Creationist Wisdom #611: Evolution Is From Satan

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Daily Citizen of Dalton, Georgia, in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. It’s titled What is unscientific? The newspaper has a 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. His first name is Maynard. This is the third time we’ve written about one of his letters. First there was #579: We Were Deceived!, and then #592: God or Nothing. Excerpts from his latest letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

We know that secular scientists refuse to give any credence to the theory of Intelligent Design because it is “unscientific.” Well, think along with me for a minute about such closed-mindedness. Suppose that Intelligent Design is the real truth of the matter.

Hey — that’s neat! What if Intelligent Design really is the truth? Lets find out what Maynard does with that idea. He says:

First of all, if the real truth is left out of the conversation, and some other possibility (such as billions of years) is put in its place, would not every conclusion drawn from such a false premise be flawed? Isn’t that basic science? If your foundation is not true, nothing you build on it can be trusted.

Can’t argue with that! Let’s read on:

Well, that is exactly the road that the theory of evolution has traveled. From the get go it has been littered with erroneous conclusions and outright lies.

Amazing! Does Maynard have any examples? Yes, he does! Brace yourself, dear reader:

For example, consider missing links. For more than 150 years they have searched unsuccessfully for a transitional form between apes and today’s mankind. Over the millions of years it would have taken for such evolution to occur, there should be thousands of transitional forms. However, so far, no such fossils have been found — zero. Not that they haven’t tried. Numerous “missing links” have been put forward: Piltdown man (a deliberate hoax), Nebraska man, Neanderthal man, Lucy, Ida, et al. — all proven to be false.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! As with Maynard’s earlier letters, this one is another catalog of creationist clunkers, all of which we’ve debunked several times before, or are found in the TalkOrigins Index to Creationist Claims. Because his arguments are so familiar, we won’t bother with any debunking. Here’s more:

One icon of this nature, however, continues to hang on. We are all familiar with the ape-to-man pictorial that graces many textbooks worldwide. Did you know that there is no fossil evidence for more than two-thirds of these artist’s renditions?

Uh, doesn’t the fossil evidence that Maynard admits exists mean anything? No, and he explains why:

And even if there were, it is impossible to reconstruct what flesh and hair would have been like from a mere bone fragment. They are all fanciful imaginations based on the false premise of what billions of years might have produced.

Okay. Moving along:

I should also mention rock dating. Why are some rocks said to be millions of years old when they are found to contain carbon-14 molecules which would have completely dissipated after only 103,000 years or so?

Would it have been too burdensome for Maynard to learn something about Radiometric dating? Apparently yes. Here’s another excerpt:

And you might also check out the textbook peppered moth story — dead moths being affixed to a tree trunk in order to stage photographic “proof” of evolution. The list goes on and on.

Yes, it’s an endless list of frauds. And now we come to the end:

Satan, the father of lies, has given us evolution so that we might not give credit to our one and only Creator God, and his word, the Bible. Open your minds and hearts, my dear friends. The time is getting short.

Wise words indeed!

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 #611: Evolution Is From Satan

  1. So Satan gave us evolution. Da*n, I those evil scientists at my graduate school told me it was Darwin’s idea. Now I know I’ve been lead astray. But seriously, Maynard, none of them were looking for transitional forms between apes and humans, since humans clearly are apes. (Yes, you too, bubba). And if you want to discuss radiometric dating, go read a geology textbook first. Cheers.

  2. Maynard scores a 9.5 out of 10 on the Hovind Scale of Insanity, but alas only scores a 6.5 out of 10 on the much more stringent Time Cube Scale of Insanity

  3. So, evolution is from Satan; and ID/creationism is from God?

    Hmmm. From which would you buy a used car?

  4. Charles Deetz ;)

    I don’t know who was lying, but it wasn’t satan.

  5. Apparently God and Satan are still frenemies like they were in the time of Job, competing in a cosmic game that uses human souls as scoring tokens.

    Despite widespread fears that Satan is winning, he’s clearly the underdog. Not only did he manage to persuade only a third of the angels to join his rebellion, he is also personally thrice outnumbered by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.

    Makes you wonder how Christianity can call itself monotheistic. It’s got a trickster god on the one hand and an ostensibly benevolent three-member committee on the other.

  6. For more than 150 years they have searched unsuccessfully for a transitional form between apes and today’s mankind.

    I nominate Maynard for the missing link, albeit more on the ape end than the mankind end.

  7. Like they say, reality is a bitch! Get over it!

  8. Another dimwit who cannot read his own book o’BS.
    Lucifer was & is still an angle made by gawd and under his TOTAL control, or has he lost some of his omni-ness? Lucifer cannot do anything with out gawd’s OK! So if Lucifer is doing something then it is gawd’s doing!

  9. The idea that there is an evil creator of the material world comes from Gnosticism, a religion which caused a lot of trouble in the early church.

