Josh Brecheen

"Many students buying into the religion of evolution have been persuaded by the Miller experiment, even though it is plagued with falsehoods. The Miller experiment, taught nationwide, presents the findings of a 1953 experiment using a hydrogen-rich mixture of methane, ammonia and water vapor which produced amino acids (building blocks of life). Only 7 years following this experiment the scientific community began asserting (now majority of scientific community consensus) hydrogen could not have been present in a formless and void atmosphere (due to nature of the element to escape into space)."

Geeze. This has nothing to do with evolution which is an established claim and the Miller experiment did achieve on major breakthrough: To show that it IS possible to form the building blocks of life from inorganic compounds through natural mechanisms without supernatural intervention. Furthermore, scientists didn't just stop here. How come creationists always assume that an experiment is done once and never refined or improved upon. 1960 Joan Oro' refined this experiment with more likely early Earth conditions and not only produced amino acids, but also nucleotides. These experiments are repeatable. NOW! Let's see you pray over a pile of dust and turn it into anything other than a pile of dust. Demonstrate YOUR claims. Let's see a demonstration of some real magic. Every biology textbook clearly states that there is no consensus on the origin of life. Miller experiments were an attempt that failed, but has never been used to mislead children. It encourages children to perhaps start doing research themselves that might lead to a better solution to the problem. This is progress. These experiments enrich our knowledge. Useful knowledge. "God dune it." is a dead end.

Josh Brecheen

"In revisiting the experiment with accurate ingredients of carbon dioxide, nitrogen and water vapor (as agreed upon by the scientific community) the results produce formaldehyde and cyanide. Outside of killing embryos, chemists know embalming fluid is the results of mixing these two toxic organic molecules."

I don't know what you're talking about. Modern versions of the Miller experiment with a refined understanding of early Earth conditions solved the nitrite toxicity problem by adding iron and carbonate. Again, this only shows that it's possible. Nobody is claiming we have an explanation. This isn't a religion, this is a demonstration. Faith=belief with no evidence. Science=demonstrating claims (no faith required).

Josh Brecheen

"Geochemists have known this since the 1960s yet it is still a major emphasis in textbooks across America. Although totally false, the Miller experiment is continually used as one of the more convincing arguments used to indoctrinate impressionable young adults."

And science has progressed since the 1960's. There are many probable hypotheses for the origin of life. Can't wait for them to start teaching the experiments that synthesize RNA and get it to reproduce without magic. Science doesn't indoctrinate. It works. Only have to show these "impressionable young adults" that science works without magic.

Josh Brecheen

"Given column constraints we don't have time to dismantle the “Java” man's shoddy excavation techniques (nor Java's limited bones mirroring today's human remains) or a myriad of other key evolution misleading’s but I encourage all readers to buy the scientifically reviewed bestseller “The Case for a Creator” by Lee Strobel. It's time we truly educate ourselves and our students."

This is stupid. Do you realize we've found thousand of these. You're going to focus on one questionable instant when we're finding these thing all the time? Not a single creationist ever falsified a fossil. It's always the scientists discovering forgeries (not that many and Java wasn't). Creationists can't do it. They'd have to accept evolution. I love how creationists reject evolution until it's used by scientists to determine if a fossil is mis-catagorized or a forgery.

Josh Brecheen

"Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling painting of God reaching out with a pointed finger is no less worthy of being placed alongside Darwin's drawing of monkeys morphing into humans. In an attempt to explain our existence the teaching of evolution is ironically working against its own theory. For the blind followers, it is making monkeys out of them as they ignore the full gamut of scientific facts."



Scientific facts in the "Holy Book" of Stupid

Rabbits chew their cud Lev 11:6, Deu. 14:7

Bats aren't mammals but birds Gen 11:13, 19

It takes 40 years to walk from Egypt to Canaan (not really just 10 days) Exodus

Spraying dove's and lamb's blood cures disease Lev 14:2-52

GIANTS! Numbers 13:33

God loves a crazed man and foreskins 1 Kings 17:23-27

God hates handicapped kids and midgets Lev 21:16-24

Josh Brecheen

"There is one thing the scientific community agrees upon. It is a mystery."

