The media creates a false narrative and does a disservice to truth when it pits “science” and “creation” at being at odds with another. There is no actual conflict between the two, the ones creating conflict are scientists who have little understanding…
If I’m disputing the false dichotomy as being a false dichotomy, it is quite a stretch to say that I am “reinforcing” the dichotomy. The popularity of the post seems to suggest that it resonated with people.
The media typically only presents the issue of teaching evolution in schools by suggesting that there are only two possible “camps” a person could belong to: the “scientist” camp that doesn’t believe in God, and the “creationist” camp that only endorses YEC or “intelligent design” (ID in this case being limited to a “God of the gaps”.)
The media is thus doing a disservice to the truth and a disservice to the public it claims to inform. Through presenting a false dichotomy it forces people to think that their belief in the sound science of evolution must lead them to deny God. This is NOT true.
And this is a real issue, I’ve dealt with this many times, of good people who believe in God and believe in science and are trying to reconcile the two because a newspaper article or the local news suggested they “can’t” be reconciled. That’s what I’m criticizing. The media would do many millions of people a great favor by saying that science belongs in science class and the concept of God in philosophy and theology classes; and that evolution has absolutely no bearing on the existence or non existence of God. They’d do an even better job it they showed people of faith who believed in evolution, like Fr. Georges Lemaitre, who proposed the Big Bang Theory, thus showing that there were more “sides” to this issue.
But the media doesn’t want to do that because the media likes to propose things in false dichotomies that keep people apart rather than bringing them together. That’s the problem. Because every time someone asks, “Do you believe in God or do you believe in evolution?” It fails to see that the right answer may just be, “both.”