Supporters of intelligent design and creation theories keep attempting to subvert our education systems. They will not be content until every child in every school in every country is taught that our planet is only about 6000 years old and that the Bible conveys literal truth.
Now, if you don't want your kids to be brainwashed all the way back to the stone age by some religious extremist, here's what you can do:
1 - write to your MP, Congressperson or other political figure. Complain that you do not want your child indoctrinated by a zealot.
2 - encourage your child to learn as much as possible about how language can be used as a powerful tool by zealots and fundamentalists to cripple the intellect - or as a powerful tool to keep other people from doing our thinking for us.
The mere fact that creationists have been taking over the terms of science and subverting them to creationist use is proof of evolution.
Warning! Parody alert!
We searched 55 completely sequenced creationist genomes for phrase synthesis and meaning degradation capacities. A significant proportion of these creationists appears to lack category invention capability. Interestingly, these creationists are parasitic, symbiotic or fastidious (i.e. have difficulty acquiring culture outside of their cloistered environment). It is suggested that the lack of category invention dynamism is a trait associated with parasitic behaviour as a result of evolutionary processes in combination with environmental pressures.Acknowledgements and apologies: Bernard Henrissat, Emeline Deleurya and Pedro M. Coutinho
Language is a dynamic mechanism which thrives when given free reign. Throughout history, most conquerers have killed off the language of the subdued nation completely. The Romans and then the Normans failed to kill off the very language you are using as you read this. The English language has adapted, absorbed, modified and even rejected words. Despite the objections of pedants who decry the 'new' words, and words not being spelled properly, language changes, it evolves. A language is simply the common pool of the common people. It is only what the common people enjoy using in their language that survives. Language is the most democratic process known to man precisely because it is evolving with the needs of the 'common herd'.
When scholars got a stranglehold on Latin, and forced it into the mould of 'proper grammar', even though it was the acknowledged international language of its day, it promptly died. Language is a dynamic, living thing, it thrives, as humans do, when, free of bonds, it flourishes, it blossoms, it brings to this short passing from dust to dust that we call 'life' a blessed wealth of joy. It also enables one who wishes to study Holy Writings to gain a wealth of ethical guidance from those sources, rather than be told by someone with an agenda what it is that the words ought to have meant.
Evolutionary Processes in Language.
Take any mechanism in evolutionary biology, tell me that it is ID at work and then I'll point you to a proof of its operation in language - by comparing an old book with an older one.
Don't give me that babel fable schmabel. If a creator caused all languages to appear at one moment in time to confuse people, why do they have so many shared words and grammatical structures? Why is there a demonstrable divergance and convergance of languages during historic times? Why are we converging towards a common global language? Could there be a creator that uses magic powers or ID to confuse languages, only for them to rebound towards a common tongue?
If any ID supporter wants to deny the fact of evolution, let them explain this fact. Why wasn't Beowolf written in the language of Shakespeare; Shakespeare in the Language of Sir Isaac Newton; Newton in the language of Charles Dickens? Hey look: proof of the evolution of the English language.
Hey! Creationists! Scientists are humans like you. Stop stealing our words! Even crows don't steal from kin.
If you have enjoyed reading this, you may also enjoy this bit of whimsy.
Important note.
Edited, o2 Apr 2009: since writing this I have found a suitable reference to illustrate some of my points about the evolutionary processes in language:
One of the fundamental problems faced by early Chinese Buddhist translators was how to express new phenomena in their language. Inevitably, new words and new Chinese characters were created, adding to ancient Chinese text.Source: Research Frontiers
This blog is intended as a light-hearted parody of creationism based on linguistic fact.
I do not intend that it should be taken as a personal attack on any individual.
The ideas expressed here are entirely my own and should not be taken as conveying or implying any endorsement whatsoever from this websites owner.
Comments are welcome, but I reserve the right to delete any comment which any reasonable person might construe as an attack on any individual person or religion, or which contains overly strong language.
Comments