Creationist Wisdom #672: The Street Preacher

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears at a website that calls itself The Patriot Post. What we found there is a column, but we’ll treat it like a letter. It’s titled Evolution: Not Fact, but a Fraud, and they have a comments feature.

Unless the letter-writer is a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name, but this time we’ve got a preacher who became a politician. It’s Don Boys, who styles himself "Dr. Don Boys." The Patriot Post says he’s “a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives; ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis, wrote columns for USA Today for eight years; authored 15 books and hundreds of columns and articles for Internet and print media publications; defended his beliefs on hundreds of talk shows.” But there’s more to be learned in the bio section of another website:

Dr. Don Boys was born in West Virginia, and received his early education there. Following his salvation as a teen, he preached on the streets of Huntington, in the jails, parks and missions. He entered Moody Bible Institute immediately after high school, was married and continued his education at Tennessee Temple College, Immanuel College and Heritage Baptist University where he earned his Ph.D. While an evangelist and Christian school administrator, Boys was elected to the Indiana House of Representatives, and was identified by the media as the ”most conservative member of the General Assembly.”

So what we’ve got here is a street preacher, bible-college PhD, and former state legislator. We wrote about him a couple of times before — see #662: Media Bias, and before that A Street Preacher Opposes Evolution. Excerpts from his new column will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

Let me provide some up-to-date information that will help honest and inquiring minds make a judgment on the controversy of origins. Only an uninformed fanatic says that evolution or creation can be proved scientifically. Christians believe in creationism because we believe in the veracity of the Bible, but we also have scientific evidence to support our position.

The street preacher has scientific evidence, while you, dear reader, are an uninformed fanatic. He tells us:

In every debate I’ve had with evolutionary scientists, the arrogant, asinine accusation is made, “Well, evolution is science while creationism is religion.” Evolution is about as scientific as a voodoo rooster-plucking ceremony in Haiti. Almost.

This is great stuff! And he’s just getting started. Here’s more:

Evolutionists don’t “know” anything about man’s origins. They guess, suppose, speculate, etc., but they don’t know. Honest scientists have become weary and embarrassed at the confusing, convoluted, and contradictory claptrap that often passes as science. They have watched their colleagues rush to defend Darwin rather than putting him to rigorous tests.

Then he does some quote-mining. We’ve seen it all before, so we won’t bother with it. The rest of the street preacher’s long column is a catalog of ancient creationist material, none of it worthy of rebuttal. What we’ll do is skip through the mess and give you some of his wilder claims, and there’s no need for us to add any bold font:

All the alleged transitional fossils that were so dear to the hearts of evolutionists a generation ago are now an embarrassment to them. Breaks my heart!

[…]

Surely it is not necessary for me to remind college professors that Piltdown Man was a total fraud and Nebraska Man turned out to be a pig’s tooth, not an ape man! And in recent years we have discovered that Neanderthal Man was simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired “ape man.” Need I go on? The truth is that only a fool says evolution is a fact as compared to gravity, and to equate scientific creationists with flat earthers as some evolutionists do is outrageous irresponsibility.

[…]

Do those who teach evolution know that scientists have characterized Darwinism as speculation, based on faith, similar to theories of little green men, dead, effectively dead, very flimsy, incoherent, and a myth. Hey, with friends like that, evolutionists don’t need scientific creationists to hold their feet to the fire.

[…]

So you see evolutionists are dishonest or uninformed when they suggest that creationists are backwoods, snake handling fanatics. In fact, over a thousand scientists with advanced degrees belong to one group that takes a stand for scientific creationism and against the guess of evolution.

[…]

Darwin suggested that life began in a warm little pond, but he never suggested where the pond came from! Most evolutionists teach that life started there also, but scientists have proved conclusively that spontaneous generation is impossible. So where did the first spark of life come from? You think maybe God was involved?

[…]

And would it be possible to remind everyone that Darwin and his followers were racists who believed that blacks were closer to the nonexistent ape men than whites? … Evolutionary teachings have resulted in soaking the soil of Europe in innocent blood. After all, evolutionists tell us that man is only a little higher than the animals rather than a little lower than the angels as the Bible teaches, so what’s a few million lives to be concerned about?

[…]

I don’t have the space to deal with numerous problems that evolutionists have such as the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, origin of the universe, beginning of life from non-living matter, the Cambrian explosion, etc.

[…]

Evolution is a guess, a speculation, a hypothesis, a theory, and a faith. Yes, evolution is a religion as I document in my book, Evolution: Fact, Fraud or Faith? And, since it is a faith, it should not be taught in public schools. At least, any thinking, honest person would agree that if it is, then scientific creationism should be taught along with it. After all, we do believe in balance and fairness, don’t we? Or do we?

