WND: One of Their Best Creationist Articles Ever

Buffoon Award

Once again, dear reader, our ever-vigilant Drool-o-tron™, with its blaring sirens and flashing lights, compelled us to notice the blinking letters of its wall display, which said WorldNetDaily (WND). As you know, WND was an early Buffoon Award Winner. We’ve described them as a flamingly creationist, absolutely execrable, moronic, and incurably crazed journalistic organ that believes in and enthusiastically promotes every conspiracy theory that ever existed. It’s in their honor that our jolly Buffoon logo adorns this post.

Our computer was locked onto this headline: The desperate atheists’ faith in Darwinism, and above that headline, in red, it says Evolution Watch. The mere existence of that journalistic category tells us all we need to know about the intellectual standing of WND, and that banner always triggers the Drool-o-tron™.

The article was written by Hanne Nabintu Herland. She’s described as “a best-selling historian of religions, author, and founder and host of ‘The Herland Report’.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

We all know Darwin. We’ve all been told for decades that he proved [Hee hee!] how man evolved from apes, in a linear evolution from amphibians at sea. They crawled on land, back in the day, and slowly evolved into other species, and here we are – Homo sapiens – the brilliant evolutionary end product. We are also regularly taught that those who disagree with Darwin are the idiots of the world.

Great, huh? Then she says:

Yet, the evolution from one species to another has never been proven, only slight variations within species. Yet, Darwin is still widely used as an example of how “modern empiricism and science” demonstrate how stupid believers in God have been in history.

Gasp — it’s never been proven! She goes on to tell us:

What English naturalist Charles Darwin outlined in “The Origin of Species” (1859) remains a theory. It is unproven hypothesis regarding the development of the species from the lower and simple to the higher and more complex, through the process of natural selection and the survival of the fittest. It still relies on a long number of assumptions. In essence, Darwin’s evolution has to be accepted by faith – they believe in it, regardless of whether it has been empirically proven or not. Verifiable proof still is missing. Despite its obvious flaws, the theory still remains at the forefront of atheist “enlightened” thought.

You’re probably feeling pretty stupid right now, aren’t you? Hanne Nabintu Herland continues:

Scientists have been totally unable to prove development from one species to another. The only element that is a documented fact is that all species derive from one common ancestor, as pointed out by biology professor at Lehigh University, Michael J. Behe in “Darwin’s Black Box. The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution.” [Behe? Hee hee!] The forming of new species – “macroevolution” has never been observed, only variations within each species – “microevolution,” such as birds getting longer or shorter wings. Evolution beyond variation remains a hypothetical assumption. Darwin, as we know, could not even explain the complexity of a human cell. As Behe states, the universe as a whole is extremely fine-tuned for life, suggesting that nature exhibits evidence of intelligent design.

Lotta clunkers in that paragraph. See “Micro-yes, Macro-no” in Common Creationist Claims Confuted. While you’re there, scroll down to “Evolution is only a theory” As for fine-tuning, we’ve written often about that — see, for example: The Discoveroids’ Proof of Fine Tuning. Okay, let’s get back to Hanne Nabintu Herland:

Another intelligent-design theorist, Michael A. Cremo, points out in “Rethinking Darwin: A Vedic Study of Darwinism and Intelligent Design and Forbidden Archaeology,” that not only did the Neanderthals live on earth in the same time period as Homo sapiens, as modern science now acknowledges, but human remains have been found in the earth’s layers from millions of years ago. [Huh?] So, it is documented that previous human-like creatures cannot be called “human ancestors,” as they lived on the earth side by side with homo sapiens.

[…]

Cremo suggests that the current paradigm and “academic” belief in Darwinism suppresses data if it does not coincide with evolutionary theory. New revelations and findings are simply silenced, in order not to challenge the current understanding of evolution.

Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis both evolved from earlier ancestors. As for Cremo, we rarely see him cited by creationists, because he’s too far out even for them — see Michael Cremo — Cutting Edge Creationist.

