Creationist Wisdom #509: Problems with Evolution

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Reporter-Herald of Loveland, Colorado, the 14th most populous city in that state. The letter is titled Evolution believers ignore too much around them. There’s a comments section at the end.

The letter-writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, so we won’t use his full name. His first name is Steve. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

Mr. Brian Myers editorial of Jan. 11 concerning Americans’ knowledge of evolution needs a few rebuttals.

We can’t find the editorial he’s talking about. It doesn’t matter. Then Steve says:

He is correct when he states that evolution is observed in various life forms. Humans vary in physical size or strength and change to some extent depending on the availability of food or the environment. Other factors such as skin, eye or hair color can vary with the gene pool. Many feel however that only limited variability is built into any given species, and suggestions that one species can somehow magically transform into another is not true.

Yeah, yeah — it’s the micro-macro mambo — see Common Creationist Claims Confuted. Let’s read on:

Evolutionists seldom talk about the complexity of every human cell.

Really? There’s a whole journal devoted to the subject — Cell. And EurekAlert, the news service of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, has an entire index classification for cell biology. Steve isn’t looking very diligently. He continues:

In recent years it has been discovered a description of a human cell would require a 500,000-page book full of genetic code which must be in the right order to sustain life. The odds of this are astronomical to have happened by chance and require a faith all of its own.

Oooooooooh — the odds are astronomical! Steve is invoking a common creationist misconception, the Theory of Spontaneous Assembly of Very Complex Molecules from Start to Finish from Utterly Isolated Atoms (TSAVCMSFUIA). Here’s more:

Then there is the issue of body systems. The human eye for example is comprised of an enormously complex interaction of lenses, complex fluids, muscles, nerves, and light sensitive cells. This had to be designed on a system level by a System Designer (God) that evolutionists will not admit to.

Oooooooooh — the eye! See Evolution of the Eye. Moving along:

Myers complains that knowledge of evolution is lacking in this country. Every public school in the country teaches evolution but polls have consistently shown many Americans simply do not believe in unguided evolutionary theory.

Is that an evolution problem, or an education problem? Another excerpt:

One reason most biologists accept evolution as fact is that virtually all university biology departments are controlled by evolutionists and they do not allow any other viewpoint to be presented. Evolution is taught as the only way to look at how various species came into being, and dissent is not tolerated.

Wow — it’s a tyranny! But Steve isn’t afraid. He’s a brave man! On with the letter:

Evolutionary theory is unfortunately today taught as fact in our schools and generally without any reference to the many examples that cannot be explained by such a theory.

Such as what — the examples in Steve’s letter? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! And now we come to the end:

As for many of us we know who our System Designer is and it is not a pool of muck plus a few billion years.

Well, Steve, none of that was original, but it was good weekend entertainment.

Copyright © 2015. 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

10 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #509: Problems with Evolution

  1. SAME old BS!!! A word salad that says nothing about anything important, and once again a person says ‘I’m an idiot and too lazy to go to any kind of school to learn anything’ but I AINT FROM SOME MONKEY!!!!!!
    BOOOORRRRrrring!!! How about some real evidence so we can at least do some work.

  2. The character E.K. Hornbeck said it best, in Inherit the Wind: “Darwin was wrong. Man’s still an ape.”

  3. Charles Deetz ;)

    Part 1: “Evolutionists seldom talk about the complexity of every human cell.”
    Part 2: “In recent years it has been discovered a description of a human cell would require a 500,000-page book full of genetic code”

    So evilutionists somehow have a enough research on the cell to support the book-of-code comparison, yet they don’t talk about the complexity of the cell at all. So how did Steve learn about this fact … scientists doing research and publishing publicly. What a maroon!

  4. Let’s paraphrase one of Steve’s sentences:

    “One reason most geologists accept a spherical earth as fact is that virtually all university geology departments are controlled by “round earthers” and they do not allow any other viewpoint to be presented.”

    Ah, yes — the great “Science is a Vast Conspiracy” complaint. It works for Ken Ham — just look at all the money it brings in from the ignorant rubes.

  5. @Pope RSG said: ” just look at all the money it brings in from the ignorant rubes.”
    For once, I’m going to commit blasphemy and disagree with my pope. These people are not ignorant; they’re stupid. Ignorance is simply lack of knowledge. Stupidity, on the other hand, is the inability to use reason, logic and knowledge properly. Ergo, these people are stoooooopid.
    Aaaaaaaaand… I’ll now submit to my punishment… IN THE COMFY CHAIR!

  6. You’re correct, Cardinal Gary, I pontificated with the wrong word. Actually, the rubes who lap up Ham’s gravy are both ignorant and stupid. And intellectually lazy.

  7. Running the gamut from such lofty topics as purportedly inexplicable complexity, to a clandestine cabal of knowledge-oppressing academic faith heads, Steve presents us with an impressive catalogue of common cretinist confabulations that is finely tuned for the existence of unremitting boneheads.

    But perhaps the most awe-inducing throw down moment occurs when Steve blurts—

    “… suggestions that one species can somehow magically transform into another is [sic] not true.”

    This reads very much as though Steve thinks evolution posits something ridiculous like either that a mouse can give birth to a cat, or that over its lifetime a creature born as a mouse gradually grows up to become a cat. If so, he really should mind his accumulation of incremental changes over many generations ’cos in the mid-17th century, analogous ideas opened an enormously fruitful new vista in mathematics. It was, in fact, an evolution of sorts…

  8. Mark Twain called man the lower animal.

  9. As far as changes to a new species.
    Even the YECs have to admit that that is an argument best avoided. See “baramin”.

  10. Stevie boy, the reason “most biologists accept evolution as fact” is the overwhelming amount of data supporting that conclusion. If there were even 1×10^-9 as much data supporting the existance of your sky fairy, even I would consider the possibility you might be right.