I Took A DNA Test…
This one gave me a chuckle this morning.
I wonder where they got the paternal sample? The only person to presumably have a direct DNA connection to ‘god’ is Jesus, and well, he’s nowhere to be found with no DNA evidence left behind. Not to mention the angel rape that is performed on Mary… but that’s another issue for a morality post.
Obviously I’m being sarcastic, but this image does raise a point I would like to address.
People like the con-men at Answers in Genesis like to say how DNA evidence is flawed and untrustable as a way of determining historicity of human evolution. They have been presented with the mountains of evidence that show very conclusively why there could have been no actual ‘adam’ or ‘eve’. But on one hand they toss this science out, but then will gladly use the terms inappropriately to back their cause. It’s like the way Deepak cons people using the term ‘quantum’ in a way it isn’t meant to be used. They allow the use of confusing science to back their own cause, but then deny that same science when it stands up against their faith.
This is basically the premise behind Jerry Coyne’s new book ‘Faith vs. Fact’. Get it HERE if you don’t have it already. In short the book explains how if you are willing to take things on faith, then you are intrinsically anti-science. There may be some cognitive dissonance that allows people to have faith as well as agree with science, but at some point those two worlds are going to collide in a way that dissonance wont be able to deal with.
So, in review, if you are going to use scientific evidence then use it correctly and consistently. If you aren’t, fine but don’t pretend.