Austin Cline and Johnny Hart

I normally don't respond to other blogs directly, since, quite frankly, blogs don't really mean much in modern life, and one scarcely-read blog commenting on another scarcely-read blog is rather silly. I usually save my comments for subjects that are worth the time and effort. I will make an exception.

Austin Cline has recently commented on Johnny Hart's B.C. comic strip, particularly one on evolution. It was a fairly funny strip, I thought. Hart’s poetry has some awkward rhymes, but overall it’s good entertainment.

Of course, Mr. Cline’s complaint is that Hart is making fun of evolution here. the trouble is that his criticism of this comic makes some missteps. I might instead use one of Mr. Cline's favorite words: fallacies.

FALLACY #1: That B.C. is "a platform for his religious bigotry." Huh. Now not subscribing to Evolution is "bigotry"? Mr. Cline might want to look that word up, especially since Johnny Hart only expressed a point of view; it is Mr. Cline who is making personal attacks. Or at least come up with some real examples of bigotry in B.C. Otherwise, this is just name-calling. Oh, I won't even bring up when Mr. Cline calls Hart an "ignoramus" for simply, apparently, being a Christian. That is the only conclusion we can draw, since Mr. Cline gives no other reason for the label.

FALLACY #2: Saying that Hart called Darwin a "preacher" to call Evolution a religion. No, Hart called Darwin a preacher because, well, Darwin was a preacher. To be honest, that's not entirely fair. He did study to become a clergyman (at his father's request) and did graduate from Christ's College at Cambridge. To my knowledge, he did not ever actually become a full-fledged "preacher," but it is clear that Hart was referring to this fact, and not some grand conspiracy as Mr. Cline would have us believe.

FALLACY #3: Saying that Hart was wrong for putting "theory" in quotation marks. Hart was "putting the word theory in scare quotes as if evolution weren't a 'real' theory." The fallacy here is obvious. Evolution is not a real theory, it is a hypothesis or model. The reason is simple. In the scientific method (and we are dealing with science here, and so these are the terms we must use), a hypothesis is made, and that hypothesis may become a model if it is known to have at least some validity. If a hypothesis is proven through controlled experiments, it then, and only then, becomes a theory. Gravity is a theory because it has been observed countless times in controlled environments.

Evolution, obviously, cannot be recreated in a controlled environment. It can therefore never truly be a scientific theory.

Wow, four paragraphs and at least three fallacies. Considering that one paragraph simply says, "PZ Myers links to a recent comic in which Johnny Hart demonstrates his credentials as a creationist and an ignoramus", I think that rate is remarkable. He calls Johnny Hart an "ignoramus," but in these four paragraphs he has proven that he knows little if anything at all about Charles Darwin and doesn't even understand the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis. Hart, meanwhile, has done nothing wrong but had the audacity to satirize Evolution.

I'm not certain that Mr. Cline is qualified to start calling people names.

-Paul Lytle, Primum Mobile Magazine

Comments? Email us.

Texian Weblog © Copyright 2005, Jason E. Heath