While trawling search engines yesterday for “archaeological evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ”, I happened upon an article by the “Institute for Creation Research”. I have now spent the better part of the last two days crying and laughing at their half baked posts defending Christianity and attacking anyone else. However, within the mire of credulous and often completely irrational posts is a gem of truth in the debate over creationism or evolution: the unwitting expression of a dark secret we would nary have thought would be publicly expressed, especially by the person responsible.

The post in question concerns the archaeological evidence for the existence of Jesus, and was written by one John D. Morris Phd. Dr Morris is the President of the Insitute for Creation Research (ICFR), as well as being the son of the founder. The section of his post in question reads as follows:

“With or without the ossuary or other archaeological evidence, we can still be confident that the events are true. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith, well grounded in the facts of history, and the Bible is an entirely accurate document. On its teachings we can base our lives and eternal destiny.”

In essence, Dr Morris is blatantly stating that facts are irrelevant in his belief system. In the entire post, he offers no examples of archaeological evidence apart from the Ossuary. The only “historical evidence” provided are passing remarks by the Roman historian Josephus and the Bible itself, the very document that is being challenged. In other words: no evidence. Yet Dr Morris’s conclusion is that we should believe the story anyway. He is completely unfazed by his lack of evidence. He literary states “With or without the ossuary or other archaeological evidence”, and provides none of the “historical facts” in his second point. This is textbook cognitive bias.

This is in stark contrast to the stance of evolutionary biologists. As I am sure Dr Morris would point out, there are definitely flaws in the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Mainly, Evolution is a process that takes an exorbitant amount of time, and is therefore not observable. However, any evolutionary biologist worth his/her salt would readily admit this. Evolution is a science, not a religion. Their “belief system” is based on the best interpretation of available evidence. If flaws are found, or new evidence introduced, the theory will adapt, or die (no irony intended).

Despite the name “Institute for Creation RESEARCH”, the beliefs of Dr Morris and his brethren are not based on evidence, rather on their absolute certainty in the infallibility of the bible. Furthermore, they do not seem to care whether or not there are secondary sources to back up the claims made within. On the other hand, science constantly adapts to new information, and evolutionary biology is no different. Which would you rather be taught in school?