A cousin of mine, who is a born-again 6-day creationist, has been sending me and my family emails, books, and other reading material since he got "saved" 6 years ago. He's taught his children how to proselytize to people like me and has allowed them to do it (the youngest started preaching to me once he learned I'm an atheist, and gave me a book on creationism 3 years ago). Last Easter my cousin sent me a very long and drawn-out email begging me to accept Jesus as my personal savior. After a few months of himming and hawing over how to respond, I sent him a message back, politely declining but remaining firm in my stance that I do not believe what he believes and that I would appreciate it if he respected my right to my beliefs, as I respect his rights.

So yesterday I get this email from him saying that he'd like to send me a book on evolution:

I picked up a book for you the other day that I would like to send to you, but I won't send it if you are not interested. It talks about the theories of evolution and creation from a scientific standpoint. I know you like to challenge your brain and look at all angles of things. Is this something I could send you? Keep in mind I don't claim to be an expert in either area; I just noticed a stimulating book and thought of you. The book is called the Evolution Handbook and is a compilation of three books written by Vance Ferrel. I will be honest, I am not of the scientific type and there are a lot of things in there that I don't understand but they seem to be more up your alley. I too need to read the book. I will get one for myself and try and read through it in my "spare time". I laugh as I write that part. Here is just a partial list of chapters:

Big Bang
The age of the Earth
Dating Methods
DNA and Protein
Fossils and Strata
Vetiges and Recapitualtion
Laws of Nature
etc....

It seems very interesting. The author claims to use over 3,000 scientific facts and 1,350 scientific quotations or references.

Immediately, there are red flags popping up all over this thing. First of all, science books don't boast about how many scientific facts, quotes, and references lie within their pages.. they just don't advertise themselves that way. Seems like a gimmick to try and reach people who are ignorant of how science works and would be drawn to this book because, well hey, "it says scientific FACTS right on the cover!"... This prompted me to do a google search of the author and title of the book. Sure enough, Vance Ferrell is a young-earth Biblical creationist, and the first webpage that popped up looks like it hasn't been updated since early 2000 (http://evolutionfacts.com/Handbook%20TOC.htm)

So I figure, if I'm gonna have to "stimulate my mind", he should taking part in this as well:

... Hmm.. May I suggest a book trade instead? I think if we are both looking to truly stimulate our minds we should be reading books that don't necessarily conform to our individual worldviews... books that challenge our viewpoints and make us think, rather than make us nod our heads in silent agreement. You can send me a book of your choice, and I'll send you one that I think is appropriate. If nothing else at least this will give us something fun to do in what "spare time" we have (Yes, this is my idea of fun... I need a life!)

Shortly thereafter I get a message back:

I think that is a great idea but I cannot in good conscience make a commitment to you knowing this is something I cannot do. I have three books right now I have been trying to read for over a year and just don't have the time. I work one full time job and four part time jobs which means 7 days a week, 12-14 hour days most days. Add in family commitments, meals, showers, house chores and the reading I have to do for work, and I am out of time. In fact, I have been trying to figure out how to squeeze one more day into the week. How about I just send the book as a gift? I would also understand if you would rather I did not. Either way, I still love ya

So he has time to read the Evolution Handbook but not a book of my choosing? Hmm. Alright, whatever. I told him I would still accept the book as a gift, but now I'm thinking about going back on my word.. This seems like a blatant attempt to proselytize, even after I politely declined his attempt last year and explained my reasons for not believing in the things that he does. I know they say "don't judge a book by its cover", but even the title of this book REEKS of typical creationist dishonesty. By titling it "The Evolution Handbook", the author is targeting a group of people who, at best, have a simplistic and minimal understanding of biology. The title is also intended to reel in an audience that wants to know more about evolution, or about the evolution / creationism debate. And yet I can tell just be looking at the table of contents on the website that the book is CLEARLY one-sided, rehashing long-debunked canards about the age of the earth and carbon dating, and propping up creationism as truth and evolution as fairytale. That would be like Richard Dawkins writing a book titled "The Christian's Handbook" and then proceeding to use the book to rail against Christianity and debunk the the whole Jesus story. And even though we atheists might agree with him, I'm pretty sure most of us would call him out for being a deliberately dishonest prick.

