Creationist Wisdom #806: The Lake of Fire

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Spectrum, a Gannett newspaper published in St. George, Utah. It’s titled In God’s name. If you go there, it’s the first of two letters at that link. The newspaper has a comments feature.

Because today’s writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. We’ll use only his first name, which is Manuel. This is the fourth time we’ve written about one of his letters. He’s from Oklahoma but his letters get published in newspapers all over the country, so we just realized they’re all from the same guy. For his earlier gems, see #423: Evolution is Folly, and then #547: False Teachings, and most recently #766: 165 Million Years. Incredibly, the Tulsa Beacon has an archive of his letters that they’ve published.

Excerpts from his latest letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

Fear of God has almost disappeared in America. Time is the new god to many.

Huh? What’s Manuel talking about? He says:

To unbelievers, it is time which gets the credit for everything God Almighty created. They are totally ignorant of God and His Eternal Word. Fiction has displaced reality in the name of science.

This sounds serious. Let’s read on:

We hear a meteorologist say “We are scientists, we know!” Or we see a bearded prospector on TV, look at his find and say, “This is so-and-so million years old.”

Yeah, those bearded prospectors are all crazy. Manuel gives us another example:

Then, there were the two scientists who claimed they discovered the “The First Fossil,” an object which they claimed is about 300 miles long in the center of the Earth.

Was one of those scientists Jules Verne? After that he says:

But did scientists ask where all the matter to cover the fossil came from, to form the rest of the earth, which is almost 8,000 miles in diameter? Doubt it! In their minds, they do believe this earth was formed by layers and layers of rock and they have assigned a certain age to some layers.

They’re all fools! Manuel continues:

Because individuals fail to read and to learn the Word of God they end up believing man’s false ideas. Eventually they end up in Hell, and later the Lake of Fire, for eternity. That lake of fire is Satan’s future home for eternity, and he wants your company.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] The Lake of Fire!

And now we come to the end:

The obvious way to prevent going there is to study God’s Word, the Holy Bible, and by hearing His word. God knows and loves each one of us. Service to God is not slavery, but a noble undertaking.

Go ahead and ignore Manuel if you want to, dear reader, but you know what your problem is? You can’t handle the truth!

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Ken Ham ‘Debunks’ Richard Dawkins

This is creationion science at it’s best, dear reader. It’s a battle of intellectual giants. In one corner, we have Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia. Ol’ Hambo is famed not only for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG), but also for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum, and for building Ark Encounter, an exact replica of Noah’s Ark.

And in the other corner we have Richard Dawkins, who needs no introduction.

However, this is no ordinary battle. In fact, it’s entirely imaginary. Ol’ Hambo refers to a video that features Dawkins, and then he tells us why Dawkins gets everything wrong.

Hambo’s post is titled We Agree with Richard Dawkins (Sort Of). Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and bible references omitted:

Famed UK evolutionist Richard Dawkins recently appeared in an interesting video posted to the website Big Think. In this video, the atheist and biologist argues for objective truth and the importance of both intuition and evidence. Now, we don’t say this very often, but we actually agree with some of the points that Richard Dawkins maks in this video! He says, “Science . . . is committed to objective truth” and “science works.”


Now, we would agree with Dawkins here — observational (or operational) science works! And it only works because we don’t live in a universe that arose by natural processes, such as the one Dawkins believes in. If the universe were a result of such random processes, why should we expect the laws of nature to work the same tomorrow as they did today? And why would they work the same here on earth as they do throughout the universe? Why should everything be orderly and predictable? This only makes sense in a biblical worldview where there is a Creator who has ordered everything and upholds the universe and who created the laws of nature and the laws of logic.

Yes. Everything is orderly and predictable — except for all those miracles that the bible tells us about. Then he brings up an old clunker:

Of course, Dawkins fails to make a distinction between operational science (which is testable, observable, and repeatable) and historical science (which is not directly testable, observable, or repeatable).

For our rebuttal of that, see Common Creationist Claims Confuted. Then Hambo quotes Dawkins:

The only reason to believe anything is true is that there’s evidence.

Aha! Now Hambo rips into him:

It’s ironic that he urges scientists to discard their hypotheses and not allow emotional attachment to influence their decision if their ideas aren’t supported by evidence. But does he actually practice what he preaches? Not at all. His inconsistencies are glaring! Molecules-to-man evolution is not supported by the evidence, and several lines of evidence soundly argue against the possibility of such a notion. For example,

Hambo presents three killer arguments against evolution:

The law of biogenesis states that life only comes from other life. Evolutionary origin-of-life stories break this scientific law. Despite years of trying in laboratories, scientists have never been able to create life from nonlife and there is no observational evidence that such a thing could have happened.

