Self-Published Genius #133: Proof of Creationism!

Today we have a new addition to our series about Self-Published Geniuses. This is where we bring you news of authors with a vanity press book in which the author claims to have made paradigm-shattering discoveries, and announces his work by hiring a press release service. We learned about today’s book from one of our clandestine operatives. This one is so well-placed and valuable that he doesn’t even have a code name.

The title of today’s press release — they all have huge titles — is Author Gerald L. Goodwin’s New Book ‘The Twilight of Creation’ is a Faith-Based Read That Tackles the Debate of the Start of Life via Evolution Versus Creationism, and it was issued by Newswire. Here are some excerpts from the press release, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Recent release ‘The Twilight of Creation’ from Covenant Books [Ding Ding!] author Gerald L. Goodwin provides a thought-provoking exploration of the debate revolving around the theory of evolution and the theory of creationism.

We’ve encountered that publisher before. Their website, Covenant Books, says:

Our business model is quite simple – if your manuscript is accepted for publication, we can publish it and bring it to the world-wide market for a relatively inexpensive initial investment [Hee hee!] because we receive a small portion of the royalties you earn.

Okay, they’re a vanity publisher, so the book belongs in our collection! Moving along, the press release says:

Exploring the proof needed to prove creationism, Goodwin provides examples of evidence that lead to the realization that creationism might not be a far-fetched theory after all.

Gasp! This is exciting! After that, the press release tells us:

Gerald L. Goodwin, a graduate of Lamar University with a BBA in accounting [Ooooooooooooh! An accounting major!] and a successful career in sales, has completed his new book, “The Twilight of Creation”: an eye-opening look at the arguments surrounding the theory of creationism, and evidence that it may in fact be correct and supported by history.

Wowie — Creationism may be correct and supported by history! The press release continues, with a quote from the author:

“It is a marvel to this layman how and why most scientists, biologists, and others accept the theory (of evolution) without real challenges or proof,” writes Goodwin. “Science continues to try to prove the theory of evolution year after year, decade after decade to make it more palatable.”

Yeah — but scientists never prove anything! The quote from the author goes on:

Now, why do you suppose, as Christians, we must be able to prove how a God started it all and keeps it going? [Good point!] Again, it is like a sporting event that has one team play without rules and the other compete with the referee challenging every play. So to win this one, we creationists must fight with one hand tied behind our backs. After our preliminary ideas listed, I must now study the creation side, the God side, and offer proof of these ideas.”

It’s not fair! Why should only creationists have to prove stuff? Here’s another quote from the author:

“To begin with, I must define ‘creationism by God.’ Wow, I quickly realized that I must study, identify, and prove that my idea is more valid than that of Mr. Darwin. I must be able to review and refute what all these folks, much more learned than myself, use as proof of creation’s beginning. I found this would require more knowledge than I possessed at that time, but in the following pages, I will present my opinion on this great debate.”

Creationism is a lot of work, but the author did it and it’s all in his book! Here’s more from the author:

“This review of Darwin’s theory and God’s record will be presented from the standpoint of a Christian layman. The text will attempt to outline the pros and cons of each argument, letting you, the reader, to be the final judge. As you may have surmised by now, my aim is to prevail on God’s side. You will be the final judge.”

This book sounds like it’s absolutely wonderful! But that’s enough from the press release. We looked for the book at Amazon, and we found it!

Wowie — it has 99 pages and costs only $13.44 in paperback. What a deal! And yes, Amazon has a “Look inside” feature. Hey — there aren’t any ratings yet. You can be the first!

Okay, dear reader, we’ve given you all the information we can find, and it looks great. Go ahead and buy the thing — and tell ’em the Curmudgeon sent ya!

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

Hambo Reveals an Incredible Accomplishment

This one was found at the website of Answers in Genesis (AIG), the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. It’s titled Letter Sent to AiG Highlights Incredible Accomplishment, and it was written by ol’ Hambo himself. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

We recently received a letter at the AiG ministry that I thought I would share with you. It’s a letter from a mom, Jennifer Campbell, who hopes to visit the Ark Encounter someday. [A great ambition!] She wrote us because she’s very proud of her daughter Caroline for an incredible accomplishment she finished last year: [What was it?] Caroline has written out the entire Bible by hand, “word for word, book by book”!

Wowie! For the moment, your Curmudgeon is stunned. But we must go on. Hambo says:

The mother shares that it took her daughter ten years to finish writing out the Bible [Gasp!] and that “we have researched and have found only a handful of people who have done this and none with a disability.” (Caroline has Down Syndrome.)

After that he tells us:

Caroline’s incredible feat has been written about in a variety of places, including the newspaper clipping her mom sent to us:

A copy of the newspaper article is embedded in Hambo’s post. Among the wonders revealed therein is the fact that:

Over nearly ten years, the plucky twenty-eight year old from Beaufort filled 43 plastic binders with 10,493 pages of note paper displaying her crisp penmanship.

More than ten thousand hand-written pages? Your Curmudgeon is in shock! Hambo gives us a few bible quotes, and then finishes with this:

It’s wonderful to see someone who has put so much time and effort into writing out God’s Word. What a great way to slowly study through Scripture, meditating on the truths found in it, from Genesis to Revelation.

Your Curmudgeon is overwhelmed! What’s your reaction, dear reader?

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

Behe and Irreducible Complexity — One More Time!

This one is hard to believe, but it popped up yesterday at the creationist website of the Discovery Institute. The thing is titled Behe Answers Best Objections to Irreducible Complexity, and it has no author’s by-line. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

On a new episode of ID the Future [Ooooooooooooh! A Discoveroid podcast!] Lehigh University biologist Michael Behe addresses what Philosophy for the People host Pat Flynn [Who?] considers some of the best objections to Behe’s central intelligent design argument.

