The Laminin Protein

This image is a textbook illustration of a protein called "laminin." I first encountered not in my biology class but in visiting a friend's church, the perhaps unfortunately named "Sulphur Creek Bible Church." What were these people doing talking about laminin proteins? Well, perhaps you noticed, as they do, that it is "shaped like a cross." And if you are a true believer, perhaps you also see it is an illustration of the New Testament verse: "For by him all things were created; things in heaven and on earth , visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." Well, perhaps you may not see it that way - but some very religious and very influential people do and this image has been used to make that exact argument - that we can deduce, from the shape of a protein molecule, the truth of the claims made in the Bible.

An example:


If you start at 2:30 and watch the remaining five minutes, you can see how he uses this image to argue that the visual appearance of the laminin protein illustrates the truth of the New Testament.

The image itself, the argument it is being used to make, the people who are making these arguments, and the authority they derive from them are all very interesting. As an example of visual rhetoric it strikes me as especially interesting because this claim is made specifically because of the way something appears to the eye. As an example of religious rhetoric, it's interesting because it is an example of religious people co-opting scientific styles of argumentation in order to advance religious claims. As a science, it's interesting, because by itself the image seems to just be an illustration of some molecules and how they interact.

It's also interesting because you don't actually have to know how a molecule works in order to understand the argument the image is being used to make (and perhaps if you do know how a molecule works, you won't buy it). In the video I linked to above, the preacher asserts that it is, in fact, his ignorance that makes him so convinced, because God is "simple" and everyone can see it, plain as day. While many scientists would probably be appalled, I think this image illustrates several of the things we have discussed in class, in a way specifically connected to visual rhetoric.

We might be reminded, for instance, of popular perceptions of science and visuals not as representations but static snapshots of what "just is," or the facts laid bare. I also wonder about what this says about the unique ways images can be used to make arguments. What kind of arguments can we make with images that we cannot make with words alone? Additionally, how can placing an image within an argumentative context direct viewers to interpret in one way rather than another? And in regards to this specific argument, what can the use of this image reveal about how people negotiate the dichotomy of "science versus religion?" It seems to me that much of this guy's argument relies upon laying out the dichotomy and then "reuniting" the two warring categories. As a more general argumentative technique, how do we see that being used in public discourse?

I could go on and on about this stuff - it's really fascinating to me. I just wanted to share this image because it speaks directly to my interests and, I think, to the goals of this course.