Creationist Wisdom #899: Evolution and Politics

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Herald-News of Joliet, Illinois. They have a comments feature, but there aren’t any yet. The letter is titled Response to Dickson’s rampage.

Because the 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 Robert. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

This is a response to Wes Dickson’s slew of letters attacking God, Bible, conservatives and Republicans.

We can’t find a “slew” of Dickerson letters, only two, each pointing out a small inaccuracy in scripture. Here’s one of them: An alteration. But that’s enough to enrage Robert. He says:

Wes questioned God’s existence and actions. God’s existence is clearly seen by what he has made and by actual scientific data, [Hee hee!] but those who are spiritually blind want to reject God’s authority and remain willfully ignorant.

Go, Robert, go! He continues:

The general theory of evolution [not the special theory of evolution] has never been directly observed, putting it outside the realm of science, and it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. [Groan!]

He’s right — no one has ever seen a crocoduck. Then Robert tells us:

God created humans to have someone to love. You don’t get love from a robot, so he gave us free will. He is allowing everyone an opportunity to be saved before holding them accountable.

That makes sense. We’ve always treated our girl friends the same way. The rest of Robert’s letter is political. Here’s a bit of that stuff:

Wes falsely claimed President Trump rejects freedom of the press. Trump rightly criticized the liberal-biased press for censoring out things that don’t fit their narrative and often presenting fake news. … Wes claimed liberals, not conservatives, brought us wonderful things like Social Security, Medicare and abolition of slavery.

[…]

Republican President Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, which was favored by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was approved by 80 percent of Republicans and only 60 percent of Democrats. The KKK was composed of Democrats.

That’s it — a tangled mess of creationism and party politics. Unfortunately, it’s a reflection of the real world these days. Make of it what you will, dear reader.

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

7 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #899: Evolution and Politics

  1. Republican President Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, which was favored by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was approved by 80 percent of Republicans and only 60 percent of Democrats. The KKK was composed of Democrats.

    This is a bit off-topic for this blog, but let me gently point out that a lot has changed for both parties since 1964. The KKK, for instance, has found a happy new home in the GOP.

    As for the Emancipation Proclamation, it applied only to those areas under Confederate control (look it up), and thus was unenforceable; it freed no slaves. Its purpose was political: to motivate Southern blacks to flee their owners and (to the extent possible) fight for a Union victory while undermining Confederate efforts to enlist the financial and military support of Britain and France.

  2. “God’s existence is clearly seen by what he has made and by actual scientific data, [Hee hee!] but those who are spiritually blind want to reject God’s authority and remain willfully ignorant.”

    Could Robert point to just one piece of “scientific data” that unambiguously proves the existence of his deity? Since there are natural (though incomplete) explanations for the universe and life on earth, all this skeptic asks is for one just piece of independent, verifiable evidence. Ancient texts and so called personal relationships with the deity don’t make the standard. Now people have argued this point before (and in other blogs/websites), and I’m not sure what I’d accept, but the night sky blinking on and off, or the sun standing still for a day, or the stars of Orion spontaneously rearranging, or some old testament smiting are strong possibilities. For all claims otherwise, the chrisian deity keeps itself well hidden.

  3. The 1964 Civil Rights Act, a real‐life example of Simpson’s Paradox:
    http://www.math.usu.edu/adele/s1040/simpsons_paradox.pdf

  4. “… the night sky blinking on and off, or the sun standing still for a day, or the stars of Orion spontaneously rearranging, or some old testament smiting are strong possibilities.”

    Not really, since all of those could be due to natural causes. e.g. The onset of a brain aneurysm or schizophrenia, or an advanced alien technology at work, a \relatively nearby roving black hole that highly distorts light from distant stellar objects, etc.

    Supernatural “explanations” are *always* oxymorons because they invoke magic. Within science, “to explain” is to render what was unknown in terms of knowns. Supernatural or any other magic related “explanations” seek to “explain” unknowns in terms of even greater unknowns, and in the case of creationism and related forms of human insanity they even try to “explain” knowns in terms of these greater unknowns.

    Such attempts to “explain” things supernaturally are not explanations at all; they are merely excuses to continue to believing in absurdities. Their other intent is to shut down all investigation since these occurrences are allegedly being controlled from unknown regions that cannot ever be investigated.

    That is why creationists spend so much time inventing untestable “models” that are inherently incapable of falsification. They consider non-falsifiability to be a strong point when it is only the invention of weak minds that want to reject reality. Science remains correctable because it is evidence and critical reasoning based. Creationists scrupulously avoid both.

    For just one example of the latter, see the Texas 2012 GOP platform:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_blog.html

  5. “Go, Robert, go!”

    I don’t know why that line always makes me laugh. I always get a mental picture of some cartoon character with steam coming out of his ears.

    Robert’s god is not very lovable, and conditional love is not really worth striving for, “free will”, or no. Robert’s idea of a god just sounds like someone holding a gun to your head, and saying: Love me, or else…

    What would constitute evidence for the genuinely “supernatural?” Difficult to say, isn’t it? Perhaps amputated limbs, or an eye, spontaneously regenerating? Or someone literally returning from the dead? But it would have to be obviously demonstrable, and repeatable under controlled conditions, and not just idle hearsay tainted by personal belief and bias.

  6. Ah yes, the good old “you get free will to choose as you prefer, but will go to hell if you don’t do as I advise you”. It’s quite unsurprising that at least in Europe most christians don’t believe in a Lake of Fire anymore, but try to define hell in more abstract terms.
    Robbie obviously is not such a christian.

  7. “God created humans to have someone to love.” This is an interesting supposition. Their god created us to have someone to love … and if you do not return His Love, you will be burned in Hell forever and ever, amen.

    I am intrigued by all of the reasons these people give for why their god created us: He was lonely, He needed someone to love, etc. Of course, He is perfect and complete needing nothing, er, well, except love … and worship … and sucking up. Such a needy god, tsk, tsk.

    According to Genesis Adam was made because Yahweh needed a caretaker for his Garden, a steward for his creation. (An all-powerful god needs helpers? Why?) There is no mention of love or loneliness. These people keep making stuff up.