God has a tube!
Hi! Cassie again,
I know I’m teenie and supposed to behave myself… but I wrote my title and couldn’t help wondering… well… is the tube circumcised? As it turns out, it’s not that kind of tube. Anyway, while you godless blasphemers get your Internet video entertainment from YouTube, you could be getting your entertainment from the Magical Man in the Sky!
Believe me, I was “entertained.” God’s tube is a website and here is how He describes His Mystical Video Source:
GodTube.com is a dynamic community of people who are looking to connect, share, and belong. In its simplest form, GodTube is a video-driven social network where users can explore their faith and the tenets of Christianity.
Well I couldn’t resist, the first word I searched for was evolution. That’s when I met Charley. And that’s when I learned that woodpeckers put holes in evolution.(Click Charley’s name to view video)
In the spirit of teen-iness, I’d like us to rip Charley here a new one! I invite you, the readers to help me out. The reason I am even bothering to write about this is because I feel that some of our younger or newer readers could always use a critical thinking exercise (that includes me), and Charley here was just too perfect.
Why is it important to pick apart all of Charley’s mistakes you might ask? Well I did a Google search and “Chatting with Charley” videos seem to be aimed at teens. Whether he believes this stuff or is just being dishonest, his video is promoting lies to the general public. This is wrong. Charley is promoting Intelligent Design or ID. Intelligent design, by definition, is “a theory that nature and complex biological structures were designed by an intelligent designer and were not created by chance.” This idea is of course contrary to the theory of evolution.
Let’s look at Charley’s and the scientific community’s definitions of sci-ence and ev-o-lu-tion. (Thanks to Charley, I can now pronounce these difficult terms.)
Charley says, “Science is not science because somebody that wears a lab coat and calls himself a scientist does it. But it’s because it is sensible, meaning you can feel it with your five senses, it is repeatable and it is only in the present.”
I’m reading a great book by Donald R. Prothero. It’s called “Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters.” Don is a real scientist. I’m pretty sure Charley is not. Anyway, he says something about what scientists wear in the first chapter of his book:
Scientists are not characterized by who they are or what they wear, but what they do and how they do it. As Carl Sagan put it, “Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.”
It kind of sounds like Don and Charley agree… except for that part about “it is only in the present” and the rest of the video…
At the end of the video, Charley defines evolution. He says, “It’s used in many ways, but this one is the concept that given enough time all things will happen. That a rock ultimately will turn into a man. Non-living things turn into living things. They’ll say it will only happen once, but it still happened. That is what they’re saying. That’s like saying this mousetrap could ultimately turn into a mouse. Which doesn’t make a lot of sense.”
Well, Charley, you don’t make a lot of sense. Evolution is a change in the inherited traits of a population from one generation to the next through a process called natural selection.
The main idea of evolution is that every living thing comes from a common ancestor; it is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations, including the emergence of new species. To demonstrate this, scientists have found and documented fossils that show how species have changed over time. By studying inherited species’ characteristics and other evidence, scientists reconstructed evolutionary relationships and represent them on a “family tree” called a phylogeny (Tree of Life Project). Many different scientific disciplines support the theory of evolution: biology, geology, genetics and many others.
Evolution is a scientific theory. For a theory to qualify as scientific it must be: Consistent (internally and externally), simple (sparing in proposed entities or explanations), useful (describes and explains observed phenomena), empirically testable and falsifiable, based upon multiple observations, often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments, correctable and dynamic (changes are made as new data are discovered), progressive (achieves all that previous theories have and more), and provisional or tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty).
Intelligent Design lacks consistency, is not falsifiable, violates the principle of simplicity, is not empirically testable, and is not correctable, dynamic, tentative or progressive. ID is not science.
So help me count all of the reasons that Charley is full of excrement in this video. I’ve just highlighted the problems with his definitions. You can go here and learn the facts about woodpeckers.
These fallacies really represent Charley’s lack of understanding of evolution, or basic scientific principles for that matter. Yet many people all over America would agree with such a rancid argument. Why? Because, they don’t understand basic critical thinking skills and science. They don’t understand that investigation, science and skepticism can lead to true enlightenment. Nothing is more important to me then answering questions about the universe and helping people understand these answers. Science is by far the best way to do that.