Creationist Wisdom #875: Genius in Scotland

We were informed about today’s letter-to-the-editor by Paul Braterman, who has become our chief operative in Scotland. It appears at the website of something called Hebrides News, located in Stornoway, the largest town (population 8,000) in the Outer Hebrides, an island chain off the west coast of Scotland. The letter is titled Evolution theory is “all gobbledygook”, and they don’t 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 today we’ve got some kind of preacher. The letter is from Donald J Morrison, a Home Mission Worker for the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing), about which see Wikipedia’s write-up: Free Church of Scotland (since 1900). We’ll give you some excerpts from Morrison’s letter, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

Truth is not something the evolutionary theorist is particularly interested in, they would rather believe a lie. There are many undeniable proofs against evolution to show that it is nothing but a hoax, a delusion and a very big lie. [Hee hee!] One strand of evidence is found when considering languages. [Huh?] If, as evolutionists claim, all of mankind evolved from the same primitive life-source, then how did we end up with 7,000 different languages?

Good question! Morrison’s answer should be interesting. He informs us:

The Bible teaches in Genesis 11: 7,9 that God created all the different languages at Babel. It is far more reasonable to accept the Biblical claim that God created all of mankind’s different languages; than it is to believe that some space-dust from a massive chaotic explosion somehow became life, and then took on intelligence, and then from the same evolutionary process ended up with 7,000 different languages. That makes no sense whatsoever; it is all gobbledygook.

That was an interesting answer. And it’s one we haven’t seen before. After that he tells us:

There are no ‘primitive’ languages. All languages have a system of sounds, words, and sentences that can adequately communicate the content of culture; so no language is degenerate in that sense. This is undeniable evidence of a divine Creator. Man was created with language.

Undeniable! He continues:

If mankind had advanced through a so-called evolutionary process, then there should still be developing languages today. [Right!] However, the stark fact is mankind’s languages are vanishing from civilization at an alarming rate – thus proving that evolution is a lie. And if evolution were true, then the process by which mankind has obtained 7,000 languages would be continuing today. Has the evolutionary process ceased? According to the Bible it never happened in the first place.

You probably think that’s the only evidence this guy has, but now he presents a whole new argument:

Let me forward further evidence. [Okay, “forward” it.] There is no record of a cataclysmic event that destroyed mankind (or mass extinction as evolutionists call it) prior to 4,000 B.C. [He’s right!] And if there were, surely some of the survivors would have passed this information down to generations to follow. The Bible dates creation, as we know it today, at approximately 4,000 B.C. So it was approximately 6,000 years ago that God, Jesus Christ, created the heavens and the earth in six days. It was 6,000 years ago that Jesus Christ spoke the stars into existence. It was 6,000 years ago that Jesus spoke animals, fish, plants, and land into existence. And it was 6,000 years ago that God formed man out of the dust of the earth.

Did you follow that argument? Great, wasn’t it? Okay, let’s read on:

Such Biblical claims seem absurd to evolutionists, who have convinced themselves that the earth is billions of years old. Ironically, they have absolutely no evidence of such longevity. [No evidence!] Evolutionists have sought out dishonest scientists, who distort the facts, use faulty testing methods, and make erroneous assumptions (unethically stating such assumptions as if they were facts). Yes, evolution is at best only a theory, a ridiculous one at that, although it is falsely presented and swallowed, by the gullible, as if it were a fact.

Are you one of those gullible evolutionists? Then pay close attention to the final paragraph:

It’s amazing how people continually place God and the Bible on trial; yet unquestioningly accept the theories of evolution. This only confirms how the unbelieving heart of sinful man fervently opposes the truth of God’s Word, which declares very clearly that God created the world. How true the words of an honest man who said, ‘Truth is truth even if no one believes it; a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it.’

Okay! That’s it from the Hebrides. We’ve found the perfect place for our next vacation.

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

34 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #875: Genius in Scotland

  1. Laurettte McGovern

    “Ah, but the strawberries, that’s where I had them . . . I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, with geometric logic . . . ”

    Sorry, I had some delusional rants confused for a moment. After this, Captain Queeg makes perfect sense.