Hmmm.... A scientists definition of "mystery" is more akin to "puzzle" needing to be continually solved. Not a dead end.

Josh Brecheen

"Even biochemist and creation skeptic Francis Crick has stated, “An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going,” he said. Francis Crick is not just an ordinary scientist but a Nobel Prize awardee for discovering the molecular structure of DNA."

Here's the rest of the quote.

"But this should not be taken to imply that there are good reasons to believe that it could not have started on the earth by a perfectly reasonable sequence of fairly ordinary chemical reactions." (Francis Crick, Life Itself, Its Origin and Nature, 1981, p. 88)

It's a book about aliens seeding life on Earth.

"According to polls, 90 percent of Americans believe in God and 80 percent believe in miracles. Will we continue to check our brains at the church door every Sunday or is it possible a loving creator is behind that first miracle? The religion of evolution depends upon miraculous sets of circumstances so why continue to ignore the super majority of Americans’ belief in a miracle worker?"

And 3/4 of the world's population is laughing at the Bible while many are following equally ludicrous claims with their own version of a creation myth with their own "science" to back it up.

Every supernatural claim has fallen apart under controlled scrutiny. It's not a miracle if you take an aspirin then pray for God to cure your headache.

"Let me speculate for a minute why the attempt to ignore relevant facts is ongoing despite what the scientific community has learned in the last 30 years. If I admit the possibility of a loving God then I entertain biblical teaching whereas I am responsible for immoral behavior. In a world that has no desire for accountability for right and wrong, this is unacceptable. To a society believing that bad behavior is relative (if it feels good it must be good) that is the big rub. So, only selective science that aligns with the religion of evolution is allowed in the classroom."

Tier one peer reviewed study done last year showing that as a 1st world nation becomes more atheist and accepts evolution the social ills are greatly reduced (rape rates, murder rates, abortions rates, teen pregnancies rates,) Sweden on top with 80% atheists, Denmark is one of the happiest and peaceful societies 60% atheists and on the bottom with the most rapes rates, murder rates, abortion rates, lowest education--- U.S. With 80% believers in Mojo, Magic man in the sky.

http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP073984414.pdf

For an additional note: Vatican City only has a pop of 800 praying every second, yet manages to have 600 crimes per year. So much for the effectiveness of prayer.

This pretty much refutes the rest of his claims too.

Remember the more atheist a nation, the more moral and healthy it is. lol.

I’ve read both of Mr. Brecheen’s columns in the last two Sunday editions of the Durant Daily Democrat and I just can’t believe he is writing about this topic.

I am a devout Christian. I was raised in the Baptist church and continue to attend church to this day – into middle-age. I’ve studied the Holy Bible and have listened to this discussion by many on both sides of the issue. Having said all of that, here is my question: How does the Earth evolving diminish the awe and wonder of God having created it? Whether it happened in seven days or millions of years – what does it matter? It is still AMAZING!

Now, here is my second question: Why are you writing about this subject? We elected you to go to the Capitol and fight for our piece of the pie! You were elected to make our state and this Senate district a better place.

Our state is in financial trouble. The state budget is going to have to be cut. So, you want to waste taxpayers’ money to write, pass and then fight whether or not this law is constitutional? That money could be used to build better, safer schools. That money could be used to keep more social workers working to keep kids safe. That money could be used to feed more kids who don’t get to eat when they don’t have school. How do you expect children to learn your religious views – that you want the state to cram down their little throats – when they haven’t eaten in three days?

I learned, a long time ago, probably in high school, that a government that can force a religious view to be taught - can force ANY religious view (whether Christian, Islam, Buddhist, whatever) to be taught. I choose to teach my children MY religious views at home and in the church their father and I choose for them.

Now, I would like to answer my own question. Why are you writing about this subject? Let me give the honest answer: BECAUSE YOU WANT THE MEDIA ATTENTION!!!!! And you have gotten it! You will be on all those religious shows, acting as though you are being persecuted for your religious views. You will raise lots of money from the religious types. You are trying to secure your base to run for higher office as soon as possible. It’s all part of today’s politics and you are making southeastern Oklahoma look like uneducated hicks to further you political career.

