Back in October, the pastor of a local church published an article in the paper that offended me deeply. The article was about evolution, and was packed with standard Creationist lies, half-truths, and misinformation.
For those of you familiar with standard Creationist tactics, you'd have recognized the pastor's statements as being almost verbatim the boilerplate arguments of groups like the Institute for Creation Research. The entire column was nothing more than one big string of falsehoods, denying any possibility for evolution to be accepted as truth.
Naturally, I couldn't let this go by without calling him on the carpet. Maybe it's because I have a background in science, albeit many years old and mostly self-taught. Maybe it's because I just hate to let a religionist go unchallenged. More likely, it's because I just hate the idea of the general public being lied to, afraid they'd probably swallow it. So I wrote the pastor a long letter, explaining the errors in his statements and the duplicity of the organizations from which he obviously took them.
Much to my surprise, he actually replied.
The pastor said he was intrigued and would like to exchange emails with me on the subject. And I agreed to this.
In the past year, I've become very familiar with Creationists and their arguments. And I've become more familiar with evolutionary biology than ever before. I subscribe to an email list called DebunkCreation, which is (obviously) devoted to debunking the idiocy of Creationism, and I've seen any number of Creationists come and go, trying to foist their claims off as science, or to undermine evolution. I've even exchanged emails with Creationists one-on-one and know what a horribly frustrating experience it can be.
In case you've never engaged in this particular pastime, let me explain that Creationists are almost impossible to reason with. One of their standard strategies is to put forth a load of erroneous statements about evolution, and then (based upon these untruths) claim that evolution is clearly bogus. They will subsequently ignore completely any scientific explanations of why their claims are incorrect, and let loose another salvo of why evolution is wrong. They will again ignore rational responses, while also refusing to answer any questions directly put to them about their theory of Creation. Occasionally, they'll mention books written by scientists or others that "refute" evolution. And they'll not care that none of these books are written by biologists, but by engineers or physicists or others not truly qualified to write in-depth about biology. In the end, the Creationist will depart, stating that "evolutionists" (or, more commonly, "EVILutionists") can't support their own theory and have no responses to the refutations of Creationism.
Given all that, you're no doubt wondering why anyone would waste their time participating in such confrontations. Well, the answer is quite simple. I personally have no hope of ever "converting" a hardcore Creationist. But in groups such as the one I subscribe to, there are always lurkers… those who don't really engage in the conversation, but simply observe. Many of them are possibly leaning toward Creationism, and occasionally, they will see that the claims of Creationists are utterly unfounded and the evidence supporting evolution is overwhelming.
These are the people I'm concerned about, and I was hoping to find that the good pastor was, in fact, one of them. I was hoping his tirade in the paper was simply a parroted repetition of what he'd heard and that his own convictions weren't very solid.
And now, after many weeks of emailing, I'm not sure what to think of him.
Right off the bat, he told me he has no problem with the concept of evolution, provided that it is directed by God. This puzzled me, since his article was virulently anti-evolution, with no mention of such a scenario that he could accept. Since that bombshell, we've not made much progress. Oh, sure… I've pointed out that some of the aforementioned books by non-biologists are faulty. I've directed him to some websites that explain better than I ever could how the claims of Creationists are erroneous. I've punctured several of the arguments he'd put forth in his original column. But I still have no idea what he truly believes. His emailed statements seem to contradict his written article. So I wonder what, if anything, he's telling his congregation about evolution?
It's frustrating, but I expected that. I simply expected the frustrations to come in the form explained above, not from trying to figure out what he really believes.
Nevertheless, I'll continue my emails, along with the refutations of Creationist blather in the letters to the editor in the local paper. Lurkers are everywhere, including visitors to this site. I can only hope that my words may help them see things more clearly.
