Think Outside The Box (The Cutest Response to Creationism Ever!)

It’s nice to see that you do not let pesky things like facts get in the way, when you are promoting your cause.

James, I know you didn’t make the illustration, but you promote
the idea by listing it on your blog. First, I don’t know what you mean by the
Bible is helpful, as the depiction is that the Bible is totally wrong. The
illustration also depicts that what science has constructed is 100% accurate. Very
far from fact. For example, could you direct me to an article that explains how
science has cured cancer? If that’s too hard, simply direct me to the article
where it explains how science has cured the common cold. If you can not do
that, I am going to have to assume that science’s knowledge of genetics is
highly over rated. The illustration goes way beyond the facts and creates a misconception of reality. I know you are only trying to use an analogy to show your perception of the situation, but this illustration borders on deception.

There is no such thing as a cure for all cancers, however research over the past 40 years has helped to improve life expectancy of many forms of cancer. Is your argument that because oncology has not yet managed to find a way to cure all of the myriad types of cancer that scientific method is invalid? 

Direct me to an article where God has cured cancer, and I will direct you to ten articles where science (chemotherapy etc.) has cured cancer.

I will do this for ever article you list.

Metaphor != Lie.

So what does your comment have to do with anything that is being discussed?

Why, Howard, would our failure to have yet managed to cure all diseases be an indication that evolution has not occurred? You are not making sense.

And just for your information, one of the reasons why curing illness is difficult, and why there is no “common cold,” is because viruses and bacteria are constantly evolving.

Are you treating the picture as though it were about science’s understanding of everything and not just evolution? If so, why create confusion by ignoring the post’s title?!

Howard, the point of the analogy is not to depict that science is 1,2 or n pieces away from solving the puzzle. It is intended to illustrate that no matter how fully science explains the world around us, religious fundamentalists will continue to focus on the ever shrinking gaps in our Knowledge, no matter how small, while remaining in denial of the increasingly overwhelming proof to the contrary of their chosen belief system.

TBone, I understand that that is the goal of the illustration, but the illustration fabricates the advanced degree of science’s knowledge to bolster its effectiveness.

The blind leading the blind, why do I bother….

howard I honestly cannot wait until you die 

What a bunch of pathetic dimwits on this blog today. You sit here and ramble on about things you know nothing about. As soon as you get off your high horses and want to learn something let me know.

Hahaha, I can teach you how to spell tales….

Sounds fair. I can teach you how to live knowing that there’s no invisible wizard judging your every move.

Well, as soon as you come up with an analogy that is even remotely similar to what I believe, I’ll listen to you.

If you can not distinguish between a derogatory term for God and what God is really suppose to be, there is not much I can add to that.

“another stupid comment?” …that’s it?  you have no argument, you just brush it off like that?  If you don’t open your mind to the notion that you MAY be wrong, then that is some serious ignorance…

“No James, look at the last picture in your illustration. You are the one saying that science has achieved 99% understanding. If that were true, then there would be no “pieces” -[yes there would, 1% would be missing]- left to find. That is my whole dispute about the illustration, you are depicting that science has achieved its goals. So the illustration is
deceptive.
“THAT IS NOT THE POINT!  science has NOT found 99% of the evidence needed to “prove” anything, and nobody said that we did.. well except you, who we know is wrong. Like I said, the puzzle is not a DIRECT representation of science’s achievements.  this strip is simply about not believing everything you see/hear. it’s about using critical thinking, it’s about putting the pieces together to create your own opinions.  The reason why the puzzle in the picture has almost every piece is that it is a hyperbolic representation of the situation where the bunny putting the puzzle together has enough information to form his own opinion, but not EVERY piece, whereas the other bunny completely ignores the blatant mass of evidence and continues to blindly believe what the box is telling him.

What is God really supposed to be Howard? We use a derogatory term to belittle you. Why? Because it’s funny to see you get upset about something we all know you’re wrong about. It’s hilarious watching you attempt to defend God and belittle science when we have the overwhelming evidence of truth behind us, you have your emotions, feelings, insecurities, and loony ideas intertwined in collegiate vernacular and rhetoric – used to disguise the sophomoric undertone of your “logic” and message. You’re not fooling anyone, Howard. Michael Meehan said it best.

