The
East African Standard has a new (well, a week and a half old, but new to me) article concerning the attempts by evangelicals to suppress the hominid fossils currently on display in Kenya's National Museum. You may remember when this ruckus first began
several months ago. We now learn that churches are planning on holding "major demonstrations to the museum to press for the removal of the bones."
The ringleader of all this is Bishop Boniface Adoyo, the head of the Chairman of the Evangelical Alliance of Kenya, which has roughly six million members. The article contains numerous quotes from Adoyo, which show him to be pretty much your standard creationist. The following lines, interspersed throughout the text, are particularly telling:
"I'm worried that children will believe we evolved from monkeys. Yet this is not the truth that's killing our faith," he says. [...]
"When museums claim that man evolved from apes, they are actually hurting many Christians who believe that God created us," Adoyo says. [...]
"These people should know that palaeontology is an old science. Richard Leakey and his group are afraid that their only source of survival and fame is rightly being put into question," Adoyo claims.
Note the irony. After expressing dismay at the possibility that his job will be rendered obsolete if children are exposed to science, he then goes on to accuse
Richard Leakey of being the self-interested party.
And of course the good Bishop's ranting wouldn't be complete without reciting some creationist falsehoods:
"Even Darwin on his death bed expressed surprise that people believed his theory," Adoyo says
The good old
Lady Hope Story. Never was there a creationist claim so thoroughly refuted that it doesn't keep resurfacing. Here is another one:
The advent of DNA testing has helped us to trace the origin of man to Adam and Eve," he says. "Palaeontologists do not want to admit this because it will crumble their scientific edifice," he says.
He is presumably referring to
Mitochondrial Eve and
Y-chromosome Adam. Prior to my interest in the evolution-creationism debate, if someone told me that M-Eve and Y-Adam would be used to argue in favor of the literal Adam and Eve story, I would have said
no way. No one could be that ignorant.
Sadly, they are. You can read
these links to get the low-down on what M-Eve and Y-Adam really mean. But the well known fact that M-Eve lived about
84,000 years before Y-Adam should make it obvious to even the dimmest of bulbs that this does not in any way support the literal Bible story.
The good news in is that the Kenyan government says that it won't give into this garbage. The disturbing news is that the Evangelical Alliance has enlisted a number of "Western institutions" to aid them in their crusade against people looking at bones. One can only guess which American creationist groups that might include.
(Hat-tip to
Bartholomew's notes on religion; cross-posted to
Sunbeams From Cucumbers.)
32 Comments
stevaroni · 23 January 2007
Amazing.
Only could the creationists manage to imply Kenya should somehow be ashamed that it can show it was the cradle of the whole freakin' human race.
Raging Bee · 23 January 2007
I predict an attempt, in the near future, to destroy the evidence.
Anton Mates · 23 January 2007
David B. Benson · 23 January 2007
Steve Reuland --- I fear you fail to comprehend just how dim the dimmest of bulbs can be. Sort of like dark matter...
wamba · 23 January 2007
new heights of rubedom: "we insist that the evidence in this museum we are protesting in front of does not exist."
Fross · 23 January 2007
bah. Religious fundamentalists. They're fun to laugh at until they blow up Buddha statues or try to shut down one of the best museum displays on earth.
stevaroni · 23 January 2007
wright · 23 January 2007
I'd say stevaroni hit it on the head. Where is the sense of wonder in Bishop Adoyo and his supporters?
Paleontology, geology and cosmology daily reveal a history and universe grander than any human construction, and these people shut their eyes and ears. What's more, they don't want anyone else to know about it either.
I just don't get it. Even when I thought of myself as a Christian, the scope of the revealed universe added to my faith. Now, as I move from agnosticism towards atheism, my appreciation of the world and the tools that help us explore it continues to deepen.
Torbjörn Larsson · 23 January 2007
DragonScholar · 23 January 2007
Gerry L · 23 January 2007
Perhaps some western museum(s) might want to offer to take those pesky bones off their hands. I'm certainly not advocating for that, but maybe the threat of losing such a treasure would spark some heavy-duty push back from people who can appreciate what they have.
chance · 23 January 2007
like Raging Bee, I to fear a "Storming of the Bastille" scenario. Hope there are copies, or better, the copies should be on display and the originals under lock and key and several meters of fire retardant concrete.
John Marley · 23 January 2007
I'm not surprised the the Cretinist use M-Eve and Y-Adam to try to mislead people. They do the same thing any scientist uses religious names/terms in an attempt to poeticize (is that a word? it should be) a scientific concept. Think of the Creo-fodder that "God does not play dice with the universe" became.
Ian · 24 January 2007
stevaroni · 24 January 2007
By the way, just what is the official creationist line about things like hominid fossils?
Are they still just evil deceptions planted by Satan to sow doubt in the mind of man, or is there some more nuanced explanation these days?
I'm curious, because I hear lots of rationalizations about Noah's Ark, but precious few explanations of how half-man / half-gorilla creatures might come to be buried in ancient Africa.
Or maybe the reason I never hear an attempt at explanation is that creationists just ignore it, since in their minds there simply was no such thing as ancient Africa.
brightmoon · 24 January 2007
i agree with raging bee
i think creationists will try to destroy the fossils and im surprised that they havent tried that here in the usa
A_C_C · 24 January 2007
J. Biggs · 24 January 2007
sjc · 24 January 2007
Maybe someone should send them this link about a list of arguments that even most creationists won't use anymore since they've been so thoroughly refuted. :)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/faq/dont_use.asp
sjc · 24 January 2007
The other objections I have seen are: there aren't enough fossils or bones to fill a coffin, the fossil pieces were found too far apart to be the same individual, and the fossils are either ape or man and not transitional.
The funniest thing is that we are not in fact evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor with the other higher apes.
