Creationist Wisdom #133: Lost in Space

WE present to you, dear reader, a letter-to-the-editor titled Both sides of the coin, which appears in the Casper Star Tribune of Casper, Wyoming. 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:

In reading John Janski’s recent letter to the editor (“Conversion isn’t a goal,” April 2), let’s try to sort out some confusion!

We found that referenced letter: Conversion isn’t a goal. It’s by a self-described atheist who is opposed to teaching creationism. Today’s letter-writer offers to sort out the confusion the earlier letter may have caused. We can’t wait, so let’s read on:

His problem is with the (“government supported,” which means “we the people” support) school system in teaching creationism as well as evolution. His concern is in teaching creationism “theory” which has no evidence!

Will today’s letter-writer provide us with evidence for creationism? We eagerly continue:

I’m wondering how he thinks this world is hanging out here in space, it being just a minute speck in the universe.

Jeepers! That’s a profound point. Here’s more:

His reference to a “fact-based theory” (evolution) is an oxymoron as theory is a hypothesis proposed as an explanation by a reasonable guess.

Aaaargh!! Everything we’ve been taught is wrong — all wrong! This is an exciting letter. Let’s not stop:

His reference to creationism being a religion is incorrect. Religion is a specific system of worship such as: Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, etc. Separation of church and state is just that — government not imposing a specific system of worship to all. Creationism is a doctrine (most certainly not a religion) that all things were created by God.

A doctrine, not a religion. Okay. Here’s another excerpt:

Can you figure out how all of the different breeds of animals, kinds of flowers, different nationalities, vegetables, amazing physical complexity of the human body, and the magnificence of our bodies’ function s beginning as a baby can be explained by evolution from one single-celled amoeba?

Wow — what a truly original question! Can we figure out how the origin of species is explained by evolution?

While you’re mulling that one over, the rest of us are proceeding to the letter’s end:

At any rate, since the government pays for education, what is wrong with presenting both sides of the coin? Why should the government (we the people) support only the theory of evolution? Is discrimination politically correct?

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

Deep questions, presented to us by a deep thinker in Casper, Wyoming. Deep! There is much to ponder here.

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

9 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #133: Lost in Space

  1. What can one say, apart from

    “Danger, Will Robinson!”

  2. Nice. Forget to give the evidence of creation, lump it into a whole bunch of other belief to make it even more generic and unhelpful, then rapid fire a whole bunch of things whose explanations take entire textbooks to give satisfactory explanations. Yeah, its hard to present the other side of a coin when its a scribble…

  3. I’m wondering how he thinks this world is hanging out here in space…

    Um…gravity? I guess Casper, Wyoming hasn’t updated their textbooks since Newton did away with the need for planet-pushing angels in the 1700s.

  4. longshadow

    At any rate, since the government pays for education, what is wrong with presenting both sides of the coin?

    Okay; here we go again:

    Numerology alongside arithmetic?

    Astrology alongside astronomy?

    Alchemy alongside chemistry?

    Flat-Earthism alongside geography?

    Faith-healing alongside modern medical science?

    and on it goes ……

  5. A creationist once summed it all up for me with these words:

    “It does not matter how much evidence you show me, I can always say that God did it that way!!!”

    I suspect they know one of the many reasons why their religious stuff cannot be considered scientific.

  6. G.E. says: “I suspect they know …”

    I suspect they don’t know.

  7. retiredsciguy

    G.E. says: “I suspect they know …”

    Curmy says: “I suspect they don’t know.”

    I suspect they don’t want to know.

  8. Suspicious lot.

  9. techreseller

    retiredsciguy has it right. They do not want to know. They would rather hold their hands over their ears, close their eyes and sing la la la la la very loudly so that they do not have hear, see or speak the truth.