Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the fifth biggest-selling regional evening newspaper in Britain, the Shropshire Star of Ketley, in Shropshire. Charles Darwin was born in Shropshire. The letter is titled The fossil record does not support theory of evolution. The newspaper has a comments feature.
Because today’s 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 David. We wrote about one of his letters before — see #543: Dem Bones, Dem Bones. Excerpts from his new letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!
In answer to DJ Goodall (Star mail October 26), he says in my letter of October 10 that I wrote about fossils!
This is David’s earlier letter: Jurassic art provides a historic headache, in which he asks: “I wonder if your readers are aware of the many cave paintings, supposedly drawn or painted by primitive cave men, depicting various dinosaurs?” We can’t find the Goodall response to it, but it doesn’t matter. David says:
Perhaps he should read the letter again, as I did not mention fossils at all! My question was, how could paintings, petroglyphs, stone carvings and brass plates have been produced by people hundreds of years before dinosaur bones were even discovered if they had not seen the real thing and knew what they looked like?
We’ve seen that argument before, e.g.: The Miracle of the Ica Stones. Aside from fakes, there’s the possibility that early people found some dinosaur fossil bones and used them as the idea for cave drawings. Also, see Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times. Let’s read on:
The present popular view of the fossil record as showing a development of creatures from simple to complex over millions of years is seriously flawed. If it was true, we would not expect to find living fossils today as they should have become extinct.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Everything must change! The TalkOrigins Index to Creationist Claims has a few rebuttals of that, for example: Some species, such as the tuatara, horseshoe crab, cockroach, ginkgo, and coelacanth, are “fossil species.” They have not evolved for millions of years. David continues:
Darwin saw fossils as a very serious problem with his evolutionary view. It does not stand up to examination. He suggested that as more and more fossils were discovered we would find transitional and intermediate forms. However, not a single such species has been discovered. On the contrary, every unearthed fossil specimen has possessed features and characteristics that prove its species has never changed!
Wow — that’s extreme! Okay, this is our obligatory link to Wikipedia’s List of transitional fossils. Here’s more from David:
Many years ago I was sent a large, very heavy book by a Muslim scholar showing photographs of fossils and their living counterparts. The accompanying letter said: “Charles Darwin and his followers asserted that the millions of different species, living and extinct on the earth have evolved from one another by coincidence. But the fossil record, 99 per cent of which has been excavated over the last 150 years, documents that organisms have not undergone the slightest change for even hundreds of millions of years”.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s probably the Atlas of Creation by Harun Yahya — the pen-name of Turkish creationist Adnan Oktar. We haven’t seen any mention of him for years. And now we come to the end:
Sadly, despite the increasing body of evidence to the contrary, Darwinian evolution continues to be taught as the only theory of origins allowed in our education system, to the detriment of real scientific study and the ability to reason properly.
So there you are. David is upset, and for good reason. He can’t get any respect.
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.