“A Reasonable Argument for God’s Existence” was published in the Huffington Post yesterday. The article was written by Rabbi Adam Jacobs. We’re sure he’s a nice enough guy, but he just provides us with more proof that no matter what religion you follow, intelligence is not essential. This article, though not an original thought, was one of those that twisted our panties pretty tight.
Rabbi Adams wrote:
“Not one of them has the foggiest notion about how to answer life’s most fundamental question: How did life arise on our planet? The non-believer is thus faced with two choices: to accept as an article of faith that science will eventually arrive at a reasonable, naturalistic conclusion to this intellectual black box or to choose to believe in the vanishingly small odds that the astonishing complexity, intelligence and mystery of life came about as a result of chance.”
The implication spewing from the Rabbi’s lips is ‘if they can’t answer the question, we must be right. After all, science can only be right if it can answer any question you’ve ever had about anything. Right?’ HA! We don’t think so you Son of an Abraham. Science, like man, evolves. Prior to (and after) Copernicus, the church was certain that the Sun revolved around the Earth. Science had yet to answer that hypothesis, so the church, sounding remarkably like the Rabbi, knew they were correct about a geocentric model. After all, science can only be right if it can answer any question you’ve ever had about anything. Right?
This is another example of accommodation over explanation. Religion, simply by believing in a creating god, accommodates everything by saying, “god did it.” By accommodating everything, it explains nothing. Evolution did not just appear one day in 1859. It is the product of observation and experimentation (like every other scientific theory). Religion, on the other hand, holds a ‘holier than thou’ stance on the subject of origins of life simply by stating, “it was god.” Though the idea of god allows them to believe whatever they want about…well, anything, it does not answer any questions at all.
But this is an argument that has been done over and over and over. So, why does it piss us off so much? Because it comes in the wake of this article which states:
“The majority of high school biology teachers don’t take a solid stance on evolution with their students, mostly to avoid conflicts, and fewer than 30 percent of teachers take an adamant pro-evolutionary stance on the topic, a new study finds. Also, 13 percent of these teachers advocate creationism in their classrooms.”
Fear of the controversy means that some Jr. High/High School teacher is shaking in his booties because of what might happen to him if he teaches actual science. The teacher, sympathetic as we are, still deserves to lose his job for denying a proper education to children who have the right to learn actual science. Not knowing an answer, or not having enough evidence to support the hypothesis yet, does not mean the science is wrong. It certainly doesn’t mean god exists. The largest tragedy in science classes today is how much evidence there is to support evolution, yet it is not being taught by a large number of teachers. The teachers who actually teach it are subject to parents, staff, and students constantly trying to tell them that no such thing ever happened. Scientists are forced to answer to zealots who don’t know a damn thing about science, and because we may offend these students or their parents by talking about evolution, we are forced to accept that the student will go through life completely opposed to true science and eventually become the parent of another ignoramus.