Gary Ablett Sr., for shame. You’re a footballer. A true great of the AFL game. You are, in your own words, “no scientist.” So what gives you the right to write an ignorant screed against humanism, atheism, evolution and science in general, in a major newspaper?
Oh, did I say write? I mean plagiarise and repeat decades-old fallacies and lies. Like the fantastic “Peanut butter disproves evolution” argument:
I’m off to burn my biology textbooks after that – why didn’t they tell me about the peanut butter proof?
In addition to confusing abiogenesis with evolution (which is particularly amusing, if you read the second sentence of the wiki article on abiogenesis) and repeating lies about a lack of data supporting evolutionary theory (sounds familiar), Ablett blames the perceived moral decline of society on atheism and humanism, suggesting that if everyone was more Christian, it’d get better.
“Unfortunately, Western civilisation has embraced the “lie” of evolution as fact, and we have been completely blinded to the profound effect and impact it is having upon our society and nation.” – Gary Ablett Sr.
Yeah, it sucks that people use empirical data, logic, hypothesis generation and testing across a wide range of fields to come up with an understanding of the world around us. It’s much better to stick wholly and literally with with the contents of a poorly substantiated, internally inconsistent set of writings accumulated in a time when people, among many other things, didn’t even know Australia existed, or what a cell is.
My recent irritated post about Ray Comfort’s attempt to mangle Darwin’s work attracted some rebukes from friends who don’t agree with Christian literalist teachings and don’t like being tarred with the same brush. Yet the following day, an ignorant article attacking science, from someone completely unqualified to comment, is published by a major news vendor, presumably because they think it to be of interest to a significant number of people in Australia. Indeed, there are many supportive comments on the story.
Gary Ablett Sr. is obviously as committed to biblical literalism and Christianity as he was to his footy. He follows, to a greater extent than many people who identify as Christian, the teachings of the Bible. Moderate or liberal Christians might shake their heads at the nonsense spouted by Comfort and Ablett Sr., but they still pray to the same god, based on the writings of the same, single, ancient book. They validate faith as a position and make the intellectual climate hospitable for DunKs to blame secularism for everything wrong with society, to spread misinformation to the gullible and uninformed, and to lie about and misrepresent well-established, fundamental science.
To me, faith seems to be a license to believe whatever you want about anything, with no regard to its connection with reality. The level of cognitive dissonance a person can tolerate determines how faithful they are to their religion or ideology. Am I wrong?