
Originally published at Enter the Jabberwock. May 19th, 2008. Moving On Up! Tract #205. Art by Jack Chick - © 2008 Chick Publications
Originally published at Enter the Jabberwock
May 19, 2008
Moving On Up! - Tract #205 (MVUP)
Art by Jack Chick - © 2008 Chick Publications
Since evolution says there is no God, anything goes, right? But you still have an appointment with Him.
Introduction ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
Well we’re movin on up, To the shoreside. To a deluxe apartment on the sand. Movin on up, To the shoreside. We’re finally gonna walk on the land. Another one about evolution, this time really stretching every far-fetched, contrived argument well beyond any point of credibility. If I ever discover there was a single person in the world who was convinced by any of the ludicrous arguments put forth in this Tract, I… well… I’m not sure what I’ll do. I think I’ll spend the rest of my life crying. He’s really outdone himself this time. This one… it’s… it’s just the worst. The art isn’t terrible, but the message certainly is. This is going to be a ranty/lengthy Dissection, but hey — I haven’t done one in a while. |
Cover / Page 1 ⇑ ⇓
Page 2 ⇑ ⇓
Page 3 ⇑ ⇓
Page 4 ⇑ ⇓
Page 5 ⇑ ⇓
Page 6 ⇑ ⇓
Page 7 ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
|
![]() |
This is how we became rich, white, pudgy, golf-playing, yuppie fucksters!
Okay, here’s my explanation of the Theory of Evolution to fundamentalists. Regular readers may have heard this before, but I think it bears repeating (with a little elaboration and detailed explanation for fundies reading): There’s an island in Micronesia called Pingelap. Years ago, there was a man there who had a rare form of what’s called “achromatopsia”. What that means is, unlike colorblindness, people with achromatopsia are incapable of perceiving a particular color. Anyway, a typhoon wiped out a large portion of the island’s inhabitants, and this man was one of a handful of survivors. This man went on to replenish the island’s population, resulting in an abnormally high percentage of the island’s current inhabitants being afflicted with this normally rare disease. In other words, an extremely rare trait became relatively common as the result of a population bottleneck a number of generations ago. The Aceves family in Mexico has another rare disorder — hypertrichosis. What this means is that they grow excessive hair on parts of the body the rest of us do not, including their eyelids. In extreme cases, dense hair covers their entire faces, giving them the appearance of wolf-men. Now, if the man on Pingelap had had hypertrichosis instead of achromatopsia, there would be an island with a large population of extremely hairy people. In other words, population bottlenecks can make any genetic defects and changes commonplace. Now, if you extrapolate (expand in application) this trend over millions of years, taking into account the relatively tiny population of humans (and other animals) and our inability at the time to deal well with severe natural disasters and even everyday problems (accidents, disease, problematic births, etc), it’s easy to see how these mutations could propagate and snowball. If hypertrichosis emerges and combines with an emerged dwarfism, or Down Syndrome, or webbed toes/fingers, or any number of other things, after a while, what you have doesn’t come close to resembling what you started with. If there was a snake that grew legs and reproduced with other snakes and managed to pass on the mutation, and then the snakes with legs were better able to find food and shelter and other necessities because of this advantage, then snakes with legs would excel. It doesn’t mean that snakes without legs would die off just because they weren’t as fit, but we’d now have this new creature with legs that isn’t quite a snake and isn’t just a one-off fluke. That isn’t to say that any genetic deviation at all results in a completely new species, but substantial enough changes do indeed warrant reclassification. Otherwise, every feathered animal that flies would just be considered the exact same thing (a hummingbird is a duck is a parrot is a northern shoveler), which is wholly inaccurate. It also doesn’t mean that every beneficial mutation that could possibly take place will actually happen, or that it will eventually develop in every genetic line of a species. The answer to “if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes?” is “if some humans have Down Syndrome, how come not ALL humans have Down Syndrome?” One mutation — even a relatively common one — is not guaranteed to take place within an entire species. And that’s a quick rundown of evolution for fundamentalists. I know I’m wasting my breath… or, well, keystrokes… because these words will splash off their minds like oil from a wet rock since they have a defense mechanism against even THINKING about or CONSIDERING anything they’ve been brainwashed into believing would be contrary to their beliefs, but I figured I’d get this out there. Maybe it will help someone, somewhere, somehow, but probably not. Anyway, no, Jack, the concept doesn’t work the way you think it does. |
Page 8 ⇑ ⇓
Page 9 ⇑ ⇓
Page 10 ⇑ ⇓
Page 11 ⇑ ⇓
Page 12 ⇑ ⇓
Page 13 ⇑ ⇓
Page 14 ⇑ ⇓
Page 15 ⇑ ⇓
Page 16 ⇑ ⇓
Page 17 ⇑ ⇓
Page 18 ⇑ ⇓
Page 19 ⇑ ⇓
Page 20 ⇑ ⇓
Page 21 ⇑ ⇓
Page 22 ⇑ ⇓
Conclusion ⇑ ⇓
![]() |
An important message, or perhaps not so important
