Creationist Wisdom #490: Reason Is Absurd

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Lima News of Lima, Ohio. It’s titled Bible wins over ‘reason’. There’s a comments section at the end, with only one comment at the moment.

Because today’s writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t use his (or her?) full name. The writer’s first name is Noe, so that’s what we’ll call him (or her). Excerpts from the letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

The “sci-fies” say that modern man appeared 100,000 years ago.

We’re off to a great start. You, dear reader, are derisively referred to as one of those “sci-fies.” But Noe seems to have a high opinion of your ancestors. He (or she) says:

Some 70,000 years later, remarkable likenesses of animals materialized on cave walls, and it’s worth noting that neither at Chauvet, Maros or El Castillo were humans central to the paintings, but were drawn in fragments, or as stick figures. Man thought of himself as a part of creation, not its “cause célèbre.” He has “developed” from that sense of humility — and artistry — to the “selfie.”

From your splendid cave-dwelling ancestors, you have degenerated into a “selfie” and a “sci-fie.” Let’s read on:

If man is evolving, it’s backwards; his techno-mantra translates as conveniences for gross self-indulgence. His primal thirst for blood isn’t vestigial — it’s growing. He has declared war on the planet, and he’s winning.

Right! Our techno-mantra will be our undoing. Noe continues:

Because man was always man. Whether his head sloped or his jaw was prognathous or he was furred, it was he. Tweak the right gene and a human can grow four legs or three eyes or two pairs of arms, and maybe even intelligence. Misfortunes in procreation prove this, as did — frighteningly — Chernobyl.

We’ll let you interpret that paragraph, dear reader. Here’s more:

Professionals with real jobs can’t find Jimmy Hoffa or the million children who go missing worldwide yearly, but the “anthro-pologists” (sic) found remains in Africa they say belong to a “relative” who lived 5 billion years ago.

Seriously?

Great point! No one can find Hoffa, but somehow they can find our ancestors from — ahem! — 5 billion years ago. Moving along:

It takes more faith to believe in evolution (or the Big Bang) than it does to believe that creation only took six days. Will a church that supports confidence in theoretical science excommunicate the skeptics — or burn them at the stake?

Good question! And now we come to the end:

“Reason” is the Petri dish for absurdity.

We don’t know what to say about this letter — but it certainly belongs in 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

21 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #490: Reason Is Absurd

  1. I think Noe lost his/her Ritalin.

  2. He/she’s right – there are indeed four legged, three eyed, multi armed people strolling around Ukraine due to Misfortunes in Procreation.

  3. Con-Tester, I think that whatever it is must be stronger than Ritalin. Wow, these letters are occasionally difficult to interpret, but this one’s pretty clear – the guy’s nuts.

  4. Indeed, Noe is displaying his/her disdain for reason.

  5. Pete Moulton

    Well, I certainly agree that Noe’s “reason” is the Petri dish for absurdity.

  6. Could Noe let us know which gene to tweak to grow new organs? I’m pretty nearsighted and could use a couple extra eyes.

  7. And what’s Noe? A colony growing in the Petri dish of absurdity?

  8. Poe’s Law is in full effect, I can’t tell if the writer is serious or not.

  9. Charles Deetz ;)

    A pot-shot at the pope:

    Will a church that supports confidence in theoretical science excommunicate the skeptics — or burn them at the stake?

    Creationists feeling the squeeze for their belief in ‘magic’.

  10. Noe is trying to adopt an evolutionary perspective at first, rhetorically, in order to demonstrate what Noe considers its ‘logical’ extremes, which Noe believes to be inconsistent and contradictory. This is an old Christian skeptic’s move against science, and if we have a hard time reading this, it is because Noe is very poorly informed and has a difficult time thinking arguments through, let alone constructing one.

    The pay-off to Noe’s ramble, by the way, is a sentence you failed to put in bold: “Will a church that supports confidence in theoretical science excommunicate the skeptics — or burn them at the stake?” Noe’s letter is not only anti-evolution/anti-science, it is anti-Catholic. (Reference is to Pope’s recent pronouncement on sciences.) The view is that of the Reformation, a war that some fundamentalists think they are still waging (hence the worry about getting burnt “at the stake”). The charge that Catholicism is overly rational dates back to Luther (although there are Medieval antecedents); the alternative is to ‘feel the spirit,’ the only reliable means of ‘encountering’ god.

    There’s nothing much one can do with such a view-point discursively. It’s public presentation here amounts to a textual variation of the street-corner evangelists screaming ‘Be saved or go to hell!’ I opted for hell a long time ago.

  11. File this one under “Rantings of the Insane.”

  12. waldteufel says:

    File this one under “Rantings of the Insane.”

    It’s already filed under “Creationist Wisdom.” I think that’s sufficient.

  13. Hell I know insane people with better thinking abilities than this one has.
    This comparison is insulting to the insane, better to call S/He/IT a creationist as we know how mind numbing they are.

  14. I used to listen to that all-night radio show, whose name escapes me at the present, for laughs. Until some of the people calling up – and were being taken seriously – were clearly mentally ill. I did not like me for using them as entertainment – it reminded me of the practice of going to the “insane asylum” for amusement.

  15. “it’s worth noting that neither at Chauvet, Maros or El Castillo were humans central to the paintings, but were drawn in fragments, or as stick figures.”
    Breaking news! This happened in the 20st Century as well.

    Hence the creationists are right. There is no progress – only stagnation at best.

  16. “We don’t know what to say about this letter — but it certainly belongs in our collection.”

    It more properly belongs on the toilet paper shelf at the local A&P.

  17. jack102248 says: “It more properly belongs on the toilet paper shelf at the local A&P.”

    There are now 14 comments after the letter in the newspaper. I think they all agree with you.

  18. It isn’t often that a creationist will just rip off the mask and scream, “Reason is evil!” This is one for the trophy room.

  19. Hmm. Perhaps Noe = Poe. Only way this letter makes any sense.

  20. I just read a few more letters written by Noe to the Lima News, and that changed my opinion about Noe = Poe. Noe has a rather strange way of stringing words together on whatever subject Noe is writing about, not just evolution v. creationism.

  21. Of all the creationist wisdom letters, this is the most confusing, misdirected of them all. It lacks all reason, not just most reason. Thank you for sharing.