February 7, 2006

Dear Fundies, I'm curious about something.

First off, let me define Fundy. A Fundy is a religious fundamentalist who does not believe in the evolution of man and/or believes in a young earth. Someone who interprets his/her bible literally whether that bible is the OT, the NT, or the Koran.
Now for my questions. When you Fundies see scientific news, or just regular news about a new fossil find of an extinct life form, or stories that matter of factly peg the age of the universe or objects in the universe as billions of years old, do you simply dismiss these stories as fraudulent lies, and/or some sort of conspiracy, or do you just ignore these stories altogether?
Do you watch TV shows that "promote" the ancient universe and evolution? Do you just laugh at what they say on these shows, or do they make you angry, or do you shake your head and call them liars?
Are PBS, the Discovery Network, and the National Geographics station channel blocked in your household?
If you have children, and they are taught about evolution or an ancient universe, do you think about homeschooling them, and/or tell them their teachers are peddling lies, and/or ground the kid or intimidate the kid with threats of violence?
Just curious.

42 comments:

  1. I doubt many fundies respond to being called fundies.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ok schleurmi, your attitude has been noticed.

    Your use of bacon has been forwarded to the attitude police in Mecca. Muttawa man says you're going to be on double secret probation

    Expect a call soon

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm still looking for that first threat for my Bacon and God cartoons.
    Or a Fundy who will honestly reply to this particular post.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I do not think they will answer. First, they will bypass your blog in the same way they bypass PBS. Second, their concrete process of thinking will make an abstract answer highly unlikely.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Boy you got balls..a picture and a inciteful name on your blog..you go guy!!! Best wishes from Mike the Library Guy

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr. M, I don't expect to get a response. I'm almost convinced that the points I put in my post embarrass Fundies. I think deep down when they think about it, they know they are grasping at straws.

    Library Guy, thanks. Nice pics on your blog.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have made this point on several other blogs (it seems that few people recognize the full extent of my genius) :)

    If you see evidence that contradicts the biblical account and you don't believe the evidence because you saw that the bible says differently - HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU SAW THE BIBLE?!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Entertain the notion for a moment that us Fundies are correct (besides just having more fun). What should the world look like? We should give up fossil fuels just because some people can't handle the cognitive dissonance?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yitzchak, thanks for sort of addressing my post. The world would look the same today even if everyone on this planet had a totally different belief in how we got to this point. If we were able to physically go back in time though, quite a few people would have to change their beliefs. To me, not fighting the cognitive dissonance is a sign of insanity. I still don't understand how you can look at a scientific story and say "what garbage."

    ReplyDelete
  10. by your definition, yes, I am a fundie, and no I don't get angry or want to homeschool my kids when I see old bones being dug up. I do however, question, as any healthy cynic would, the way scientists claim the world is a bazillion years old without any actual proof. Evolution, ice age, all that crap is theory. and don't go off on me about my religion being theoretical, because as my God states up front "you must have faith" in Him to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Concerned ScotchmanFebruary 08, 2006 4:30 PM

    Would fundies use the internet for purposes other than orchestrating spontaneous demos outside Scandic embassies, or for researching how to make nukes to wipe the Zionist Entity off the map. Your question supposes that the evil ones like to relax after a hard day looking at recipes for anthrax/chem agent delivery systems, maybe by browsing a few blogs... unlikely, methinks. Excellent blog, btw

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Evolution, ice age, all that crap is theory"

    Dude, smarter people than you understand the scientific definition of theory. Look it up.

    I see an ancient world, with layers layed down, and changes.

    I don't see a 6000 year old planet, with a drowning a couple thousand years after it started.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Okay, Fundie here!

    Basically, I marvel at the world in general, love history, love anthropology/archeology, would work on a dinosaur dig if I could,

    I think the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and try to live my life that way. Think sometimes it's meant to be literal and other times it is metaphorical.

    Kids went to parochial schools that taught both bibilical and evolutional aspects of creation!

    Never blocked a single TV station ever, nor a radio station and no topic was ever off limits.

    I gave my kids a solid foundation for our religion so as adults they would have a place from which to explore and evaluate the world.

    And I only threaten my kids when they ask for money.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous1, You are not a healthy cynic. A healthy cynic would have problems with the bible too. Actually there is no real proof that Moses was in Egypt or that Jesus even existed outside of the bibles. But you obviously don't understand science, to make a statement that there is no proof. You also don't understand what scientific theory is. I'm not sure you want to know.

