This was inevitable. A few days ago, when we posted New Skull Discovery Causes Controversy, we concluded by saying:
Your Curmudgeon has no opinion. The issue seems unsettled. But we do know one thing — the creationists will be going wild over this. You know the lines they’ll take: (1) the Darwinists don’t know what they’re doing; (2) the Darwinists keep changing their theories; (3) their so-called science books are all wrong; and (4) the Darwinists still refuse to consider Genesis. Oh, and the ever-popular: “I ain’t no kin to no monkey!” It should be fun to watch their reactions.
And now the Discoveroids have fulfilled our expectations. At their blog we find this: Skull “Rewrites” Story of Human Evolution — Again. It’s by Casey Luskin, our favorite creationist. The approach he takes is mostly a combination of our predictions 1 and 2.
After a brief description of the fossil finds, Casey says, with bold font added by us:
The only reason this is making headlines is because the researchers found a few skulls in a single location, and they think they can assign them all to the same species. This excites evolutionary paleoanthropologists since usually the evidence is so sketchy you don’t even know how closely different fossils are related. So they’re very enthusiastic at the prospect of being able to assign fossils of multiple individuals found at the same locality to the same species. The fact that the ability to assign a few skulls to the same species makes headlines shows just how sketchy the story of human evolution remains.
Yes, every time new evidence is found, it’s worse for evolution. Then Casey describes the various opinions about whether several pre-human fossils that have previously been found are really all one species, as the new find suggests to some.
We note that Casey offers no opinion of his own, in spite of the keen insight he should have because of his “theory” about an intelligent designer. Instead of trying to clarify the situation, as one might expect of such a keen thinker with a superior theory, he says:
Adding to this disagreement is the fact that the discoverers admitted that if the fossils had been found at different localities, they probably would have been assigned to different species.
That’s true. But what does it mean to Casey, and what does it mean in terms of intelligent design? We’re not told. Instead, Casey quotes a few of the opinions of differing paleoanthropologists, and then he leaves us with this inspired bit of Discoveroid thinking:
So we’re left right back where we started: lots of disagreements, a big mystery and big gaps in the fossil record. What else is new?
That’s where it ends. And so, dear reader, we see how the creationist brain reacts to the sight of science in action — they’re revolted. They prefer the calm, sublime, never-changing claims of creationism.
Perhaps you noticed something else that was missing from Casey’s little essay. You didn’t? No problem. Your Curmudgeon is adept at spotting what isn’t there. Casey offers no hint as to how the new find offers any support for the Discoveroids’ claims about their intelligent designer. It appears that they don’t have a clue. Does this new evidence support any prediction they’ve made? No, it doesn’t. Therefore, it’s sufficient merely to express contempt for the ongoing endeavor of science.
Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.