Dispatch from the front lines of Ray Comfort's Krazee crusade

The "special" 150th anniversary edition of Origin of Species - the one with 59 pages of anti-scientific banana mush as an introduction - was handed out at UC-Santa Barbara on Thursday. Word on the street was that a number of campuses were hit on Wednesday, and by ~10:30am on Thursday, we at UCSB were starting to feel somehow let down, like we wouldn't get our chance to see the circus, and maybe just a little like a wallflower at the junior high dance.

Then the news hit. Graduate student Sabrina poked her head into my office around 11 and asked if I was ready. I was. Mostly I wanted my souvenir. Graduate student Chris Evelyn was already on the scene. Chris is an evolutionist with a strong competitive streak, and he was not about to let Ray Comfort's propaganda be distributed freely. Chris had found two people handing out the books near our library, and he contacted Sabrina, who let me know. I rattled off an e-mail to our Biology email list, and headed off to battle.

Aside from people paying to throw pies in the face of frat boys (fund raiser), demonstrations to save ESS (UCSB's exercise department is getting cut), flyers from "Jews for Jesus" (sounded interesting, but I didn't get one), and some other activity and demonstrations around the library (Free Palestine!), I saw no copies of the Origin, and no sign of Chris or Sabrina.

"We're over at the UCEN", Sabrina sent me a text. I walked 5 minutes over to the University Center. It was another fine Santa Barbara day, crystal clear blue skies, 70 degrees, and crisp shadows from the intense sunlight. The Comfort-ites, two of them, had run out of books. They had each carried a backpack-full to near the library, where Chris had found them. Now they were making plans to get more books. They had to park in Isla Vista, a 15-20 minute walk from the library. Chris followed them to their van - he didn't want a single book to be handed out without an NCSE flyer. Sabrina and I went back by the library to wait for the return.

By that time, my email had hit the biology department. About 10-15 other biologist found us and together we waited for the return of the banana editions. Independent of us, an Undergraduate Skeptics group called SURE was on the scene. They were prepared with flyers from Don't Diss Darwin and had written a counter argument to Comfort's banana-mush preface. Chris, still following the distributors, kept us updated by text messages. "They have hundreds of books in a van!"

Finally, they arrived, and I got my copy. I talked a bit to one of the distributors. "Jason" had a full red beard and wore a baseball cap. I learned he lives in Ojai, and he's 35 and unemployed. He had a calm demeanor, and he didn't know what he was getting into. He had recently joined a bible study group, and his friend "Mike" asked him to help pass out some books. He did not expect any sort of confrontation at all, and went out of his way to make clear that he didn't really know about what was in the book. He'd hand out a book and say things like "make sure you get a flyer and see the other side of the argument".

The other distributor, "Mike" was a older than Jason, maybe 60. He was a bit more evasive, and for a while seemed to want to get away from the skeptics and the biologists. I didn't get a chance to talk to Mike myself, but I learned that he was a veteran of military service. After a while, he too was telling people to get our flyers, to be fair. Poor Mike - most everyone I saw was a biologist just trying to get one of these laughable souvenirs. Poor Jason - he was just helping out a new friend, handing out some books.

We invited Jason and Mike to come to our screening of "Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial". They declined. Their goal was to hand out all the books. Chris made sure flyers were present, and the Skeptics were troopers, too, sticking with the distributors through the evening; although several came to the screening.

After the screening, I got another text from Sabrina "Debating going on near the library". I already had plans to take my kids to the UCSB soccer game, first round of the NCAA tourney (we won, 1-0). Chris and Sabrina, and probably Nathan, were fighting the good fight though, and I think almost no books were handed out without a flyer or NCSE banana-bookmark, or both, as accompaniments.



A little activism was fun, and I was proud that evolutionism and rationalism had a much stronger presence than anti-science banana-mush. Although this sort of thing can be energizing, in the end, I mostly feel bad for Mike and Jason. This feeling was echoed by an email I got just now from Chris.

Chris thinks that, in the end, all this was just a cheap scam perpetrated by Ray Comfort. We found out that Mike put up money to buy these books. Comfort wrote a bunch of crap, tagged it to the beginning of Darwin's classic, published cheap copies, and then used his propaganda machine to get gullible buyers to spend their money.