THIS IS WHY PEOPLE HATE POLITICS AND POLITICIANS, AND WHY GOOD PEOPLE DON’T RUN FOR OFFICE!!!

This version is much better written..earns a B grade, style-wise, compared to a sympathetic C- the first go-round.

Why is this even an issue? Our children are graduating with only a basic ability to read and write, and only rudimentary math skills---biology, taxonomy, chemistry, probability and statistics are all prerequisites to grasping evolution on any level other than faith.

And we know that you atheists wouldn’t want that, now would you?

I'll make one last observation about Mr. Breechen's screed against science. He wrote, "If I admit the possibility of a loving God then I entertain biblical teaching whereas I am responsible for immoral behavior. In a world that has no desire for accountability for right and wrong, this is unacceptable. To a society believing that bad behavior is relative (if it feels good it must be good) that is the big rub."

This is a common assertion by the weaker minded. It does not even matter which choice of the world's many religions, one can find weak minded believers who insist that their religion, following their god(s), is the only path to morality. When compared, at the core of all religions are the same rules: Don't kill, Don't steal, Play nice with the other children. All the other thousands of rules are elaborations, and job security for the priesthood. Even atheists will agree to abide by those core values, if only the religious would.

It is also revealing that Mr. Breechen feels that he needs the threat of eternal damnation to stop himself from becoming a ravening, cannibalistic rapist. For his sake and society's, I hope he never loses his faith. But I, for one, don't have those impulses. For the rest of us, the secular threat of imprisonment, and the desire for the good opinion of friends and family are quite adequate to control our anti-social behaviors.

Criticisms of Brecheen have now gone viral. If one Googles "Josh Brecheen" and evolution, dozens of pages come up. The coverage is overwhelmingly against the Senator's comments, as are the comments on his articles in this newspaper. Several commenters on national blogs make negative comments about Oklahoma and Oklahomans; this is one of the many bad results of Brecheen's ignorance. I doubt if he will read many of the comments, but he should to see the damage he has done to himself and to the State. Voters in his district should remember this.

Why doesn't the Durant Dailey Democrat put in the paper the news of how Josh Brecheen thinks science is not true, and that plagiarism is ok? If the Senator is representing the people, then I think Mr. Brecheen needs to quit and go back to his church, because I did not join his church for a reason.

Josh Brecheen wrote, “Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling painting of God reaching out with a pointed finger is no less worthy of being placed alongside Darwin's drawing of monkeys morphing into humans. In an attempt to explain our existence the teaching of evolution is ironically working against its own theory. For the blind followers, it is making monkeys out of them as they ignore the full gamut of scientific facts.”

It is very strange that Josh Brecheen is so unashamed to expose his gross lack of education in a public place. Darwin never made a “drawing of monkeys morphing into humans.” It did not happen. It is at best grossly ignorant. This popular illustration was from a public talk by Theodore Huxley. He used the skeletons of a gibbon, a baboon, a gorilla, a chimpanzee, and a human to show that the bone structure of all primates varied more by proportion than in unique bones. This is still true. Modern anthropologists are more particular, and we would not project any such direct line of decent. In fact we have fossils from very early in human evolution that demonstrate that an erect posture was much earlier than short arms and big brains. This is decades old information, and the parents of Oklahoma children should ask why they have a State Senator who is so clueless about such basic knowledge. They should also be very worried that Brecheen wants to inject this ignorance into another generation of Oklahoma students.

There is no irony greater than Brecheen suggesting he has even a passing association with “the full gamut of scientific facts,” since he has not presented any.

Josh Brecheen continues to dishonor God by falsehoods given in His name.

In 1891, Eugene Dubois discovered fossil bones on the Indonesian island of Java. The finds were a thick and flat skull cap, anatomically the frontal and parietals, one tooth, and from approximately 38 feet away, a femur, or thigh bone. Dubois had a medical training, and he recognized that the femur was of an erect walking animal, and that the tooth, while different to modern humans, was more like human than any other animal. He thought these bones, taken together, represented an advanced ape like animal intermediate between humans and the great apes.

