Texas wingnut Don McLeroy on the march

Cartoon from The Great Realization

We've written before about the chairman of the Texas State Board of Education, Don McLeroy, the christianist wingnut dentist.

McLeroy is endorsing a new book called Sowing Atheism: The National Academy of Sciences' Sinister Scheme to Teach Our Children They've Descended from Reptiles by Robert Bowie Johnson Jr., who just happened to "self-publish" the book.

In this book students in science classes in Texas will learn, according to the Texas Freedom Network, that "Scientists are 'atheists.' Parents who want to teach their children about evolution are 'monsters.' Pastors who support sound science are 'morons.'"


This would be hilarious if it wasn't so damn serious. How does a wingnut like McLeroy get to hold the position of chairman of any state board of education?

And again, all of this is an attempt to impose and install fundamentalist christianity into our public schools.

From the book: "Creationists do not want to bring religion into the classroom... Creationists simply want the God hypothesis brought back into the science classroom, and recognized for what it is--a scientifically valid hypothesis."

Heh, heh!

The "God hypothesis" is not "religion," according to this fruitcake!


TFN summarizes: "As bizzarre and abrasive as some of these ideas may be [in the book], clearly any yahoo with a half-baked idea can write and self-publish a book. That is not the important point here. The real issue is the inability of the chair of the Texas State Board of Education to distinguish between legitimate, mainstream science - a represented by the National Academy of Sciences - and a lone crackpot with an openly religious agenda."

I disagree to some degree. I think the chair of the Texas State Board of Education can distinguish quite clearly the difference between "legitimate mainstream science" and "a lone crackpot with an openly religious agenda."

I think the real point and the real problem is that the chair of the Texas State Board of Education cares not about science and students in Texas schools, but is doing everything in his power to ensure that his particular brand of fundamentalist christianity has a gateway to spread its pernicious doctrines in Texas schools.


Read the entire article here.

h/t to Steve Benen at the Washington Monthly via Alternet.

Creationism: A Cautionary Tale

With much thanks to Atheistic Cartoons. This is one of best videos I've seen in a long time!

In honor of Charles Darwin

The latest issue of National Geographic (February 2009) includes a special tribute to the great Charles Darwin.

Creationists, those stone-heads whose "truth" is carved from ancient mythological rock hewn by ignorant and superstitious tribesmen, are busy these days conducting "anti-Darwin" festivities, where they applaud their godly delusions and thumb their noses at real science, insisting on a magical creation over six days which so exhausted their too-human deity he had to sit down and rest.

The problem with creationists is simple: they begin with a belief and then attempt to fit the evidence to conform to that belief. They operate in a manner exactly opposite of the scientific method. Creationism, in its several forms, is not science by any stretch of the imagination. It represents fundamentalist Christianity, and starts from a confession of faith: The Christian Bible is to be understood literally, is true in all its aspects, and contains no mistakes or errors. Everything must follow from that confession.


A scientific theory, on the other hand, "is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers." One might say a scientific theory represents the best way to describe and/or understand some thing or some process in our world as it has been tested and found reliable.

The theory of evolution (as well as the theory of relativity, atomic theory and the quantum theory) has been thoroughly tested/documented and proven beyond any reasonable doubt. It has been shown, over and over again, to be the most trustworthy way to understand our world.

As new information comes to light, however, and as that information is put to the test and found reliable, the theory of evolution will be tweaked accordingly.


Darwin's theory of evolution has been modified on a number of occasions. How and why Darwin's theory has been modified is the subject of the National Geographic article. It's one hell of a lot more interesting than the magical machinations of a mythological deity creating the universe in six tiresome days.

National Geographic explains why it is important to honor Charles Darwin:

"This year marks the 150th anniversary of the most incendiary book in the history of science, and coincidentally, the 200th birthday of the mild-mannered Englishman who wrote it. Charles Darwin did not invent the idea of evolution, any more than Abraham Lincoln, who happens to share his birthday on February 12, invented the idea of freedom. What Darwin provided in The Origin of Species was a powerful theory for how evolution could occur through purely natural forces, liberating scientists to explore the glorious complexity of life, rather than merely accept it as an impenetrable mystery. 'Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution,' the geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote 36 years ago. That light, which began as a glimmer in the mind of a young naturalist aboard H.M.S. Beagle, today casts a beam so bright we can read the very text of life by it. Darwin would be overjoyed to see how much he did not know, and how much we have yet to learn."

Maybe the creationists should say "Thank God!" for Darwin!

The Creation Museum - a monument to ignorance & superstition

A few days ago, I wrote a "mocking" little post on that monument to ignorance and superstition, the Creation Museum, located just south of Cincinnati, in the great state of Kentucky.

A small number of Xtian fundys got their hackles raised and started whining about my lack of biblical understanding and how I needed Jesus and they would keep praying for me so that I would find Jesus (I didn't know he was lost!) and have my sins taken away and live forever in the heavenly realm (wherever that is) with their skygod.

Lest anyone is even a tad confused that the Creation Museum and/or what is oxymoronically called "creation science" is anything more than a scam perpetrated by Xtian fundamentalists who believe they are called to force this nonsense down the throats of our "innocent" little school children, I'm including a link to a post on PZ Myer's blog, Pharyngula, which provides a wealth of information dealing with the Creation Museum and the crap it promotes as science. Myers is an associate professor at the University of Minnesota.

Myers wrote this post on May 27, 2007. His introductory comments follow:

"This week, the creationist Ken Ham and his organization, Answers in Genesis, are practicing the Big Lie. They have spent tens of millions of dollars to create a glossy simulacrum of a museum, a slick imitation of a scientific enterprise veneered over long disproved religious fables, and they are gathering crowds and world-wide attention to the grand opening of their edifice of deceit. You can now take a photographic tour of the exhibits and see for yourself--it's not science at all, but merely a series of Bible stories dolled up in dioramas.

"The blogosphere is also giving them some attention -- almost none of it favorable. What I've done here is collect recent reactions from all over to the Creation Museum, and compile[d] them down into a link and a short and (I hope) representative extract. Browse through this long, long list, and when you find some quote that tickles your interest, follow the link to find the complete article. The National Center for Science Education has also compiled reactions from journalists, educators, scientists, and scientific organizations for yet more reading on the subject."


There are many links in Myers' post. If, however, you've been fooled by this pseudo-scientific, religious hokum, you should seriously consider reading through at least some of the material that is available.

One last thing: One gentleman asked if I had visited the Creation Museum, as if that would make a difference in my outlook. No, I have not. For one thing, I have not felt the need, as I've studied carefully material made available by the museum and have no interest in looking at what Myers calls "Bible stories dolled up in dioramas." Pictures of these dioramas are enough, thank you.

The other reason I won't soon visit the Creation Museum is the same reason I quit reading Mickey Mouse comic books years ago. I have no need for such fantasies as a grown-up adult.

You will find Myers' blog post here.

P.S. I "borrowed" the above photo from Pharyngula.