Creationist Wisdom #765: Evolution Demolished

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Bureau County Republican, a bi-weekly publication in Princeton, Illinois. It’s titled The missing links, and the newspaper has a comments feature — with no comments so far.

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 Ted. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

The very first verse of the Bible states: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The theory of evolution puts forth: In the beginning there was nothing; there was no time, no matter, no space, no intelligence, nothing. And out of nothing, out of nowhere, without intelligence came everything.

Yup — that’s that the theory of evolution says. Ted knows his stuff! Then he says:

Do you remember being told fairytales when you were young? What are the missing links in these two sentences? Intelligence itself is one of them. Logic, reason, and common sense are missing too.

[*Curmudgeon has to re-set his irony meter*] After that great beginning, Ted tells us:

A famous evolutionist was once asked, “Where did the Big Bang come from?” Gary Parker shares the evolutionist’s response. “You know; if somebody asks you where mass energy came from, just ask them where God came from.” Gary said, “I think he really said something much more meaningful than he thought. Either mass energy is eternal, or God is eternal. Well, science has taught us a lot about mass energy. One of the things is that it wears out. Mass energy being eternal doesn’t make sense at all. God being eternal does make sense.”

We don’t know who Gary Parker is. Did he say mass and energy wear out, or is that Ted’s contribution? Doesn’t matter. Ted continues:

Things do not make themselves. Something as simple as a tapestry shows the creativeness of its creator. Before there could be a bridge there had to be an architect designer. [Ted gives a few other examples of the same.]

Makes you think, doesn’t it? A tapestry needs a creator. Therefore … . Let’s read on:

The first law of thermodynamics and the second law of thermodynamics show the foolishness of evolution. So often the focus on missing links is on the molecule to man foolish theory. But what animal did the hummingbird evolve from a cow, a platypus, a skunk, a giraffe, a mosquito, a hippopotamus? Evolution theories have millions of missing links because there is no evidence of one kind of anything turning into another kind.

Ted’s right, you know. The hummingbird didn’t evolve from a cow. Another excerpt:

What are the missing links in our government, our school systems, our churches, our relationships, our work places? Are they not grace, truth, love, holiness, moral integrity, the principles taught in the Scriptures?

Yes — those are the missing links! Here’s more

All of man’s complex transportation systems do not compare to the complex creation of the universe with all its diversity created by the supreme creator who has revealed Himself through nature and Scriptures.

He’s right again! The interstate highway system doesn’t compare to the universe. Hey — get this:

We observe changes within a kind but never one kind of anything changing into another kind. Evolution is a false theory with destructive consequences. It is not observable, repeatable, testable, empirical science.

This letter is one of the best! And now we come to the end:

Why then, if 75 percent of Americans identify with a Christian religion do we have a secular school system that adamantly opposes God, Creation and the teaching of Christian principles?

You can’t answer Ted’s question, can you, dear reader?

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

20 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #765: Evolution Demolished

  1. Michael Fugate

    http://creation.com/gary-parker
    Author of the 1980 classic “Creation: The Facts of Life”.

  2. What did evolution get from the combination of a helicopter, and elephant, and a rhino. This guy had the answer: Hell if I know!

  3. I love it when the creationist overstates his case. Things which we know are designed, like the interstate highway system, “do not compare to” (yes, those are the words used) “the complexity of the universe”, and therefore the complexity of the universe must also be designed. He’s telling us that there is no comparison and therefore there is a comparison!

  4. I’ve got some worn-out mass energy lying about. Maybe I could sell it on eBay. Think there’s a market?

  5. Holding The Line In Florida

    They just keep getting dumber and dumber…

  6. Eric Lipps

    A famous evolutionist was once asked, “Where did the Big Bang come from?” Gary Parker shares the evolutionist’s response. “You know; if somebody asks you where mass energy came from, just ask them where God came from.” Gary said, “I think he really said something much more meaningful than he thought. Either mass energy is eternal, or God is eternal. Well, science has taught us a lot about mass energy. One of the things is that it wears out. Mass energy being eternal doesn’t make sense at all. God being eternal does make sense.”

    Physicists scream in unison: AAAAAAAAIIIIEEEEEE!

    Evidently this relic specimen of Homo erectus has never heard of the conservation of mass-energy, doesn’t understand it or doesn’t believe in it.

  7. “Things do not make themselves.”
    Does Ted mean things like snowflakes and grains sand?