I shouldn't be surprised. This to me is the lowest point of religion: the fact that (somehow) charismatic, yet underhanded people seem always to be able to lighten people's wallets in the name of religion. It's happened for centuries. Still, seeing it in action, and meeting the victims, makes me feel completely empty. I'm reminded of a time when I visited New York City and street con artists pulled cash right out of the hand of my friend. The rest of the trip was not the same. It seems to me that Ray Comfort is no better than one of these street con-artists. Perhaps it would've been more fun to be at UCLA, where Ray himself was, instead of witnessing his victims gradually realize they were caught in a scam.

Taxi-cab creationism: Idaho style

I have witnessed a thousand evolutionists descend upon Moscow, Idaho. At this conference, I've heard biologists discuss in exquisite detail new research connecting specific genes to specific evolved phenotypes, I've been regaled with stories tracing the pathways of evolution, I've seen tests of explicit historical hypotheses, and I've seen yet more data supporting predictions made by evolutionary science.

I have also been driven to my hotel by a friendly local taxi-cab creationist, something that is not at all unusual. In fact taxi drivers are my main interaction with creationism, in Rhode Island, in Georgia, and now in Idaho. When I teach Macroevolution to biology majors in California, I have come to realize that many of the students are unaware of the evolution denialism that is common in this country. I show them the DVD of the PBS documentary of the Dover trial (Judgment Day), and that is enlightening for many. I also teach them about anti-evolution arguments, and about the evidence against those arguments, and this is quite popular. But I also tell try to begin to relay some of my own experiences with anti-evolutionism, which has usually involved taxi drivers.

"So, what are you in town for", I lecture in my best southern drawl, mimicking some typological taxi driver.

"Well, I'm giving a lecture at the university".

"Aw, so whadya do".

"I'm an evolutionary biologist".

Moment of stunned silence. "Mmmm. I've heard evolution's pretty debatable".


Well, tonight I again entered a taxi, and the conversation started something like the lecture snippet above. But today, since my hotel is out of town I had some time in the cab, and since I was curious, I asked my driver a few questions, and I mostly listened. He was quite friendly, seemed determined to avoid a debate, but also shared many of his beliefs with me. I think he had given this pretty much thought, and he'd argued before about this. He'd always have his caveat, however non-factual.

I didn't ask his name, but he wore a red had, a T-shirt and had several days worth of stubble. He started making small talk about the conference, and said that he had driven someone from the conference recently. I asked him point blank what he thought about evolution - consider it field research for teaching my class, I suppose.

"Well, I'm a creationist, to be quite honest", he said. "But I don't push my beliefs on anyone".

He seemed to value greatly the fact that he wouldn't push his beliefs on anyone. Maybe he just wanted to maintain a chance at a tip.

"I used to be on the opposite side of God", he said. For a brief moment, I thought he meant he was once an evolutionist, but I came to realize he was saying he was once a "sinner". I suppose this means he was once an addict. I've known many people to convert drug or alcohol addiction into an obsession with religion.

"I used to live in New Zealand for 10 years". This seemed important to him, I'm not sure why. "We can debate, but I believe in my faith and my science, and other people believe in their faith and their science, so in the end no one will change their mind. It's fun to debate, but I guess we'll know when we die."

I said it sounds like he is really agnostic, since he says we won't know until we die. He reiterated his faith in God.

At one point I asked him how old he thought the earth is. He said 50,000 years old. "Of course that's debatable, my number comes from scripture. I know there's this carbon dating stuff, and yeah maybe the earth is billions of years old. But carbon dating has been proven to be wrong. Sure, some people argue it's right, but some people argue it's wrong. I'm actually really into collecting fossils", he said, "when I was in New Zealand, I found a turtle egg, a really rare thing, and this had the embryo in it. It was carbon dated, not the whole thing, just a little piece, and the date came back 70,000 years, even though science says these turtles are only 15,000 years old. You can do this carbon dating stuff, but you can't prove it."

I asked him why he required proof of Carbon dating, but didn't require proof in God.

