Did Adam and Eve Have Navels: Debunking Pseudoscience by Martin Gardner

Did Adam and Eve Have Navels?: Debunking Pseudoscienceby Anonymous

Reader Rating:
See Detailed Ratings

April 13, 2002: Half Truths (Suppressed Evidence): Any statement usually intended to deceive that omits some of the facts necessary for an accurate description.

I agree it is good to debunk bogus pseudo-science. At the same time, I think most people would agree that in any critique being factually accurate, fair, and honest to context is important; and therefore, when quoting, summarizing, and paraphrasing from an original source one should do so accurately, fairly, and in context to assure one does not distort the original sources meaning in any way by adding or subtracting from it.

In Did Adam and Eve Have Navels on page 42 Gardner states (my emphasis): ?On page 1352 of the Urantia Book we learn that the Jupiter-Saturn encounter of May 29, 7 B.C., gave the appearance of a single star, which we know it didn't, and this accounts for what the supermortals call the 'beautiful legend' that grew up about the 'Star.'?

Later Gardner refers to the Star of Bethlehem as a legend or beautiful myth, and states on page 44:

?In my not-so-humble opinion, the story of the Star is pure myth, similar to many ancient legends about the miraculous appearance of a star to herald a great event, such as the birth of Caesar, Pythagoras, Krishna (the Hindu savior), and other famous persons and deities.?

As the full quotation of the paragraph below shows, this is essentially what the paragraph in question in the Urantia Book is saying; that there was no Star of Bethlehem, it was only a myth, a legend, albeit a beautiful one, and that ancient man was ?continually spinning such beautiful myths about the lives of their religious leaders and political heroes.?

The actual and complete paragraph in the Urantia Book states: ?These wise men saw no star to guide them to Bethlehem. The beautiful legend of the star of Bethlehem originated in this way: Jesus was born August 21 at noon, 7 B.C. On May 29, 7 B.C., there occurred an extraordinary conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces. And it is a remarkable astronomic fact that similar conjunctions occurred on September 29 and December 5 of the same year. Upon the basis of these extraordinary but wholly natural events the well-meaning zealots of the succeeding generation constructed the appealing legend of the star of Bethlehem and the adoring Magi led thereby to the manger, where they beheld and worshiped the newborn babe. Oriental and near-Oriental minds delight in fairy stories, and they are continually spinning such beautiful myths about the lives of their religious leaders and political heroes. In the absence of printing, when most human knowledge was passed by word of mouth from one generation to another, it was very easy for myths to become traditions and for traditions eventually to become accepted as facts.? (Urantia Book 1352)

Gardner's statement above implies that the Urantia Book claims ?the Jupiter-Saturn encounter of May 29, 7 B.C., gave the appearance of a single star?? This is false and a distortion of the actual paragraph?s meaning. The first sentence in the paragraph states clearly ?These wise men saw no star to guide them to Bethlehem.? Nowhere in the paragraph in question is it stated that the Jupiter-Saturn encounter gave the appearance of a single star. I searched the online version of the Urantia Book and could find no statement that the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction ?gave the appearance of a single star.? This appears to indicate that...