30
You Go, Roger Ebert!
Posted by jns on March 30, 2005The Panda’s Thumb suggests “One Thumb Up for the TalkOrigins Archive?” over this startlingly frank piece by Roger Ebert: “Film about volcanoes falls victim to creationists“, on the basis on the final paragraph:
[...]
Surely moviegoers deserve the right to decide for themselves what movies to see? “Volcanoes of the Deep Sea,” according to the AP, “makes a connection between human DNA and microbes inside undersea volcanoes.” It says that if life could evolve under such extreme circumstances, it might help us understand evolution all over the planet.This is not a controversial opinion. The overwhelming majority of all scientists everywhere in the world who have studied the subject would agree with it. Although discussion continues about the mechanics of evolution, there is no reputable doubt about the existence of DNA and the way in which it functions.
Yes, there is “creationist science,” an attempt to provide a scientific footing for beliefs that should be a matter of faith. Creationists say evolution is “only a theory” and want equal time for their theories, one of which is that God created the Earth from scratch in six days, and man on the seventh.
Evolution is indeed a theory. Creationism is a belief, not a theory. In science, a theory is a hypothesis that has withstood the test of time and the challenge of opposing views. It is not simply somebody’s notion about something. The creationist belief cannot withstand such tests and challenges; it exists outside the world of science altogether.
[...]
An industry has grown up around the “science” supporting the “argument for intelligent design.” It refuses the possibility that evolution itself is the most elegant and plausible argument for those who wish to believe in intelligent design. If you are interested, you might want to go to www.talkorigins.org, where the errors of creationist science are patiently explained. And you might want to ask at your local IMAX theater why they allow a few of their customers to make decisions for all of the rest.
That’s a nice mention for talkorigins, sure, but look at what he says:
…where the errors of creationist science are patiently explained.
After all the time I’ve spent reading journalistic pieces by “real” journalists who go out of their way to avoid anything that might look like a fact as they rush to maintain “journalistic balance” by quoting non-scientific yobs about this silly creationist pseudo-controversy, hearing Roger Ebert (who is, after all, only a movie reviewer and not a “real journalist”) refer to the errors of creationist science is such an amazing blast of fresh air that I can hardly breath.
A fact, in fact. What a review! Two thumbs up for Roger Ebert!