Karen · 24 January 2007
Henry J · 24 January 2007
Re "The funniest thing is that we are not in fact evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor with the other higher apes."
I wouldn't say that, since the common ancestor would probably qualify as a type of ape. The recent common ancestor would likely be in the same subgroup of apes as chimpanzees and gorillas.
Henry
sjc · 25 January 2007
I wouldn't say that, since the common ancestor would probably qualify as a type of ape. The recent common ancestor would likely be in the same subgroup of apes as chimpanzees and gorillas.
Actually Chimps and us were the last to share a common ancestor about 7 million years ago. What I had meant before is that we ARE a type of ape so we really aren't evolved from them. And that common ancestor would be a proto-"ape".
Karen · 25 January 2007
LaurenTheFish · 27 January 2007
sheepadherents. I expect to see this imported into the domestic Bible-thumping 'victim's' bag 'o tricks rather quickly. "Hurting" them sounds, to the semantically naïve audience they play to, far more deliberate and aggressive than merely "offending" them - and will exacerbate polarization as well as further magnify the fundies' sense of martyrdom. Or perhaps not, as the case may be. I merely suggest keeping a sharp ear open for claims of now being "hurt" by science in the near future...LaurenTheFish · 27 January 2007
...sorry, accidently lost in editing:
(...their naïve audience) will process "actually hurting as "actually = tangibly ( = physically) harming", and the intensity of their reaction will be significantly enhanced by limbic response to this 'apparent' threat to their physical well-being. Not something to be hoped for, to say the least.
sjc · 28 January 2007
That's nothing new with theists, especially with Christians. Its called a martyr complex, or persecution complex. In the USA Christians assert that they are being persecuted for their religious beliefs by the Atheist government. It is ironic because the government is made up of mostly Christians. The founding fathers never intended America to be a Christian Nation and said so in the Treaty of Tripoli in Article 11. Christians will, of course, claim that this is a lie or that it doesn't really exist.
ARTICLE 11.
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/barbary/bar1796t.htm
sjc · 28 January 2007
P.S.
Muslims are just "borrowing" from the Christians yet again since their religion is nothing more than the combination of Jewish, Christian, and pagan beliefs as well.
Shithead · 6 February 2007
What kind of an idiot is this Bishop. Has he ever read anything but the Bible?
Ruth · 7 February 2007
Stop grouping all Evangelicals together. Many of them do not understand man's need to prove himself to be wise. I believe in the Bible, and I believe the Bishop is misled in his approach.
The Bible clearly states that No One (including Evangelicals and Scientist) knows the beginning or the end of what God created. While we might try to understand this with our feeble, limited minds,we cannot.
Science is simply man's search to understand what God created. Theories must be proven or they remain just that, THEORIES!
Can you imagine, if centuries from now (provided Christ has not yet returned) some scientist digs up the remains of a little boy from our era, and comes to the conclusion that their early ancestors had two heads. Sounds crazy, but since there are documented cases of such individuals,(as recently as last year in Jakarta) and if that is the only fossil found, the scientist should draw such conclusions right?
Well, let's hope they find other fossils to refute it, but since we have no real control over what happens to our civilization, No One can guarantee that may not be the case.
It is my opinion that the Bishop is protesting because in this era, that's what many "Christians" think they must do. However, I find no example of this in the Bible. Those who are true Christians, should be following Christ's example. He did not hold protest against the government of his time, or against the popular beliefs. He TAUGHT people!
That's what I think the Bishop should do. Don't protest, teach people to think and reason and use logic. If more "Christians" really read their Bibles, they would not be outraged at anything modern man does to try and disprove God's Word. It's already in there, and they would recognize this as simply another attempt to try and "discover" how The Creator did things in the beginning.
No, don't protest the Turkana Boy. To me, he brings more questions than answers. Another puzzle piece, that continually proves the Bible to be true. No matter what they find, they cannot answer the ultimate question. They can only come up with more THEORIES!
I think the Bishop and his followers should take a few science classes, and the scientist should study the Bible.
Ruthg · 7 February 2007
Stop grouping all Evangelicals together. Many of them do not understand man's need to prove himself to be wise. I believe in the Bible, and I believe the Bishop is misled in his approach.
The Bible clearly states that No One (including Evangelicals and Scientist) knows the beginning or the end of what God created. While we might try to understand this with our feeble, limited minds,we cannot.
Science is simply man's search to understand what God created. Theories must be proven or they remain just that, THEORIES!
Can you imagine, if centuries from now (provided Christ has not yet returned) some scientist digs up the remains of a little boy from our era, and comes to the conclusion that their early ancestors had two heads. Sounds crazy, but since there are documented cases of such individuals,(as recently as last year in Jakarta) and if that is the only fossil found, the scientist should draw such conclusions right?
Well, let's hope they find other fossils to refute it, but since we have no real control over what happens to our civilization, No One can guarantee that may not be the case.
It is my opinion that the Bishop is protesting because in this era, that's what many "Christians" think they must do. However, I find no example of this in the Bible. Those who are true Christians, should be following Christ's example. He did not hold protest against the government of his time, or against the popular beliefs. He TAUGHT people!
That's what I think the Bishop should do. Don't protest, teach people to think and reason and use logic. If more "Christians" really read their Bibles, they would not be outraged at anything modern man does to try and disprove God's Word. It's already in there, and they would recognize this as simply another attempt to try and "discover" how The Creator did things in the beginning.
No, don't protest the Turkana Boy. To me, he brings more questions than answers. Another puzzle piece, that continually proves the Bible to be true. No matter what they find, they cannot answer the ultimate question. They can only come up with more THEORIES!
I think the Bishop and his followers should take a few science classes, and the scientist should study the Bible.
Anton Mates · 7 February 2007