Now that was an ark-load! We won’t bother with any rebuttal. This is how the street preacher ends his rant:

Sorry, professors, evolution is NOT a fact. It is a fraud, a fake, a farce and a faith, and taxpayers should demand that the religion of evolution be kept out of public schools unless the truth of scientific creationism is taught as well.

If that’s an example of what The Patriot Post regards as patriotism, we’ll probably avoid the place from now on.

Copyright © 2016. 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

17 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #672: The Street Preacher

  1. I have never seen such a collection of crap since I spent a summer at my cousins’ dairy farm.

  2. This collection of crap is nothing more than bald-faced lies!!!
    In a real debate he would be trampled!!

  3. If Neanderthals were simply men with rickets and arthritis, why are there no more Neanderthals but there are still rickets and arthritis?

  4. waldteufel

    What a delight this dimwit would be at a dinner party! A babbling, drooling clown, not unlike the whacko uncle many of us have to deal with occasionally at family gatherings.

  5. michaelfugate

    Did he ever mention what his evidence for creation was – other than the Bible, of course?

  6. michaelfugate asks: “Did he ever mention what his evidence for creation was – other than the Bible, of course?”

    Yes. You weren’t paying attention. His evidence is that your evidence is bad.

  7. Don Boys sounds like a Ray Comfort with a smidgen more anger, a slightly larger vocabulary, and not one sliver more ability to reason.

  8. michaelfugate

    So if my evidence is bad and he’s a creationist, doesn’t that make his evidence worse?

  9. @Megalonyx

    It’s lucky I wasn’t eating or drinking anything at the time I read your comment. The neighbors may be calling round to inquire if I’m okay, though.

  10. Do those who teach evolution know that scientists have characterized Darwinism as speculation, based on faith, similar to theories of little green men, dead, effectively dead, very flimsy, incoherent, and a myth.

    It’d be nice if Don Boys could produce any evidence to back this lot up.

  11. “… evolutionists are dishonest or uninformed when they suggest that creationists are backwoods, snake handling fanatics.”

    BACKWOODS? I assume he means “backward(s)”?
    Then again, this writer is neither out of the woods yet nor likely to ever find his way out of the woods. In fact, he likes it there.

  12. Dave Luckett

    No, he probably means back woods, ie worse than rustics; hillbillies, only not so refined.

    It’s a dog whistle. This is a call to the resentment of people who think that they’re being looked down on, and whose fierce reaction is to cry “I’m as good as you are!” It was C S Lewis – not a favorite here, I know, but he had some clues – who remarked that that is not the reaction of someone who really thinks as much.

    This appeal to resentment would imply that this piece is pure propaganda, and the writer knows it. But there’s more.

    If he had done the smallest amount of investigation of his claims, he would know them to be false. Therefore, either he has not done any such investigation, or else he retails what he knows to be falsehoods. But even if we charitably assume the former, then his claims of “up-to-date information” or “scientific evidence” must be known by him to be falsehoods, at least. If he has not investigated, then ipso facto he has no information, no evidence.

    So he is either retailing knowing falsehoods about the evidence, or he is retailing knowing falsehoods about his investigations. Either way, he is retailing knowing falsehoods.

    Which is to say, he’s a liar.

  13. “helping you to choose the best candidate.”
    Yeah, but probably not in the way you envisage, dear SC ….

  14. Oops, wrong page.
    Yeah, Donnie is a gem in every scientific crown. My favourite:

    “Darwin suggested that life began in a warm little pond, but he never suggested where the pond came from!”
    Irrefutable. Geologists suggest where the pond came from, Darwin was no a geologist hence Evolution Theory is wrong! Checkmate, athiests.

  15. @Mark Nieuweboer
    That question, where the pond came from, is interesting because it immediately suggests the same question about Genesis 1. At the beginning of God’s creation, so the Bible tells us, there was a wind blowing across the face of the water. Where did the water come from?

    I don’t mean this as a criticism, but Darwin was a geologist.

  16. Eric Lipps

    And in recent years we have discovered that Neanderthal Man was simply a man with rickets and arthritis, not the much desired “ape man.”

    So the original fossil of Neanderthal man had arthritis. So what? Many species other than Homo sapiens suffer from arthritis. And are all Neanderthal fossils supposed to be those of ordinary “men with arthritis and rickets”? Even the female ones? Apparently the good doctor thinks we have only that one specimen to go on.

    Need I go on?

    Please don’t. But Dr. Don does anyway:

    The truth is that only a fool says evolution is a fact as compared to gravity, and to equate scientific creationists with flat earthers as some evolutionists do is outrageous irresponsibility.

    It isn’t necessary to equate creationists with flat-earthers to say that both are ridiculous. But evidently no less than Kent Hovind is worried enough about this to make a point of distancing himself from the flat-earthers and geocentrists, despite the Bible’s clear indications that the earth is indeed flat and stationary at the center of the universe.

  17. @TomS: thanks, I learned something yesterday.