linuxmafia.com 2016/linuxmafia.com.tar/linuxmafia.com/pub/skeptic/files-to-classify/ark.txt

Internet Message Format | 1996-02-19 | 7KB

From: Taner Edis <[e-mail]>
Subject:      American creationism
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date:         Sun, 21 Feb 1993 14:48:50 EST
   BC:  "I believe we were put here for a purpose."
   P:   "Nonsense...  We're here simply because we survived." [...]
   BC:  "OK, how do you explain love?"
   P:   "Give it up, kid -- if we aren't here to survive -- we
         wouldn't have survived to be here!"
   BC:  "Lousy logic is a lot more palatable if you sloganize it."

        (dialogue in todays Sunday comic strip, "B.C.")


        Yesterday, I speculated that the center of gravity of
creationism may shift to the Islamic world.  Just a few hours later,
our homegrown American variety of scriptural literalists demonstrated
that they'll do their best to junk my prediction.
        I'm referring to the two-hour CBS special, "The Incredible
Discovery of Noah's Ark."  I hope that somebody, especially among
those associated with regional skeptic groups, captured it on tape (I
don't have a VCR).  CBS has been pushing "specials" promoting
creationism, life-after-death, UFO's, ghosts etc for at least a year
now.  This one, however, may have been the most audacious piece of
propaganda of them all.
        It was wonderful, at least if part of your attraction to
skepticism is to be able to observe human perversity and high
weirdness.  The program never let up, never became boring -- my mouth
was wide open most of the time, when not occupied with cries of
"WHAT?"
        I can't fully summarize the program, what with so many
"Professor of ___ology" types reassuring us that they can demonstrate
that the literal Noah story is viable in all its details (no
affiliations shown, and many of the names were recognizable as
prominent creationists:  C. Baugh, H. Morris, son and arkeologist J.
Morris, and a host of people sounding like they were from
fundamentalist colleges).
        All sightings and sighting legends are brought up, and dressed
up as being quite credible, including old standbys like the one about
some from the Russian army entering the Ark just before the
Revolution.  The program just overwhelms the viewer with so many
"eyewitness" accounts and what not, including at least four by people
still alive.  One, for example, is a Palestinian Christian living in
California, claiming to have entered the Ark and retrieved a piece of
wood, displayed to the camera (no tests on it being done is
mentioned).  Unfortunately, his companion fell into a crevasse with
all the photographic evidence.  A Turkish reporter for a religious
right newspaper (Islamic) tells why he thinks that an angular dark
spot near the summit he photographed from below is the Ark.  We get
really multicultural: Armenian boys, British explorers, etc. etc.
        They even think they know the exact shape of the Ark, like a
huge wooden pencil box.  These days it's supposed to be broken in two,
after a 19th century earthquake.  They explain at length how there
would be no problem with its seaworthiness, how the animals would have
made it to the Ark from all over the world (instinctive search for a
safe place), how it would be no problem for a staff of eight to take
care of the animals in the Ark for a year, why only about 20000 pairs
of animals on board could account for all the animals we see today
(all 300 or so dog breeds come from the same stock, so...), how whales
and fish live happily in the waters.....
        OK, I've seen almost all of these claims before, but it can be
presented pretty powerfully on TV -- and these guys had a decent
budget.  They present a model Ark being tested in a water tank (while
I'm screaming "it doesn't scale, you fools" at home) with waves, to
demonstrate how the Ark could withstand the Deluge.  They have fancy
graphics, high tech investigative devices, satellite imagery.
Reproductions of the current state of the halves of the Ark.
Polygraph testing of an eyewitness.  Very occasionally a token skeptic
shows up to say it's impossible, without explaining in detail why, and
is promptly rebutted by a calm and efficient Professor-Of-The-
Appropriate-Science explaining how it can be done.
        Oh, they also had a bunch of actors play out a made-for-TV
version of the Noah story, special effects, scoffing corrupt
unbelievers and all.
        The most impressive part was one I didn't know about before.
I'd seen the creationist idea of equating the Biblical firmament to a
vapor-cloud canopy around the Earth, but somehow they convert it to
part of the deluge by calling on a meteorite impact (they must have
been following the dinosaur extinction theory).  Even better, they
have a theory (demonstrated with some *very* impressive graphics) to
explain all the water released from the "fountains of the deep."  You
see, once upon a time, we had hydroplates instead of tectonic plates.
The antediluvian Earth's crust was supported on a layer of highly
pressurized water, perhaps at up to 10 miles underneath the surface.
One day a crack arose in the surface (maybe because of our meteorite),
and because of the pressure, this widened very rapidly.  A huge crack
encircling the globe developed in the course of about 24 hours (they
imply that they can calculate these things), with all this water
(about half the volume of the present oceans) spewing out of it.  The
spray was like a heavy rain.  As an extra benefit, the pressurized
water rapidly eroded the sides of the crack, sending immense
quantities of mud all over the place.  This laid down all our
sediments and caught many animals by surprise, freezing them in death,
as the fossil record shows.  The hydroplates slid around very fast on
their water beds, until the water was depleted or they ran into each
other, creating mountains and ocean trenches.  The mid-Atlantic ridge
is shown, and it is suggested that this ridge, encircling the globe,
is the remains of the original global crack.  All of geology in a few
days.
        It goes on and on.  But I also can't help getting curious --
they are so eager to find a scientific, purely naturalistic scenario
that would make the story of Genesis literally correct.  It is as if
they try to buy a literalism that can be taken seriously at the cost
of any role to play for their God.  He is unemployed, or behind the
scenes, but presumably he acts in mysterious ways.

        Anyway, I've spent too much time raving about creationists
this weekend.  Maybe I should watch basketball, or listen to
Satyagraha or something.

        Taner Edis