And furthermore, modern science has recently invented a vaccine for cancers that has been shown to effectively reverse terminally ill cancer patients into fully viable cancer-free people. We also have many other cures we have been working on, unfortunately the bible has played a role into politics, and politics plays a role on science… negatively.  I can only imagine the breakthrough we’d have by now if religion wasn’t always getting in the way. It’s people like you, Howard, that we are trying to make fun of through this comic strip. You are a quintessential example of a real-life example of the comic strip, representing reality as you say. Good job. Everyone observe Howard’s comments and behaviors. He represents today’s ignorance.

Why would I be upset because you show yourself to be an ignoramus? hahahaha

The metaphor here is that until science can provide an answer for absolutely EVERYTHING, there will always be religious, anti science types who will point to the gaps in our understanding and declare that since science hasn’t yet found this answer, none of the answers provided can be relied upon. This is, obviously, ridiculous. Scientific advances are steadily providing answers for things previously declared ‘unknowable’. But despite the daily proofs that science can provide answers, there are still people who will say “Science hasn’t cured cancer therefore God”. The fallacies Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc and Non Sequitur are never more apparent.

Howard, it says science has not put all the pieces together very specifically in the last picture. There’s a missing piece, and it’s one of the central pieces. We don’t know what that last piece is but we continue to search for it; however, we can make scientific theories based off the surrounding pieces’ shapes and images to give an idea of what that missing piece might look like. Ahhhh, beauty of the scientific method.

Also, Howards, there are 24 pieces in that puzzle, and since you continue to argue that science knows 99% of everything based off the “deceptive” depiction of it in the comic, let it be known that 23/24 is actually 95.8333333 percent – we’ll say 96@twitter-361586932:disqus  for short. So clearly you have been the one exaggerating the extent of what science has an understanding of.

Okay, so what is the 4% science doesn’t know?

So you believe in god.

hm… Well let me just say he is the biggest jackass I’ve ever met.

Since you know.. he is punishing our entire race based on what our ancestors did..

Tells all of us to forgive other people.. yet, we are still living with horrific things going on all around us and he chooses not to do anything about it.

“real facts” ??

Just what facts have you related except to say science is right and I am wrong?

So the removal of free will is the answer? What do you suggest? Should God destroy the ones causing horrific things, or just stop them? where do we draw the line between what is acceptable and what is not? Whose guidelines do we follow in this decision? If God got rid of everyone doing bad on the earth today, a very small number would be left. Is that what you are asking for?

So far in this comments section:

-Atheists putting forth intelligent, rational arguments about why scientific theory is an excellent, beneficial process and how it points to the unlikeliness of God’s existence.

-Some bloke called Howard who is trying to prove the existence of an Invisible Space Wizard using the idea that Science doesn’t have all the answers as the main pillar of his argument.

By the way, I believe that unicorns exist, and because science doesn’t know everything, you can’t prove that they don’t! Checkmate Science! Checkmate Atheists! I’m right because you can’t prove that I’m wrong, so there!

I may not have told YOU any facts but I base my opinions and things that I believe to be in existence on the facts that I read or hear from credible sources, i.e. science, etc.

and to answer your question “what is the 4% that science doesn’t know”

If we KNEW the 4% that science didn’t know then it WOULDN’T BE UNKNOWN WOULD IT!? It’s not like we’re keeping secrets from science. We don’t know what we don’t know, we open our minds to new things and we LEARN about them from the introduction of new discoveries… and I’d like to point out that at the moment, we DON’T know even CLOSE to 96% of the knowledge in the universe, we probably don’t even know 30% of it, the universe is a massive place, just ask your God, he made it just for you.

Lol Howard can’t be real, I mean how is it that first you see the metaphor then you see the exact embodiment of what it’s depicting. I was laughing so much at the image then read the comments and nearly fell out of my chair laughing.

It’s funny cause he doesn’t get it.

It’s funny because he’s a submoronic cretin.

Aaaaand confirmed for troll.  Fuck, you got me.

