Creationist Wisdom #556: Evolution Disproved!

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Argus Leader of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. It’s titled Evolution ‘too complicated’ to be random. An icon below the headline takes you to the newspaper’s comments feature.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. We’ll use only his first name, which is Olin. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

I was in a one-room country school back in the 1930s. One day the teacher gathered the students around her and read from a new science book telling us that we’d evolved from monkeys. In childish awe, I asked, “How come they didn’t all turn?”

Even as a child, Olin had enough brains to ask the most profound question of all: Why are there still monkeys? What answer did he get? He tells us:

The teacher laughed heartily, but didn’t answer my question. I thought, “That must have been a dumb question. I’m going to find out why.” I’m now 88 years old, but I don’t know why? If it ever happened.

After a lifetime of questioning, Olin still doesn’t have the answer. He’s unaware that ol’ Hambo’s Answers in Genesis outfit doesn’t recommend that question any more — see If We Evolved From Monkeys, Then Why …? But Olin has more questions. He lists them:

Beyond a theory, do you know what kind of power, force and energy is evolution?

Where does it dwell? Come from? Go to?

When does it work? Species dying all the time.

Why?

How?

You can’t answer Olin’s questions, can you? Let’s read on:

On Saturday, Dec. 11, 1982, page 7A of the Argus Leader told about Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe writing a book, “Evolution from Space.”

Olin still has the newspaper from 1982? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We can’t find that article, but it doesn’t matter. He tells us what it says:

1. Too complicated – biomolecules too complex to happen randomly.

2. Odds are one to 10 to the 40,000th power.

3. Darwinian evolution is most unlikely to get even one polypeptide right, let alone the thousands on which living cells depend for survival.

That sounds like Hoyle. The Wikipedia article on Fred Hoyle mentions the book. It even tells us: “Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes for even the simplest living cell without panspermia was one in 1040,000.” So Olin got it right — more or less. But Hoyle is also notorious for the junkyard tornado argument.

Here’s the end of the letter, and Olin has another expert for you. Besides Hoyle he’s got Einstein:

Albert Einstein, “I’m convinced God doesn’t throw dice.”

You didn’t know Einstein was a creationist, did you? Great letter, Olin!

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

20 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #556: Evolution Disproved!

  1. Beyond a theory, do you know what kind of power, force and energy is evolution?
    Where does it dwell? Come from? Go to?

    That’s the bit that has me entirely baffled. What does Olin think evolution is (or is thought to be by them crazy evolutionists)? A force like electricity, but with the power to make species mutate?

    At least he’s read his Hoyle & Wickramasinghe. Their restatement of the panspermic hypothesis seems a bit less crazy today than it did back then; it’s still on the fringes, but no longer on the outermost fringes. It was interesting to note that the Druyan/Tyson Cosmos devoted some little while to it in (if I recall correctly) the final episode . . . although without, I think, crediting Hoyle & Wickramasinghe.

  2. realthog asks: “What does Olin think evolution is (or is thought to be by them crazy evolutionists)? A force like electricity, but with the power to make species mutate?”

    I’ve seen it before. They think it’s some kind of force, like a hurricane, that comes along and transforms everything. That’s why they can’t figure out how monkeys didn’t get changed.

  3. There’s only a one in eight chance of taking any three atoms from a choice of two (hydrogen and oxygen) and getting water, but the funny thing is, when Mother Nature tries it, she gets H-O-H every dang time.

  4. If evolution is true Olin, why are there still bananas?

  5. @Och Weel

    If evolution is true Olin, why are there still bananas?

    And why, for that matter, are there still loons?

  6. Even as a child, Olin had enough brains to ask the most profound question of all: Why are there still monkeys? What answer did he get? He tells us:

    The teacher laughed heartily, but didn’t answer my question. I thought, “That must have been a dumb question. I’m going to find out why.” I’m now 88 years old, but I don’t know why? If it ever happened.

    Sigh . . . this one again. Olin, like many creationists, seems to think evolution is about living things “turning into” other living things (“Show me a monkey turning into a man!”), when it’s really about species emerging or disappearing, usually over long stretches of time.

    I find myself wondering what this guy did with all those years, besides reading Fred Hoyle, who despite being a brilliant man has managed to wind up on the losing end of one scientific controversy after another. Certainly he made no serious attempt to understand how evolution is actually supposed to work.

  7. If you have grandchildren, Olin, how come you’re still here?

  8. SL/OT:
    Curmudgeon, did you know your favorite creationist posted this piece:? https://stream.org/real-science-vs-bill-nyes-undeniable/

  9. Christine Janis

    @ reflectory

    “Nye is apparently unaware that this so-called evolutionary “prediction” went belly-up after scientists found tracks of true tetrapods with digits some 18 million years before Tiktaalik in the fossil record. As Nature put it, Tiktaalik cannot be a “direct transitional form.””

    Ah, those creationists and their faith in trace fossils. You’d think that with this degree of fervor about tetrapod origins they’d be citing the scientists who show that burrows in the Ediacaran are evidence of bilaterians at that time, even if (like the owner of the Polish footprints) we don’t have the body fossils.

  10. Mr Olin is a liar, as if he truly looked for the answers he could find them in any elementary text on evilution. Now his list of questions also show his total lack of knowledge on science as well as evilution. He is just another dim creationist that is afraid to look anywhere but in his particular book o’BS.

  11. Eric Lipps says: “I find myself wondering what this guy did with all those years, besides reading Fred Hoyle …”

    I doubt that he did that much. All he says is that he read about Hoyle’s book in a 1982 newspaper article.

  12. Of Evolution, Olin demands to know

    Where does it dwell? Come from? Go to?

    I’ve been asking the same things about Cotton-Eye Joe…

  13. “Albert Einstein, “I’m convinced God doesn’t throw dice.”
    Let’s not tell Olin about Quantum Mechanics – the shock might be too much at his age, with declining health and such.

  14. I fear that poor ol’ Olin’s missive doesn’t even rise to the level of low hanging fruit. Brain-eating zombies would sniff and pass him by as inedible.

  15. Off- thread, but certainly on-topic:
    http://www.gocomics.com/bc

    Today’s installment of B.C. shows how Bill Nye’s debate has made Ken Ham’s name more recognizable.

  16. The link to the April 21, 2015 “B.C.” might not work after today. Anyone know how to lock it in?

  17. Try using this link, Pope Retiredsciguy:

    http://www.gocomics.com/bc/2015/04/21

  18. Doctor Stochastic

    Actually, evolution is too complicated not to be random.

  19. Doctor Stochastic, Aaaargh!!

  20. Thanks, Cardinal Megs.