    Concerned Scotchman, I don't think Fundies are going to the Live Science web site when they surf. I don't think they are going to the How to Make Bomb sites either. They probably hang in forums with like minded "thinkers."

    Anonymous2, I'm with you. There is very little in the way of archaeological or historical proof of much of anything written in the bibles.

    Kim, hi, a have nothing but admiration for Emergency Nurses. You aren't a Fundy by my definition. I think you are a Theistic Evolutionist. Many scientists are the same. They believe in God, evolution guided by God or started by God and an ancient earth.

    ReplyDelete
  15. When a scientist uses the word theory, it means this:

    "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena"

    Evolution and the gravitational theory fit into it.


    As I said in one of my comments, a fundy is, almost by definition, someone who does not go beyond a concrete process of thought. I do not think Kim is a fundy at all

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi. I'm a fundie Christian, but have no quarrel with you. I just want to say this:

    Coolest. Blog-handle. Ever.

    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi, I'm pretty much down with Kim (and Hi, Juliette, you here from A-man's, too?).

    I am a fundie, and am down with God and Jesus, too. What was the first book ever printed? Before that, most everything was ratty, tattered scrolls, written by folks who thought the world was flat. I think it is those types of people you have issues with, the Flat-Earthers and the Luddites of today.

    I have no problem with looking at all of the evidence (which seems to change every few years, and I've lived 50 of them, for some perspective) and saying, on the one hand, "I just don't know!" and on the other hand, "Praise God, I have faith in you, sorry for all the humans mucking it all up!"

    When you have a gang of highly trained, experienced scientists on one side of the field, denying and mocking God, and a gang of the same type of scientists on the other side of the field, praising God, and mocking those other scientists, well, I think I'm just gonna crack a beer, and sit back and enjoy the show.

    If you're right, no harm, no foul. If I'm right, you go to Hell.

    Perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I guess I'm a 'Fundie' although I don't think I could ever call myself that - rhymes too closely with 'Undie'. I balk at calling myself a pair of undershorts. However, its your blog, so I'm a Fundie

    Evolution, Science...

    Here's what this Fundie thinks:

    The fundamental (there's that word)question is not evolution vs. creation, PBS vs. Home school, etc. Rather, it is God vs. No-God. This and everything that follows from the answer to that question is an article of faith.

    If you accept the premise that he exists, then the next question becomes is he omnipotent and omniscient (all powerful and all knowing)? If yes, then he actually has the power to guide an evolutionary process across countless generations of living organisms and billions of years to arrive at exactly the result he wanted. You can have both evolutionary process and creation simultaneously in this case. At the same time, if he is all powerful, he also actually has the power to place a fully formed world spinning in place around a sun, complete with reservoirs of oil and minerals and fully formed dinosaur bones waiting to be found....and do it is six days with a day off for a job well done.

    Sound ludicrous? Why not? I once received a toy for Christmas that was a block of clay like material, along with some small tools. My job was to chip away at the clay and 'find' the dinosaur fossil (a treasure!) within. That toy was created by an adult for a child. It was created to evoke a sense of excitement and wonder, to stimulate my thinking, build coordination and ultimately a sense of accomplishment at successfully 'finding' the fossils. If a human, loving, parent could give a gift like that to a child, why would a loving God 'Parent' not also give a gift like that to his children?

    I have no problem with either scenario, because I believe he exists, is all powerful and all knowing, is interested and involved in his project (you, me the universe), has a specific plan for it (down to the tiniest detail of how sub-subatomic particles act) and has both the capability and desire to communicate to his creation in as much detail as they care to accept.

    The details of the ways in which he did all these things are not really important to me. Interesting? Very much, it is exciting to see the things we 'find' and learn the things we learn. I sometimes think that those who spend their time angrily arguing over the details - perhaps they have not completely come to a solid acceptance of the most important detail of all and the rest of the fight is really a fight to convince themselves.

    Yes, I am a Fundie. I believe in the Christian version of historical events, I believe God chose to reveal his message in the bible and that it is completely accurate in conveying his spirit and intent that we can know that spirit and intent through prayer, meditation and study. I care very much in chipping away the clay he has put there and finding the treasure within.

    Six days or six billion years? I don't care at all.

