Evolutionists Offended by Word Choices

By Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There are arguments that evolutionists should not use[1], and a different way to supplement this is how some make false arguments about word choices. Many items will be referenced below, but this child is not endorsing them.

Misotheists and other evolutionists feign outrage about the words we use, but those are disingenuous at best. These objections serve as red herrings, distracting from the points being made. In addition, such pretense at offense is often used for straw man arguments, the genetic fallacy, and ad hominem attacks.

Anti-creationists hate us so much, they pretend to be offended by real words. One claimed the word "evidences" was made up by K. Hovind. Disproved right here!
Original image: Unsplash / Kimberly Lake
They are very angry people, and when they claim to believe in reason and logic, it's often quite difficult to see anti-creationists use such things.

Words Cause Discomfort

A common malison hurled by promoters of atoms-to-atheist evolution toward creationists is that we use words they dislike. When seeking ammunition against Christians and creationists, anti-creationists are all over their search engines like chickens on bugs. When it comes to doing research before making ad hominem attack or making assertions, not so much.

Some have even claimed that creationists made up the term living fossils for our own purposes, but a quick internet search reveals that this is something common in evolutionary parlance. It originated with Charles Darwin.

Three “E” Words

One word that the typical village misotheist will wave off is evolutionist. It is often claimed that this word was made up by creationists, but that is the opposite of the truth. It is not only in dictionaries, but Darwinists use it to refer to themselves. These include Drs. David B Kitts[2], Colin Patterson [3], and Ernst Mayr[4]. Theodosius Dobzhansky also referred to himself as an evolutionist[5].

A bit more difficult to study is the word evolutionism. Some evolutionists become infuriated when creationists it, insisting evolutionism is a derogatory word. However, facts disprove assertions, and a favorite search engine produces dictionaries that do indeed have the word. It can be found outside creationist circles: The University of Alabama’s Department of Anthropology[6], Encyclopedia [dot] com[7], it was used by Michael Ruse[8] and the journal BioScience[9], and more.

Part of the objection to evolutionism is how the ending denotes something is a worldview, but evolution is a worldview. It is interesting that evolutionists will use creationism as a pejorative, but will not show creationists the same courtesy they think is deserved.

The final entry really takes the rag off the bush.[10] Recently, an atheopath on social media claimed that “K. Hovind popularized the non-word 'evidences', and since then every creationist uses it.” Not hardly!

Source is here (Used under federal Fair Use provisions for educational purposes) 
Sure, creationists use the word evidences. It’s valid. The complainant did not support his claim that every creationist uses that word, and a simple search reveals that evidences is frequently used in secular academic materials. Here is a sample of those results:

  • The United States Geological Survey[11]
  • International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics[12]
  • National Institutes of Health[13][14]
  • Heliyon open access journal[15]
  • Plos One open access journal[16]
  • International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science[17]
  • Creative Education via Scientific Research Publishing[18]
  • The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences via NIH[19]

As for the other part of his assertion that “K. Hovind popularized the non-word”, it is clearly wrong about that being a “non-word”. There is no evidence that this person (probably Kent Hovind) popularized it, either. In fact, the USGS reference above was published in 1953 — the year Hovind was born.

Lessons Learned

The first one is clearly evident: not only do internet Darwinists have antipathy for biblical creationists, but they have a tendency to lash out and make up their own “facts”. Second, many claims can be refuted or put into context by using a good search engine. The final takeaway is that some homework and being intellectually honest is better than just making chin music for the purpose of attacking someone. These people know that God is real and suppress the truth (Rom. 1:19-23), and it is reasonable to conclude that they are afraid of the truth that biblical creationists present.

References and Notes:

[1]    Is evolution true? 21 bad arguments for biological evolution, https://creation.com/is-evolution-true, accessed 11 October 2021

[2]    David B. Kitts, https://libquotes.com/david-b-kitts/quote/lbt9b0y, accessed 11 October 2021

[3]    Colin Patterson, https://origins.swau.edu/temp/classes/patterson.pdfaccessed 11 October 2021

[4]    He wrote a book in 1988 titled Toward a New Philosophy of Biology: Observations of an Evolutionist, accessed 11 October 2021

[5]    Theodosius Dobzhansky, https://todayinsci.com/D/Dobzhansky_Theodosius/DobzhanskyTheodosius-Quotations.htm, accessed 11 October 2021

[6]    https://www.anthropology.ua.edu/theory/social-evolutionism/, accessed 11 October 2021         

[8]    Monad to Man, 2009, chapter 2 was titled “The Birth of Evolutionism”

[9]    “Edinburgh and the Birth of British Evolutionism: A Peek behind a Veil of Anonymity”, https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/68/8/585/5039568accessed 11 October 2021

[10]  A Western slang expression, similar to “takes the cake”. This had its origins in contests shooting rags tied to bushes, and an excellent shot removed the rag entirely. http://www.word-detective.com/2010/03/rag-off-the-bush-to-take-the/accessed 11 October 2021

[11]  Exploratory drilling program of the U.S. Geological Survey for evidences of zinc-lead mineralization in Iowa and Wisconsin, 1950-51”, https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/cir231, accessed 11 October 2021

[12]  “Observational Evidences for Extremely Strong Magnetic Fields in Solar Flares”, https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=7365, accessed 11 October 2021

[13]  “The epigenetic side of human adaptation: hypotheses, evidences and theories”, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25413580/, accessed 11 October 2021

[14]  “Honey and Health: A Review of Recent Clinical Research”, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28539734/, accessed 11 October 2021

[15]  “Latent topics resonance in scientific literature and commentaries: evidences from natural language processing approach”, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844018302822, accessed 11 October 2021

[16]  “Development of a Search Strategy for an Evidence Based Retrieval Service”, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0167170, accessed 11 October 2021

[17]  “A review of literature on restaurant menus: Specifying the managerial issues”, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878450X13000231, accessed 11 October 2021

[18]  “PhD Thesis Writing Process: A Systematic Approach—How to Write Your Literature Review”, https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=89516, accessed 11 October 2021

[19]  “The Influence of Colour on Memory Performance: A Review”, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3743993/, accessed 11 October 2021

Comments