Creationist Wisdom #433: Just Look Around

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the News-Review of Roseburg, Oregon. The title is Evolution is also just a belief.

We don’t like to embarrass people (unless they’re politicians, preachers, or other public figures), so we’ll just use the letter-writer’s first name, which is Frank. We’ll give you a few excerpts from his letter, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

Both creation and evolution are religious world views. You have to believe it happened. Nobody was there and there is no irrefutable evidence that either one happened. … Both are beliefs. The only reason they call evolution science is because scientists study it. There is just as much scientific evidence that creation occurred (if not more) than there is that evolution occurred. Just look around.

[*Curmudgeon does as he’s told, looks around, shrugs, and continues blogging*] Then Frank says:

Science believes that 18 billion years ago all the matter in the universe condensed into a small dot (about the size of a period on this page), then exploded (the big bang). From there all the chemicals “evolved” somehow, then our solar system was formed, Earth formed.

[*Curmudgeon lifts head from desk and somehow carries on*] Splendid description of current cosmology. Accurate in every detail. Nice going, Frank! But it has nothing to do with evolution. Oh wait — that’s coming next. Let’s read on:

Then it rained on the rocks for millions of years, a goo formed and eventually living cells somehow “emerged” in the goo, found somebody to marry and after millions of more years, here we are. Sounds scientific doesn’t it?

Sure does — especially that detail about marriage among those early living cells! Frank knows what he’s talking about. He continues:

That is basically what is being taught in our schools as science. I believe “In the beginning God.” So-called science believes “In the beginning dirt.” The evolutionary theory has not done anything in the progress of man or our technology. Why it is taught in school as science is beyond me.

It seems that there is a great deal that is beyond Frank, but that doesn’t hold him back. Watch as he changes topics to the Constitution:

Liberals have so convoluted the true meaning of “separation of church and state” that I don’t think anyone knows what it is anymore!

Right! And now we come to the end:

Like it or not, this country was founded on Christian principles. Read the Constitution. See for yourself.

Hey, Frank, we’ve read it. We can’t find that stuff in our copy. We’ve read the Federalist Papers too, and it’s not there either. Ah well, thanks for the letter. It’s a fine addition to our collection.

Copyright © 2014. 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

18 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #433: Just Look Around

  1. Letter-writing Frank proclaims:

    Both creation and evolution are religious world views. You have to believe it happened. Nobody was there and there is no irrefutable evidence that either one happened.

    So both are therefore equally worthless? Does Frank want to cut some sort of deal, maybe, we’ll throw the works of Newton, Darwin, and Einstein on the book-burning pile, if Frank and his ilk throw all their copies of the Bible, Koran, Book of Mormon &c on as well?

  2. I’m left with the impression that Frank may have been forced to put his schooling aside at an early age.

  3. Christine Janis

    “So-called science believes “In the beginning dirt.” ‘

    So what does he think that the “dust of the earth” is, then?

  4. Ceteris Paribus

    Input:
    “Both creation and evolution are religious world views. “

    Output:
    1. Wail pitifully in a minor key.
    2. Gnash and grind teeth.
    3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 until unconscious.

  5. I believe “In the beginning God.” So-called science believes “In the beginning dirt.”

    If memory serves, this comes from one of Hovind’s videos.

  6. “In the beginning dirt.” as point out is the buyBull not science.
    But this gets worse, think about dirt, where does it come from?
    Exactly, dirt is just a polite way to refer to worm schite. So the buyBull actually says …gawd picked up a pile of worm schite and breathed upon it. So xtian think men come from schite, so having them vomit forth BS is only natural.

  7. TPK is correct. The last two paragraphs of that letter are direct quotations from incarcerated creationist Kent Hovind’s video series. It is really appalling that even though Hovind has been locked up for many years now, there are still people watching and even quoting from his mindless videos.

  8. Rachel Maddow did a piece tonight on AIG and the dinosaur. I knew AIG has received tax breaks from KY, but $42-43 million dollars! Anyway, her take on the whole thing was quite good. The dinosaur folks who supposedly discovered the dinosaur said they’d prayed to find a dinosaur, and lo and behold right after their amens there were the dinosaur bones. As they dug them out the found leaves and other non-fossilized flora materials that the bones were supposedly resting on, hence direct evidence of the flood and the obvious brief antiquity of the find. I wanted to provide a link to MSNBC/Maddow, but I have trouble loading the site. Maybe SC can get it and elaborate.