When he published his findings, Dubois was roundly criticized in the European press, and among those early few archaeologists to actually have an opinion. They were all politically motivated to believe that the human race must have first appeared in their own European homelands, and not some far-off Asian island. Dubois had proposed the name of “Pithecanthropus Erectus.” This literally means, the upright ape man. For years, Dubois continued to excavate and contend with his critics. For example, see his paper from 1896, and 1924.

Eugene Dubois, MD

1896 “On Pithecanthropus Erectus: A Transitional Form Between Man and the Apes”

The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland

_______

1924 “On the principal characters of the cranium and the brain, the mandible and the teeth of Pithecanthropus erectus” Proc R Acad Amsterdam.

As late as 1966, the name Pithecanthropus erectus was used for related fossils. Yes, there were many more fossils. Hundreds. The few bones discovered by Dubois were superseded by dozens, and then hundreds of specimens. And, in the 1960s it was realized that the conclusion by Dubois that these organisms were upright apes was only correct In the sense that we are all “upright apes.” In 1964, Lewis Leakey, with professors Tobias, and Napier published the formal description of African fossils they named, Homo erectus. By the obscure rules we use to assign scientific names, they were able to replace the name “pithecanthropus” proposed by Dubois with the genus of us modern humans, while they retained his species name. But, in this case they made good sense. The African specimens were from much older sediments than the Java fossils, the African fossils were much better preserved, and were clearly examples that belonged in our genus. I find it very interesting that Darwin in 1871 suggested that the most likely origin of humans had been in Africa. Is that why Mr. Brecheen rejects science, that his ancestors were African?

Leakey, Tobias, and Napier

1964 “A New Species of the Genus Homo From Olduvai Gorge” Nature Vol 202, No. 4927: 7-9

Jacob, Teuku

1966 “The sixth skull cap of Pithecanthropus erectus” American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 25, Issue 3, pages 243–259, November

The minor disputes over the recovery methods of Eugene Dubois over 100 years ago are trivial since we have hundreds of well excavated examples of H. erectus from all over the world. It is pathetic, and embarrassing that a supposedly educated man, like Josh Brecheen could rest his entire credibility on such an obvious fallacy. That he has no clue about the years of relevant research, or even what “research” means is exposed in his endorsement of Lee Srobel. But, it is dangerous to Americas future to allow this level of ignorance to pervert education of our children.

Senator Beechen's two op/ed pieces have engendered the reactions that they deserve from a scientific perspective at least.

Ironically, I'm sure that the Senator would willingly exploit the results of recent international surveys showing that the average US student is deficient in basic Scientific knowledge. Exploiting these results in order to advocate some kind of reorganization of public education, probably towards privatization and/or vouchers.

I'm sure something similar from him in respect to other current Scientific issues will be coming soon. Smells like a crusade.

Unaware, perhaps, that it's the very kind of misinformation, attacks and belittling of Science rampant in his writings that contribute to the problem, not to any solution.

In short, if the good Senator's views find their way into our schools, you can bet the results will be even worse than they are now.

American kids are falling further and further behind in science, math and critical thinking. Mr. Brecheen's ramblings, particularly things like "...monkeys morphing into humans" goes slamming into facts like facts don't matter. I suppose with examples among "adults" like this, we can hardly blame our kids for slipping so badly. Since the ever-evolving concepts of evolution are the very basis of the bio-sciences, kids who pay attention to nonsense like this are darn sure not going to be tomorrow's leading scientists.

Josh Brecheen seems to think that the way to honor God is by insults and lies. That is not what I learned in church.

Let's begin with the Miller/Urey experiment. (I'll only give 1, or 2 references to actual science for each point. There in fact could be dozens). First, in the 1960s through the 1980s, there was disagreement among scientists about the Earth's earliest atmosphere, this was resolved in the late 1990s. We are now confident that the early atmosphere was high in reduced gases.

Feng Tian, Owen B. Toon, Alexander A. Pavlov, and H. De Sterck

2005 "Hydrogen-Rich Early Earth Atmosphere" Science 13 May 2005; 308: 1014-1017;

Genda, Hidenori & Abe, Yutaka

2003 “Survival of a proto-atmosphere through the stage of giant impacts: the mechanical aspects” Icarus 164:149

Holland, Heinrich D.