8/10 good effort.

Ah yes, now that you finally realize that we are all making fun of you, you change your stance.. “oh haha guys, no see I was just making of the people making comments on here…” 

even thought YOU were the first person to comment.

hilarious, in the way that hypocrisy is hilarious.

My father once told me never to argue with idiots, because they will take you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

Goodnight Howard, you truly are an unbelievably abhorrent and illogical person.

Okay, goodnight toejam….

Hi Howard, you accidentally capitalized the g in god.

Yes, thanks for the correction. It would be turkey god.

What aliens? The Bible does not talk about or support the idea of aliens. So if we are contacted by one, I’ll recant everything I ever said.

lol

You seem to miss the point. People say god is omnipotent and all powerful.

Given that logic, it isn’t for us to draw the lines for what is acceptable and what is not. The question answers itself when you ask “whose guidelines do we follow” because there is an omnipotent and all powerful god who has already given us guidelines.

Yet, despite being omnipotent, all powerful and endlessly wise. This “god” cannot devise a way to end peoples suffering in life. He can’t intervene directly when he is needed most. Or he chooses not to.. but, then if he chooses not to.. he isn’t merciful.

These are reasons I have stopped believing in god honestly. You take the conversation of “what do we do”.. When the real question is “what is god not doing?”

Howard, people like you are why the rest of us are behind. The things we, as intelligent beings, could do if we were not constantly debating the reliability of a book of personal accounts of who God is or could be are staggering. Instead, people like you find a convenience in not working to understand the nature of things as they are, and you assume that the first thing you see and are told is true must actually be true. Further, when your “truth” is questioned, you fail to apply intelligence to support your point, instead perpetuating straw-men by asserting that any questioning of the reliability of your “truth” is malicious deception or otherwise immoral, unpatriotic, illegal behavior.

You’ve failed at life. When you have the opportunity to exit, please do. The rest of humanity would like to move forward; we’d like not to regress into the abyss of follower-thought you feel is sufficient enough to explain things  for which you’ve done little to no research in purposing through alternative means.

This is shameful mentality, and calls into question the capacity for our species to make informed, intelligent decisions even for ourselves.

Did I stop you and bring you here to argue with me? By all means get back to your scientific study and stop bothering me.

you THOUGHT that.  But you were wrong, so there’s your problem, you’re welcome.

It took you that long to come up with that clever response? Maybe it just took you that long to figure out I spelled THOUGHT wrong. :p

The “common cold” has been cured. It just mutates so often that vaccines are useless.  And defensive much? 

Prove you are really Jesus. Turn that puddle of goo into a fish. Oh wait, wrong Jesus,that’s the god of evolution.

And this from a metal head drunk.. don’t make me laugh Ozzy…..

Wow! Just think if I had actually put forth any religious beliefs or arguments here. I got all these sissies’ panties in a bunch just by saying the illustration was inaccurate and hinted that I do not agree with evolution.

Okay so not a drunk, but you sure are on drugs if you think for one second you are smarter than me. You say you don’t…… hahahahahahahaha

Howard is an idiot. I’ve never seen such ignorance. How can such a person, except a fool, honestly believe that this illustration is making the claim that NINETY-NINE percent of Evolution has been solved, or that NINETY-NINE percent of all genetics has been mapped? How can you have such ridiculous assumptions?

ok, whatever you say dude, I’m done.  I’ve heard more coherent arguments from a rock.  Oh and by the way, when you say you are “smarter” than someone, that doesn’t include knowledge that you made up. 

I would just like to thank all the pseudo-scientists for providing me with entertainment today. Your lack of reason and knowledge provided me with endless entertainment. It was no surprise that science and hate go hand in hand, good job everybody! Kind of reminds me of the inquisitions, how nice. I have to go now because you are beginning to bore me. And if you stop hating so much, the God of the Bible might open your eyes to the truth, but don’t count on it in your current state. So you might as well keep believing that you are the result of monkeys, your actions sure show that.

I think the box is even lying about the number of pieces in the puzzle. I count only 24 (including the missing piece).

