"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture."
----- Ray Mummert, creationist from Dover, Pennsylvania, 2005
Welcome to the "Creation 'Science' Debunked" Home Page.
For most of the world, the controversy over creation and evolution was settled way back in the 19th century, after the theory of evolution was presented in a paper by Charles Darwin to the Linnean Society in July 1858. During the five-year around-the-world trip of the Royal Navy ship Beagle, Darwin had collected a variety of specimens from South America and across the globe, including the various finches that inhabited the Galapagos Islands and which now bear his name. Darwin's study led him to conclude that species were not, as was generally accepted at the time, fixed and immutable, but changed over time to become entirely new species, through the process of natural selection.
Darwin's theory of evolution was accepted universally by the scientific community. Conservative religious groups, however, particularly in the United States, were outraged by the idea.
The creationist movement surged into prominence in the 1980's, when the fundamentalist Religious Right took up the anti-Darwin cudgel, and allied itself with the conservative elements of the Republican Party to form a powerful political constituency that has dominated American politics for the past 25 years. During this time, anti-evolutionists, first under the name "creation scientists" and then later as "intelligent design theorists", waged pitched battles against evolutionary science, culminating in a series of Federal court fights in Arkansas, Louisiana and Pennsylvania.
In 2005, a Federal judge in Dover, Pennsylvania ruled that ID was nothing but creation "science" renamed, and was unconstitutional to teach.
This website has one very clear objective in mind -- to present a history of creation "science" and its latest reincarnation as Intelligent Design "theory", and to lay bare the political and social roots of this movement. There have been several excellent websites and books that have dissected the scientific distortions and errors made by the creationist/ID movement and the devastating effects they would have on science education -- this website, however, aims to go beyond that, and examine the underlying social/political aims of creationism/ID. It must be recognized that the evolution/creation debate is, at core, not really about science or education. The creationists/IDers are not concerned in the slightest about scientific questions, or about correctly interpreting data, or about forming better explanations and understanding of the natural world. Instead, creationism/ID is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the fundamentalist Religious Right -- it is a religious and political movement, not a scientific one, and its goals are entirely religious and political, not scientific. The ID/creationists are a part of a larger political movement with radical theocratic aims, and their anti-evolution and anti-science efforts are, as they themselves declare, simply the "wedge issue" which they have chosen in order to gain entry for their wider anti-democratic political goals.
It is my opinion that the ID/creationists (along with the rest of their Religious Right companions) represent, in their attempts to re-mold all of American society in accordance with their own narrow sectarian beliefs, the single greatest threat to freedom and democracy in the United States today.
Deception by Design: The Intelligent Design Movement in
America By
Lenny Flank, Jr. ISBN 978-0-9791813-0-6 . Hardcover 6x9,
244pp. . A history of the anti-evolution "Intelligent Design" movement in the US, from the Scopes trial in 1925, through the rise of creation "science" in the 1980's, to the rise of intelligent design "theory" in the 1990's. Appendix includes the Wedge Document,
a leaked internal document which spells out the theocratic political goals of the Intelligent Design movement. 
The popular image of creationists tends to picture a group of rural hayseeds with not much education, who continually thump the Good Book as they speak. Modern creationists, however, are very slick, are usually well-educated, and are very skilled in the techniques of debate and sophistry.
A Short History of Christian Fundamentalism
Church/State and the Christian Fundamentalists
Creationists And the Religious Right
Who Are the Creation "Scientists"?
What are the Aims of the Creation "Scientists"?
Creation "Science": A Short Legal History
Arkansas and Louisiana: The Death of Creation "Science"
The Intelligent Design movement is much more slick and sophisticated than the creation "scientists", but have essentially the same goals. Most of the support for the ID movement comes from former supporters of creation "science", who see in the ID movement a potential way to get around the legal rulings that killed creation "science".
The Birth of Intelligent Design "Theory"
Ohio: The Rise of the Intelligent Design Movement
Dover: The Fall of the Intelligent Design Movement
"Teach the Controversy": ID's Latest Scam
The Discovery Institute's Hidden Religious Agenda
The "Wedge Document"; The Political Goals of the ID Movement In Its Own Words
"Explore Evolution": A Look at the Probable Louisiana "Supplemental Textbook" On Evolution
The scientific arguments of the creationists, while nonsensical, are very intricate and detailed, and can sound very convincing to people who do not have enough scientific knowledge to make a good judgement (such as local school board members). Although the creationists have made many pseudo-scientific arguments against evolutionary science, for reasons of space we can only discuss a few of them here. The creationist failure in these areas should indicate how much credence we can give to the rest of their "science".
