Just when I thought my opinion of creationists couldn’t get any lower, I ran across this article posted on the Answers in Genesis website (the group suing the state of Kentucky for $18 million) claiming that unicorns were real and to deny their existence is to “demean God’s word.”
No, seriously, that’s what this article claims:
Some people claim the Bible is a book of fairy tales because it mentions unicorns. However, the biblical unicorn was a real animal, not an imaginary creature. The Bible refers to the unicorn in the context of familiar animals, such as peacocks, lambs, lions, bullocks, goats, donkeys, horses, dogs, eagles, and calves.
The author of this piece, Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell, claims that the “biblical unicorn” is real because, you know, it says so right there in the Bible. She also went on to write, “Modern readers have trouble with the Bible’s unicorns because we forget that a single-horned feature is not uncommon on God’s menu for animal design. (Consider the rhinoceros and narwhal.).”
Yes, you read that correctly. According to Mitchell, because rhinos exist that “proves” that it’s entirely possible that unicorns once roamed the Earth.
Sadly, that wasn’t even her most asinine argument in support of the existence of unicorns.
“The absence of a unicorn in the modern world should not cause us to doubt its past existence. (Think of the dodo bird. It does not exist today, but we do not doubt that it existed in the past.),” she wrote.
And you know why we can say for certain that the dodo bird existed in the past? Because there are records of humans interacting with them and skeletal remains proving that they existed.
But then the article got even more bizarre.
“Whatever it was, it is now likely extinct like many other animals,” Mitchell continued. “To think of the biblical unicorn as a fantasy animal is to demean God’s Word, which is true in every detail.”
You hear that? If you deny the existence of unicorns that means you’re denying God’s word in every detail. Though I can’t help but wonder how she feels about the incest, slavery and degrading of women that’s also included in the Bible. Wouldn’t denying all of that also “demean God’s word” according to Dr. Mitchell?
Creationists are absolutely ridiculous. They really don’t seem to understand that the Bible is not a book filled with verifiable and indisputable facts, but that’s exactly how most of these people treat it. Take last year’s debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. Numerous times Ham dismissed overwhelmingly accepted scientific evidence by simply asking Nye, “Were you there? Did you see it happen? Then how do you know”? Meanwhile, whenever Nye challenged his creationist views on something, Ham would simply cite the Bible as his “proof.”
It was utterly maddening.
And it’s essentially the same tactic that Dr. Mitchell is using here to defend the existence of “biblical unicorns.” Because the Bible says they were real, to creationists such as herself, that’s all the “proof” they need – even if there’s absolutely no physical evidence proving they ever existed.
They really don’t understand the difference between visual and physical evidence supporting a factual conclusion (dodo birds existed/rhinos exist) vs. believing in something simply because it’s written inside of the Bible.
Then again, it’s my belief that to be someone who believes the Earth is only 6,000-years-old and that humans roamed the planet alongside dinosaurs they have to be at least borderline insane. So it’s not really surprising that many of these people seem to struggle with reality and rational thinking.
As the popular meme says, “Creationism: The belief that Kirk Cameron knows more than Stephen Hawking.” And that pretty much sums it up.
Latest posts by Allen Clifton (see all)
- John Kelly Has Disgraced Himself, this Country and Our Military - October 21, 2017
- New Disgusting Report Exposes Fox News as the ‘Harvey Weinstein’ of Cable News - October 21, 2017
- For the Second Time, Trump Accuses Family of Fallen Hero Sgt. La David Johnson of Lying - October 20, 2017