Howard, at this point I’d like to hear a bit about what you think the “God of the Bible” you mentioned would have to say about your behavior, and how you have treated people on this comment thread.

I’m thankful for comments sections like this

The common cold is not one sickness, it is an umbrella term for a multitude of infections that have similar symptoms so only those infections discovered can be vaccinated against. Science is a process and because we may not have discovered a cure for cancer yet does not mean science is at fault, if in 1829  Pierre Joseph Pelletier had said ” I guessed science does not have all the answers” and prayed for those who had malaria quinine would have never been discovered and millions more would have died. Your ignorance offends me.

Howard I’ll pray for you brother but the my Jesus doesnt take kindly to ignorant people like you who are not open to the masses of others trying to put forward their view. I see what you are saying but perhaps others put forward a more compelling argument?

Please don’t delude yourself into thinking that you’re leading anybody.

James, I’m sure I don’t know what your view is, but in mine, simply believing in God is not the same as being a follower/worshiper. To be a follower/worshiper of God requires that you live your life a certain way. I have not done that.

It didn’t start out to be entertainment, but when people totally ignore what you say, jump to ignorant conclusions, fabricate issues in their own minds, and call you names, then you can not take such people seriously and you treat them accordingly. The sad part is I probably know more about science them most of the people who commented. No one could even wrap their minds around what I was trying to say. If you could answer a question to clear this all up.

On a scale from 0% to 100%, in your opinion, what percentage of evolutionary genetics has been explored compared to everything you can imagine there is to know about evolutionary genetics?

Yep. Das what’s called “Ad Hominem” – a logical fallacy.

No guys, I think howard has a point. I’ve never been to a desert, so how can I really be sure that they actually exist?

Howard is an athiest and he is trolling you all.

All I can say in regards to this photo is:

Two working hands (science) accomplish more than a million clasped in prayer (religion).

Thank you, James, for this post. Very apt illustration of the frustation one encounters when discussing origins with Creationists. It’s sad that the comment thread for such a wonderful post had to sink as low as it did. But the silver lining in that cloud is that this thread provides so much corroboration for the central point of the post! 

Speaking from my perspective, as a former young earth creationist who chose to put the puzzle together in the way that makes the most sense, this post made me smile even as it offered a soft rebuke to the way I (regrettably) used to think!

… 

First of all, the puzzle is not complete. There is a piece missing. Science doesn’t have all the answers, nor does it ever claim to. This image doesn’t make that claim either.Secondly, you ask for a cure of the “common cold” where if you were even slightly informed you would know that science has no known cures for viral infections. The “common cold” is a virus. It’s incurable to science at this moment, and this is even taught in high school biology classes.

Lastly, the reference to the Bible being helpful is relating to the fact that had the puzzle actually been the one that the box said it was, it would be helpful. This is a direct relation to the Bible. If the world had a God, and Heaven, and Angels, and a Devil and all of the other nonsense, the Bible would be a great guide for people. 

As it stands, however, from our best knowledge the Bible is not accurate, so it is not a good guide. Science does not provide a complete understanding, but it provides conclusive evidence with every claim and is quite accurate for many topics. And it certainly doesn’t claim to know everything.

Howard,
As you said, “And there is the problem, the blood was merely a ceremony performed after someone was cured. Read Lev 14:3″…correct. I think I indicated either curing, or cleansing afterwards. Even if only cleansing afterward, this is where you and I diverge, and no need to respond, since it isn’t a point worth discussing (only because you won’t change my mine, and I won’t change you’re mind). I respect your beliefs, but for ME, Lev 14 expresses something more akin to vodoo. I certainly do not think a God, any God, would be foolish enough (OK, maybe I’m blaspheming) to give instructions to place a killed lamb’s blood on my right ear lobe, right thumb, and right big toe, for anything, even symbolic. Sounds more like a skit in Monty Python’s Flying Circus. However, I do believe the Aaron priests were firmly in control at the time, at the expense of the Shiloh priests and Jeremiah (Jer 7:22), and wrote Leviticus with the prime motivation to consolidate their control over the kingdom and the people, since their primary (only) source of power and money (and prime rib and prime dove and prime lamb meat – which they also sold for extra bling) was through the sacrifical system. The whole root cause lies in the separation of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judea (two kingdoms, two versions of scripture, two stories of creation, two stories of flood, two priesthoods, two sites for temple). Except the Aaron priests of the South finally won out (they were lucky/smart enough to support Saul, and Solomon). So the sacrifical system dominated in the south (consolidated in Jeruselum). You might say J & P dominated in the end over E and D, although D and the Redactor used the entire combination to glorify both north and south. Like the democrats write their version of history, the republicans write their version of history, and someone combines the two to glorify the entire nation. Amen.