What should I do? I figure I have one of several choices to make. Either I:

A) Politely decline the book (I really don't want to do this, as I think it is rude to decline a gift)
B) Decline the book and tell him exactly why I want nothing to do with it (basically the paragraph I have written above)
C) Accept the gift and read / don't read it, and never reply
D) Read the book and reply minimally ("It was okay", "I wasn't a fan", etc.)... OR,
E) Accept the gift and use every resource available to debunk the ever-loving shit out of it.


As for option 'E', I know debunking the thing wouldn't change his mind, nor would I expect it to. But at least it might get the point across to him that I understand the mechanics of evolution, that I am very serious about my stance and I'm not an atheist / evolutionist because I "hate" god, or because I was "indoctrinated" in public schools, etc. Also in doing so, I'd have to brush up on my biology and give myself a crash-course in geology, physics, embryology, and other topics, since these are areas where Creotards like to stick their grubby paws... so in the long run I would probably learn a lot from taking on such a project. But at the same time, do I really want to devote a huge chunk of my time to something that will ultimately serve no purpose?

I would go with E or talk him into a book trade and use a book like "Only a Theory" and send him. He probably didn't read the book(s) he's sending you but just going off of what others have told him or went to the Christian bookstore and saw the book, its premise, and its claim of a great many citations. Those would be the two options I would go with.

I'd go with B.

Why should you waste your time?

The author claims to use over 3,000 scientific facts and 1,350 scientific quotations or references

I lol'ed.

Basically, that book he sent you is a tissue of lies from start to finish, because that's what creationism is based upon - erecting lies about valid science in order to prop up 3,000 year old mythology. He's demonstrated the duplicity behind creationism to you by stating that he's not going to bother addressing any contrary arguments, instead, he wants the privilege of being able to tell you what to think, whilst indolently ignoring the vast mountains of evidence refuting creationist assertions. I'd tell him straight that if this is his level of discoursive dishonesty, he can shove it.

On the other hand, you can tell him to come here and see how hard he thinks he is. Several of us here will take particular pleasure in exposing any lies he peddles, and you can savour the end result at leisure.

Calilasseia wrote:
On the other hand, you can tell him to come here and see how hard he thinks he is. Several of us here will take particular pleasure in exposing any lies he peddles, and you can savour the end result at leisure.

Heh, I doubt he'd want to come here because you guys are "from the internet"... he and his wife have made it clear to me before that they don't trust anything they read on the Internet.... immediately before they linked me a page to "Dr. Dino's" website....

In other words, they only look at whatever confirms their biases. Just point and laugh.

Tell them you read it & were not convinced, then gave it to a Christian friend who was appalled at the deceitful approach the book took, read a proper text on evolution & has abandoned religion as a result.

I think you have been more than fair already. You have let him know, politely, that you don't share his views. Perhaps one final email, just as polite, repeating that stance and asking him to put an end, once and for all, to the proselytizing. His words have been unfailingly polite; his actions less so.

If that doesn't work, then I'd wait for a rainy day, and go for option E.

One thing's for sure, if I decide to tackle this thing as a long-term project (a concise debunking certainly can't be written over the course of a single day, or even a week), I'm going to need to employ the proofreading skills and knowledge of scientists in the Rational Skepticism community. I'd want to make sure that I am giving an accurate rebuttal. While I know I can hold my own in a discussion about evolution with a creationist, my understanding of topics outside of evolutionary biology is not that great.

Happy to help on the physics.

Evolving wrote:Happy to help on the physics.

Noted! Thank you for volunteering :3

Ah, I see you refer to

Sheradon wrote:...scientists in the Rational Skepticism community...

I shall be a scientistTM next year when I get my degree!

Evolving wrote:Ah, I see you refer to

Sheradon wrote:...scientists in the Rational Skepticism community...

I shall be a scientistTM next year when I get my degree!

Good for you! Congratulations... I'm jealous, for I only have a lousy Bachelor of Arts degree XD

Thank god no one in my family is remotely like this. If someone was though, my answer to all this would be simply "NO".

Or if you have the time, get him to send it and then start asking stupid questions. "If Einstein is wrong and the speed of light is not constant for all observers, does that mean I can go back in time and create the universe myself?"