  2. The Scottish kind of preacher is right! If Dutch evolved from German, how come people still speak German? Ha!

    “It was 6,000 years ago that Jesus Christ spoke the stars into existence.”
    Nasty materialist evilutionist athiest comminazis like TomS and me always ask questions like “How did god do it? How was design actualized? Here you have it. With one masterstroke this Scottish kind of preacher has advanced creacrap “science” enormously.

  3. Incidentally, language is one of the most illustrative examples of how a great variety of species can emerge from only a few by way of allopatric speciation. English and American grew so far apart in just a few hundred years that some Englanders can’t understand some Americans any more.

    A corollary of Don Morrison’s statement that all(!) languages were created by God at the Babel incident is, that people who were suddenly bestowed with different-but-similar languages decided to group together and travel to the same region: Nordics to Scandinavia, Germans to Austria-Germany-Low Countries and so on. After all, in Morrison’s view Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, German and Dutch did not develop from each other.

    If this is the best Creationism Scotland, Ltd. has to deliver, Paul’s life must be easy.

  4. Michael Fugate

    Does “free” in Free Church mean free from thought?

  5. Once again, others beat me to it. I was going to point out to the Scottish preacher man that languages are a perfect example of evolution of different species (of language) from common ancestral languages. Indeed, the example of the drift of American from British english in less than 300 years is one. And in the United States, there are abundant regional dialects. It seems unlikely in the extreme that the baby Jesus popped them all into existence at Babble (or wherever) and then the folks speaking them migrated to Maine and South Carolina independently! I believe linguists even group languages in to tree-like graphs, similar to evolution of species.

  6. Michael,
    In my 70 years on this planet, any time free is included in the name of any church/religion, it IS totally thought free. I know our host here, SC, likes dogs and I do also, but I would rather have a cat. The best LOL cat is one of a cat sitting inside a storm door looking at a dog on the front porch. The caption is; “We don’t want any of your mindless dogma”. Being just an old, broken down former machinist I equate mindless with thought less. If that is wrong, please feel free to educate me, I enjoy learning every day, is partly why I visit here every day.

  7. Holding The Line In Florida

    I am gratified that it just isn’t just us poor “Americans” that are such afflicted. However since he is in a more educationally advanced continent maybe the good Rev could follow in Hambo’s steps and open a ministry in say Mississippi. Plenty of sheeple there.

  8. I will be reblogging this for the benefit of my friends in the Hebrides, an embattled group.

    Both Lyell and Darwin used the evolution of languages as parallels to the evolution of species.

    But what really puzzles me, as someone who heard Yiddish in my parental home, is this: if all the languages were created at Babel, how come Yiddish was created a thousand years before there were any Jews?

  9. [Not reblogging, since SC retains rights; blogging about]

  10. And surely amoebas should be turning into elephants.

  11. cnocspeireag

    You are quite wrong to claim that Stornoway is the largest town in the Hebrides. It may well be the largest town in the Outer Hebrides, but my local town, Portree, is the largest in the Hebrides by about two thousand people.

  12. There have been studies of the history of languages which have used the exact same computer programs which have been developed for studies of biological evolution.

  13. Michael Fugate

    Another letter from the same site posted a few days after this one concludes:
    “Scotland is now in the 21st century but attempts are made continually to drag us backwards.”

  14. Paul Braterman says: “Not reblogging, since SC retains rights; blogging about”

    I never liked reblogging, but feel free to quote whatever you think is worth quoting.

  15. cnocspeireag, I apologize to the people of Portree.

  16. Eric Lipps

    Truth is not something the evolutionary theorist is particularly interested in, they would rather believe a lie. There are many undeniable proofs against evolution to show that it is nothing but a hoax, a delusion and a very big lieOne strand of evidence is found when considering languages. [Huh?] If, as evolutionists claim, all of mankind evolved from the same primitive life-source, then how did we end up with 7,000 different languages?

