MetaCatholic

Claude Mariottini is clearly suffering from a burst of New Year optimism. In a post today on Science, Evolution and Creationism he draws attention to a new book available for free online reading, and says:

People who teach creationism and intelligent design may not like the conclusions presented in this book. However, both creationism and intelligent design proponents should read the third chapter of the book and see whether the arguments presented by the scientists are valid.

My own experience is that this is nothing to do with valid arguments, far less with the evidence. Creationists are interested in neither. For them a valid argument is one that supports their position, however supremely silly it is, and however cavalier with the evidence.

I learnt this lesson years ago as an undergraduate, when listening to two fellow students arguing their respective cases. As the argument went on, I became more and more stupefied by the case the creationist was putting forward. Finally, unable to resist it any longer, I intervened with a deeply ironic reductio ad absurdum. (At least that’s what I thought.) I suggested earnestly that what scientists didn’t realise was that as God created the world, the devil followed behind planting fossils in the rocks to confuse and tempt humankind.

Unfortunately, while my scientifically-minded friend laughed, the creationist nodded earnestly and said that was exactly the sort of thing that could have happened. Since then I have never believed any creationist to be susceptible to reason (or, indeed, to irony). They wouldn’t recognise a valid scientific argument if it kicked them in the balls. (I would apologise to all female creationists for this piece of sexism, but I suspect they just love patriarchy.)