It must be my age because I have been getting more confused lately.
For a long time, I have referred to the book and both movies,derived from the late Swedish author Stieg Larssons, as The Girl with the Butterfly Tattoo.
Of course everyone knows it is “dragon,” instead of “butterfly.”
If I had butterflies on the brain six months ago, I think my whole body must be permeated with them after viewing Lad Allen’s DVD Metamorphosis: The Beauty &Design of Butterflies. (Illustra Media Series) You can get it at:
www.amazon.com or http://www.metamorphosisthefilm.com/
No, I haven’t developed a sudden interest in entomology.
I had to review it for an interview with the producer for Phyllis Schlafly‘s hour-long syndicated radio program.
It is always an honor for me to sit in for this prominent woman, conservative author and political activist when she is speaking before some large assembly around the country.
The video was marvelous but I had to admit it was a tough sell for a radio program.
From the very beginning I thought this would be a tough interview because the pure natural beauty of the Monarch has to be seen to be appreciated.
How can I show pictures on the radio?
Allen would have been better served on television.
But persevere we did!
I was deeply impressed by the deep and varied complexity of the flittering creature.
But of course Allen did not appear on our program just to discuss the butterfly by itself but he wanted to talk about it in terms of its scientific and metaphysical relationship with an Intelligent Designer.
I asked him why the Monarch?
He said there were lots of different species to choose from but they had to choose one that they could videotape easily and could track through all of its habits and routines.
They would never have attempted this with the species that I think is an even better choice than the Monarch and that is the Bengal Tiger.
Allen said they did not want to be eaten by their subject before finishing the DVD.
When you compare the Bengal Tiger and the Monarch butterfly with the sketchy fossil record of Darwinian biologists I think one need conclude that what the left is selling in not scientific truth but a politicized agenda that defines another sector of the centuries-long culture war.
For such a tiny being to have that much detail, both inside and outside, is a visible proof of the invisible God that thousands of scientists have so much trouble in accepting.
The navigational system of the Monarch’s eyes allows them to traverse 2500 miles during their annual migration from the warm climates of the Unites States to the milkweed plants which they need for breeding in temperate Mexico.
This alone is enough to make me wonder aloud how supposedly learned and highly educated scientists cannot not see the handiwork of God or at least some Intelligent Designer at work.
For anyone to say or argue that the Monarch butterfly just evolved randomly is so silly an idea one would be tempted to laugh in the collective faces of this highly educated scientific elite.
The whole notion of Darwinian evolutionary is an insult to our human intelligence.
Why students fail to question it in school or when they are free of the propaganda force of our schools and the power of the grade, they don’t renounce it, is way beyond my understanding.
I told Allen during the program that according to my historical understanding, until the Renaissance, the idea of God, as the creator of the world and the center of the universe, was the central feature in Western Civilization.
It was the humanistic ideas of the Renaissance that relegated God to the periphery of intellectual and cultural pursuits.
This picked up even greater steam during the French Revolution and its aftermath.
The Deism of that period preached a passive God who did not seem very interested in His creatures’ lives.
Like some sort of sadistic voyeur, He just watches.
As the intellectual elite grew more godlike in its own self estimation, they conspired to get rid of God on earth by killing His servants—His priests and nuns and destroying His houses of worship.
Still He persisted.
One divine faculty they never could explain away was His powers of creation.
His creation was the last stumbling block.
In what might be called supply side biology, Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution provided the elite with a scientific lever with which they could remove the creation boulder.
He published his theory with compelling evidence for evolution in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, overcoming scientific rejection of earlier concepts of transmutation of species.
By the 1870s the scientific community and much of the general public accepted evolution as a fact.
Even though it was a mere theory, and violated the scientific method that includes observation and experimentation, it is accepted as the absolute gospel truth, and fast became the false idol of the new religion that thousands of skeptical scientists genuflect before.
God was finally, after many centuries eliminated.
He was proven as a non-Person, who need not apply on Christmas and Easter, feast days that are slowly slipping from the American cultural consciousness.
Does that mean there is no God?
Of course not.
All scientists know that nature abhors a vacuum.
As a result millions of their egos are lining up to collectively file as the new god of the universe.
The boundless ego of man is ready and willing to be worshiped and deified.
Millions will bow before them in the public arena and will never question their heterodoxy.
I can hear their Big Amen resounding in college and university classrooms all over America, while God’s statues, relics and icons are being removed like those of a fallen dictator after a revolution.
To me it is nothing more than a discordant choir, clamoring the empty verses of a decaying philosophy that signifies nothing and has been filled with the wet dreams of god-deniers throughout history.
When they have all passed from the earth, God will still be sitting in His architectural seat and taking joy in those who still love Him.
When I was in college (1960 -64) I recall being taught
that we could believe in evolution as long as we be-
lieved that somewhere along the line God breathed
a human soul into the evolving creature. Never did
buy that idea. I basically believed in Genesis. How-
ever later I read an article in OSV written by a VERY prominent cleric that said Genesis was written in response to the paganism of the times and we
need not take it literally. I don’t mean to indicate that
I believe all the details in Genesis such as the amount of time in which God created the universe. The confusion, even among churchmen, has been a plus to the atheist who have infiltrated our schools at all levels.
Recall the term which we heard in the mid 90s :
OBE – Outcome Based Education. The outcomes
were to be values and attitudes which of course be-
long in the home as opposed to the government
schools. Though we no longer hear the term OBE
it is alive, up and running. AND evoution is being
taught in our schools today to instill in students an
attitude which is supportive of atheism!!!
Unfortunately the Cardinal Bernardin Legacy: the
Seamless Garment is every bit as alive as OBE and
thus is providing the basis for the social justice/
socialism movement in both Catholic and Protestant
Churches.
JustFaith, Lent 4.5, Support for illegals, are all
enabling our current administration to destroy our
Constitutional Republic.
Many of you are aware of some of the above but
perhaps do not know about Lent 4.5 – I urge you to
google and become informed about it. It is very
green AND Green is the new RED!!!
MF
Comment by M. F. — January 19, 2012 @ 3:37 pm
BB, I admire your thoughtful pursuit of proving the existence of God through the complex Monarch butterfly. Keep putting the word out there and hopefully it will open minds . During the 60′s and 70′s we went through a period where miracles were explained away. Thank God Jesus said ” The gates of hell shall not prevail”. I cling to that. Satan has never rested from trying to win souls away from God. We need Our Lady whose heel with crush the serpent. Rosaries.
Comment by Mary B — January 21, 2012 @ 3:16 am
Good article. There are tens of thousands of other examples from nature of the inexplicable complexity of his creatures, from bacteria, to ants on up. What of the beautiful, fantastically colored fish, denizens found at depths of thousands of feet in ocean caverns where there is no light and never has been? Made that way for the pure joy of the Creator, with no scientific rationale defensible for “survival of the fittest.” To bone up for discussions with Darwinists, your followers need to read Phillip Johnson’s book “Darwin on Trial”(1991) and/or watch the entertaining, delightful short movie made by Ben Stein, “Expelled”. The latter reveals, from one on one interviews, how the careers of multiple scientists have been derailed by the mere public expression of any doubt about the utility and veracity of Darwin’s theory.
Comment by LT — January 24, 2012 @ 1:43 am