You probably know who Michael Behe is, but for those who don’t, we’ll repeat what most of you already know. He’s not only a Discovery Institute Senior Fellow, he’s also a tenured professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University. His colleagues at Lehigh are so impressed by his brilliance that they publicly disassociated themselves from him by issuing this statement: Department Position on Evolution and “Intelligent Design”.

Also, as most of you know, Behe was the Discoveroids’ star witness in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. We wrote about his catastrophic appearance there in Michael Behe’s Testimony. Remember that link, because we’ll refer to it soon.

Okay, back to the Discoveroids. They say:

As far back as the 1996 book Darwin’s Black Box [Link omitted!], Behe has argued that certain features in biology are irreducibly complex. That is, they require numerous essential parts, each carefully fitted to its task and integrated with the other parts, in order for the molecular machine or system to function at all.

Irreducibly complexity again? Groan! Wikipedia has a good article on it — see Irreducible complexity. Let’s move along. The Discoveroids tell us:

Two examples are the bacterial flagellum motor and the blood clotting cascade. Such systems are, in Behe’s words, irreducibly complex and could not have arisen through any blind and gradual evolution process. The better explanation for their origin: intelligent design.

This is exactly the same stuff Behe argued about way back in the Kitzmiller case. As we describe in our earlier post to which we already linked — his arguments were totally demolished. The Discoveroids continue:

Since Darwin’s Black Box became a bestseller a generation ago, Behe has attracted opponents in places high and low. Following the philosopher Alvin Plantinga, Flynn says that some of the attacks on Behe have been hysterical, but some have been more thoughtful.

Yes, Behe has attracted opponents. The big question is: Does he have any followers? (Other than his fellow Discoveroids, of course.) Ah well, let’s read on:

Flynn focuses the discussion on what he regards as some of the more substantive and interesting objections, beginning with one from a noted philosopher who is partly sympathetic to Behe’s work, Plantinga himself. Behe gamely responds. Download the podcast or listen to it here. [Link omitted!]

And now we come to the end:

To see Behe’s responses to common and key objections collected in a single book book, get your copy of his newest book, A Mousetrap for Darwin: Michael J. Behe Answers His Critics. [Amazon link.]

There’s not much we can say, except to remark that it’s rather amazing how Behe clings to his old and utterly rejected arguments. Well, he’s a Discoveroid, so what else would we expect?

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

Believing Evolution Is Dumber than Flat Earth

This one is an oldie. In fact, it’s two years older than your Curmudgeon’s blog. We found it at the website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the granddaddy of of all creationists outfits, the fountainhead of young Earth creationist wisdom. It’s titled Is Earth Really Round?, and it was written by John D. Morris,  son of the founder of ICR. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Without a doubt, Earth is round, or nearly so. Using careful measurements from the ground and observations from space we can be certain it is essentially a sphere, with only minor bulging near the equator. If reduced to the size of a billiard ball, it would be perfectly smooth, and we wouldn’t even be able to feel the highest mountains or deepest oceans.

That’s rather shocking, considering the numerous statements in the bible to the contrary. We discussed most of them in The Earth Is Flat!, which you have probably seen before. It’s rather amusing that most creationist websites claim they’re not flat-Earthers, as if doing so will give them some credibility. Anyway, Morris says:

By the way, the Bible has always taught a spherical Earth. [BWAHAHAHAHAHA!] There are, of course, instances of phenomenological language, where the author refers to what the viewer can see, just as we do today when communicating. We talk about “flat” terrain or a “flat” ocean even though we know they follow Earth’s curvature. It is flat to our eyes and to our listener’s eyes. But when the issue of Earth’s shape is addressed in Scripture, the Hebrew wording implies sphericity (see Isaiah 40:22, etc.).

Creationists always point to that — which (in English) refers to the Earth as a circle — but which should be translated as disk (not sphere) — and they ignore the dozens of unambiguous flat-Earth passages in the bible that we cite in our old post. After that, Morris tells us:

This may seem unimportant, but evolutionists often belittle creation thinking by comparing it to belief in a flat Earth. [Who would do such a thing?] Certainly most who do so are merely repeating catchy insults from others, even though there are many who make the claim maliciously and purposively. While this may make them feel superior it belies a great misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of creation and of the nature of science itself!

Morris accuses us of misunderstanding or misrepresenting creationism. We’ll shrug that off. He continues:

Of course creationists and evolutionists agree fully on Earth’s shape. It involves observational science. Earth can be observed to be round. This is not a matter of interpretation. This is simply an observational fact. To deny it is to deny observation, and no one does.

Fair enough. We all agree on the shape of the Earth — in spite of what the bible says. Let’s read on:

Compare this with macroevolution, the theory that basic plant and animal types have changed into others. This is not and has never been observed. [Egad!] Instead, we observe stasis, that things “stay” the same, with only minor adaptations to the basic types. Evolutionists recognize this fact of the present too, but they claim things underwent major changes in the unobserved past when no one was present to observe it, and that all of life experienced these major changes. Indeed, their claim is that all of life came from a common ancestor. They argue about the mechanism by which this happened, but not the truth of the claim.

Isn’t this great? Skipping a bit, we come to the end:

So in reality, evolution claims bear more resemblance to flat Earth claims than does creation thinking. [Gasp!] Based as it is on a rather unsupported view of the past, and a denial of present observations, its supporters really shouldn’t be throwing stones at those who are doing better science.

So there you have it. Evolution is as dumb as flat-Earth, and you’re the dummy, dear reader.

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.