WorldNetDaily: The Junk-Science of Evolution

Buffoon Award

We almost missed thiis one, but thanks to the ever-vigilant Drool-o-tron™, with its blaring sirens and flashing lights, we were compelled to notice the blinking letters of its wall display, which said WorldNetDaily (WND). As you know, WorldNetDaily (WND) is the flamingly creationist, absolutely execrable, moronic, and incurably crazed journalistic organ that believes in and enthusiastically promotes every conspiracy theory that ever existed. WND was an early winner of the Curmudgeon’s Buffoon Award, thus the jolly logo displayed above this post.

Our computer was locked onto WND’s latest article, Why do Christians follow evolution-based diets? And look at WND’s subtitle: “Exclusive: David Lightsey examines books’ claims about foods allowed by Scripture.” Wowie — it’s an exclusive! You can’t find this information anywhere else!

But who is David Lightsey? WND informs us:

David Lightsey, M.S., is a food and nutrition science adviser with the National Council Against Health Fraud as well as Quackwatch, combating nutrition and health misinformation on a national level. He is also a voting member with the Creation Research Society and an adjunct college professor in nutrition. He is a well-seasoned junk-science spotter (30 years) with appearances on NBC “Dateline,” “CBS Evening News,” etc.

That might be the most impressive résumé we’ve ever encountered. David proudly uses “M.S.” as a title, to let us know that he has a master’s degree — in something, from somewhere. He’s a voting member of the prestigious Creation Research Society, and he has appeared on television. This guy obviously knows what he’s talking about, so we’ll jump right in. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

According to many New York Times best-sellers over the past few years, many of the myriad of diseases that afflict man would subside or be eliminated if we just ate like our purported paleolithic ancestors. For example … . Similar books touting the popular Paleolithic, Caveman and Eat 4 Your Blood Type diets have all made the best-sellers lists in the past, all providing similarly misguided advice.

We’ve all seen such promotions. What of it? David says:

It is understandable why this type of dietary nonsense has become so popular. According to a recently published Gallup poll – May 22, 2017 – 57 percent of the U.S. population believe in some form of evolution, which illustrates the growing science illiteracy of Americans.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! You gotta love WND! After that, David tells us:

The obvious initial reason is quite simple. The restricted foods are all clearly allowed by Scripture and have been part of man’s diet since the beginning of time.

We think he means six days after the beginning of time, but let’s not quibble. David continues:

Since evolution is based upon the initial premise of abiogenesis, which is biologically impossible, the various food restrictions based upon evolutionary theory are senseless.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Let’s read on:

Regardless of the obvious arguments opposing evolution and any promoted lifestyle associated with it, let’s look at some specific well-established health reasons why various foods should not be excluded.

We’re going to skip over most of David’s article, because it’s a discussion of things like sugar, dairy products, legumes, and grain. Maybe what he says makes sense, maybe it doesn’t. Your Curmudgeon isn’t a nutritionist, so we’ll leave it up to you to read and evaluate David’s advice if you care to do so.

This is the stunning conclusion of David’s article:

The take-home message here is very simple. Making food choices based upon the junk-science of evolution is misguided.

So there you are, dear reader. WND warns you to avoid making food choices based on the junk-science of evolution. Sound advice indeed!

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

17 responses to “WorldNetDaily: The Junk-Science of Evolution

  1. The interesting question is WTF has gone wrong at NCAHF and Quackwatch? Although he doesn’t seem to be speaking on their behalf in this instance, and the private lunacies of members don’t necessarily reflect on their professional capacities elsewhere. Sort of.

  2. Hah! Little does David Lightsey know!

    As a paid-up card-carrying member of The Darwintern, my evolutionary diet consists chiefly of puppies, usually consumed live, and cute kitten smoothies warm from the blender.

    And the centrepiece of our Kitzmas festive table is the traditional roast suckling child garnished with crocoduck sausages.

  3. Adam & Eve were food junkies, the bible says so. Loved bacon-burgers & fries, fried chicken, etc.

  4. Mark Germano

    “The restricted foods are all clearly allowed by Scripture….”

