Woo Meets Creationism

6 February, 2009

As a kid, I was really into dinosaurs.  I planned to be a palaeontologist.  I tried to picture the world inhabited by the Chinle fauna.  Or the late Cretaceous of Eastern Montana.  I tried to imagine the world if dinosaurs were still around.

As an adult, and looking at my car insurance premiums, I’m real glad that, other than avian theropods, there are no dinosaurs.  Hitting a whitetail is bad enough;  hitting an Apatasaurus would be really bad.  Mountain lions and grizzly bears see humans as possible food;  working a forest fire with Utahraptors in the area would be damn close to suicidal.  Though, Calvin’s dreams of T-Rexes flying F4 Phantoms?  Could be interesting.  (Though it would make Julia’s education a lot easier (and a lot more prosaic).)

Luckily, the temporal separation between humans and non0-avian dinosaurs is on the order of 63-plus million years.  Here in the US, hitting a buzzard (did once, with my VW Microbus), turkey, or other large bird is the closest we can get to having a traffic accident with a theropod.

Or is it?

Objective:  Christian Ministries (Warning:  Extreme Stupidity Alert), though, knows different.  The earth, since it was created in 5004 BC, is not old enough to provide 63 million years of temporal separation.  Therefore, Apatasaurs, Plesiosaurs, Trilobytes and Velociraptors (which are guarding Noah’s Ark) all live.  Along with Pterosaurs.  And they plan to prove it.  Really. 

Here’s their plan:

The goal of Project Pterosaur is to mount an expedition to locate and bring back to the United States living specimens of pterosaurs or their fertile eggs, which will be displayed in a Pterosaur Rookery that will be the center piece of the planned Fellowship Creation Science Museum and Research Institute (FCSMRI). Furthermore, the rookery facility will establish a breeding colony of pterosaurs in order to produce specimens that could then be put on display by other regional institutions or church groups.

By doing all this, we hope to accomplish three goals:

  1. Support Creation Theory by showing the incorrectness of the philosophy of Evolutionism.
  2. Educate the population about Creation Science.
  3. Create excitement about Creation and the Bible in the public.

This is typical right-wing creationist claptrap.  Notice the goals.  They are not trying to prove a positive.  They are not trying to find something new. 

The goals are to disprove ‘Evolutionism’ and support Creation Theory (acually, all three goals are basically the same ones).  I have to admit, this is a little more than most creationists are willing to do.  They are actually going to go and find some evidence rather than just say, “I don’t understand, so God must have done it.”  Go for it.  Really.  Beats hell out of actually being useful, right?



  1. It’s not evolutionism, it’s Darwinism. Get it right.

  2. I used to love dinosaurs too! When I was little my dad would tape the Walking With Dinosaurs documentaries for me to watch. I also had a very religious friend which lead to me knowing that there were /no dinosaurs in the bible/. Going out to try and find pterosaurs is just ridiculous, but even if they did, would that really prove anything? They weren’t mentioned in the bible, which is supposedly the word of an all-knowing god. So wouldn’t god bother to warn his ‘most loved creations’ that there are some bloody huge dinosaurs just itching to gobble them up?
    Even if their expedition succeeded it would prove nothing. 😐 It would be an amazing story of survival and adaptation, but proof of creation? No.

  3. You’ll be very relieved to hear that Objective Ministries is possibly THE most brilliant hoax website going. It’s fooled everyone that’s seen it, myself included. Once you know it’s a massive piss-take on creationist websites, it will become one of the singularly most hilarious websites you have ever read.

    They’re just a little too good at the parody, which I think is a bit unfortunate. But one day I will get one of their t-shirts and wear it at SVP. For the same reason that Paul always amends his spouse’s badge to say he’s a lecturer in Intelligent Design at the Eastern Kansas College of Jeebus Studies.

  4. Philly: I prefer left.

    Beth: Dragons were renamed dinos in the mid-1800s, so the Bible does mention dinos. Sort of.

    Julia: Party pooper. Well, they got me. And Crooks and Liars.

  5. Like I said here

    [W]hy do evolution deniers refer to evolution as “Darwinism”? We don’t call germ theory “Pasteurism” or vaccinations “Jennerism”. Why not? Because in science, it’s the theory, the scientific discipline that’s important, not the person or persons who develop it. What evolution deniers are doing is trying to frame evolution as a philosophy or religion, implying dogmatic acceptance and unquestioning adherence and veneration (ie – Marx, Mohammed, Jesus, etc.).

  6. Philly: Just commented there. Good catch. And, as I said there, “I’ve noticed that most IDiot articles/screeds/apologetics/inanity follow along the same basic lines: I (personally) don’t understand how something so complicated could evolve, so the theory of evolution is dead; evolution threatens my religious beliefs, therefore evolution is dead; or, the acceptence of evolution removes the religious limits on my behaviour, so evolution is dead. All are dishonest arguments.”

