Creationist Wisdom #163: Which Came First?

The USA has no monopoly on creationism. We are pleased to bring you an article from the Windsor Star, a newspaper in Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada.

This splendid column, or letter-to-the-editor — or something — is titled Evolution column stirs debate. It’s a response to Unenlightenment worn proudly, like a badge, by Janice Kennedy, which that same paper published a week ago. The earlier article had said:

Mike Huckabee, former Arkansas governor and host of a Fox News talk show, is an evangelical Christian fundamentalist, and a creationist. As governor, he supported teaching creationism in schools — and not as allegory. Kids should know the world was created in six days, right?

And Sarah (“Drill-baby-drill”) Palin is also keen on creationism in schools — not to mention blurring the line between church and state, according to her new book.

Provocative stuff! We’ll give you some excerpts from today’s response to that earlier item, with bold font added by us. Here we go:

To summarize [the earlier article], the Internet enables flat earth, conservative creationists (read Christians) such as Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee, a podium to showcase their stupidity.

Today’s author isn’t particularly defending Huckabee and Palin, but rather their creationism. Let’s read on:

Bearing in mind that Darwin was neither a scientist nor a biologist but enough of an intellectual giant to propose a theory which Miss Kennedy is willing to put her faith in, I would love for her to sit down and explain to me in exact terms, not generalities, how evolution works.

He could take the time to read any of the multitude of well-written texts on the subject, but besides requiring effort, he knows that it would be a waste of his valuable time. Behold:

Which came first, the mouth or the stomach, the heart or the circulatory system it feeds? Think about it. How is it possible for a creature to evolve into male and female with perfectly compatible male and female sex organs at the same point in time and have the whole thing work?

Hey — that’s really great! Here’s one more excerpt:

The odds of this alone happening would keep Johannes Kepler the brilliant mathematician and, oh yes, creationist, busy for decades were he still alive and make a believer in evolution look “resolutely dopey.”

Johannes Kepler? He died in 1630. That was a wee bit before 1859, when Darwin published Origin of Species. No doubt Kepler was a creationist, as was everyone else in his day. Wikipedia says that Kepler was also an astrologer. He did some very notable work on planetary motion, but this is the first time we’ve seen his name used in an argument against the theory of evolution.

Now you’ll need to click over to the Windsor Star to read the whole thing for yourself. You really should, because unless you keep up with the latest creationist arguments, how can you hope to defend your position?

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

19 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #163: Which Came First?

  1. ” You really should, because unless you keep up with the latest creationist arguments, how can you hope to defend your position?”


  2. The same writer posted a rant in the paper today against liberal politicians. It’s 10 below zero according to the web site, so he’s probably shut in with nothing to do.

    I think this is the first time I’ve seen anyone state that Darwin was neither a scientists or a biologist. The last line in the letter sort of sums it up, although probably not in the way the writer wanted.

  3. Puf, it is ten below zero centigrade, but the wind chill is 20 below zero C.

    This writer’s brain sure shut down because of the cold. Mine is about to. But for both, the weather and from reading this letter. I should have not …

  4. I saw a hilarious ‘test’ written by some moron who run a creationist ‘museum’ in hillbilly-land asking the same stooopid questions like
    Which evolved first, male or female?
    See for yourself –
    I laughed till pee came out.

  5. That is an awesome questionnaire. I especially like #14. I thought I’d heard just about every possible descriptor applied to the earth and to humanity before, but “underpopulated” is a new one.

  6. That’s a great test, GreatGungHolio. Question 15 is very interesting:

    Why hasn’t evolution duplicated all species on all continents?

    In Origin of Species, Darwin noted that the continents in the Old World and the New have similar habitats (forests, deserts, etc.), but the species inhabiting them are different — which is contrary to what would be expected if they were created for those habitats. The geographic distribution of species was one of his big clues that species migrated to where they’re found and gradually changed along the way.

  7. Actually, the letter-writer has a powerful point about male and female genitalia. The horrible truth is that it took about 100,000 years before the first human female evolved, and the behavior of our ancestors until then is something we don’t like to think about. We probably came close to extinction on several occasions. Fortunately, although it took a very long time, females finally evolved. Things have been much more interesting since then. This problem is probably what doomed the dinosaurs.

  8. Benjamin Franklin

    Which came first? The minstrel, or the pre-minstrel syndrome?

  9. The pre-minstrels were migratory, hunter-gatherer musicians.

  10. I’ve been called a traveling minstrel, so obviously my Schwinn ten-speed is a minstrel cycle (but maybe only when I play ragtime).

  11. olbenfranklin

    Being a minstrel is nothing to sing about.

  12. GreatGungHolio

    Were you a black and white minstrel? Completely p.c. I presume.

  13. Bicycling Guitarist, I assume you ride your bike side-saddle.

  14. I never tried riding it side-saddle. It would make pedaling rather difficult.

    I’ve been thinking up more slogans to describe what I do, such as “Bicycling Guitarist: the pay’s not great but the hours suck!” Immediately the pedagogue (dull pedantic teacher) in my head tells me I should use “and” instead of “but” in this slogan. I tell it to keep its and off my but!

    Hmmm, if one teaches bicycling, is one a PEDALgogue?

  15. The Bicycling Guitarist says: “I’ve been thinking up more slogans to describe what I do …”

    So have I, and although it’s certainly tempting to mention a few, it’s best that I restrain myself.

  16. … it’s best that I restrain myself.

    Ahhh, an auto-bondage freak, just as we suspected…..

  17. This site would be laughable if it was not so hateful.
    [Editorial note: Ark-load of creationist material deleted.]