Skipping her discussion of the expanding universe, and how Einstein denied it for a while, she ends her brilliant post with this:

So, for now it is we who are stuck with the desperate atheists’ desire for Darwinism to be true, regardless of documentation or proof. So, a Darwinist is someone who believes in an unproven theory and desperately hopes for it one day to come true.

Well, dear reader, that was certainly entertaining. We hope WND continues to post articles by Hanne Nabintu Herland. She’s a great creationist.

Copyright © 2018. 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

12 responses to “WND: One of Their Best Creationist Articles Ever

  1. Michael Fugate

    From her Herland Report – subtitled White Christians are the Best!

    When the Testosterone level falls, Civilizations weaken and die – The Testosterone Hypothesis, by Roy Barzilai – Herland Report

    Religion motivates people to love one another in a way that secularism cannot – Hanne Nabintu Herland at The US Christian Post

    When the stupidity level rises…

  2. Religion motivates people to love one another in a way that secularism cannot
    For example, secularism cannot motivate people to become suicide bombers.
    Religion can motivate people to save another’s soul from eternal punishment by inflicting any degree of finite torture.

  3. Mark Germano

    If 54% of Americans accept evolution (including the theistic kind), and only 3% of Americans identify as atheist*, I think Herland should take up her beef with other Christians.

    I’m aware that the 3% stat might be up to an order of magnitude to low. Don’t @ me.

  4. “Great, huh?”
    Yup. Every single statement regarding Evolution Theory contains something incorrect and now I’m quite charitable. I’m not even going to try to list them, let alone address them. No, the expanded universe bit caught my attention. Let me see if it is as bad – that would be quite an achievement.

    “Whoever contradicted the prevailing view would be called “unscientific.”
    Uh no. Physicists like Friedmann, Lemaitre and Gamow were never called unscientific.

    “he (Einstein – FrankB) calls this the biggest mistake of his career ”
    Yeah – admitting a mistake is something a creacrapper typically would never do. It’s telling that Hanne thinks that this somehow discredits Evolujtion Theory.

  5. Ross Cameron

    Grrrr. A historian who equates a theory with a hypothesis. Will they ever learn?

  6. ‘…previous human-like creatures cannot be called “human ancestors”, as they lived on the earth side by side with homo sapiens (sic)’.
    Creationist superstar, Jonathan Sarfati, has made this blunder, too.
    So grand-children can’t possibly co-exist at the same time as their grand-parents, or even great grand-parents.
    That just can’t happen, right?

  7. Mark Germano

    Or parents, to drive that point home.

  8. Mark Germano

    “Scientists have been totally unable to prove development from one species to another. The only element that is a documented fact is that all species derive from one common ancestor….”

    You can’t prove it, even though it’s a fact?

  9. That also drew my attention, Mark. She’s all over the place. As regards, “We are also regularly taught that those who disagree with Darwin are the idiots of the world”, I don’t remember that being in any curriculum, but people may be driven to that impression by the fact that many anti-Darwinians can’t even be bothered to get the basic facts straight.

  10. One of the inherent compensations of our universe is that the arrogantly ignorant are always so very eager to make themselves visible to everyone. Dunning-Kruger and all of that.

  11. Herland agrees that “…the universe as a whole is extremely fine-tuned for life, suggesting that nature exhibits evidence of intelligent design.” How does anyone think that’s true. Much of our planet isn’t fine-tuned for life (especially the life of us, god’s alleged dearly beloved) and the vast majority of the volume of the universe outside our planet appears extremely hostile to life.

  12. …the universe as a whole is fine-tuned… This is denied by those who argue that Earth is a “privileged planet”. This is questioned by those who argue that we have no knowledge of the universe of the distant past.
    …fined-tuned for life This is denied by those who argue that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics or the Law of Conservtion of Specified Complex Information are incompatible with the origin of life.