1999 “When did the Earth’s atmosphere become oxic? A Reply.” The Geochemical News #100: 20-22

The 25 years or so of scientific research Mr. Brecheen has missed also saw important results for the formation of organic chemistry in environments apart from the Miller/Urey atmosphere. Particularly in marine hydrothermal vents, but even outer space.

Engel, Michael H., Bartholomew Nagy,

1982 "Distribution and Enantiomeric Composition of Amino Acids in the Murchison Meteorite", Nature, Vol 296, p. 838

Chyba, Christopher F., Paul J. Thomas, Leigh Brookshaw, Carl Sagan

1990 "Cometary Delivery of Organic Molecules to the Early Earth" Science Vol. 249:366-373

Schoonen, Martin A. A., Yong Xu

2001 “Nitrogen Reduction Under Hydrothrmal Vent Conditions: Implications for the Prebiotic Synthesis of C-H-O-N Compounds” Astrobiology 1:133-142

Blochl, Elisabeth, Martin Keller, Gunter Wächtershäuser , Karl Otto Stetter

1992 “Reactions depending on iron sulfide and linking geochemistry with biochemistry” PNAS-USA v.89: 8117-8120

There are two major ironies; First, the chemistry that Brecheen ignorantly claimed could not support the origin of life, formaldehyde and cyanide, are really essential precursors to life.

Matthews CN.

1992 Hydrogen cyanide polymerization: a preferred cosmochemical pathway. J. Br. Interplanet Soc. 45(1):43-8

Saladino R, Crestini C, Ciambecchini U, Ciciriello F, Costanzo G, Di Mauro E.

2004 "Synthesis and degradation of nucleobases and nucleic acids by formamide in the presence of montmorillonites" Chembiochem. Nov 5;5(11):1558-66

Borquez E, Cleaves HJ, Lazcano A, Miller SL

2005 "An investigation of prebiotic purine synthesis from the hydrolysis of HCN polymers"

Orig Life Evol Biosph. Apr;35(2):79-90

And, the second is that in the last paper Stanley Miller co-authored, and published posthumously, it is demonstrated conclusively that the "building blocks of life" will from naturally even in atmospheres with some free oxygen;

Cleaves, H. James, John H. Chalmers, Antonio Lazcano, Stanley L. Miller, Jeffrey L. Bada

2008 “A Reassessment of Prebiotic Organic Synthesis in Neutral Planetary Atmospheres” Orig Life Evol Biosph (2008) 38:105–115

So, Mr. Brecheen, you owe some people an apology starting with textbook publishers, scientists, and teachers.

Brecheen's argument is this.

Brecheen: I don't know how life started, so instead of investigating and weighing the evidence, let's just say some invisible being somehow *poofed* it into existence, OK? My religious faith tends to make me only listen to people who support my own beliefs. I ignore everything else. Besides, I have a big religious base who will eat this up, and their votes are what is important!

Scientific Community: The truth is important. Being honest is important. Just because you don't know something about our natural world, doesn't mean you can make up any explanation you want and call it fact. We need to look at the evidence as objectively as possible and test hypotheses. We have investigated evolution in this way, and the evidence is overwhelming. It is one of our strongest theories.

Brecheen: I don't need to read the scientific journals or investigate. I can fully explain anything. God did it. You see? I just explained everything. In fact, I don't even need to put my thoughts into my own words. I can just plagiarize an author I agree with. I'm sure nobody will notice. >_>

Scientific Community: We will continue using the scientific method to reveal the truths of the world we live in. This method got us to the moon, allowed us to create the internet, and continues to provide many other luxuries that we take for granted. You have the right to believe that the God of your choice waved his/her/its wand in order to create the diversity of species, but please don't make the absurd claim that blind religious faith is the equivalent of science.

Josh, go ahead and lay out your evidence for the existence of a divine creator and for creationism, or for any other alternative hypothesis for that matter. Keep in mind that -- like everything in science -- it has got to be something we can test. It must be falsifiable. I'm sure we would all love to see what you come up with. :)

No, I don't really think Josh will take me up on this. If he ever tried to, I'm sure he would simply look for some small gap in our knowledge of evolution and claim that it is evidence supporting his particular religious belief.

