Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Free Lance-Star, of Fredericksburg, Virginia. It’s not easy keeping track of these things, but we think this is the sixth such specimen we’ve found in that newspaper — the last time was Creationist Wisdom #136.
The letter is provocatively titled Evolution as ‘science’: Virginia schools get an ‘F’ . We’ll give you a few excerpts, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, and some bold font for emphasis. As we usually do we’ll omit the writer’s name and city. Okay, here we go:
This is in response to your March 27 editorial titled “Virginia aces science.”
The letter-writer is referring to this, about the Fordham Institute’s having awarded Virginia an “A-” for its K-12 science standards. In particular, that editorial says:
One pitfall Virginia (mostly) avoids is what Fordham calls “dissin’ Darwin” — i.e., treating evolution, especially as it applies to human beings, with unjustified skepticism.
That’s what aroused today’s letter-writer. Having introduced his subject, he writes:
Yes, Virginia is well within the box of atheist evolution. They don’t dis Darwinian evolution. It is easy to follow the politically correct crowd, even though it has been going down the wrong road for many years.
The “box of atheist evolution”? Hey, that’s a new expression! Let’s read on:
If one is a Christian, one believes God created everything, and everything was created with an apparent age. The day after Adam was created, a modern doctor would swear he was a young adult.
All living things were created with an apparent age. So the 4 billion years age of Earth was the apparent age. Try to imagine how life started, without immediately having an apparent age.
We tried to imagine how such a letter could be written without apparent imbecility, but we weren’t able to do it. Let’s just continue:
There is no scientific proof, or even evidence, that one species ever evolved to a higher species. Changes within a species due to various combinations of genetic information from each parent are numerous. This is microevolution. But changes to a higher species, with new genetic information not available from either parent, are nonexistent. This would be macroevolution.
Micro-macro — Aaaargh!! That’s debunked here: Common Creationist Claims Confuted. We try to avoid clichés in writing this blog, but in this instance it’s no cliché — if we see one more of these letters that babbles about micro-macro, we are literally going to vomit!
The letter continues:
Natural selection causing a new species is a fairytale with no proven example in all of recorded history.
We are sooooo tempted to snicker about all the fairytale in Fredericksburg, but that sort of thing would be way below our standards. We’ll behave and just move along with the letter:
If macroevolution were true, there would be millions of examples of intermediate species. There is none.
Not one! BWAHAHAHAHAHA! And so, dear reader, we are linking to this yet again: List of transitional fossils.
Now for the end of the letter. This sentence, at least, is somewhat original:
If all reference to evolution were removed from all the biology books, we would still have the same biology.
Right, it would be exactly the same — except for one thing: It wouldn’t make any sense. Perhaps the letter-writer wouldn’t notice the difference.
Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.