  10. If Satan is the Father of Lies, wouldn’t that make his Dad the Grandfather of Lies? Or should that be Godfather rather?

  11. For example, consider missing links. For more than 150 years they have searched unsuccessfully for a transitional form between apes and today’s mankind. Over the millions of years it would have taken for such evolution to occur, there should be thousands of transitional forms. However, so far, no such fossils have been found — zero. Not that they haven’t tried. Numerous “missing links” have been put forward: Piltdown man (a deliberate hoax), Nebraska man, Neanderthal man, Lucy, Ida, et al. — all proven to be false.

    So Neanderthal man, of whom we have abundant fossil evidence, and Lucy and her kin, are right in there with Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man as fakes?

    Apparently it counts for nothing to “Maynard” that it was evolutionary scientists who identified Piltdown Man as a fraud and Nebraska Man as a mirage. No, those evil evolutionists can only lie in their demonic quest to destroy religious faith.

    Whatever he’s smoking, it can’t be legal.

  12. What infuriates me, and any reasoning being, is the blank flat denial of reality involved here. “Missing links”, yet. Every time another link is found, it only creates another space – and that process will go on effectively forever.

    What evidence is required, by a mind like Maynard’s? A nineteenth century misattribution, an early twentieth-century fake, and it’s all false? Lucy’s bipedalism? Sediba’s almost perfect intermediary gait? Habilis’s toolmaking? Erectus’s brain expansion? Neanderthalis’s genetic signature?
    A whole class of bipedal ground-walking apes, the Australopithecines, with variant branches in other directions than the hominin? These are not enough? What would be enough?

    He lumps Ida in, too. Nothing could possibly demonstrate better his ignorance and malice. Ida is a basal primate from the freaking Eocene, for Bog’s sake.

    What evidence is required, then? The answer is, no evidence would ever be enough. In Maynard, we see a mind that doesn’t process evidence.

    I suppose I should go on about his apparent Manichaeanism, but who cares? What’s the point? Maynard denies the evident, while fervently affirming the insubstantial. How would it improve matters to show that he is also in heresy on a point of theology, equally insubstantial? It’s the denial of reality that matters, and the rest doesn’t.

  13. Now we know what became of Dobie Gillis’s less-than-brilliant friend, Maynard G. Krebs. (Those of you younger than retirement age may have to do some googling to understand.)

    Seriously, though, it’s hard to determine who has the lesser intelligence — Maynard, or the editor who decided to publish this letter. Makes me glad I don’t live in or around Dalton, Georgia.

  14. Maynard’s fable about the peppered moth is straight out of Jonathan Wells’s * Icons of Evolution*. The “staged photographs” simply illustrate the principle of camouflage. Kettlewell’s original conclusions were correct, and Majerus, who criticised his methodology, spent many years repeating his work more rigorously and fully validating his interpretations. For good measure, Majerus also collected unstaged photographs, a difficult feat since camouflage works. More on this at *Creationism As Conspiracy Theory – The Case Of The Peppered Moth* http://wp.me/p21T1L-7O

  15. Pope retiredsciguy sets some homework for the whippersnappers:

    Those of you younger than retirement age may have to do some googling to understand.

    But that–as Krebs himself would protest before passing out–would mean doing some “Work!?”

  16. Paul Braterman points out

    Maynard’s fable about the peppered moth is straight out of Jonathan Wells’s * Icons of Evolution*

    and provides a link to his own splendid article on the topic, including Majerus’ posthumously-published work and Coyne’s acknowledgement of its soundness.

    But the dear old Attack Gerbil continues to ignore all that, and as recently as July 2014 was still vomiting forth the same old same old.

  17. I’m putting myself on the Naughty Step for the rest of today for once again screwing up my html tag thingies…

    [*Voice from above*] It would have been fixed sooner, but AT&T malfunctioned and the Curmudgeon was offline for about 20 hours. He has a lot of catching up to do.

  18. @retiredsciguy
    To come to the defense of the editor. Editors like to print just about anything that they can. It makes for happy subscribers to your paper when you print their letters. And if the letter gets reactions, then the advertisers in your paper know that there are people who read your paper with enough interest to react to what they see printed, even something as obscure as a “letter to the editor”.

  19. Isn’t this a new one?

    “it is impossible to reconstruct what flesh and hair would have been like from a mere bone fragment.”
    Kudos to Maynard, I say! He deserves his own entry in the TalksOrigin catalogue.

  20. Christine Janis

    “But the dear old Attack Gerbil continues to ignore all that, and as recently as July 2014 was still vomiting forth the same old same old.”

    “That’s an interesting claim [about Archaeopteryx being an intermediate form], given that Archaeopteryx appears millions of years before its supposed theropod dinosaur ancestors, a point Wells establishes in the book, representing a highly contradictory temporal sequence.”

    The relevant dinosaurs have been known in the Jurassic since 2009.