    Tom Wenneson

    P.S. There is plenty of reliable proof for the existance of Jesus the man - well documented by the Romans and other non-Christians of his time. His Death, resurrection and Divinity are all articles of faith. I cannot vouch for the rest of this site, but the link below worked in refreshing my memory on his historical presence: http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/historical-and-scientific-proof-of-jesus-faq.htm

    ReplyDelete
  19. Bane, scientists are not against each other when it comes to evolution and an ancient universe. Now, as far as belief in God goes, around 40-50% believe in God as well. They just think God started everything off, and is watching, and in some cases (with Jesus or Moses for example),he steps in.
    I checked out your blog, and from what I know about Christianity, quite a few Christians will tell you that you are going to hell too:)

    Tom, thanks for the link, I'll review it skeptically. Interesting case coming up in Italy about whether Jesus actually existed, it'll be interesting what comes out there.
    The fact you allow for an ancient universe and possibly evolution prior to 6000 years ago, does not qualify you to be an official Fundy in my books.

    ReplyDelete
  20. OK Tom, I read the link, and the whole thing is refuted in the sites I provide in my Smoking Gun/James Frey post.

    Josephus for example was born in 37 AD, after Jesus died. He wrote one line which could have just been based on rumour. The other historian talks about Christians. There was definitely a Christian movement that was evident around 60-70 AD. But that is no proof that Jesus existed. There were those in Greece for example who worshipped numerous Gods, who obviously never existed.

    And nobody is certain when the scriptures were actually written. They definitely were not written until at least 25-50 years after Jesus supposedly died.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Not a Fundy? It's ok, I can take it. I'll still sleep well tonight.

    As an aside, I tend to lean toward a 6-8000 year old world and events unfolding more or less in accordance with bibical history. To me, it is the most fantastic of possibilities.

    I use the term 'fantastic' in the sense that I think it would take a more powerful God to do it all in 6 days than to stretch it all out over billions of years.

    If I am willing to believe that God came to earth as completely human while still completely God, willingly died at the hands of his creation as a sacrifical lamb to atone for all of humanity's offenses (both in the past and those yet to be committed)and then brought himself back to life, so all who believed he rose could enter heaven with him for eternity.....If I can believe all that (which I do) I can handle a six day creation.

    I just have no problem with him taking his time. In either case, whether shake-n-bake or slow-cookin', he created, that's ultimately all that matters in the list of things I care about.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Bane, scientists are not against each other when it comes to evolution and an ancient universe.

    They absolutely are, but I am not one of those that runs off to get links, because a) I'm lazy and b) I just don't care what you think, if I believe you to be wrong.

    And when my Christ got his feet washed by hooker's hair, and ate with tax collectors, the most despised personage (by Jews) of the day, why do you think he would sentence me to Hell?

    By the way, I see you rummaging around in my blog, and that is just fine. You will find that I do not attend church, but I do adhere to the main bits of Christianity.

    Christ was born of a virgin, and died for our sins. He is the risen Son of God. He will return, triumphant. If you believe in Him, you are saved.

    Don't? Yer fucked.

    All else is Faith and guesswork, and mental masturbation, as far as I'm concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Tom, I like your allegorical story of the toy dinosaurs in the clay. I thought the same thing when I bought those for my kids.

    And no, my Alpha-Bits do not sent me messages. But the Fruit Loops...they whisper...

    ReplyDelete
  24. To paraphrase someone (I'm really sloppy at research - you are obviously much better than I at this): Lack of proof of existance is not proof of non-existance.

    I can accept that all of the references could be hearsay, many things are.

    But from the common sense perspective, it doesn't hold, at least to me. The underlying premise of stereotypes, rumors and gossip is that there is a grain of truth underneath all that is built on top. A trite phrase says that "where there's smoke, there's fire".

    In the same way, the sudden appearance of the Christian movement, the appearances in the historical records to Jesus and Chistians and the explosion of both the accepted and non-accepted gospels and apostolic writings make a strong circumstantial case for his existance as a man. I would suggest he was a man of enough influence to motivate others to try and leave a record of their interaction with him or with those who claimed to know him.

    Not enough, perhaps, to build a conviction on, but enough for me.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Tom, I just said there is no evidence, to me, that Jesus existed. I don't think I said that mean he didn't exist. Lots of people existed throughout history without any evidence available today of their existence. But if you really lean heavily to the 6-8000 year old earth, I have to put you back in the Fundy category.

