Creationist Wisdom #130: The Inquisition

WE present to you, dear reader, a letter-to-the-editor titled Prof misrepresents intelligent design, which appears in the Sun Chronicle (formerly The Attleboro Sun and the Evening Chronicle) of Attleboro, Massachusetts. In case you click over there, it’s the second letter from the top in a poorly-formatted page.

For raw fanaticism, topsy-turvy misinformation, and more than a touch of martyrdom, this one is a keeper. We’ll copy most of today’s letter, omitting the writer’s name and city, adding some bold for emphasis and our Curmudgeonly commentary between the paragraphs. Here we go:

Professor Ken Miller may be a true believer in Darwinian evolution, but his grasp of intelligent design is deficient. In his interview (“Standing up for science,” March 22), Miller demonstrates why not a lot has changed in the political world since the time of Galileo. It seems the Roman Inquisition has been replaced by the Darwin Inquisition.

Most of you know who Kenneth Miller is. We found a link to the article today’s letter-writer finds so offensive: Standing up for science. Does Miller come across as inquisitional?

Let’s read on in today’s letter:

Miller completely misrepresents intelligent design theory, while using the word “evolution” in a nebulous, meaningless way. He seems to be a proponent of using the coercive power of the state to keep school children in ignorance. Rather than encouraging skeptical inquiry, he would impose the bankrupt neo-Darwinian concepts of natural selection and random mutation on yet another generation.

Aaaargh!! By changing a few words around, that could be a description of a certain dentist on the Texas Board of Education. We continue:

Miller displays his ignorance when he equates “creationists” with “scientific creationists” or infers that “intelligent design” is synonymous with these two very different concepts. Of course understanding and relating the facts aren’t important when you think, as Miller does, that scientific ideas can be overturned, or “exposed” in a court of law. He is correct, however, when he states “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Galileo would concur.

Yeah, what does Ken Miller know? Here’s the end of the letter:

If you want answers to the many vital scientific questions that Darwinism cannot and never will answer, if you truly have an open mind, if you think intelligence could not possibly evolve from non-intelligence, and if you want to expand the scope of science, I suggest you look into intelligent design. Your children in school may face censorship, but you don’t. Professor Miller and the rest of the ruling elite can’t shout down progress much longer.

[Writer’s name and city can be seen in the original.]

As usual, we left out the letter-writer’s name and location, but it’s available for the world to see. We searched for his name and found what seems to be his website. Check it out. You may be in the market for a sequin-covered lobster.

Copyright © 2010. 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

7 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #130: The Inquisition

  1. It seems the Roman Inquisition has been replaced by the Darwin Inquisition.

    Sure it was. Because all children are required to learn by heart the Origin of Species and whoever takes Darwin’s name in vain or denies he is God, is burned at stake or sawed in two halves after having his tongue cut out, his bones crushed and his flesh ripped off with iron claws!

  2. Ok, creationists. Explain this:

    Child prodigy (Sophmore at UConn at 13) wants to be and evolutionary biologist:

    http://xenophilius.wordpress.com/2010/03/29/child-prodigy-13-claims-uconn-age-bias/

    If a literal genius can’t find anything wrong with evolution, then how can people who have *never taken a biology course in their lives* have anything to say about it???

    Stupidity, thy name is creationist.

  3. LRA challenges: “Ok, creationists. Explain this”

    Easy. The devil got him.

  4. ID activists never miss an opportunity to whine that “Darwinists” who equate ID with creationism “misunderstand ID.” Yet they are strangely silent when many of self-described creationist fans do the same thing.

  5. retiredsciguy

    The letter writer says,
    “Professor Ken Miller may be a true believer in Darwinian evolution, but his grasp of intelligent design is deficient.”

    That’s like saying Stephen Hawking shouldn’t write about cosmology because his grasp of astrology is deficient.

  6. Hear hear, retiredsciguy. It’s laughable that any of these nogoodniks would impugn the expertise of someone like Miller.

  7. obligatory: NOBODY EXPECTS THE DARWIN INQUISITION

    Thank you, thank you. I’ll be here all week.