    Speaking of restricted foods and scripture, the “Leviticus 11 Jambalaya with Shrimp and Andouille Sausage” is amazing! Although, admittedly, it is lacking both shrimp and andouille sausage.

  5. [David Lightsey] is also a voting member with the Creation Research Society and an adjunct college professor in nutrition. He is a well-seasoned junk-science spotter (30 years)

    Wait, how do we make sense of this? Let’s see:
    * A train spotter is someone who likes trains, so train spotters are often to be found in an environment with trains;
    therefore
    * David is a junk science spotter, so he is to be found in an environment with junk science.

    Otherwise it doesn’t make sense.

  6. Gospel of Matthew chapter 15
    The scribes and Pharisees noted that the disciples of Jesus did not wash their hands before eating. Among the responses of Jesus, in verse 11 he says:
    “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.”

    I don’t understand how a True Bible Christian could be concerned with nutrition.

  7. Can anybody help me out?

    “Making food choices based upon the junk-science of evolution is misguided.”
    That junk-science tells me how come I’m lactose tolerant.

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/070401_lactose

    Is David telling me that I shouldn’t drink milk anymore?

  8. Michael Fugate

    The nutrition section is in the Apocrypha book of Julia where it says
    “Thou shalt eat five servings of fruits and vegetables each day.”
    “Thou shalt limit thy intake of salt.”
    etc.

  9. Since evolution is based upon the initial premise of abiogenesis, which is biologically impossible, the various food restrictions based upon evolutionary theory are senseless.

    Let’s leave aside the observation that the Creation fable describes a series of abiogenetic events culminating in the creation of man (technically, the creation of woman doesn’t count since Eve, we’re told, was formed from the living tissue of Adam’s rib). The funny thing is that the supposedly evolution-based diets peddled in those books are indeed quackery—but that this has nothing to do with whether evolution itself is true or not, any more than the nonsense of astrology means that the planets don’t really move.

    Then there’s the issue of abiogenesis. It’s true that “life comes only from life” has been a dogma since the nineteenth century—but it’s also true that genuine scientists have always recognized that this can’t be entirely true and are well on their way toward creating at least very simple forms of life in the lab. (Creationists, keep your torches oiled and your pitchforks handy! Who knows when you’ll have to storm the castle, er, laboratory!) For that matter, it might be happening in nature, too—but only in the most secluded places, since any proto-life created elsewhere would quickly get eaten, and that would be that.

  10. Oh, and of course, for “created” read “arising.” Poor word choices like that are seized upon by creationists as admissions that evolution is a sham.

  11. Ross Cameron

    ’57 percent of the U.S. population believe in some form of creation, which illustrates the growing science illiteracy of Americans.’ Fixed it for you, Curmie.

  12. According to the Gallup Poll of May of 2017
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx
    belief in creationism is a “new low”,
    38% saying that “man developed over millions of millions of years, but God guided the process” (a new high)
    19% saying that “man developed over millions of years, but God had no part in the process” (remaining at the high of the previous poll),
    38% that “God made man in the present form” (a new low).
    You chose to say that the first is a form of creationism, but the trend is that the second is increasing (and the third is decreasing) which does not indicate an increase in science illiteracy.

  13. I remember one more Bible proof-text, Mark 16:18
    “They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; …” AIUI, the snake-handling churches also will drink poisons like strychnine.

  14. Eat 4 Your Blood Type is in no way scientifically valid. Using that book’s silliness to condemn evolution is comparable to using snake handlers to condemn religion.

  15. @Tom B
    Eat 4 Your Blood Type –
    I don’t keep up to date on the latest diets, so that didn’t mean much to me.
    I suppose that there must be a diet plan depending on your astrological sign.
    How about a diet depending on your name? “Tom” – that means that we need more in the fatty, salty food group.

  16. Mark Germano

    A diet based on eye color or thumb length would be analogous. At least those are determined genetically.

    Although, a diet based on name is just as ridiculous.

  17. I imagine that before The Fall, Adam and Eve were perfectly healthy eating nothing but fruit and nuts. No meat, no cultivated plants, no bread. No beer. No fermented grain beverages at all.

    I don’t really see this as being much of a paradise.