I guess I have a bit of explaining to do. You probably remember that I said I’d start doing more Dissections when I was finished writing my book, and I haven’t really been making good on that. In fact, Dissections have become somewhat of a rarity. Truth is, I’ve gotten a bit burned out. Not so much on Chick specifically, but on fundamentalists and oppressive theocratic nutjobs of any flavor. It’s not that I don’t enjoy mocking their laughably ridiculous belief structures and ideas, but, well, it depresses me. These people — the ones who so proudly champion their moral superiority — aren’t moral at all. In fact, they’re some of the least moral people, regardless of however many charities they might support or fundraisers they might organize. They aren’t motivated by genuine goodness — if they were, they wouldn’t need fear of God and hell. They’re driven by obedience, by the carrot of heaven and the stick of hell. So often, they speak of “temptation”, as though it’s an urge or desire they routinely experience to be a terrible person and the only way they manage to resist is by praying to God. That scares me, a lot. They don’t care about people, only about their own personal salvation. Yeah, sure, they might “convert” other people, but it’s all ultimately because they believe that if they don’t, they will themselves go to hell. They have to try to domineer everyone else’s lives because it’s the only way THEY will make it to heaven, it’s part of their “personal relationship with Jesus”. And that’s still all mostly about souls than about people themselves anyway. It would be dangerous to remove their belief system, because then we’d have a bunch of thoroughly dangerous people walking around without their artificial boogeyman consciences to scare them away from raping babies and such, but it would be really fucking nice if they’d stop acting like they could speak from a position of moral authority. I’m more moral than they are by epic magnitudes, and they have no place telling me what I can and cannot do. It’s like a schizophrenic on half a dose of their medication telling someone without schizophrenia that they have to take the same pills in order to ignore the voices in the toaster. They never once stop to take a good critical look at the Bible and analyze it from the perspective of real morality. A moral God wouldn’t hand out infinite punishments. A moral God wouldn’t condemn people to such infinite punishments simply by virtue of being born a human. A moral God wouldn’t arbitrarily restrict the minds of the first two people he creates so that they aren’t aware of good and bad, and then become infuriated with them when they disobey him and become no longer retarded. A moral God wouldn’t ask a man to kill his son for no reason, and then stop him at the last minute “as a test”. A moral God wouldn’t completely destroy a man’s life and family just to prove a point to Satan. In fact, I can’t think of a single instance in which God demonstrates that he’s actually good. At least, without being a total asshole shortly afterward. It seems to me the real villain of the Bible… is God. That’s right — fundamentalists worship the devil. If you’re going to buy into this whole “good/evil” deity mythology story, well, it’s easy to spot evil when you see it, and the angry, wrathful God depicted in the Bible is clearly the mother of all terrible nightmare monsters. Nothing else we’ve ever managed to come up with — the Holocaust, war, biological warfare, terrorism, Freddy Krueger, murder, rape, corpsefucking, every villain in every work of fiction ever — is as sinister and cruel as an omnipotent being that will guiltlessly condemn innocent people to an eternity of the most unimaginable pain. I’m not by any means a religious person. I try to act on others according to what they individually find find good and bad, without any consideration to any kind of belief system or authoritarian dictate. That’s true morality: Treating individuals as they want to be treated, and ensuring that nobody violates anyone’s consent. It’s difficult because it varies from person to person, but that’s how it works: If you want to know what’s right and what’s wrong, ASK. (There’s more to this subject, but I’m writing another full post about it.) You shouldn’t be good or bad to other people because of eternal repercussions, you should be good to other people because, well, they’re people with thoughts and feelings and emotions, and because you’re a person with thoughts and feelings and emotions. But if I had to take religion seriously, and buy into some kind of theology, I’d say that the Biblical God is the same as the Biblical devil, and that the Bible itself is a tool used to imprison anyone who believes in either. What it calls “Original Sin” is more like a gift that binds us and allows us to reject this entire system, to see it for what it really is, to identify evil when we see it. Maybe that’s why the Biblical God was so upset with Adam and Eve — because they could call him out for what he really was. The Tree of Knowledge is the real Jesus: A savior to provide us a means from escaping a cruel God by choosing not to subscribe to anything in his book of lies. Heaven, Hell and Earth have all struck me as particularly prison-like anyway. What’s funny is, whether I’m secular or not, this theology can still apply without any alteration to my lifestyle. The best way to believe in God is to not believe in God, because if there is truly some loving and caring omnipotent entity out there, he’s going to love us whether we kiss his ass or not, and is going to respect us more if we were good people without needing to constantly cower in fear worrying about the conditions of our afterlives. A genuinely loving God would be proud of me for living a secular life, and for showing consideration for other people without needing fear as a motivator. A genuinely loving God is infinitely better than the monster depicted in the Bible, but I still don’t believe in him anyway. |
Further Reading ⇑ ⇓
- Vintage page at Enter the Jabberwock (Courtesy of Archive.org)
- Product page at Chick Publications
Other Reviews & Commentaries ⇑
- User Slick146 (Space Battles Forum) - https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/lets-read-chick-tracts.525049/page-33#post-36671074
- User FreudianSlip (Space Battles Forum) (via Boolean Union) - https://boolean-union.com/dissections/spacebattles/FRDSLP.CHICK.MVUP.DISCT.html
- Bible Reloaded (YouTube Video) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiMZRHLGhgk
Jabberwock