IT’S A GODDAMN DUCK

Actually that is just one of the definitions of a metaphor that is listed in the Oxford English Dictionary, the second being:
Something regarded as representative or suggestive of something else, esp. as a material emblem of an abstract quality, condition, notion, etc.; a symbol, a token. Freq. with for, of.
Words and language are evolving all the time. Just look at their etymologies and this is clear. The meaning of words can and does change in concordance with the progression of society.
What you have done is taken one of a number of possible explanations and clung to that as your understanding, regardless of any other possibility that exists or may come to exist as society progresses.
What I have done is to acknowledge that yours is a possible meaning of the word, but taken the time to put forward another meaning that is equally valid. I also understand that in five, ten or one hundred years the meaning of the word may evolve and will embrace it when it does.
Now before you reply, commenting on my pre-occupation with the topic of ‘words’ rather than the topic on which this thread is based, I would ask you to consider ALL the meanings of ‘metaphor’, re-read what I have written with that in mind, and perhaps understand that my argument is applicable to more than just words… 

Gary, I’m not so sure about that. I’ve seen online conversations (if one can call them that) which sank into name-calling pretty quickly, and I have never seen a face to face conversation on the same topics spiral downward as quickly or reach the same level of vitriol. Recognizing the other as a person seems to change how we approach interactions.

On the subject of pepper-spraying into submission, did you catch my pepper-spraying Dalek picture?  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2011/11/doctor-who-and-the-pepper-spraying-daleks.html 

Well, at least your site is honest enough to equate “Intelligent Design” with “creationism.” But the issue is not “creation” vs. “atheism” but acceptance of science vs. promoting nonsense in its place. There are plenty of Christians who embrace mainstream science, and the promoters of young earth creationism are as dishonest and selective about the Bible as they are about science.

James,
“Recognizing the other as a person seems to change how we approach interactions”…or perhaps the fear of being hit tempers our actions?
I saw the pepper-spraying Dalek. I’d prefer to see a whipped-creme spraying Dalek, in honor of Thanksgiving.

Fool, the common cold isn’t caused by genetics, & knowing the cause of cancer doesn’t mean we know how to cure it. That’s like saying that we don’t know that asteroids exist because we can’t stop one from hitting the planet.How could you even make a statement so stupid? No, seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

The bible *may* be helpful. There are some morals in there, however, that are a good guideline to live by, religious or not. So, the bible is not helpful, or practical in some situations. Same could be said of other religious texts.

Clever satire? Better argue semantics for 10 pages & insist it’s the “real issue.”

No. I am sick & tired of this myth that science & religion are equals. In fact, you can see why they’re different in those first 2 panels: One would rather assume the box is right, while the other wants to put the puzzle together & actually see FIRST HAND what the result is. Assumptions will never be equal to actual discoveries. Ever.

This was essentially a cute but serious post trying to make a point about science and creationism. For a more humorous take, you might enjoy this:  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2011/12/the-difference-between-creationism-and-science-is-like-the-difference-between-chicken-and.html

The fact that you’ve so blatantly misrepresented the claim of this comic in order to make your point tells me more than your words ever could.

Very cute illustration but I
really think a debate on science and God is a waste of time would they
so easily complement each other and in the end one in the same (in my
heart and mind)

There is no god. Prove it. Til than, shut your hole little man.

Howard it is people like you like make all organized religion look bad. It is this simple the bible is an ancient book out dated and misinterpreted by whatever denomination you’re from, ment to teach people lessons and give people the morals and values necessary to interact with each other. Religion is a cultural stepping stone used thousands of years ago to bring people together. Thanks to the introduction of religion we as a species have become literate and have a basic bartering system for trade, that being said we have passed the point where this is useful. All these things can and should be attributed to religion it has done a lot for us however to say that science serves no purpose and that these people are ignorant for not blindly following what your book says makes you a retard. Religion no matter how you look at it was the first wide spread social experiment (science) which worked better than anyone could’ve expected. But now it causes people like you to call people stupid for trying to better mankind as a species these science experiments will be the reason we thrive in the future.

Stumbledupon this, thought the image was good, then read the comments! Howard couldn’t have epitomised the “it’s a duck, the box says so” rabbit any better!

Also… The Spanish Inquisition was a Christian organisation;Howard the Inquisitor – “Believe everything in the Bible!”Everyone else in this post – “No, I have good evidence that it isn’t true”HtI – “I ignore your evidence, believe everything in the Bible!”EE – “In addition to my first portion of evidence, I have some more evidence!”HtI – “I ignore your evidence, believe everything in the Bible!”
EE – “But my evidence is really compelling, and the Bible has many points of hypocrisy and contradictions!”
HtI – “He is a witch! The Bible teaches us that “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”, burn the witch!”
EE – *burns in the fires of Howard’s ignorance*HtI – “…you should have seen that it was a duck from the picture on the box, repent, ye sinners.” 

Late to the party but Howard was hilarious, thanks for helping me have a good start to the morning.  Wow. “Pseudo-Scientist”.  The proverbial cherry on top.  Nice touch.  Then following with “oh by the way, its a duck.”

Thank you James for sharing the cartoon as well.  I think its a very good illustration of non-rational thinking.  Broader even than just the creationism vs evolution argument, I think.  

All I can say to Howard, is that many people have tried proving that God doesn’t exist, all I see that you think evolution doesn’t exist. So in answer to your rather biased view is that I would like to see you prove that evolution doesn’t exist. Without using quotes from your Bible of course. There have been countless examples of evolution throughout history. Darwin and his finches, the cause for no cure to the many cancers, the ever evolving bacteria. These are but a few. Of course you are welcome to disprove my argument.

edit “*science has the correct answers”

found the pieces next to a box. cant see inside the box yet.
 the duck box is full of duck pieces, and makes a duck. and the one already out is made of the graspable things.

Those who liked this post will probably get a kick out of this one: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2011/12/proportional-time-for-creationism-a-simple-solution-to-a-science-education-conflict.html 

I was never taught about god as a child never went to church and still don’t…and for me seeing is believing and I can say with out a shadow if a doubt that there is life after death.I almost died of a pill overdose at age 17 and briefly crossed over it was peaceful perfection I begged to stay but was told I couldn’t yet…I don’t tell people what to believe like churches like to I just live knowing that no matter what we do here it doesn’t matter on the other side.you don’t earn you’re way in, you just go if you follow the light being (it didn’t give me its name) but I got the feeling it didn’t really matter. believe or not I don’t care it is what it is.

 Can’t be bothered to read any more of your ridiculous comments Howard, its people like you that make me not want to live on this planet anymore.

Phigene, while there certainly are some young-earth creationists whose view is like that you describe, to generalize about all in the pessimistic way you do is unhelpful. I was once a young-earth creationist, not because I thought I should ignore countere-evidence but because I was at that point in my life hearing only one side of the story, and did not know well enough in my teenage years to seek out opposing viewpoints. When it became clear to me that young-earth creationism involved deception and misinformation, I abandoned it.

It also does not help things if you show that you are poorly informed about religion, if you are trying to get a person of religious faith to think critically. It is a common view propagated by Dan Brown’s novel The Da Vinci Code that the canon of the Bible was determined by committee at the Council of Nicaea, but it is thoroughhly false – the process was in fact longer and much more complex! You also got the century of the council wrong. If you don’t care enough about the history of Christianity to learn about it from reliable sources, then it is best to avoid the topic. That is much what I would say to a Christian who did not take the time to inform herself or himself about mainstream science, and it applies to pretty much every field of knowledge and study equally.