Message or messenger? (aka "The Attack of the Killer Comment")

Within a half-hour's time, I received two different links in my Twitter timeline. One dealt particularly with the concept of Creation vs. Evolution as it appears in a US state's public-school curriculum. The other offered a rather science-intensive look at a possible flaw in "Neo-Darwinism". The juxtaposition of the two ideas intrigued me, and I began to contemplate a blog post on the subject.

I wasn't sure which direction to take: simply reporting on the information, discussing the concepts of creationism and evolution in school classrooms, the science of creationism. I remembered a tweet  I had favorited a few days ago about legislation involving the teaching of evolution in US public schools:

9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom

Then I read the comments on the that article. I knew after reading just a few comments that I had my blog post.

First, to summarize the article in my own words:

Even though our country has money troubles, it's the perfect time to force schools to teach creationism. Texas, Kentucky, Florida, New Mexico, and Missouri each had a bill presented this year (2011); Tennessee and Oklahoma had two. Some of these pieces of legislation passed; others died in committee. Speaking of the bills in process in Tennessee, Steven Newton of the National Center for Science Education states: (this legislation will) "allow teachers to bring this culture war into the classroom in a way that is going to leave students very confused about what science is and isn't."

If you have not yet heard of the "National Center for Science Education", it is a "not for profit" 501(c)(3) organization with a ".com" internet prefix. Organized in 1981, it boasts 4,000 members "with diverse religious affliations." In the "disclaimer" section, the mission is stated: NCSE is "devoted to promoting and enhancing the teaching of science, especially the evolutionary sciences, in K-12 public schools." (emphasis mine)

This post is not intended to be about the NCSE; I offer that information simply as a means of explaining the position taken by the author of the "9 Bills" post. The tone of the article, from the opening lede to Steven Newton's quote, indicates nothing but contempt for the idea of creationism. As I read the comments, I realized that the intended audience was expected to agree with that contempt.
There was very little clear, factual explanation of the theory of evolution and its educational value. (Kudos to the few commenters who tried.) There were a few "anti-evolution creationists" who tried to offer clear, factual explanations of their ideas. However, the overwhelming use of comment space was personal attack of those creationists. Appeal to Ridicule, mis-direction, ad hominem attacks abound. Why?


As the article is a few days old, I don't expect that my comment at the MotherJones site will be read by those who frequent the site, so I've reproduced the comment here. I replied to a comment that began with this sentence:

If you wish to understand why the cliche of "Dumb Americans" gets kicked about so much over here in Europe.... look no further than this article.

From bteacher99: Having lived outside of the US for several years, I can assure you that "dumb Americans" has less to do with the beliefs of Creationists and more to do with the behavior of American tourists and expats who give every impression that what they want is the most important concern, and that the only thing worth thinking about is the latest claptrap on TV or the web.

Any Creationist who dared to comment on this thread was immediately shot down with "facts" accompanied by insults. Are some of you unable to have a coherent conversation with someone that disagrees with you without calling names like kids on the playground? That's not the impression you are leaving for the reader.

If this is such a serious and important issue to you, shouldn't you be about the business of converting the opposition with reasoned arguments and replies? There is some of that, to be fair, but what I saw more than anything is appeal to ridicule, and perhaps some personal attack. So what if I disagree with you? Does that mean you should explain your views step by step, or just take the easy road claim those with whom you disagree are uneducated, "special", "dumb" or perhaps even in need of re-education.

Creation or evolution? Anti-creation and anti-evolution? The original topic, a very important discussion in today's America, is lost (at least in this comment stream) in the flood of an attack. This flood, I suspect, will last much longer than did the flood in Noah's day. A note of caution to those who wish to defend their faith, regardless of Who or what is the recipient of that faith: if you disagree with the message, don't shoot the messenger. Your readers will appreciate it, and you may actually accomplish what you set out to do: share your ideas with others.