toward UFOs. It included some
interesting demographics about the respondents. It seems only 38% of
evangelical protestants say it is either "very likely" or
"somewhat likely" that intelligent life exists on other
planets. However, 66% of the people with no religious preference said
the same thing. Given that information and the obvious attitudes of
each group toward the Bible, one could reasonably conclude that the
more likely someone is to believe the Bible, the less likely he is to
believe in UFOs. Furthermore, less religious (or non-religious)
people are almost certainly evolutionists so, by connecting the dots,
I think it's safe to say that people who believe in UFOs are probably
evolutionists.
Do
you think I'm generalizing? Perhaps I am a little – but only a
little. Evolutionists have a real stake in the existence of extra
terrestrials. If abiogenesis occurs naturally, and if the earth is
not unique in the universe, then it's almost a statistical certainty
that life has sprouted up many different times throughout the vast
universe. The late Carl
Sagan
made this very point and the group SETI
has spent millions of dollars listening for alien radio signals which
evolutionists are sure must be out there.
There
are also shows like the History Channel's, Ancient
Aliens.
These shows interview “scholars” and “scientists” who engage
in their own brand of pseudoscience and claim that ancient cultures
had frequent contact with extraterrestrials. These same “experts”
often attribute miraculous events described in the Bible to
encounters with aliens. For example, they claim Elijah's ascent into
heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kings 2:11) is actually his being
taken away in a space ship. Now, I haven't heard any of these people
state their position on Biblical creation but I doubt they hold to
the same “ordinary meaning” of the Bible that most creationists
have. It's more likely that they're evolutionists.
Still
another evolutionists who notably believed in aliens is the late Dr.
Francis Crick. This Nobel prize laureate and co-discoverer of DNA
understood that abiogenesis is so absurdly improbable that it
couldn't have happened multiple times. He proposed the theory of
“directed
panspermia” which claims that life began somewhere else in the
universe and was intentionally planted here by aliens.
The
same tendency for UFO nuts to be evolutionists exhibits itself in
other kook-theories as well. Cryptozoology is an obscure
“scientific” discipline which aims to “study” elusive species
like Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster. It escapes me, though, how
anyone can “study” a species that can't be found. Why not study
Leprechauns? Anyway, cryptozoology also has a firm foundation in
evolution. Laypeople have suggested that Big Foot is a missing link.
The more “official” position (I chuckle when using words like
“scientific,” “study,” or “official position” when
discussing Big Foot) is that Big Foot is another large primate and so
is an evolutionary cousin to humans, similar to the way gorillas are.
The Loch Ness Monster is claimed by some to be a plesieosaur-like
species that became trapped in the Loch when it was cut off from the
sea. A small population of the critters has survived unchanged in
its little niche for 65 million years.
Now,
I realize my observations are anecdotal and not a scientific
samplings of evolutionists' attitudes. Nevertheless, I'm reasonably
confident in my opinion. If I were a betting man, I would be willing
to wager that a lopsided majority of UFO-ists are evolutionists as
are believers in Big Foot/Nessie. I would even say the same of
believers in ghosts. And don't forget that we're certain that the
president of the Flat Earth Society also happens to be an
evolutionist. Do you see a pattern here?
Please
note carefully that I've been careful to not say the majority of
evolutionists believe in Big Foot or UFOs. Instead, I'm voicing my
opinion that the majority of people who believe in these crackpot
theories are evolutionists. Do you see the difference? So you may
be wondering where I'm going with this. Am I making a
guilt-by-association argument? No. Am I making a sweeping
generalization to imply that the few evolutionists who believe in
UFOs represent all evolutionists? No. More than anything I guess
I'm taking enjoyment in linking fancy unto fancy. I think it's just
funny and ironic that the most outrageous beliefs are held by the
people who accuse creationists of being scientifically illiterate.
Who's the crackpot now?
Kidding
aside for a moment, I think there are a few things we can take away
from this: First, I think it's clear that “junk science” does not
appeal to creationists. If it did, the ranks of UFO and Big Foot
enthusiasts would be flush with creationists.
Second,
no group is represented by its extremists. Unless evolutionists want
to associate themselves with Big Foot hunters, they need to stop
holding up people like the convicted Kent Hovind as an icon of
creationists. At least most creationists are honest enough to
denounce the bad behavior or weak arguments of its members. People
like Sagan are mainstream evolutionists and their cohorts seem
reluctant to speak a word against them.
Finally,
we should acknowledge that beliefs have consequences. I've seen the
photos and videos of UFOs. Is that really the best evidence for the
existence of aliens? Why then do so many people believe in life on
other planets? I say it's merely a consequence of believing in
evolution because the theory virtually demands there must be. I've
written before that a
worldview that rejects God and the Bible is not rational. A
person who rejects the Bible is foolish; it's no wonder then that he
should embrace foolish beliefs.
