02.05.07
Name Calling
There’s an old phrase that has surely gotten on many a nerve: “I know what you are, but what am I?” This is obviously a child’s thing, and anyone who’s grown up should automatically despise using this phrase. By the time a person has become an adult, the lesson should have been learned that an argument is never truly won by smearing the other side. Even if one is personally assaulted, at which point the possibility of using “I know what you are, but what am I” opens up, it is out of the question for an honorable person to return spite for spite. However, I believe there is a difference between using this phrase out of spite and using this phrase to provide a certain point against the original name calling.
Upon my lurking in several reaches of the Internet and the world of entertainment and literature, I have come across a number of snide remarks against Christians in general and Young Earth Creationists in particular. You see, many evolutionists, like other people, can be very childish in their arguments. Take for example this statement by an evolutionist on Wikipedia ridiculing Creationists:
“Creationisn [sic] is all POV [Point Of View] and nothing more, so is any other religious mumbo jumbo, nor indeed that world is a creation of a my Pet Cat, who happenned [sic] to think it all into existence, therefore we might be no more than the thoughts of my Cat. Oh Lord Cat grant me the ability to forgive the Creationist zealots who put POV all over wikipedia. Remove Creationists before they remove free thought”
This is on the talk page for the Neanderthal article, in which a paragraph on Creationist beliefs regarding the fossils could be found under the heading of Popular Culture. At the time of the remark, the section had long been removed and there was a lone editor making a case for it to be put back up.
What really makes me raise my eyebrows and shake my head in amusement sometimes is how so many insults against Creationists could simply have their proper nouns switched around to provide a perfect description evolutionists themselves. Let’s take a look at a different version of the above quote:
“Evolutionism is all POV and nothing more. It proposes that the world is a creation of random processes, which happened to chance everything into existence. Therefore, we might not be anything more than insignificant animals without purpose or reason for morality. Lord, grant me the ability to forgive the evolutionist zealots who put POV all over wikipedia. Remove evolutionists before they remove free thought.”
Evolutionists claim that science is on their side and that anyone who doesn’t believe in molecules-to-man evolution is blind as stupid. Creationists claim that science is on their side and that evolutionists are blind to what is right in front of them. Indeed, I have read someone’s writing where it was stated that the author saw no evidence of water crafted landforms on a global scale. Then I spend an hour and a half in my secular Geography class hearing the instructor talk about how nearly all of the earth has been shaped by weathering from water.
It’s crazy how evolutionists keep saying that Creationists are narrow, closed minded religious fanatics while at the same time brushing under the carpet and conveniently forgetting glaring evidences and inconsistencies which go against the concept that they are shoving down the throats of people who aren’t allowed to hear alternative theories. Of course, and evolutionist would scoff at this use of the word “theory,” because Creationism is “completely unsubstantiated.” Again, this is name calling. A Creationist would say that molecules-to-man evolution is completely unsubstantiated. Give evidence.
Creation is said to be purely religion, having no place in science. It promotes the suspension of natural laws in favor of miracles and hinders the advancement of man’s knowledge. The act of creation is unobservable and unobserved, so the argument goes. Yet it is evolution that is purely a false religion, having no place in science. It promotes the suspension of natural laws (such as the law of biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics) in favor of miracles (such as abiogenesis, which has never been observed) and hinders the advancement of man’s knowledge of true history. Because the course of new kind creating evolution is said to require thousands and even millions of years to yield a noticeable change, it is by its very nature unobserved and unobservable.
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
–Christ Jesus (Matthew 7:3-5)
