A Song for Darwin Day

Yes, dear reader, today is Darwin Day, when we celebrate the life and work of Charles Darwin, born on 12 February 1809.

Your Curmudgeon, always fair and balanced, wants to teach the controversy by disclosing the evidence against Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection. Therefore, for your listening pleasure, we present a video of that old-time favorite — I’m No Kin to the Monkey!

To add to the festivities, we declare this post to be an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. We’re open for the discussion of pretty much anything — science, politics, economics, whatever — as long as it’s tasteful and interesting. Banter, babble, bicker, bluster, blubber, blather, blab, blurt, burble, boast — say what you will. But avoid flame-wars and beware of the profanity filters.

The comments are open, dear reader. Have at it!

Copyright © 2017. 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

21 responses to “A Song for Darwin Day

  1. This confirms my belief that the opposition to evolution is based, not on the Bible, or any traditional religion, let alone evidence or reason, but the revulsion to the obvious fact that we are related to the rest of life on Earth. Most particularly most objectional, because we are most obviously related to the other primates.
    Equating evolution to that one small issue.

  2. Michael Fugate

    Are monkeys in the Bible?

  3. Be sure not to mention it to the AGW-denialist Toddler-in-Chief or his creationist Veep, but today I got an email from the National Academies Press wishing me a Happy Darwin Day and offering a bunch of books on evolution and other scientific subjects. The one I grabbed immediately was Understanding Climate’s Influence on Human Evolution — a double whammy, wot?

  4. Ook ook!

    ‘Good’ is not the word!

  5. Christine Janis

    Astounding —- after the first go around I knew all the words, but the woman singing keeps referring to her song sheet.

  6. Christine Janis

    I mean, after the *first* go around.

    [*Voice from above*] Indeed you did.

  7. She’s lip-syncing. That’s a perfect analogy for the creation science and intelligent design movement.

  8. @Michael Fugate
    In the KJV there are mentions of “apes”, but that was the word for what are known today as (non-human, non-ape) Old World monkeys. The word “monkey” is a modern innovation in English. The only non-human primates known to the Ancient Near East and Europe before the voyages of European discovery were the Old World monkeys.
    See “List of animals inthe Bible” in Wikipedia.

  9. Michael Fugate

    but nothing about apes’ relationship to humans…

  10. … unless one counts this
    “For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.”
    Ecclesiastes 3:19

  11. “I’m No Kin to the Monkey!”

    Since the bible claims that at least one jackass could talk, these supremely superstitious singers must be related to jackasses.

  12. I’m baffled, just dumbfounded, that the creator/designer made human sex and childbirth so much like sex and birth in other animals. Surely, he/she/it could have been a little more inventive, making us less monkey-like.

  13. Thank you Mr Curmudgeon for sharing this wonderful piece of americana with us. TomS says ” Most particularly most objectional, because we are most obviously related to the other primates.” Two great comments about how horrifying it must be for those taught they are special to be related to other animals. And her hairdo is “special” although alarmingly similar to the Clint Eastwood’s orangutang do.
    Burbling . Now the good news. Betsy DeVos intends to build “God’s kingdom” in publicly funded corporation run classrooms thanks to the school voucher and charter school programs nationwide ! Except that charter and voucher schools underperform, teach religion often and enrich corporate
    bank accounts its a great idea. But the money’s good if your belong to the lucky sperm club in America.
    As any avid Curmudgeonite reader will tell you, organizations with the word “family” in their title are often associated with the religious right, creationism and other conservative issues like anti LGBT and planned parenthood. Congratulations then as we welcome the.DIck and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation to national prominence.. Welcome to your new Department of Education, curmudgeonites.

  14. Michael Fugate

    All very confusing if the Bible is the source of all science as Ham claims?

  15. And the monkeys are probably thrilled that they’re not.

  16. Here is Springer’s FREE (imagine Springer doing something for free!) “Evolution: Education and Outreach” online journal about why creationism is wrong. They have 25 issues and 552 articles. Compare that to the pathetic ID journals that fold after a few issues. One title that caught my eye: “Rate variation during molecular evolution: creationism and the cytochrome c molecular clock.” Now that’s an appropriate Darwin Day topic!

  17. @och will
    To borrow a line of reasoning from ID:
    There are three ways of dealing with the complex specified fact of the similarities between the human body and those of other primates.
    a) It is a matter of chance. But the similarities are far more numerous and pervasive than the eye.
    b) it is fulfilling some goal, there is some similarity of purpose for the intelligent designers. In which case, we should be telling our kids that they should be acting
    c) it is due to the working of natural laws, such as descent with modification,

  18. Traditional and “old time” it’s not. Copyright Dave Hendricks, 1964. As a “country” ballad it’s about as genuine as a tudor TV cabinet.

    Whitcomb and Morris’s “The Genesis Flood” dates from 1961. So this little ditty is no expression even of the fundamentalist movement of the late nineteenth – early twentieth century. It has no inkling even of Protestant fundamentalism’s genuine moral or ethical aspects. It has nothing to do with Christian tradition whatsoever.

    No, this is an expression of the infantilism, malicious denial, rabid loathing of learning and enshrined ignorance of later twentieth century young-earth creationism. Christian tradition is actually far more receptive to understanding. In fact, a genuine Christian theologian would instantly recognise what really drives these faux-yokels: it is pride swollen to hubris. “Them eggheads don’t know what-all.” That is, I’m better than they are!.

    Huxley’s riposte comes to mind. But Huxley was debating Bishop Wilberforce, a man who at least had respect for scholarship. We are not engaged in debate, a reasoned contest between minds. It’s a shouting match against a party of unreason, prejudice, ignorance and rabid refusal to face facts. It’s a political struggle against the extinguishing of the Enlightenment itself.

  19. @ Dave Luckett Well said!

  20. It is always nice to see the DI continuing their alternative facts reporting – Wells claims Darwin is to blame for Lysenkoism.

  21. Michael Fugate

    This is interesting as well – what do they think will happen if sex is discussed?