What is the "Scientific Theory" of Creationism?
Noah's Flood: The Creationist Explanation of Fossils
Fossil Hominids and the Evolution of Humans
Information Theory and "Genetic Information"
Intelligent Design "theory" offers nothing new. All of its "scientific arguments" are just re-hashed versions of standard creation "science" arguments put out thirty years ago.
What Is The Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design?
Behe's "Irreducible Complexity"
Dembski's "Explanatory Filter"
Meyer's "Cambrian Explosion" Paper
Perhaps the silliest argument made by the creation "scientists" is their notion that the earth is only six to ten thousand years old, and that all fossils are really the remains of the animals that drowned during Noah's Flood. . .
Reasons for a Creationist Young Earth
The "Appearence of Age" Argument
Radio-Dating and the Age of the Earth
The "Population Growth" Argument
Much of the creationist case is based upon intellectual dishonesty. Creationists depend heavily on quotations from evolutionary scientists and writers which they have pulled out of context and twisted to sound like something other than what the writer intended. They also depend heavily on half-truths, distortions, deliberate citation of data they know to be untrue, and outright fabrications.
Creationist Misquotes and Out of Context Quotes
Creationists, Evolution and the Nazis
"Dr" Hovind and His Bogus "Reward"
Francis Hitching and the Creationists
Creationist Credentials: Is there a REAL Doctor in the House?
Does Science Discriminate Against Creationists?
The Latest Lies: The Tulsa Zoo and Grand Canyon Stories
Despite their arrogant claims to represent the "Christian point of view", the creationists and their fundamentalist friends constitute a very tiny minority in mainstream religion. Every mainstream Christian denomination in the United States rejects the paranoid and ultra-literalist world-view of the creationists, and sees no conflict at all between Christian faith and modern science.
Is Evolutionary Science the Work of the Devil?
Is Genesis Scientifically Accurate?
Did Noah's Flood Really Happen?
Mainstream Churches and the Creationists
Many people have treated the evolution/creation controversy (if they think about it at all) as if it were a scientific dispute -- as if the two viewpoints were merely differing ways of interpreting scientific data. (This, in fact, is precisely how the ID/creationists wish to present it.) Scientists in particular have tended to respond to the ID/creationist movement by first ignoring it in the hopes that it would go away, and then with long technical explanations of how the scientific conclusions of the ID/creationist arguments are unsupported, incomplete or just plain wrong. All of the scientific refutations of ID/creationism have not, however, lessened the conflict -- if anything, they have heightened it. The reason for this is simple; ID/creationism is not science and it does not have scientific goals. Because of this, it will not be beaten by science or by scientific arguments --- these are essentially irrelevant to the real goals of the ID/creationist movement. The ID/creationist movement is a political movement with political goals, and it must be beaten the same way that every other political movement is beaten -- by out-organizing it.
In my 20-plus years of fighting creationist/IDers both live and online, I have come to depend on a number of simple guidlelines for dealing with them. I offer these here in the hopes that others can put them to good use. The ID/creationist movement (and the larger fundamentalist Christian political movement of which it is only a small part) can only be beaten by a political organization that is dedicated to countering it at every turn. And the entire art of political organizing is all about knowing when to use what tactic to your best advantage (and your opponent's best dis-advantage).
The first step in beating the ID movement is to recognize that IDers have a specific agenda that they want to follow, and specific arguments that they want to make. So don't let them set the agenda. Go outside the areas they want to deal with, and force them to deal with areas they don't want to deal with -- such as who funds them and why. ID also insists that it's science and not religion. That is their own argument. So force them to live up to it and either put up or shut up. Either they have something scientific to offer, or they don't -- and anything religious they want to talk about is irrelevant (as well as illegal in schools). Force them to demonstrate publicly that they simply can't live up to their own terms of argument. They have nothing scientific to offer. On my DebunkCreation list, discussions are limited only to science, and discussions about religion are specifically excluded. We have had over 400 different creationist/IDers come in over the years. Not a single one was able to state a coherent scientific theory of ID or creation, but every single one of them wanted to tell us all about their religious opinions.