Sen. Brecheen continues to display his ignorance of evolution, simply regurgitating creationists’ false claims. The Miller-Urey experiments he mentions are incomplete. There have been experiments since those he lists where the atmospheric mixture used was close to that thought to be present at time early life may have started; the results pretty much confirmed earlier studies. Even so, the origin of life is, strictly speaking, not a part of evolution, which is the study of changes through time after life was formed. I can be quite sure that Brecheen has read none of the scientific articles on the subject. The Miller-Urey experiment is not a major emphasis in current textbooks and the difficulties of such an experiment is usually included in the discussion. Yes, much remains to learn about the origin of life, but that does not negate what we know about evolution.

Lee Strobel’s book, which I have read, was not a scientifically reviewed book and has been severely criticized by competent scientists. As usual, creationists only pick and choose what they cite. The Java man reference is another of the often repeated criticisms one sees in creationist material. All of the other now extensive fossil evidence on human evolution is just ignored.

Brecheen says “For the blind followers, it is making monkey out of them as they ignore the full gamut of scientific facts.” Indeed, the full gamut of scientific facts provides overwhelming evidence for evolution in literally tens of thousands of truly scientific refereed publications. It is the creationists like Brecheen that ignore the truly scientific facts.

To what does “there is one thing the scientific community agrees upon” refer? There is much in evolutionary biology not yet known, but lots that is. New knowledge on evolutionary mechanisms is produced at a high rate, There is much more to learn, but the current information provides what is truly overwhelming evidence. What have the creations produced? Not one iota of scientific evidence for their view. They can only try to denigrate evolution, with no real evidence other than their Biblical references. Faith in religious beliefs is not science and can never be, since, as others have pointed out in comments to Brecheen’s articles, science can not address the supernatural. Science has no way to address religious beliefs and religious beliefs can not decide science. Thus, science is not and can not be a religion! Also, polls do not govern science and science must ignore them, even if there is a ‘supermajority.’ Most developed countries in the World do not show such poll results. The U.S. is next to last (only Turkey is lower in the acceptance of evolution, but none of these polls can determine what science is or how it works. Most of the developed World laughs at us for such poll results.

Brecheen’s statement of “Hypothesis as fact” again shows that he knows nothing of science and the scientific method. Evolution is NOT a hypothesis; it is a scientific theory (not the same meaning as used in everyday parlance) based on numerous facts.

We want to be like Texas – and Louisiana and Kentucky – that are receiving much derision for their recent creationism and anti-evolutionism? Then forget about attracting the biomedical and similar technical industries to Oklahoma in the future as our reputation for ignorance reaches new heights.

Brecheen must have had someone that knows how to write correct English in this article; it is somewhat better than his first piece, but only in that one regard!

What is plagued with falsehoods are most of this Senator's statements.

Senator Brecheen,

You have failed to defend from criticism your most recent junkyard of confused rhetoric, so I question why you have advanced this nonsense.

Several days ago, the president of the Atheist Community of Tulsa challenged you to publicly debate the aspects contained in your previous commentary. Why have you not responded to him? Why do you seem unwilling to debate the nonsense you intend to introduce as legislation?

Your position is demonstrably flawed, but I suspect you will ignore pertinent rebuttals and continue to grandstand for your gullible constituents. I suppose a YouTube video is necessary to refute, worldwide, your perpetual ignorance.

I was a professor in a class that the Senator took when he was in college. This nonsense about creationism was not part of his curriculum. I would say that he could have a promising political career. However, he won't get there by proposing legislation that has no chance of passing constitutional muster. He also needs to come forth concerning the plagiarism in his previous article. His future political opponents have a strong issue to throw at him. His potentially promising political career may be derailed before it gets started. In the movie The American President there is a great line. Michael Douglas, as the President, says "I was so busy trying to keep my job that I forgot to do my job". Senator Brecheen needs to stop running for reelection long enough to actually demonstrate that he knows how to govern. Filing frivolous bills in the legislature and writing scientific nonsense in the newspaper might be a way to get reelected but it is not a demonstration that he knows how to govern.