    Well, one might start by examining how languages, including English, are known to have, yes, evolved from earlier ones such as classical Latin, Greek, etc., and how they’ve even incorporated new information as new developments in history, science, technology and so forth have occurred. All of the so-called “Romance” languages spring primarily from Latin and proto-German, yet almost all have evolved so far from those beginnings that a modern person without appropriate education would find those earlier tongues incomprehensible. (Ever try readingBeowulf in the original?) Indeed, despite having common origins, modern European languages are different enough from each other for that.

  17. What’s faintly amusing is how broadly the preacher lays out some aspects of Darwinian evolution, while in the process misunderstanding it.

    He’s obviously never studied his own family tree, and pondered just how you can get so many descendants, and establish “cousinship”, from a few ”common ancestors”.

  18. Michael Fugate

    After rereading this, I am pretty sure Donald provided strong evidence that Genesis is neither scientifically or historically accurate.

  19. Dave Luckett

    This is an overwhelming demonstration of the power of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This person is too ignorant and incompetent to understand how ignorant and incompetent he is. He probably believes the arrant untruths he disgorges. But has he asked himself “Why do the scientists who have studied life and the Earth believe that life evolved over billions of years on an Earth that has been changing over that time?” Has he had the basic humility to recognise that he doesn’t know, and has he taken the first, tiny, initial steps to find out? Not on your life!

    Every single assertion he makes is false, and so blatantly false that even the smallest amount of basic investigation would instantly expose the falsity. No evidence for the age of the Earth, he says. No evidence for the evolution of languages, he says.

    The combination of ignorance, assurance and arrogance required to retail such windy untruths in this manner is epic. A brassy hubris pervades all. It passes understanding that any person could be literate in English and yet to have walled his mind off from simple fact so comprehensively. To have done it requires more, I think, than mere indifference or simple neglect. It requires active avoidance, growing out of extreme aversion.

    You might ask where this aversion comes from. What has science or a scientist done to him that explains such antipathy? I can only retort that seeking rational reason for an irrational attitude might be instructive, but it is inevitably futile, in the end. This what he believes. This is what a small but significant population believes. Nothing, no evidence, no demonstrated fact, can shake that belief. Contact with such evidence only entrenches it.

    There’s a novel,at least, in that transaction. I really should think about that.

  20. @Dave Luckett

    The aversion stems, I think, from their hatred of something- namely, science- they know they can’t control. Hence their double-talk about religion and science being merely two different epistemologies; different, but somehow equal.

    They’re not. They’re more like two different ontologies, or realities; and since science is based on empiricism, it’s inevitably going to out-compete- or at least pose considerable existential threat to- theistic beliefs and feelings, which most demonstrably are not empirically based.

    This explains also, I think, creationist attempts to try and co-opt science to suit their own agendas. As Michael F has pointed out, why should they even need science if faith is supposedly so superior? It’s a tacit admission that faith alone can’t cut it.

    In my experience, It takes very little for some creationists’ rage and naked hate to be revealed.

  21. The question that still troubles me is why such people have followers.
    Dunning-Kruger describes the effect on an individual.
    The predictions of the End Times provide a repeating example. Everyone knows of the many failures. So why believe this new one?
    Or, why believe that we have always been at war with Eastasia on one day and the opposite the next day? Although I was familiar with 1984, I was shocked when I saw it in my world.

  22. Holding the line in Florida needs some comfort: “I am gratified that it just isn’t just us poor “Americans” that are such afflicted.”
    Like our dear SC you should learn to read Dutch. I have some excellent Dutch creacrap sites for you to waste your time on.

    PaulB understands that scientific branches don’t stand alone: “Both Lyell and Darwin used the evolution of languages as parallels to the evolution of species.”
    Darwin used another inspiration, one that’s actually very important for christians:

    The principle of common descent was not invented by biologists.

  23. Textual criticism is another field which has used a computer program developed for biological evolution, so similar is the reasoning.
    When there is a tree-like nested hierarchy of taxonomy, it is reasonable to suggest common descent with modification. As is the case with biology, textual criticism, and history of languages. As far as I know, in all three cases, no one has offered an alternative. And, of course. there is massive collaborative evidence.

