Creationist org. distributes literature at Dartmouth

By Joy Chen

Published on Saturday, December 5, 2009

Web Update

  • Print
  • Report an Error

Hoping to promote creationist ideology and refute Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, volunteers for the evangelist organization Living Waters distributed copies of Darwin's “The Origin of Species” — featuring an added creationist introduction — at Dartmouth on Nov. 18. The College was one of 100 universities nationwide that the group targeted for distribution of the books.

The 54-page introduction attempts to refute the scientific evidence of evolution and links Darwin's theory with the Holocaust and sexism.

The organization gave out 107,000 copies of the book nationwide, Ray Comfort, the founder of Living Waters, said in an interview with The Dartmouth.

"Our goal is to give college students both sides of the argument, because that's what America's all about," Comfort, who was not at the Dartmouth event, said.

Tony Miano, who took part in overseeing Living Waters’ activities at the College, added that the ultimate goal of the movement was to “present the gospel and hope to get more people to have faith in Jesus Christ.”

Elisabeth Hansen '13, a student who received the creationist edition of “The Origin of Species” on Nov. 18, said that some students were "furious" about Living Waters' activities, but that she doubted the organization would generate much controversy on campus.

"When we brought it up in my Writing 5 class, the professor was appalled," Hansen said.

Hansen said she doubted the book's influence on Dartmouth students.

"It was odd," Hansen said. "I didn't find it persuasive at all. I picked up the book just not to be rude."

Marian Guetierrez ’13, however, said she believed some students would be persuaded.

“Many students probably have not read the original version of the book,” Guetierrez said. “When you are given something to read and you haven’t read the other side of the argument first, you can be more easily persuaded.”

Biology professor Roger Sloboda said he believed that the distribution of such books would not make a difference on campus one way or another as most students would likely hold onto their original views on the subject.

“I just think they wasted their money on this, and I’m glad they wasted it on something like this and not something else,” Sloboda told The Dartmouth.

Mark Farmer, a cellular biology professor at the University of Georgia, which was also targeted by Living Waters, said in an interview that Comfort's organization might have had an influence at his university.

"I think [many students] were taught the creationist theory since they were born through parents and pastors," Farmer said. "I'd say 50 to 60 percent of the students in my introductory biology classroom come to class with a deeply held creationist belief in mind."

Farmer, who self-identified as a scientist of faith, strongly disagreed with Living Waters' arguments in the added introduction to the book.

"To see a group that's opposed to an issue is one thing, but when you start to create a mindset that the Nazi's Holocaust was somehow a result of Darwinist work or that Darwinism was somehow the result of Darwin's racism or hatred toward women, then it is a libel, and it is a libel against a man who has been dead 100 years and cannot defend himself," Farmer said. "It is really a great disservice to Darwin in particular, and I think, scientists in general."

Farmer said that many faculty members at the University of Georgia vehemently oppose the Living Waters' techniques.

"It was never my intention to get these people off campus, or to silence them by any means," Farmer said. "But at the same time, I was not prepared to just sit there and let them put things out there that they know to be false."

Comfort said most of the students nationwide were friendly to the group distributing books. "They were thrilled to get a free book," Comfort said, "If they don't like it, they can throw it in the trash, but most of them were appreciative."

Comfort said that a minority of students, who he labeled as "atheists," were not receptive. He added that he has received several angry e-mails and ultimately aims to distribute one million books to students and to make distribution "regular."

Between 1,200 and 2,000 volunteers have helped to distribute the books so far, Comfort said.

"There were a lot of people who volunteered," Comfort said. "There's a small vocal minority who want to get rid of God, but there are a lot of Americans who believe in God and country."

Comments

The 54-page introduction refutes the scientific evidence of evolution and links Darwin’s theory with the Holocaust and sexism.

I don’t think “refute” is the an appropriate word to describe this, considering it implies that they actually this work has any scientific validity.

By on Dec 5 | 11:40 pm

“The 54-page introduction attempts to refute the scientific evidence of evolution and links Darwin’s theory with the Holocaust and sexism.”

And losing the “s” in “links” would make it clear that “attempts to” also refers to that part of the sentence: “attempts to…link Darwin’s theory with the Holocaust and sexism.”, rather than making it sound as if they succeeded at making the link, which is what you have now.

By on Dec 6 | 1:10 pm

“creationist theory”…

Are you sure that a biology professor actually called creationism a “theory”? I somehow doubt that very much.

By on Dec 6 | 5:30 pm

A common tactic of creationists is to simply repeat, over and over and over again, the same old creationist canards that have been refuted for decades. Thus, by their own behavior, they demonstrate that they are obstinate against correcting their errors, and diligent about promote known falsehoods. Ray Comfort’s “introduction” to Origin of Species is yet another example of this. There’s also the fact that Origin was published 150 years ago, and evolutionary science (among other relevant areas of science that falsify creationism, such as geology, paleontology, and astronomy) has advanced greatly since then.

Creationists despise science, because they despise anything that so unequivocally contradicts religious doctrines that they hold so dear, but rather than abandoning their empirically false religious dogmas, they’d much rather promote pseudoscience propaganda as a charade to try to make their religious doctrines not look so bad.

By on Dec 6 | 6:56 pm

Comments are closed on this article.

Most Viewed | Latest Comments

  1. Lohse: Telling the Truth
  2. Pollard: Muckraking for a Buck
  3. Rolling Stone article targets College culture
  4. Obama nominates College President Jim Yong Kim to lead the World Bank
  5. Rolling Stone publishes article about hazing at Dartmouth
  6. Chang: Inequity in Our Backyard
  7. Tuck initiative broadens use of online resources
  8. UJAO drops all 27 SAE hazing charges
  9. Mahoney: How Not to Combat Hazing
  10. Romney allegedly eyeing Ayotte