Based on:

http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Pete+McMartin+Climate+change+deniers+cherry+picking/8117271/story.html

From: Gerda Peachey <gerdapeachey@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 1:44 AM
Subject: Vancouver Sun, Pete McMartin, Creationists and Flat-earthers
To: pmcmartin@vancouversun.com

Hi Pete:  I’ve been thinking about your article on climate change deniers in the Vancouver Sun, March 18/13.

It’s fairly common practice for secular writers to throw in gratuitous references to ‘creationists’ and ‘flat-earthers’, no matter what topic ostensibly is being written about.

Presumably, when you bring dumb creationists into the discussion your readers will be silenced. Any arguments that might have been raised against your central theme will fall when you invoke the stupidity of ‘creationists’ to drive home your point.

By the way the late Stephen Jay Gould, no friend of Genesis, nonetheless had the class to show the nonsense about Christians holding to a flat earth belief, is a contrived fraud.

(My husband, Richard Peachey, wrote the following:
  “The Christian church has never believed in a flat Earth, despite frequent accusations of this by evolutionists.
  “The late science historian and evolutionary spokesman Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard acknowledged: “There never was a period of ‘flat earth darkness’ among scholars (regardless of how many uneducated people may have thus conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity was never lost, and all major medieval scholars accepted the earth’s roundness as an established fact of cosmology” (Natural History, March 1994).
  “As Gould goes on to explain, this scurrilous “flat Earth” charge against Christians was spread by two anti-Christian (and pro-Darwinian) books of the late 19th century: John W. Draper’s History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874), and Andrew Dickson White’s A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896).
  “Both Draper and White were academics who should have known better, but their evolutionary prejudice seems to have led them astray.
  “For more insight into this fascinating story, readers can consult Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians (1997) by University of California historian Jeffrey Burton Russell.”)

 

But I would like you to consider this: In order for you to think and type your insults at the Creator and those who believe in him, this is what was happening. Billions and billions of neurons and hundred of billions of interconnections were going on in your brain.

Cascades of electrochemical events, all requiring every other part to be fully functioning were at work while you tapped out your words of derision towards God your creator.

The most complex man-made computers on earth combined in one super-computer would be a clumsy piece of junk, compared to you.

No computer, no building, no car, no piano, no wheelbarrow comes about by mere natural forces. We recognize these were created by intelligent designers.

You, who are so vastly superior to any of these, did not get here by the process of accidental mutations and natural selection, over millions of years. God created you in his own image.

Hope you enjoy this gentle poke at Time magazine by Andrew Lansdown.

Differences between humans and animals

by Andrew Lansdown

‘No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.’ So began a feature article on evolution in TIME magazine (‘How Man Began’, March 14, 1994). The more I thought about this sweeping statement the more I began to warm to it.

For example, like humans, apes have well formed rational faculties. Their ability to develop an argument, follow a line of logic, draw conclusions and frame hypotheses is quite remarkable.

Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful.

The apes’ ability to codify language in writing is further proof of their close relationship to humans. In this respect, it was most gratifying to see the number of apes who wrote to TIME magazine in response to the article on ‘How Man Began’. I was particularly  interested to follow the line of reasoning of the orang-utan who argued that apes had evolved from humans, not vice versa.

Like humans, apes also have a strong spirit of inquiry. Their research in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, medicine and physics is noteworthy.

Apes also (again, like humans) yearn for meaning in life. This is why they devote so much of their time to philosophy, theology and ethics. The religious sentiments and practices of all apes can be traced back to their intense and endless quest for meaning.

Apes are concerned about questions not only of origin but also of destiny. The best proof I can offer for this claim is the maxim by one famous ape philosopher who said, ‘Whether my life leads ultimately to the dirt or to the Judgment, either way, I’ve got a problem.’

Apes also have, like humans, a refined aesthetic sense. They admire beauty and long to surround themselves with it. When an ape cultivates a garden, puts flowers in a vase, or hangs up a painting, what is it doing if not expressing a love of beauty?

Again like humans, apes have a strong creative impulse. This is seen in their poetry, painting, dance, drama and music. To a lesser extent their creativity is also evident in the way they gather in weekly craft groups to weave baskets, spin wool, knit shawls, and cover photo albums.

The sense of humour shared by all apes is another proof of their close kinship to humans. Their delight in the ridiculous and their love of a good laugh is plain from the popular ape jokes they tell.

Reason, language, inquiry, wonder, longing, religion, morality, aesthetics, creativity, imagination, aspiration and humour … such intangible but fundamental qualities are by no means unique to humans, as I hope I have conclusively shown. Therefore, in the profound words of TIME magazine: ‘No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals’.

This being the case, Christians are plainly wrong to insist that humans and animals are vastly different. And they are also obviously wrong to insist that this difference arises from the fact that God created us humans in His own likeness. And if they are wrong to insist that God made us in His own likeness, then they are wrong to insist that God has any claim on us.

Furthermore, if God has no claim on us, then we are free — free to be animals like our evolutionary ancestors — free to be as low-down as snakes, and to make pigs of ourselves, and to act like donkeys.

Did I say ‘free’?

Hiss! Oink! Hee-haw

Advertisements