Creationist Wisdom #331: Too Stoned

This is another letter-to-the-editor from the Yuma Sun of Yuma, Arizona. It’s titled Evolution makes no sense with God. 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:

Evolution makes no sense to me and if Darwin didn’t believe it, why should I? Darwin came up with it for the money and the blind masses bought into it.

Great beginning! We’re going to enjoy this one. Hang on, here comes more:

There is no other explanation for us being here except through Creation. There is too much evidence to even entertain the thought of evolution.

We love this guy! Let’s read on:

As far as how old the universe is, only three entities know – can you say Holy Trinity? Who really cares how old the universe is, 50,000 or 17 trillion years? It’s all a number, sorta like the deficit.

Yeah — who cares? Is this great or what? We gotta continue:

Remember, our time is not God’s time. His one second could be like our 1,000 years. As for me, I’m going to believe in Creation by our Heavenly Father, my Lord and Savior. Only through his grace go I.

Have it your way, letter-writer! Here’s more:

As for evolution being taught in school when I went, I can’t remember last week let alone what or if they taught evolution in the 60s and 70s. I was too stoned.

Now you know where our title came from. Moving along:

In my early Christian life one thing held me back. So, if God created us who created God etc. That’s where Miss Connelly is right it is about faith and call a cow a cow, my higher power is God! If a person is embarrassed to acknowledge him in public he will be embarrassed for you.

We have no idea who Miss Connelly is, but it doesn’t seem to matter. The letter-writer has neatly solved the problem of who created God. Here’s another excerpt:

Isn’t it great that we live in a country where we can praise and worship whoever we want? We are truly a blessed nation even still.

Yes, that is great. Here’s the stunning end of the letter:

A lot of people think God has left the building but you can still see his awesome and wondrous works in our lives. If you doubt that go to a maternity ward and tell me if those little ones are created or evolved?

There’s not much we can add. This is truly a letter that speaks for itself.

Copyright © 2013. 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

17 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #331: Too Stoned

  1. Ceteris Paribus

    Stoner hallucinates: “That’s where Miss Connelly is right it is about faith and call a cow a cow, …”

    My guess would be that Miss Connelly is likely a Hindu, of a branch that provides for a female to be a Guru. That would account for the Stoner’s apparition of Miss Connelly discussing the theological importance of cows.

    Next, Stoner says: “If you doubt that [where babies come from] go to a maternity ward and tell me if those little ones are created or evolved?”

    Well I don’t know how it is in his state of Arizona, but here in the state of Brownbackistan Kansas, it is a state law that each of the little basket weavers “little ones” in the maternity ward must provide a DNA sample. The point being to establish which one of the putative fathers will have to pony up for the child support claims.

    To the best of my knowledge, to date not one of the DNA samples has ever fingered even one member of Stoner’s Trinity.

  2. What’s the speed limit? It’s all a number! How much do I get paid? It’s all a number! What’s my blood pressure? It’s all a number! Who cares about numbers?

  3. And this letter was actually printed? Then again, ranks right up there for most laughable with the Republican Benghazi “hearings” or the IRS “scandal.”

  4. One interesting detail about the little ones in the maternity ward: It is only a matter of months since they all had TAILS.

    The human embryo starts to form a tail. Accounting for one tenth of the lenght of the embryo, it has developing vertebrae, a neural tube, and other complex features. Clearly a perfectly good tail is underway. The DNA says: “Build a tail! Any monkey needs a tail!”

    Then, around the eighth week of gestation, the DNA program suddenly says: “On second thoughts, we don’t need a tail after all. Reabsorb it. Sorry about all the trouble building complex vertebrae only to scrap them.”

    I tend to think that a Creator who designed human genes from scratch would simply have omitted the tail instructions altogether, instead of having the DNA issuing contradictory orders like this.

    The embryos that will eventually turn into the oh-so-adorable “little ones” in the maturity maternity ward seem to initially aim for something not quite like the current outcome. Something rather more monkey-like, actually.

  5. Oops, “maturity ward” in the last paragraph should be MATERNITY ward.

  6. There’s a joke in there somewhere about creationists and little ones in a “maturity ward,” but darned if I can’t think of it.

  7. anevilmeme.

    Somehow I think the letter writer has been stoned more recently than the ’70’s.

