Creationism Is Not Science Part 4

Excerpt from the following web site explores the connection between Creationism and Ecology:

The gospel truth, according to the book of someone said so.

Biblical Creationism presents a serious roadblock to ecological thinking. It is often used as an excuse to trivialize nature and promote human greed. Rush Limbaugh prefaces the chapter on ecology in his first book by proudly displaying his Creationist views, then proceeds to justify his arrogance toward anything non-human as part of a Biblical mandate. Many people mix Christianity with politics and force their beliefs on others via said politics. This violates the Constitutional separation of church and state (atheism is the lack of belief so it doesn't apply here). Creationism also contributes to scientific illiteracy and disrupts higher education. It clearly undermines biology, which in turn affects people's beliefs about nature.

At the core of Creationists' beliefs is an ancient book written by people who claim to have "spoken to God." This book only exists in an Earthly form and is no different than any other book except for its contents. It doesn't glow in the dark, and people who open it are not propelled upward on a beam of light. It's just a book (albeit with some wise advice in it) and it's clearly figurative in many areas. Creationists use a ridiculous circular argument which states that the Bible is literal because the "Bible says so" (which it never actually does). Don't bother pointing out the absurdity of this argument, because they have as many rationalizations as there are verses in the Bible. And they are willing to change the context of scripture to whatever suits the argument at hand. If science proves that Jesus couldn't have walked on water, Creationists will claim that the water was frozen, and so on.

Another Creationist tactic is to claim that the Bible is an "historical document," as if bits and pieces of reality prove that everything else in the Bible is literal. Is the fact that the Bible correctly describes the location of Jerusalem proof that Moses parted a huge body of water, that men lived to the age of 900, that stars fell to the earth and that all life on the planet was slapped down in seven days? These ideas would be laughed out of any courtroom but Creationists hide behind the notion that "anything is possible with God." They believe this absolves them from the need to prove anything through normal channels. It makes them impossible to reason with. The only thing that would give Creationism scientific validity is unbiased proof of a deity's existence, and this will never happen. They've already had 2000 years to come up with something concrete.

The Bible offers vague, supernatural explanations for phenomena like weather and earthquakes because the authors of the Bible had no means of understanding otherwise. Why is the topic of human origins the only scientific discovery that's so hotly contested by fundamentalists? It's because the origins of Man are considered far more personal than the workings of a storm cloud. Fundamentalists are hypocrites for accepting the scientific method when it gives them cars, computers and life-saving medicine. So-called "scientific" Creationism is just a religious crusade.

Christianity is not based on literal, universally accepted truths. Religion is generally passed down through families much the same way as speech patterns, mannerisms and the inclination to smoke or drink. One need only look at the geographical distribution of world religions to see this. If the Bible was a literal document containing universal truths, missionaries would not be needed to spread the gospel in foreign lands. The idea that all fundamentalists were "destined" to be believers is absurd. If there is truly one God watching over the entire planet, why are there so many different religions with multiple gods? How can fundamentalists know they're the chosen ones who've found the only way to live?