  7. I’ll have to go check out the Christian Ministries site. It looks like it should generate a few chuckles. I’m glad Julia tipped me off that it’s a parody site – sometimes it’s hard to distinguish the Poes from the Fundies.

  8. Chappie: They got me. Now that I know its Poetic, its freakin hilarious. If I’s seen the ‘photo’ of the union soldiers with the pterasaur it would have clued me in quicker.

  9. Creation vs. evolution:
    Creation= Intelligent Designer=all existence is planned.
    Evolution=random selection=innumerable atomic and sub-atomic accidents.
    Science is not exclusive to either evolutionists or creationists.
    Evolution=presently considered by a perceived (since it can not be determined either way) majority as the truth. This change in perception can be attributed, in large part, to the work of Charles Darwin in the mid 19th century, Albert Einstein in the 20th century, and many other scientists past and present. A main tenet of evolutionists is that science and creationism are incompatible.
    Creation=with the exception of ancient Greeks who considered science an intellectual exercise, not a practical application, from around 600 B.C., science originated in the 16th-17th century A.D.. A main tenet is that science is a means of identifying the creator. Here are some examples:
    Francis Bacon- considered the father of modern science—said “There are two books on which we should read. One was Scripture, the other the book of nature.”
    Johannes Kepler- Celestial Mechanics — said scientists are “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.”
    Sir Isaac Newton, arguably the greatest scientist of all time,-calculus and dynamics— is quoted as saying…”this most beautiful system of sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all and account of His Dominion He is wont* to be called Lord God.” And,
    “Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance.”
    Other creation believing scientists include:
    Louis Pasteur- bacteriology.
    Lord Kelvin-energetics
    Blaise Pascal-hydrostatics
    Charles Babbage-computer science
    Lord Joseph Lister-antiseptic surgery
    Robert Boyle-chemistry
    James Simpson-anesthesiology
    Samuel Morse-telegraphy
    Belief doctrines for the beginning of all existence:
    Creationists believe in the formation of all things by The Almighty God, in 6 literal days.
    Evolutionists currently believe that nothing exploded nothing else, nowhere, thus the big bang created all that exists. This belief should be left open to change based on future scientific discoveries.

    * From Wikipedia, in the list of commonly misused English words:
    Won’t is a contraction for “will not”, while wont is a rare, slightly archaic word meaning “accustomed” or “inclined to” (as an adjective) or “habit or custom” (as a noun).

  10. Bud,

    First, evolution is observable, so you’re mistaken.

    Second, “[a] main tenet of evolutionists is that science and creationism are incompatible” is another mistake, since there’s no “tenet” of evolution that says anything, one way or another, about the supernatural and there is no “tenet” to accepting evolution which requires an opinion, one way or another, on the supernatural.

    Third, appeals to authority are logical fallacies. Because so-and-so believed something doesn’t make it so.

    Fourth, I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about concerning “evolutionists” beliefs concerning things blowing up or not.

    Lastly, I’m wont to believe, from your multitude of mistakes, that you’re a Creationist or some kind of religious type of the ‘I don’t know much about science, but…’ persuasion.

    Have a nice day. 🙂

  11. I think there’s some great big Cre(a)ti(o)nist spam-all-the-atheist/evolution-blogs day today. I got a crazy on my site too. Deep joy.

  12. Bud: Show some originality — this is, verbatum, the same comment you left on July 26, 2008 on my post, ‘Darwinism — Religion?’ ( https://iambilly.wordpress.com/2008/07/26/darwinism-religion/#comment-1482 ). And, on that date, Philly said this to you:

    Now for Mr. bud, who has graced us here with his presence and demonstration of technical savvy at being able to copy/paste from the AiG site, I have to agree with the Chaplain. To just add to her reply:
    • Despite Sir Isaac Newton’s genius, he devoted most of his life to alchemy, including trying to turn lead into gold, the foolhardy quest for the “Philosopher’s Stone”. Intelligence is no guarantee of either being right on everything nor being immune from being a fool.
    • “When I look at the solar system…” nonsense is framed rather well by Douglas Adams’ puddle analogy at the end of this clip
    • As for numbers of scientists who accept evolution, try The List of Steves
    • Evolution has nothing to say about the origins of life, just its development. The study into the origins of life is called abiogenesis.

    Philly: Nice to see you. Sorry you had to reply to exact same set of nonsense twice.

    Julia: Could be, considering it is Abraham Lincoln’s birthday, right?

  13. Mark 16: 16 He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.


  14. Yes, the “Objectiveministries” site is a parody; it’s very unlikely to have been written by anyone labeled “creationist.”

    But there have been living-pterosaur expeditions in Papua New Guinea, over the past fifteen years. The concept of living pterosaurs is alive and well, notwithstanding parodys and ridicule.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: