Evolution conspiracy

{{crenav}}
Many creationists [[Conspiracy theory|assert]] that there is a '''conspiracy''' in science to maintain the truth of '''evolution'''. This is utterly ridiculous.

==Scientists can't question dogma==
{{main|Scientific dogma}}
Some creationists claim that, in general, scientists are pressured (possibly by [[Big science|some imaginary entity dubbed "the scientific establishment"]]) not to challenge the established [[dogma]]. This assertion has it backwards, given the [[Scientific method|nature of science]].

==Evolution has become unquestionable==
{{main|Evolutionism}}
Creationists [[Henry Morris]]<ref>[[Henry Morris|Morris, Henry M.]], 2001 (Feb.). ''[http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-religion-not-science/ Evolution Is Religion--Not Science]''. Impact #332.</ref> and Ben Wiker<ref>Wiker, Benjamin D., 2003. [http://web.archive.org/web/20030714115329/http://www.crisismagazine.com/julaug2003/feature1.htm ''Does Science Point to God? Part II: The Christian Critics''].</ref> argued that evolution has obtained the status of sacred revelation and that to express doubts by bringing up the counterevidence to the theory is to brand oneself an intellectual infidel.

===Responses===
First and foremost, evolution is constantly changing as the understanding of the mechanisms of genes, gene expression, etc. is vastly expanded. The [[modern synthesis]] shows how much evolution has changed since Darwin's time, and how much more it may change.

The problem with this claim is that the premise is downright false; evolution isn't seen as sacred. The claimants seem to believe that if someone defends an idea, no matter how well established in science, they are defending it as though it were sacred. This is incorrect because they are only defending the [[fact]]s. There is nothing sacrosanct about the evolutionary theory; it is defended in the same way that the Theory of Gravity or Heliocentric Theory is defended. It is only the action of scientists defending science and facts from [[War on Science|non-science and interference]].

As with all established theories in science, counterevidence is welcome, but presenting it does risk ridicule if the evidence turns out to be obviously misinterpreted (as most do). However, if the evidence is strong and plentiful enough, then the paradigm will shift.

Evolutionary theory has obtained its status through entirely scientific reasons. For the first 50 or so years, it was on the defensive against counter-claims, but it eventually won out because the evidence is on its side.

Regardless, this claim doesn't prove that the theory is untrue.

Finally, [[Hypocrisy|hypocritically]], all creationist organizations require all of their employees to follow [[Statement of faith|statements of faith]] in order to ensure that they do not uncover, accept, or present evidence that can potentially contradict a literal interpretation of the [[Bible]].

==Scientists lie about evolution==
Scientists who propose [[evolution]] and an [[Age of the Earth|old earth]] and oppose [[creationism]] are [[lying]].<ref>[[Jack Chick]], ''[http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5002/5002_01.asp It's Coming!]'', Chick Publications. </ref>

===Responses===
#"Lying" implies that the person knows better. Even if [[YEC]] is true and evolution and old earth are false, scientists could just be mistaken.<ref group=note>See also "[[Garbage in garbage out|garbage in, garbage out]]", e.g. an honest person with no intent to deceive can still spread misinformation if they are themselves misinformed.</ref>
#Scientists are disincentivized to lie, since they can be publicly called out and ostracized as a result. Furthermore, [[Argumentum ad hominem|attacking scientists]] is a [[Logical fallacy|''deeply'' flawed]] method of "[[Proof|proving]]" creationism; even if [[Poisoning the well|such attacks are successful at damaging the credibility of scientists]], this ''does not'' and '''cannot''' make '''''actual evidence''''' (such as the fossil record) less supportive of evolution and more supportive of creationism.
#If all scientists who accept evolution were lying, this would be a world-wide [[conspiracy]] over a timespan of more than 150 years with hundreds of thousands of members, which is not believable.
#It's just as realistic (if not [[Lying for Jesus|''more'' realistic]]) to assert that creationists are the ones who are lying.

==Flat Earth==

===Claim===
It is not true that the [[church]] used to teach that the [[flat earth|Earth was flat]]. Only two [[Christian]] theologians (Lactantius and Cosmas Indicopleustes) taught it, and they were largely ignored and uninfluential. The flat earth myth is a product of [[Darwinism]] meant to make it look like [[religion]] was the enemy of [[science]] when it was not so.<ref>[[Jonathan Wells|Wells, Jonathan]], 1999 (Oct. 20). ''"Evolution: Teaching the Controversy"'', debate at Burlington-Edison High School, sponsored by Skagit Parents for Scientific Truth in Education.</ref>

===Responses===
#This is [[Red herring|irrelevant to the truth of evolution]].
#Greek geographers had indeed realised that the earth was spherical by the 5<sup>th</sup> century [[BCE]], and the cultures dependent on Greek science ([[Roman Empire|Roman]], medieval Christianity, [[Islam]]) followed them. The medieval flat-earthers were a minority, but not as tiny a minority as Wells wants you to believe. Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, Theodore of Mopsuestia, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Ephraim Syrus, Athanasius of Alexandria, Diodorus of Tarsus, Epiphanius of Salamis, Hilary of Poitiers, and Severianus of Gabala are other theologians with the same leanings.<ref name=Schade /><ref name=Burt />
#The idea that [[medieval]] Europeans believed that the earth was flat originated in the mid-19<sup>th</sup> century. So this part of the claim is true. But the historian {{wpl|Jeffrey Burton Russell}} claims, as Wells does, that this was an intentional conspiracy, which goes not only beyond the evidence but also beyond credibility. For example, Russell's main villains, Antoine-Jean Letronne and Washington Irving, both died before Darwinism even existed.<ref name=Schade>Schadewald, Robert, 1999 (Oct. 24, 16:15). ''"Re: Wells speech at Burlington Edison High School"'', USENET post to talk.origins, Message-Id <3.0.1.32.19991024161523.01174958@gold.tc.umn.edu>.</ref><ref name=Burt>Jeffrey Burton Russell, 1991. ''The Myth of the Flat Earth'', New York: Praeger.</ref>
#[[Conflict thesis|Making religion appear as an enemy of science]] was not necessary for Darwinism. [[Galileo Galilei]] and creationism are enough to demonstrate that [[War on Science|religion ''can'' be an enemy, at least of some scientific findings it does not like]].<ref name=Schade /><ref name=Burt />
#There are flat-earth advocates even to this day, often with religious justification<ref>http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm</ref> for their theory, suggesting some causal link between past religious interpretations and today.

==See also==
{{fun|Scientific evidence of evolution being a hoax}}
*[[Evil Liberal Science Conspiracy]]

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV9zTOTxQNs Evolution The Greatest Lie EVER Told !!! Evolution Debunked by White Rabbit of The CTN], [[Vigilant Christian]]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA611.html CA611], [[Talk Origins]]
* [http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA662.html Mark Isaak's page for this claim]
* [https://archive.is/QBYLP ''The Flat Earth: A Detailed Study of Personal Bias and Historical Thinking''] Ethical Atheist, 2001
* [http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/history/1997Russell.html Jeffrey Burton Russell summary]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

{{crebox}}

[[Category:Creationist claims]]
[[Category:EvoWiki ports]]

Categories: Creationist claims, EvoWiki ports