  8. Ceteris Paribus

    H. K. Fauskanger says:

    “I tend to think that a Creator who designed human genes from scratch would simply have omitted the tail instructions altogether, instead of having the DNA issuing contradictory orders like this. “

    Yes! Exactly so. Humans have no tails, so any fetal tails are clearly the work of Satan. That is why last month our Brownbackistan Kansas governor Sam Brownback himself (brothers, can I hear an “Amen” and see a genuflection for the Gov?) signed into law a declaration that human life starts “at fertilization”.

    And a couple years back the absence of monkeys in Kansas was put to music by John McCutcheon.

    Monkeys

    Song credits:
    words and music by John McCutcheon
    When the Kansas School Board mandated that creationism be given equal weight in classroom instruction back in 1999 songwriters around the world rejoiced.
    I went to school this morning
    It was the first day of the year
    Took out my paper and my pencil
    And I opened up my mind and my ears
    The teacher said, “Now students take your places
    “Everybody settle in your desk
    “The first class in going to be science
    “Gonna use the Bible as our text.”
    Chorus
    There ain’t no monkeys in you
    There’re none in me, I know
    And there ain’t no monkeys in Kansas
    ‘Cause the school board to me so
    So let’s get rid of Pythagoras
    Relativity and all the rest
    Cause if you can’t find it in Genesis
    It ain’t gonna be in our test
    Chorus
    Now, the land is flat in Kansas
    As anyone can see
    And if the school board says that the world is flat
    Well, that’s good enough for me
    Chorus
    Every culture has a way to see creation
    Each religion has a version of its own
    So if you aren’t Christian or Jewish
    You better hope Kansas ain’t your home
    Chorus
    I’ve learned that faith is one thing
    And knowledge is something else
    One doesn’t rule the other one out
    As Einstein said himself
    Chorus
    Now, God gave us intelligence
    And God he gave us brains
    But I guess he ran just a little bit short
    On that school board on the plains
    Chorus
    Stonington, ME & Winfield, KS
    ©1999 John McCutcheon/Appalsongs (ASCAP)

  9. If you doubt that go to a maternity ward and tell me if those little ones are created or evolved?

    I often remark that many of the anti-evolutionary arguments are at least as relevant (if not more so) to reproductive biology – arguments for Scientific Storkism.

    Occasionally, as in this case, the anti-evolutionist makes the point explicit.

  10. Garnetstar

    Wow. This guy hit it out of the park on the first pitch, “Darwin did it for the money”. A truly original thinker.

  11. Stoner seems to be perpetually stoned.

  12. If you doubt that go to a maternity ward and tell me if those little ones are created or evolved?

    Hmm. All those newborns in the maternity ward have an instinct where if you put something into their palms, they will clutch it tightly with their tiny fists. Which makes perfect sense as an inherited instinct by which a baby monkey would clutch its’ mother’s fur as she carried it on her back, but seems useless for a hairless ape.

    But as TomS points out– those babies are beautiful. What seems more plausible to you as a description of the origin of beautiful babies–

    1. that a grunting, sweating man inserted his purple penis into a greasy vagina and squirted it full of sticky goo, and then after 9 months of the mother being sick and vomiting and grumpy and eating strange foods, the baby is pushed out through her vagina with a squashed face and an umbilical cord attached to a bloody placenta– or

    2. that that same baby grew up in a magical cabbage patch, and was carried by a magical stork to a lovely pre-furnished baby room where diapers magically disappear?

  13. Diogenes says: “a grunting, sweating man inserted …”

    And you wonder why you can’t get a girl to date you more than once?

  14. That is not the reason, Curm. That is not the reason.

  15. just so happens i went to the maternity ward this morning. one of the little ones was very sick. was that part of gods plan? sorry writer but there are so many things that aren’t perfect about the little ones that i have to go with evolution.

  16. Diogenes is of course right to point out that the beautiful Stork Theory provides a much more attractive and pleasing origin story for babies than the disgusting alternative involving purple penises, sticky goo and Mom being sick and vomiting for months.

    Maybe much of creationism is really an aesthetic venture of sorts? Consider this illustration from a classical Jehovah’s Witness anti-evolution book:

    http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/evolution67/evolution1.html

    Here we have a couple of oh-so-thoughtful people contemplating the origin of the human race. In elaborate thought-bubbles above their heads appear two possible alternatives.

    Alternative #1: Pre-fall ADAM AND EVE. How noble! How beautiful! How elegant! How innocent! How Caucasian!

    Alterantive #2: Some stupid-looking, hairy, hunch-backed ape-like thing, barely intelligent enough to cling on to a crude club.

    Come on….who do you WANT to be your ancestors?