For that reason, I will also not have time to attempt a similar treatment of the Noah’s Flood seminar, so instead I’m just providing a link to Auke’s transcript. (A friend pointed out she — if I correctly remember who it was — opposes the use of the word “seminar” for these things. I suppose I could rather call them “talks”?) Auke’s hope is that some scientists in relevant fields will be able to give a thorough response to such nonsense from their areas of expertise.

You may wonder: “does it really matter if some people take some mythological stories literally instead of metaphorically?” Well, imagine the potential impact when a science-denying creationist is appointed dean of a faculty of Natural Sciences at an otherwise excellent university. Even if he is able to keep his own beliefs out of the picture, it could affect e.g. funding decisions. So the fight for a good education continues, and we continue to hold thumbs for the appointing of a good dean. (Without taking a thumb-holding superstition seriously: it’s merely a figure of speech. M’kay? You got that?)

The previous CMI-in-Stellenbosch seminar was given in March this year, by Don Batten from Australia. I made eight posts in which I addressed every part of the seminar, thanks to the transcript provided by Auke. Below is the full index of my posts related to the seminar (copied from a previous post, dropping the fluff), followed by some discussion about Noah’s flood.

Posts Related to the Batten Seminar

• A Creationism Lunch Hour – the announcement.
• Creationists and Liars – a general piece about quote mining and two logical fallacies, things used in the talk
• Creationists Believe Lions Originally Ate Plants – bleh, I don’t think much of this post. Just me ranting about “no death before the fall”. Mostly written due to my frustration at fumbling questions at such seminars.
• Incorrect Creationist Calculation: Likelihood of Formation of a Particular Protein – A piece debunking Batten’s final calculation, his attempt at a “climactic end” for his seminar. Explains some of the probability elements of mutation and natural selection, i.e. evolution.
• Batten #1: “Defining” Evolution?
• Batten #2: Transitional Fossils and Quote Mining
• Batten #3: Science versus Wishful Thinking
• Batten #4: Intelligent Design and ATP Synthase
• Batten #5: Junk DNA, Vestigial Organs, Kinesin, Intelligent Design
• Batten #6: “Information”
• Batten #7: Natural Selection
• Batten #8: The Incorrect Calculation
• Batten Seminar Coverage in Die Matie – A letter by Kenneth and Maud, and an article by Ivanka van der Merwe.
• Batten Seminar Coverage in By

– Jurie van den Heever

• Batten Seminar Coverage in Die Burger

– Johannes de Villiers, Francis Collins

• More Batten Seminar Coverage in Die Matie – three letters: a creationist’s response to Kenneth and Maud’s original letter, and two letters responding to that one

Noah’s Flood

In preparation for the upcoming seminar, which may (or may not) deal with the flood…

In the Batten Seminar Coverage in Die Burger, Jurie van den Heever wrote about Noah’s Flood. Duplicating the relevant content here:

Despite Don Batten’s supposed “scientific” approach, in 2001 he wrote in an article in a creationist magazine where he claims all humans on earth, except Noah and the rest of the Ark-family, were wiped out in a flood approximately 4500 years ago.

The interesting thing about this is that the Egyptians that lived in the neighbourhood simply continued with their lives without noticing that they’re drowning in a flood. Also, the famous pyramids of Giza near Cairo that were completed approximately 500 years earlier, was left unharmed by the flood.

Other older inhabitants of the old Middle-East, for example the Babylonians, had the nerve to only record a local flood, wherein featured their own Noah and a much smaller ark.

Considering the Judaeans spent a particular period of time living in banishment in Babylon, and that the oppressed usually incorporate some elements of the oppressors’ life- and world-view into their own, this is likely the true source of the mythical flood and ark story in Genesis, irrespective of Don Batten’s declarations.

For in-depth detail on the flood story, I recommend taking a look at The Talk.Origins Archive: Flood Geology FAQs, in particular the first link, Problems with a Global Flood. For a quick reference to typical claims, see the Flood section of the Index to Creationist Claims (a wonderful resource by the way, certainly a nice collection to spend some of your procrastination time on).

Then there’s always Wikipedia’s entry on Noah’s Ark, which gives a decent overview on various traditions’ perspectives on the story, the history and present state of literal, metaphorical or mythological interpretations of the story.

The article starts out discussing Andrew Snelling. A few years ago, he gave a talk about his PhD research at the geology department at Stellenbosch University on a Friday, talking about a geological specimen a couple of thousand million years old. The following day he gave a talk in Table View titled “Dinosaurs in Genesis”, claiming the earth is only a few thousand years old, and that humans and dinosaurs existed together.

The wider implication of creationists’ claims are that science as a whole is incorrect, especially astronomers and physicists’ calculations of the age of stars and other heavenly bodies (which has nothing to do with biological evolution).

Snelling’s activities led to a condemning article by an Australian scientist, Will the Real Dr. Snelling Please Stand Up?

At the end of the first column, following further discussion of Dr Snelling’s dishonesty and cognitive dissonance, Van den Heever turns to Don Batten. He points out that his talk was full of misrepresentations and obvious errors.

Batten’s true colours began to show when a science student with fundamentalist leanings asking how he should react to lectures on evolution. Without a second thought, Batten suggested the Snelling method. The student was encouraged to remain silent about his anti-evolution attitude and simply give the desired answers in tests and exams, so that he can obtain his degree. Because the university is testing knowledge and not beliefs, he can simply ignore rational facts and believe what he wants. Again, cognitive dissonance.

A specific religious conviction is not needed for a career as researcher. What is important is a healthy curiosity and an ability to investigate the natural world in a rational way.

Other requirements include dedication and honesty. If you are dishonest enough to remain silent despite believing you’re busy with nonsense, you should rather consider changing careers. On the other hand, once you have your degree, you can also [manhaftig?] declare that you are a scientist (which you are not), that the creation account of Genesis is literally true (which it isn’t), and that consequently evolution is false (which it isn’t).

I particularly liked the ending of his letter/article:

Despite Don Batten’s supposed “scientific” approach, in 2001 he wrote in an article in a creationist magazine where he claims all humans on earth, except Noah and the rest of the Ark-family, were wiped out in a flood approximately 4500 years ago.

The interesting thing about this is that the Egyptians that lived in the neighbourhood simply continued with their lives without noticing that they’re drowning in a flood. Also, the famous pyramids of Giza near Cairo that were completed approximately 500 years earlier, was left unharmed by the flood.

Other older inhabitants of the old Middle-East, for example the Babylonians, had the nerve to only record a local flood, wherein featured their own Noah and a much smaller ark.

Considering the Judaeans spent a particular period of time living in banishment in Babylon, and that the oppressed usually incorporate some elements of the oppressors’ life- and world-view into their own, this is likely the true source of the mythical flood and ark story in Genesis, irrespective of Don Batten’s declarations.

Van den Heever draai nie doekies om nie…