    Bane, you can repeat your opinion over and over that scientists are against each other but NO reputable scientist believes in a Young Earth. There might be 6 in the USA out thousands, and I have linked a story about how one former YEC exposed 3 of them as being frauds. I wrote about it in fact in one of my earlier posts. So whoever has told you that they are at each others throats is lying to you, or they are equally misinformed.
    You seem to have your own rules of who goes to hell. Do killers who believe in Jesus get to go to heaven too?

    ReplyDelete
  26. BE-Jew, have you ever seen a Quark? Go get me a cup of them, please.

    And who hands out these 'reputations' to scientists? 'Reputable', like Kinsey? Puh-leeze.

    Like I said, I'm not gonna do your research for ya, but it is far far more than your '6 out of thousands'. You insult both of us with paras like that.

    And yes, if they forego killing, and truly repent, Heaven awaits. As a killer, I devoutly hope so.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Bane, I'll do the homework for you. Kindly read my Dec. 29th post.
    Here is a great link on a scientist who used to be a Young Earther:

    http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/

    And here is a Christian Ministry that I can admire because they don't dismiss science:

    http://www.answersincreation.org/faq.htm

    ReplyDelete
  28. Pick and choose, baby, pick and choose.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Had to go to bed, this thinkin' and writin' stuff is tiring.

    Bacon Eater (not a very complimentary name, but I like it better than 'Atheist Jew', which comes across as an oxymoron to my way of thinking), Thanks for the interchange, I found it interesting. The discussions were enjoyable. I'm sure I'll post here again and thank for the blog comment.

    Bane, I'm not a killer, but found tremendous comfort in a book by Max Lucado called in 'In the Grip of Grace'. It was an eye opener to me in that, while I intuitively understood the Lord's willingness and ability to forgive (and forget), I didn't really accept it. Reading Max's discussion of the possibility of salvation of Jeffrey Dahmer was an eye opener for me and began to show me the depth of his ability move past our faults. Great book.

    The best to you both and anyone else that reads this.

    Tom

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bane, you pulled off a typical Fundy move. You made a ridiculous statement that scientists are fighting each other over the fact the earth is ancient or not, and now without proving that statement your have resorted to claiming you are right, when in fact, anyone with any knowledge in the subject knows you are wrong. But go ahead and beat your chest and claim victory if it works for you.

    Tom, I enjoy your posts. You seem open and honest. Call me Bacon or BEAJ if you like for short. BTW, a Jew is a Jew by religion and other ethnicity. Anyone born to a Jewish mother is considered a Jew for the rest of his or her life. Hitler disposed of Jews based on ethnicity, not by what the Jew believed. And there is a Jewish culture which most Jews are exposed to because the majority of Jews in the world are at least somewhat religious and that means almost every Jew is exposed to family religious functions, Passover dinners, Chanukah (which has around 12 correct spellings) and Bar Mitzvahs, etc. And of course there is always bagels with cream cheese and lox and beef knishes.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Based on your definition of "fundy" I'd say that probably 80-90% of North American Christians, of whatever stripe wouldn't be considered "fundies"

    I consider myself a "fundy" although by your definition I wouldn't be one. The Judeo-Christian creation myth with Adam and Eve and the snake and the apple are a bit hard to swallow. (if you'll pardon the eating the apple pun) I believe the Bible is divinely inspired, but that the book of Genesis is not necessarily inerrant. Whoever the bronze-age writer was that G-d revealed himself to didn't have the sort of frame of reference that Science and mathematics has given to those of us with a late 20th century education. More than likely the concept of numbers larger than multiple thousands was outside the writer's frame of reference. The concept of thousands was probably mind-blowingly large.

    So, yes I think that much of the first book of the Bible is probably metaphorical, or at least should be read through a filter that the writer was probably a semi-literate bronze age shepherd.

    Could G-d's six days of creation be 6 billion years? Absolutely.

    Am I descended from an unknown primate millions of years ago? I don't know. But I hope not. I'm pretty sure the Guys burning Danish flags are though.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hi dpatten, I'm not sure if you are a Fundy. If you consider science discoveries regarding fossils and the ancient earth to be hogwash, then you are a Fundy. You are off with the 80-90% thought. 80-90% of Americans believe in God. But there is such a thing as Theistic Evolution. You should look it up. Unfortunately, to me at least, 45% of Americans are Fundies. Check out the stats for yourself:
    http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

    ReplyDelete
  33. The number I referenced was 80-90% of North American Christians I didn't say 80-90% of Americans.