DNA is a complex language system, and language systems only come from an intelligent mind. They never arise by random chance. Evolutionists cannot satisfactorily explain the origin of DNA.

Evolution requires the addition of vast amounts of brand-new genetic information to turn an amoeba into a man. Yet there is no known process that adds this necessary genetic information.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The so-called “law” of biogenesis is debunked in Common Creationist Claims Confuted. As for DNA being “a complex language system,” that’s debunked at the TalkOrigins Index to Creationist Claims — see The genetic code is a language. And Hambo’s nonsense about “genetic information” is debunked in Phlogiston, Vitalism, and Information.

After unleashing his killer arguments, Hambo tells us:

Evolutionists have to ignore the evidence when it comes to all of these questions (and more!) and come up with “just-so” stories to explain what might have happened. But these stories aren’t based on operational science. They’re based on imagination and speculation. According to Dawkins’ statements, he should no longer be an evolutionist! Why is he holding on to a bankrupt antiscientific idea? Because this is a spiritual battle, and he is in rebellion against God.

Yes, that explains it. Hambo continues:

Sadly, Dawkins argues for objective truth while ignoring the ultimate objective truth — God’s Word. It is true throughout the ages, regardless of culture, and regardless of whether anyone believes it or not.

Dawkins is a fool! And now we come to the end:

It is our prayer that someday, before it is too late, Richard Dawkins will recognize his need of a Savior and will repent and trust in Christ.

So there you are, dear reader. The great battle is over. The droolers are cheering wildly. Dawkins has been defeated, and Hambo has once again demonstrated that he is the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else.

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

ICR: Bird Fossil Is Proof of the Flood

Tis is getting tiresome, but it probably thrills the droolers who eagerly absorb whatever they read at the website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the fountainhead of young-earth creationist wisdom. And it’s another example of what we call the Creationist Scientific Method:

1. Select a conclusion which you hope is true.
2. Find one piece of evidence that possibly might fit.
3. Ignore all other evidence.
4. That’s it.

ICR’s article is titled Stunning Bird Fossil Has Bone Tissue. It was written by Brian Thomas. He’s described at the end of his articles as “Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.” This is ICR’s biographical information on him. Here are some excerpts from his new article, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

Recently, Chinese researchers described their discovery of the “earliest” bird fossil with fused pelvic bones, just like modern birds.

Brian is referring to this paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS): Insight into the growth pattern and bone fusion of basal birds from an Early Cretaceous enantiornithine bird. All you can read without a subscription is the abstract, but PhysOrg wrote about it ten days ago — see: Fossil find pushes back date of earliest fused bones in birds by 40 million years. They say:

A trio of researchers with the Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins of Chinese Academy of Sciences has found evidence that pushes back the earliest example of fused bones in birds by approximately 40 million years. In their paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Min Wang, Zhiheng Li and Zhonghe Zhou describe their study of the fossilized remains of a bird dated to approximately 120 million years ago.


Until now, the consensus among scientists has been that such changes [fused bones] did not occur until just before land-based dinosaurs became extinct. But now, new evidence by the team in China suggests that the time frame will have to be pushed back approximately 40 million years — the bird now represents the oldest known example of fossilized remains showing bone fusion of its major parts.

Let’s find out what Brian makes of this fossil find. He says:

Also like modern birds, this fossil appears to be made of original bone, not mineralized bone (which would be rock). Could any process preserve actual bones for 120 million years?

“Original” bone? We don’t see any mention of that in PNAS or PhysOrg. They refer only to fossil bones. Brian tells us:

The fossil, named Pterygornis dapingfangensis, came from Jehol Biota in northeastern China, and more specifically from a sedimentary rock horizon deemed 120 to 131 million years old. All the other bird fossils with fused hips and arm bones came from later-deposited Cretaceous layers thought to be some 40 million years younger. Thus, the study authors’ main point with this fossil’s description was to reshape the evolutionary origin of birds in a way that would accommodate this 40-million-years out-of-place fossil. But in the process of describing these modern-looking fused bones that challenge tales of flight evolution, these researchers found normal, fresh-looking bird bone.

