Attempting to read Missouri State Rep. Rick Brattin’s bill to promote creationism and redefine basic scientific concepts is a hair-pulling venture into the absurd.
Brattin has been a longtime opponent of the teaching evolution. In the past, he has proposed similar bills in support of creationism or intelligent design. This one outdoes his previous efforts both in its length and in disregard for reason.
Take a look at Brattin’s definition of evolution:
“Biological evolution”, a theory of the origin of life and its ascent by naturalistic means. The first simple life was developed from basic elements and simple molecules through the mechanisms of random combinations, naturally occurring molecular structures, other naturalistic means, and millions of years. From the first simple life, all subsequent species developed through the mechanisms of random variation, mutation, natural selection, adaptation, segregation, other naturalistic means, and millions of years. The theory is illustrated by the evolutionary phylogenic tree. Theory philosophically demands only naturalistic causes and denies the operation of any intelligence, supernatural event, God or theistic figure in the initial or subsequent development of life.
First of all, evolution is not about the origin of life. It is about how species change. Brattin is confusing Darwin’s “Origin of Species” with the origin of life. Studying the origin of life is abiogenesis. Before drafting his next bill, Brattin needs to freshen up on his basic science…commonsense too.
Every year, new anti-evolution bills pop up in state legislatures around the country. Every year they take us into the creationist rabbit hole where new and unknown things about science are proposed with little connection to reality. Brattin’s rabbit hole looks like the deepest and darkest of the year.
Brattin takes it upon himself to believe that evolution goes out of its way to deny God. Again, he needs to brush up on science before crafting legislation about it. Evolution makes no reference to God. But that is problem in Brattin’s mind. Apparently, he thinks that if God is not mentioned then it must be a secret plan to indoctrinate children.
The bill then moves onto define “biological intelligent design,” which is described as not requiring “the identity of intelligence responsible for earth’s biology but requires any proposed identity of that intelligence to be verifiable by present-day observation or experimentation.”
If there are some experiments to identify a supreme being, it’s time for the intelligent designers to bring them on. Whatever these are may be along the line of observations like the eyeball being too complicated to have evolved through evolution. The eyeball may be a wonderful thing but is loaded with flaws that an intelligent designer never would have placed in it. Then again, these observations about intelligent design have never explained why men have nipples either.
The bill then proceeds to lay forth multiple reasons why evolution is a farce and intelligent design undeniable. My favorite is this:
(k) The lack of significant present-day observable changes in species due to random variation, mutation, natural selection, adaptation, segregation, or other naturalistic mechanisms implies intelligence as the cause for all original species;
Are we supposed to believe that Brattin has never heard of bacteria developing antibiotic resistance? I guess if you can’t witness an apatasaurus turning into a chicken during a lifetime then the whole evolution thing must be wrong and that means intelligent design is right.
The bill is unlikely to become law, but that probably won’t deter Brattin from trying next year.