  24. My homage to this piece is now up at A new argument against evolution
    @TomS, Dennis Venema (Adam and the Genome; Biologos) draws attention to the analogy between the evolution of manuscripts and the evolution of DNA.
    @FrankB, a quick search for the origin of the Indo-European language family tree took me to van Boxhorn, The lead links about him, as it happens, are in Dutch

  25. Nicely done, Paul Braterman. A thought suddenly occurs to me. Could Morrison’s peculiar arguments, together with his location in the Outer Hebrides, somehow be analogous to the biological diversity found in remote places like the Galapagos Islands?

  26. He’s from Inverness, on the mainland. Inver, mouth of a river; Ness as in Loch Ness. But the Hebrides News seems to go in or this sort of thing. Stornoway is, as you say, in the Outer Hebrides, and the Council there until recently put padlocks on the children’s swings on Sundays, for fear the Lord’s Day be desecrated by their heathenish oscillations.

  27. “Does “free” in Free Church mean free from thought?” Creationists are always eagerly striving to look backwards (pun intended). “Free” in this context relates to the dictionary definition in exactly the same as “Liberty” in “Liberty Baptist” does. Remember “Creation Science”, “Intelligent Design”, etc? Like Humpty Dumpty words mean only what creationists want them to mean. Rational dictionaries and encyclopedias[*] really don’t fit into their imaginary universe.

    *Look at “Conservapedia” to see what a creationist encyclopedia looks like:

  28. A “Free Church” is a church which is not connected to the government, as in the UK, distinguished from an “established church”.

  29. As far as I know, there is only one clear example where the theory of the common descent with modifications among Indo-European languages has made a prediction which has been verified: the Laryngeal theory (see the article in Wikipedia – which, unfortunately, is rather too deep for a beginner to understand). Briefly, a linguist, working on the hyothesis that Sanskrit language was derived from a common source, inferred that there had to have been a h-like sound in the past, which disappeared from alll known languages. Some time later, another linguist was able to decipher the Hittite language, and then it was then noticed that the newy deciphered language had that h-like sound in the right places as inferred.
    The absense of many examples of predictions is not considered a fatal flaw in linguistics. One is enough to make one comfortable.
    Of course, evolutionary biology is famous for plenty of such predictions which have been varified by the later discovery of fossils – the “transitional fossils”,

  30. @TomS: spot on regarding “Free Church”. The Free Church of Scotland broke away from the established Church of Scotland in 1843. For decades, it was home to enlightenment. Luminaries included Hugh Miller, who argued for acceptance of an old Earth, and later Henry Drummond, who welcomed evolution theology, and to whom we owe the expression “God of the gaps” when applied to evolution deniers.

    Most congregations of the Free Church, after various mergers, rejoined the main Church of Scotland in 1929, after it was formally disestablished. However, some doctrinally conservative congregations, now forming the Free Church and the Free Church (Continuing), remained outside and firmly reject evolution. The Church of Scotland itself is split on the issue, since the mainstream, acceptors, do not wish to alienate the deniers who predominate in the Highlands and Islands.

  31. “Henry Drummond, who welcomed evolution theology”
    I think Dietrich Bonhöffer formulated the God of the Gap fallacy better (see Wikipedia). But what I’d like to point out here is that creacrappers claim that theology is superior to science. Still they totally neglect that it were two theologians who at a very early stage demonstrated why creationism is, well, nothing but crapola.

  32. Inverness ? A highland scoundrel if ever there was one.

  33. The main problem with such blatant ignorance so forcibly asserted is that it is contagious.

  34. This has been one of the most entertaining articles. Others have commented on the technical aspects of The Rev’s absurdity. And there are, thankfully, plenty of “Letters to the Editor” in the Hebrides News who have done likewise.

    Scotland’s own geology is the most remarkable aspect of this article. Scotland is FAMOUS for the diversity and the age of its geology. Yet somehow, inexplicably, amazingly, surprisingly, despite the physical evidence, and in spite of the physical evidence, The Rev and his mates at The Free Church hold to a 6,000 year age of the earth. The irony is delicious.

    The Rev deserves recognition, SC. Surely there is some form of recognition, some appropriate appellation, that will enable us to remember the Rev and his unique contribution to lunacy.