    “We observe changes within a kind but never one kind of anything changing into another kind.”
    Of course not – it’s because Ted and co never put any effort in defining “kind”, let alone test the limits of micro evolution.

  8. So… if naturalists can’t answer where did the big bang come from, and that’s evidence for th3 god of the Bible’s existence…
    Then why can’t we ask where God came from and get a straight answer?

  9. If everything that exists had a cause, and that cause must be as complex or more complex than its effect… who created the god of the Bible and why don’t we worship that instead of the inferior ‘effect’?

  10. Ceteris Paribus

    Ted asks: “Why then, if 75 percent of Americans identify with a Christian religion do we have a secular school system that adamantly opposes God, Creation and the teaching of Christian principles?

    Gee Ted, that’s a tough question. Um, my first guess would be “Because Satan walks the earth Today”?

    There is another possibility: See, suppose those “75 percent of Americans identify with a Christian religion” turn out not to be really great at statistics?

  11. Michael Fugate

    Isn’t the answer something called a Constitution?

  12. But isn’t it a relevant question, where did the universe come from? I’m certainly not siding with the creationist viewpoint, but even if we take the big bang and go back in time to some teeny, tiny bit of compressed everything, where did that come from? Sure, we think we can trace it back to that point, but what about before that? Yes, the laws of physics weren’t operational so we can’t explain further, yet it still leaves the question begging for an answer. Multi-universes? Eternal bouncing universe? No, I don’t buy the god / supernatural explanation, but it does leave the question open, does it not?

  13. “No, I don’t buy the god / supernatural explanation, but it does leave the question open, does it not?”

    No it does not. To catch up on modern cosmology a bit you should read at least one of a number of available articles and books on that subject. Firstly that “nothing” still has fluctuating quantum fields within it. Secondly, the thus far measured curvature of the universe indicates that there is a rather high probability of it being infinite in size. In other words, the start of the observable universe may have occurred within a tiny local point in another universe, due to quantum fluctuations in that region, etc. No conservation laws are broken by this.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Universe_from_Nothing

    https://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Brief-History-Updated-Expanded/dp/0553103741/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_1

    https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2016/07/18/space-emerging-from-quantum-mechanics/
    etc.

    And this (including the classes) would also be a relatively good starting point:
    http://www.worldscienceu.com/

  14. Let us assume that there is no natural answer possible for where did the universe come from. Let us also assume that that is a meaningful and important question. Let us also not assume that supernatural explanations are not ruled out.
    All of that does not mean that there is a supernatural explanation for where the universe came from.
    Moreover, let us assume that there is a proof that there is a supernatural explanation.
    That does not supply us with a supernatural explanation.
    It may be an unsatsfactory situation, but if that is what we have, so be it.

  15. Ross Cameron

    Gary Parker, Henry Morris both big in the dreamworld till they got shot down in flames—a thousand times. Talking about childhood fables, can we include the bible?

  16. Mike Elzinga

    @ Ed:

    I’ve got some worn-out mass energy lying about. Maybe I could sell it on eBay. Think there’s a market?

    Well, if it has any dark matter or dark energy in it, you may have to sell it on the black market.

  17. @DavidK: as Bertrand Russell already pointed out, when you accept causality – ie postulate a chain of cause and effect – you have the choice between infinite regress and an arbitrary first cause.

  18. @mnbo
    ISTM that when one accepts any sort of continuity one has that sort of choice. I think of the mathematics of open (corresponding to regress) or closed.

  19. Tom Said: “Let us also not assume that supernatural explanations are not ruled out.”

    But supernatural “explanations” ARE ruled out due to an obvious and fundamental logical inconsistency.

    In science and all logical thought “to explain” is to render unknowns only in terms of knowns. “Supernatural explanation” gets this backwards by trying to explain knowns using unknowns. And that is precisely why “supernatural explanation” is widely recognized as an oxymoron. It is no different than claiming that knowns are actually due to magic – something that failed as an explanation centuries ago. Science has greatly advanced by requiring evidence and critical reasoning. If you abandon those then you have reached the point of “any excuse will do”. See what (not a scientist) Mark Twain even said about miracles.

  20. @Zetopan
    I do not disagree with your point. I was just concentrating on one difficulty.
    Creationism is confronted with so many. I was trying to point out that creationism does not offer any solution to “why is there something, rather than nothing”. Even if all of their arguments had any value.