"I just have faith, and I guess we'll see when we die."

At some points it sounded like he accepted some parts of evolution. I said at one point, that an important thing for me is that we share common ancestry with every single other living thing, and that I found that continuity of life beautiful.

"Well, yeah sure, but if we're connected to some green slime and apes and everything, then there is nothing that makes us special", he said. "I believe in the literal word of genesis, and - yeah sure it was translated by man, and humans make mistakes - but genesis and evolution are incompatible".

I asked him if it were possible that God said "let there be evolution". Sometimes he did sound like a deist.

In the end, he said his faith gets him through another day. "Nothing wrong with that", I said, as I got out of the cab, and paid the fare. I did give him a good tip.


Tomorrow I'll go back to the conference. I'm sure I'll see yet more amazing, detailed science, fueled by the predictions of decent with modification. That is what will get me through another day.

Creationism and Evolution in our society

I was asked in an email to complete a survey about "creationism and evolution in our society".  I came up with some answers, spur of the moment, and I thought I would paste them here.  If it really is a student, I would like to help him out, and pasting it here gives me a little more incentive to complete it. (Anyone know what is a "Facharbeit"?)


Dear Reader.
 I'm a german student who works on a "Facharbeit". We had to choose a subject and I think that the controversy between Evolutionists and Creationists is very interesting. Therefore I decided to learn more about it. I've created a survey and now I'm sending it around, hoping that many people are going to write something in the gaps. It would be very helpful if you answer me because here in my town I'm not able to talk to someone about this subject. If you are able to open the word file you can fill in the gaps there and send it back. This would make it very easy for me to evaluate the documents. Well, if this doesn't work, I've just copied the survey and you can fill in the gaps in this E-mail and send it back.
 Hope hearing from you soon. Thank you.




Survey
Creationism and Evolution in our society


1) Do you support the evolution or the creationist theory?

I fully accept the enormous weight of scientific evidence that has accumulated for the theory of evolution.  By "the theory of evolution", I mean the common ancestry of all living things, and descent of living things with modification.

I am not sure what "creationist theory" means.  There are many stories of creation, many of which are not consistent with known facts and observations.  I have not heard a creation myth that I support, and I know of no creation story that could be called a "theory" in the sense of a scientific theory.


2) Do you think that the other theory is non-sense? (Can you explain why you think that the other theory is non-sense?)

I would need more information about what is meant by "the other theory"; but many of the creation myths I've heard are non-sense in my opinion.  For example, the Iriquois creationist story states that people once lived in the sky until a woman, pregnant with twins, was forced down to the Earth.  At that time, the Earth was covered with water, there was no land.  A giant turtle wanted to help the woman who had fallen to earth, so the turtle swam to the bottom of the sea and placed mud on its back to generate North America.

Yes, I think this creation theory is non-sense.  There is no evidence of any turtle the size of North America, nor any evidence of any animal that could reach such a size.  There is no evidence that this turtle is under North America today.



3) Are you sure that the theory you believe in is the right one? Why, why not?

Science should not be a matter of "belief".  Given the enormous weight of evidence for common descent of all living things, and for descent with modification, I might say that I "believe" that this explanation will remain "the right" explanation for a very long period of time.




4) Do you think that there could be a danger if the world believed in the opposite theory?

Again, I am not certain what is meant by "the opposite theory".  But, yes, I imagine that if belief in creation stories is a symptom of a potentially dangerous pattern of thought: When people believe what they are told without thinking critically about it for themselves, they are prone to dangerous manipulations.


5) Do you think that there’s a possibility that there’s an answer in between those two theories?

Again, I'd have to know which 2 theories.  I don't think there is a true answer between the theory of evolution and the Iriquois creation story.


6) Maybe you’ve got an idea how that theory would look like?




7) If someone would find out that the theory you believe in is surly not the right one, would there be an effect on your life? Would you be frightened? Would you think that there’s something missing in our world?

Yes, if common descent and descent with modification were proven false, it would have an impact on my career.  I would change the scientific questions I am studying.  I do not think this would lead to something missing in the world, because the current scientific view of the history of life would simply be replaced with another scientific view of the history of life.