The simple fact is that the creationist/IDers have a clearly articulated, deliberately planned strategy for theocracy, and virtually no one in the US agrees with the extremist political philosophy of the DI or its funders. That is power we can use. People simply don't want a theocracy. Keep pushing the IDers about it, force them to defend it publicly, and watch their public support melt away.
Don't focus on the science. Non-scientists trying to argue over science is a recipe for disaster. On the other hand, scientists arguing over science is a recipe for boredom. Nobody wants to listen to deadly-dull lectures on "pre-biotic polymer chemosynthesis" or "the homology between type III secretory apparatus and the bacterial flagellum" (yawn). This isn't a science symposium. Don't treat it as one. Treating this as a "science debate"; only reinforces the false impression given by IDers that there is a legitimate scientific debate, with two equally valid sides. There isn't. It allows them to set the agenda and to fight on their own chosen terms. Don't do it. This fight is a political fight. It's simply not about science.
Keep in mind that IDers are vulnerable on many fronts, so use them all. Most theologians reject the religious assumptions of the ID/creationists and their fundamentalist base. The IDers have no science to speak of. No one agrees with their political extremism. Many of the prominent IDers spout out things that are, quite frankly, nutty (such as Phillip Johnson's denial that HIV causes AIDS). The ID movement's funding comes mostly from fundamentalist extremists and, in the case of the Center for Science and Culture, largely from one single radical ayatollah-wanna-be. Internally, the ID movement's supporters are an unsteady marriage of convenience between a variety of different religious zealots, most of whom would ordinarily be ready at the drop of a hat to wage Holy War on each other. Their most vocal "supporters" undermine their own legal strategy by preaching their religious opinions at every opportunity. So attack them on every possible front. Don't let up for a second, come at them from every possible direction, and don't give them an instant's rest. Above all, take the fight to the IDers. It's not enough for us to be defensive and react to what the IDers do -- we need to start setting the agenda and go on the offensive, introducing things that we want and forcing the other side to defend themselves against it.
The only thing that will beat ID/creationism (and all its future derivatives) is an informed public that makes it clear to everyone that it does not want a fundamentalist Christian theocracy, won't support it, won't allow it, and will do whatever it takes to prevent it.
So get out there and help.
When faced with a local or state effort to introduce creationist religious doctrine into the schools, the very first thing to do is seek help from experienced creationist fighters. Here is a list of resources to help local groups oppose the creationists:
The Arkansas Case: Opinion of Judge Overton
The Louisiana Case: Supreme Court Decision
The Dover Case: Federal Court Decision
The National Center for Science Education; The Leading anti-Creationist Organization in the USThe Panda's Thumb Blog; A Virtual Watering Hole for Anti-IDers
The Talk.Origins Archive; Extensive Collection of Resources to Debunk Creationism/ID
The Talk.Reason Archive; Essays Concerning ID/Creationism
British Centre for Science Education; The Fight Against Creationism in the UK
In April 2007, I did a podcast interview with the Dogma Free America website, on the subject of intelligent design. The interview is in two parts, in episodes 16 and 17, and is available online in MP3 format at:
Send me e-mail: Lflank@yahoo.com
I am also the owner of the DebunkCreation email list, which is the largest evolution/creation list at YahooGroups. This list is for discussion of creation "science" only -- no religious discussions are allowed. To join the list, enter your email address and click below:
Prefer a blog to a mail list? Visit the Debunking Creation "Science" blog
This Darwin's Web Ring site is owned by Lenny Flank
Want to join Darwin's Web Ring ?
[Skip Prev]
[Prev]
[Next]
[Skip Next]
[Random]
[Next 5]
[List Sites]
| LinkExchange Member |
Some fine folks are busy translating this entire website into Spanish. Some other fine folks are translating this site into Portuguese.
This web document was prepared by Lenny Flank (lflank@yahoo.com). The texts in this web document may be reproduced and distributed for noncommercial purposes, provided that copyright notice and credit line is included. Last revision June 2, 2006.
Get your own Free Home Page