They found “normal, fresh-looking bird bone”? Brian doesn’t quote anything specifically saying so from the original paper. Instead, he summarizes the researchers’ findings and then says:

Why, after at least 120 million years, do these finely detailed structures still exist? Why haven’t the lacunae, or especially the canals, been filled in with sediment or mineral precipitates after millions of years of Earth’s water cycle? Incessant erosion, deposition, dissolution, temperature change, and precipitation should have devastated these fossils after so much time. The study authors did not ask or answer any questions like these.

Maybe those questions weren’t raised because the research paper makes it clear that they were discussing the structure of fossilized bones? Brian concludes his post with this:

If Noah’s Flood buried this bird in the widespread Jehol sediments alongside thousands of other animals — a catastrophic process that does not happen today — then the mystery of how this bone fossil could look so fresh quickly resolves.

So once again, dear reader, we see how the Creationist Scientific Method, with perhaps a bit of creative exaggeration (a/k/a wishful thinking), proves that the bible is true and evolution is nonsense.

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Klinghoffer: Intelligent Design & Oogity Boogity

Promoters of pseudoscience often take comfort from the fact that some new scientific theories may be ridiculed at first, but eventually they become accepted. The classic example is the vicious hostility encountered by Galileo’s theory — which he backed with observational evidence — that the Earth and the other planets orbit the Sun. There are others. A good example is Alfred Wegener and his theory continental drift

Five years ago, Casey invoked Wegener’s theory and predicted that like it, one day the Discoveroids’ “theory” of intelligent design would be accepted, and their brave struggle will be universally praised — see The Discovery Institute and the Ugly Duckling. As we said then:

Alfred Wegener proposed a theory of continental drift in 1912. Alas, he had no supporting evidence — other than the easily observable fact that the continents seem to fit together like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Wegener was never regarded as a kook, however. He later provided evidence of similar geological structures and fossils on opposite oceanic coastlines, which supported his hypothesis that the land masses has once been joined; but he needed a mechanism that could cause the continents to move around, and without that his idea didn’t go anywhere. Unfortunately, he died before his hypothesis was accepted in the 1950s, after the discovery of evidence like seafloor spreading and mid-ocean ridges.

Casey’s post was laughable at the time, but what’s even funnier is that the same argument is still being made by the Discoveroids today. Their latest post is How to Think About Minority Science Views — The Case of Plate Tectonics. It was written by David Klinghoffer, a Discoveroid “senior fellow” (i.e., flaming, full-blown creationist), who eagerly functions as their journalistic slasher and poo flinger. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

The idea that continents drift is now taken for granted, but it wasn’t always. In fact, when the theory was proposed by Alfred Wegener in 1912, it was mocked, until decades later after Wegener had already died, when the theory was ultimately accepted. The issue was one of mechanism. Wegener couldn’t adequately explain what was driving the continents apart. He did know that the evidence, including the way continents could be pictured as fitting together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, indicated strongly that they did so.

Yes, yes, we know all that. Then he says:

If this sounds familiar, it should. The debate about intelligent design is in many ways a replay of the controversy around Wegener’s theory.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Let’s read on:

Over the question of a mechanism, one of the more childish Darwin activists calls ID “Oogity Boogity.” [Klinghoffer links to a post by your Curmudgeon: Intelligent Design Has a Mechanism.]

After that, Klinghoffer devotes a few paragraphs to Wegener’s theory and his ultimate vindication. Near the end he says:

Will ID, like Wegener’s theory, win the day against the majority view? And if so, how soon? Of course, that’s impossible to say, partly for reasons that go beyond science.

Reasons beyond science? What are those? Klinghoffer explains:

One distinction between the theories is that the history of the continents and their arrangement has no particular significance for philosophy, whereas the history of life, how biological novelties emerge, obviously does.

Is Klinghoffer admitting that the Discoveroids’ “theory” is really a theological doctrine? He doesn’t quite say it, but it’s certainly implied. He ends his post with this:

In the differing treatments of the ideas, at Wikipedia and elsewhere, that distinction probably makes all the difference.

We respectfully disagree. It’s not merely the way places like Wikipedia arbitrarily treat the subject. The problem is that Intelligent design literally isn’t science at all. The Discoveroids’ founding manifesto, The Wedge Document, makes that quite clear. It states that the goal of the intelligent design movement is to replace science as currently practiced with “theistic and Christian science.”

The Discoveroids’ “theory” will never be accepted. Why? Although Klinghoffer may think this is childish, the reason is that intelligent design is nothing but Oogity Boogity!

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article