    So I stand by my statement that I suspect 80-90% of North American Christians Aren't what you, Oh porcine consuming Semitic skeptic, define as fundies.

    Incidentally I wouldn't consider Religioustolerance.org a neutral POV site.

    They are neither religious or tolerant. Much as Jerry Falwell is neither moral or a majority


    Do I consider the study of fossils Hogwash? Certainly not. I have a pretty good collection of fossils myself. Do I wholly discount evolution? No, right now we're in a similar situation as the 5,000 year old sheepherder from my earlier post. We don't have enough wisdom accumulated to know or understand our own completion completely. So, no, I'm not anti-science. We should study more in order to better understand G-d and the Universe that he has created.

    ReplyDelete
  34. If monkeys evolved, why are there still monkeys?

    ReplyDelete
  35. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Bane, you can't fool me, you aren't about learning new stuff. But I do feel it is my duty on my blog to educate my commentors whether they like it or not.

    This is from Answersingenesis.com, a Fundy website:

    "‘If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today?’ In response to this statement, some evolutionists point out that they don’t believe that we descended from apes, but that apes and humans share a common ancestor. However, the evolutionary paleontologist G.G. Simpson had no time for this ‘pussyfooting’, as he called it. He said, ‘In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man’s ancestors were apes or monkeys (or successively both). It is pusillanimous [mean-spirited] if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise.’

    However, the main point against this statement is that many evolutionists believe that a small group of creatures split off from the main group and became reproductively isolated from the main large population, and that most change happened in the small group which can lead to allopatric speciation (a geographically isolated population forming a new species). So there's nothing in evolutionary theory that requires the main group to become extinct."

    http://tinyurl.com/p3z4

    ReplyDelete
  37. Bane,

    Your statement, "If monkeys evolved, why are there still monkeys?" (if that is what you actually meant to say) doesn't make any sense. Monkeys that we see today have evolved into the monkeys that we see today.

    On the pretty good chance that what you meant to say was, " If humans evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys around?", would show your complete ignorance of the evolutionary theory. You are just repeating some of the ID propaganda that has a hold of your brain. Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans evolved separately from the other primates. Is that too difficult of a concept to grasp? Please read the book "Evolution For Dummies", pun intended, it may help you.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I suspect that it bothers you, some, that I have read the propaganda from both sides, in fact received a university level education in the sciences, and that I came out of it all as a 'Fundy'. And there is no really 'new stuff', merely 'old stuff' that has been misinterpreted by the religious left.

    And still with the non-factual (that means 'lie') assertion that out of all the bazillions of scientists, there are only five or six deluded ones who side with me?

    By the way, I have no problem with adaptation and micro-evolution. But clinging to some old fart's (that means 'Darwin') THEORY that he himself was not comfortable with is, well, kinda sad.

    Bacon Eater, I like you, but your anger and rage is obvious, and I believe it clouds your judgement. I shall molest you no further, and I wish you well on your path to enlightenment.

    Feel free to visit my place at any time. Do try to be kind to us cretins, though. We are sensitive souls, and easily hurt.

    I sense a good mind, in that tangle of barbed wire.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Bane, you did it again. I'm not angry. I'm laughing now. Just because you say there are more than a few "scientists" who believe the earth is young, does not make it true. You can confidantly say it over and over and over again. I have done real research on this. Apparently you haven't got a clue.
    25% of university grads believe in Young Earth Creation, so there are other ways to get a university degree without understanding science.
    And Darwin was not uncomfortable with his theory. If you are talking about him recanting on his deathbed, well that is another Fundy lie. Again, the link I gave to answersingenesis (a Fundy website) even says it is a lie.
    I'll go to your website, because other than your ignorance when it comes to science, you seem like a good guy.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I met a fundie at a community event a few weeks ago. He told me quite serously that they don't teach that stuff (evolution) at the university anymore. It had been disproven.
    ...
    Yes seriously and that was it Q.E.D.
    ...
    Well, I know the truth and that is that fundies brains have been surgically removed by aliens and they have been replaced by two double AA batteries. (not rechargeable).

    ReplyDelete
  41. Max, I hope you didn't have food in your mouth when this fundie said that.
    I would undoubtedly had a major spit take.

    ReplyDelete