  9. omg this is from my hometown! I am ashamed but not surprised. There are of course people here who are very badly misinformed about evolution so their opinion is garbage. I would write a reply to the article but they require a subscription. Maybe I will write a guest letter myself in rebuttal, but on the other hand I might not want to make too many enemies in my hometown when some mean person could swerve just a little in their pickup truck while I am riding along on my bicycle playing guitar.

  10. lanceleuven

    It’s almost as if this guy has absolutely no idea of what he’s talking about…

  11. In all fairness, his (cited) estimate of the time that has passed since the Big Bang is some 130 % of the actual figure cited by scientists: “18 billion years” instead of 13.8 billion years. That’s not so dysmally bad, for a creationist trying to retell his impression of scientific conclusions. Then again, one has a sneaking suspicion that he believes the true age of the universe is 6,000 years, which IS a dysmally bad estimate if science has anything to say.

    Incidentally, on the Facebook page promoting the upcoming creationist drama “A Matter of Faith” (recommended by K. Ham!), the moviemakers recently declared that until four years ago, “evolutionists” thought the age of the universe was 4.6 billion years, but then (because their “figures did not add up”), they changed it to 13.2 (sic) billion years!

    I tried to point out to them that they were confusing the age of the earth and the age of the universe. The age of the latter was estimated to be roughly fifteen billion years even decades ago, before new observations allowed the figure to be refined to about 13.8 billion.

    Unsurprisingly, my educational efforts haven’t been rewarded with even a single “like” so far, though there are at least some rational people reading the page. One of them accused the moviemakers of lying; I tried to gently point out that they rather seem really, quite sincerely CLUELESS.

  12. I found your comment and “liked” it.

  13. I was able to submit my own letter to the editor without having to subscribe to the paper or web site. I don’t know if they will publish it, but the following is what I said:

    I just read Frank Plummer’s letter “Evolution is also just a belief.” It is full of many misconceptions and falsehoods about this subject. I do not “believe” in evolution. I accept it as an observed fact of nature just as I accept gravity and for the same reasons: overwhelming evidence that this is so.

    Evolution is quite possibly the best-supported scientific idea of all time. It explains so much so well with so few assumptions and is backed up by so much evidence of so many different types all pointing to the same reality that to deny it happens is just as ignorant as if one were to insist the earth is really flat in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

    The genetic evidence is strongest of all: patterns of nested hierarchies in the data that produce the same tree of life as other genetic data and that also match what we find in the fossil record. Even if we had never found any fossils, once we discovered DNA and started comparing the DNA of different species we would have figured out evolution happens. Human chromosome 2 is practically a smoking gun showing our recent common ancestry with our great ape cousins.

    So Frank, the reason evolution is taught in schools is because it is good solid science that is supported by every measurement we can make and falsified by none. The reason creationism does not belong in a science classroom is that it is NOT supported by evidence. I noticed some of your information apparently came from the videos of Kent Hovind. It is sad how much misinformation is spread about this subject by people claiming to do so in the name of God. They shame Christ.

  14. Hey, The Bicycling Guitarist: That was a darn good letter!

  15. Yeah, good letter BG.

  16. ah shucks. I learn from the masters here.

  17. Charles Deetz ;)

    DavidK, I listened to Maddow too (via podcast), and she seem most amused by the creationists willingness to mingle dinosaurs with man, Noah specifically. This whole prayer and leaf thing sounds new, too.

  18. Charles Deetz ;)

    Found this gem of science apologetics while browsing comments about the Maddow screed by one ‘Kelpie’:

    But we all know that electricity didn’t really change, just human knowledge and understanding. Lightning is no longer proof that God is angry, it’s just a natural phenomena capable of being understood and explained. Earthquakes are caused by plate tectonics, not angry gods. Disease is caused by germs, not angry gods. Rainbows are prisms of light, not proof that god is happy.