5 Greatest Bits of Creationist Science
People take a very dim view of Creationism because it's, you know, wrong. I'm not saying that there's no God and that He had nothing to do with the way things turned out, I'm just saying that asking Biblical literalism to be considered science is like my daughter insisting Harry Potter is her brother. I'm glad you like a book and all, folks, but eventually you have to walk outside and smell the gravity.
That said, just because someone believes a wrong thing doesn't make them a dumbass, and more importantly it doesn't make the thing they believe in not awesome as hell! I've got a running offer with hard-line conservative Christians that I will totally trade them acceptance of gays and lesbians for acknowledging that dinosaurs and man coexisted. My friends get church weddings, and all I have to do is look at pictures of tyrannosaurs with saddles on them? Where do I sign?
Today I wanted to look at some of the scientific theories Creationists have tried to forward to explain away the science debunking a Young Earth model. In many cases, their theory is better than real life.
The Illusionists - Live From Broadway (Touring)
TicketsSat., Mar. 11, 4:00pm
The King and I (Touring)
TicketsTue., Mar. 14, 7:30pm
Brain Candy LIVE: Adam Savage & Michael Stevens
TicketsThu., Mar. 23, 8:00pm
Ist Annual Beaumont Corvette Club Comedy Explosion
TicketsFri., Mar. 24, 8:00pm
Impractical Jokers "Santiago Sent Us" Tour Starring The Tenderloins
TicketsSat., Mar. 25, 5:00pm
White hole cosmology: When people clash about the age of the Earth with Creationists they usually use the fossil record and stuff like that because it's really hard to argue with giant skeletons. However, there is also something called the starlight problem. What it means is that we know the universe is more than 6,000 years old because since the speed of light is constant, we can measure the distance of interstellar objects based on how long it takes the light from those objects to hit us.
Creationist Russell Humphreys decided to tackle the starlight problem and how to resolve it with Biblical literalism in his 1994 book Starlight and Time. His theory? That God created the world inside of a black hole, subjecting Creation to massive time distortions so that billions of years might pass outside the black hole while only a few days would pass within it. This would, he said, explain why quasars and such are so much older than the Young Earth he believes in. It doesn't because his math has more errors in it than a Cubs game, but the image of God tinkering with the planet inside a black hole workshop is metal as hell.
Anisotropic synchrony convention: Another attempt to explain away the starlight problem is anisotropic synchrony convention. The idea behind this theory is that light does not travel at a constant speed. Instead, it moves toward us at infinite miles per hour, but away from us at 1/299,792,458 of a second. That's why we can see objects that the speed of light should indicate are billions of light years away on a Young Earth.
The weird part about this theory is that it can actually work within the realm of known physics. It's basically impossible to test if light travels faster one way than another due to the problem of perfectly synchronizing clocks to measure it. Therefore, we just sort of assume that light does in fact maintain constant speed because even though you can make this idea work, it turns relatively simple equations into pointlessly complicated ones.
Abiogenesis: Now, abiogenesis is probably a real, if rare and unproven thing. At some point life must have been created from non-living matter in order to get Meatworld a-rolling. And, Creationists tend to like the idea because it sounds as close to "And God made the platypus and the slow lorises on such and such day" as you could possibly want.
What they don't like is how it ties into evolution. Primordial soup combines to make the first single cell organisms, and those mutate to become eventually us and eventually giant mantis men if the evolution chart I made in sixth grade is in any way accurate. So Creationists have the unfortunate problem of loving one part and hating another.
They solved this with peanut butter... in the video above Chuck Missler explains that each sealed jar of peanut butter in the world contains everything necessary to start the random life process implied by scientific abiogenesis theories. However, no one has ever opened a jar of peanut butter and found new life despite it happening millions of times a day, and therefore unguided abiogenesis is nonsense.
This is ridiculous because no sane person ever opens a jar of peanut butter and checks a sample for unknown microscopic life. It's awesome because now I can't stop thinking of God creating the next dominant species out of peanut butter... hopefully one that has the good sense to know a really stupid theory. I can't wait to open a jar of Jif and meet Jef, the new Mantis Man son of Mantis God.
The Subsiding of the Waters of the Deluge by Thomas Cole
Hydroplate theory: The Flood is another focus of Creationists, and for some reason it tends to be a big bother. One of the scientific questions that plague the faithful is where did all the water necessary to cover the Earth come from? Apparently, this is the one area where just shrugging and saying "God made it rain a bunch" isn't an option, even though pretty much every person on Earth would be totally fine with accepting that maybe one day it rained a lot and if there is a God then yep, that sounds like classic God-ing.
Instead, Walter Brown in 1980 came up with hydroplate theory. In Brown's mind, between the crust of the Earth and the center there was once a huge expanse of water. When it came time to wipe most life on Earth like dog poop from a boot, God didn't make with clouds. No, he bitch slapped the Earth so hard that the crust broke and all the water gushed out.
Man, what do you call it when you try to prove the Bible inerrant, and end up coming up with something a million times cooler than God's original method of smiting? Plus, hydroplate theory leads right to...
Lunar bukkake hypothesis: Do not Google the middle word if you don't know what it means.
There once was a man named Evan Philips who made insane YouTube videos under the handle NephilimFree. He talked about plenty of crazy Christian stuff as well as aliens because it was really hard to get all the lead out of toys for a while there.
Philips was bothered by the Moon. See, the craters on the moon alone pretty much prove that the Earth is older than the Bible says so, but Philips has an answer for that. When God dropped the mike on the Earth in the Flood, not only did water cover the land, it shot up with such a force that geysers traveling at supersonic speeds actually hit the moon and even other planets with enough force to cause giant impact craters. The resemblance of all this messy splashing around reminded Rational Wiki of a particularly depraved sex act, and I utterly refuse to use any other way of describing it.
So, to sum up... Creationist science would have us believe that God created the earth inside a black hole using a light that can travel at the speed of infinity. He then filled the Earth with water and drop kicked it so hard it killed almost everything and gave other planets a saltwater pearl necklace that left giant holes. On top of that, the only reason your peanut butter isn't full of Mantis Men is because God hasn't made it happen.
Get the Theater Newsletter
Get a rundown of upcoming theater events and ticket deals in Houston.