A couple of suggestions:

1. Ask him to highlight what he believes is the single strongest argument in the book and refute it.

2. Ask him to highlight the argument(s) in the book that convinced him to convert to christianity. And and then ask him if he would deconvert if you refuted them. If he denies that he would deconvert then you are wasting any further time discussing this matter with him.

Note that these books are not written to convert the heathens, they are written to reassure the faithful.

scott1328 wrote:A couple of suggestions:

1. Ask him to highlight what he believes is the single strongest argument in the book and refute it.

Unfortunately he hasn't read the book yet himself. =\

I have to ask, where might I find some of these references that Vance Ferrell is referring to throughout his book? For example, in regards to archaeopteryx:

Modern birds in same strata. Bones of modern birds have been found in Colorado in the same geologic rock strata—the Jurassic—in which archaeopteryx was found in Germany (Science 199, January 20, 1978). According to evolutionary theory, this cannot be; for millions of years ought to be required for Archaeopteryx to change into a regular bird. If it was alive at the same time as modern birds, how can it be their ancient ancestor? Birds have also been found in the Jurassic limestone beds by researchers in Utah.

I have tried googling "Science 199, January 20, 1978" hoping to be able to read this piece in its entire context, but the only thing that pops up is (unsurprisingly) creationist sources citing this article.

EDIT: Aaah, found it!

EDIT#2: Wait... I need to pay for a membership in order to see the article? D:

EDIT#3: Wow... this is infuriating. I tried googling the title of the article to try and find it for free, and the only thing that pops up are creationist sources! I wonder how many of them have actually bothered to read the article themselves, since you have to pay at least $20 in order to download it, and a minimum $50 for a student membership in order to access all these old issues of Science.

Sheradon wrote:

scott1328 wrote:A couple of suggestions:

1. Ask him to highlight what he believes is the single strongest argument in the book and refute it.

Unfortunately he hasn't read the book yet himself. =\

Then there is truly no point in even discussing it.

If you like your cousin, apart from his endless proselytising, accept the book. Read a bit, until you find something obviously wrong (just try a few strange-sounding things on us here, it shouldn't take long). Then tell him thanks but you've tried it and found it wanting. End of story.
Later: OMFG! Did I urge you to read some of this mind-rotting drivel, as outlined on his web site? It's just lies, and unsophisticated lies at that. Take this bit from #3/33

AN ASTOUNDING CLAIM—The evolutionists applied their theory to the amazing discoveries about DNA—and came up with a totally astonishing claim:

All the complicated DNA in each life form, and all the DNA in every other life form—made itself out of dirty water back in the beginning! There was some gravel around, along with some dirt. Nearby was some water, and overhead a lightning storm. The lightning hit the dirty water and made living creatures complete with DNA. They not only had their complete genetic code, but they were also immediately able to eat, digest food, move about, perform enzymatic and glandular functions, and all the rest.

I was expecting him to at least come up with the "mathematical" fallacy that genomes or proteins could never occur over the lifetime of the universe (search "weasel program"), but this is just hellfire preaching. So I'll change my recommendation to saying "Thank but no thanks and stop pestering me with creationist drivel". Sorry.
PS: Bang on cue, here come the weasel words:

"MATH LOOKS AT DNA—(*#4/37 More Mathematical Impossibilities*) In the world of living organisms, there can be no life or growth without DNA. What are the mathematical possibilities (in mathematics, they are called probabilities) of JUST ONE DNA molecule having formed itself by the chance?

If he does send a copy, don't even let it into the bathroom! Get it into a clinical waste bag, quick.

AN ASTOUNDING CLAIM—The evolutionists applied their theory to the amazing discoveries about DNA—and came up with a totally astonishing claim:

All the complicated DNA in each life form, and all the DNA in every other life form—made itself out of dirty water back in the beginning! There was some gravel around, along with some dirt. Nearby was some water, and overhead a lightning storm. The lightning hit the dirty water and made living creatures complete with DNA. They not only had their complete genetic code, but they were also immediately able to eat, digest food, move about, perform enzymatic and glandular functions, and all the rest.

WOW. That seriously hurt to read... I'm literally at a loss for words..