Creationist Wisdom #924: You Want Evidence?

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Ponoka News of Ponoka, Alberta, population 7,229. The name Ponoka is Blackfoot for “elk.” The letter is titled God’s existence all around, and the newspaper has a comments feature.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote her by using her full name. Her first name is Lois. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

Lois begins by informing us that she’s writing in response to Scott Lewis’ Dec. 5 letter to the editor related to the existence of God, which you can see here: Reader questions Deacon’s column about God. It’s a good letter, based on observable facts versus faith, but Lois disagrees. She says:

I’m not sure where Scott Lewis gets his facts from but his statement, “…continuing to grow and learn while seeking truth” makes me think he’s not interested in seeking truth, only in justifying his opinion. The mind won’t believe what the heart has rejected is what I see.

Aha — Lois claims the observable facts are on her side. She tells us:

The human mind, soul, and body is “fearfully and wonderfully made.” [Right!] It takes far more faith of [sic] believe in evolution than in a designer. The intricate fashioning of a cell could never just happen.

Good, huh? She continues:

DNA is in every cell of your body (about 37.2 trillion in the average person). [Gasp!] I don’t have enough faith to believe that happened by chance. The idea of evolution wants you to believe that time plus nothing equals everything.

Lois has a keen understanding of evolution. Let’s read on:

Sir Fred Hoyle, a noted astrophysicist and mathematician compared the likelihood of even the simplest cell forming by natural processes to the probability of a tornado sweeping through a junk yard and assembling a Boeing 747. That would never happen.

Ah yes, the Junkyard tornado. Another excerpt:

There is so much evidence for a designer one would have to stick their head in the sand to miss it. [Or some place else to see it.] All that we observe, where did the air come from? A perfect mix of oxygen and carbon dioxide to support life; our planet is the perfect distance from the sun; it spins at the perfect speed. Just coincidence?

That’s The Privileged Planet argument. Lois is well-versed in creationist lore. Here’s more

The second thing you [the earlier letter-writer] announced as fact is that there is no extra-biblical evidence for Jesus found in the Bible. Totally untrue. [Ooooooooooooh!] Every archeological dig in the Middle East confirms more people and places spoken of in the Bible. The existence of Jesus is a fact supported by even our calendar designations of B.C. and A.D.

Wowie — that’s great evidence! And now we come to the end:

You do have faith Scott. People don’t reject God because there isn’t enough evidence for His existence. They deny Him because to acknowledge Him means they would need to follow Him and the majority of people just want to be god of their own lives. [Scripture quote.]

The facts are everywhere! Only a fool would deny it. Great letter, Lois!

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

13 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #924: You Want Evidence?

  1. “DNA is in every cell of your body (about 37.2 trillion in the average person). [Gasp!] I don’t have enough faith to believe that happened by chance.”

    No Lois, not by chance. Just by DNA polymerase and replication 37.2 trillion times.

  2. The existence of Jesus is a fact supported by even our calendar designations of B.C. and A.D.

    Sweet Jesus! She’s right!!!

  3. Another great example of “I’m too st00pid for science, so gawd did it”..
    Definitely not suitable for zombie food!

  4. I wonder if she knows that there used to be over 400 days in a year.

  5. “[Our planet] spins at the perfect speed”.
    Any faster and we would fly off.

  6. Christine Janis

    @KeithB. Or that oxygen and carbon dioxide levels have fluctuated wildly over earth’s history. Hell, for the first couple of billion years there wasn’t even enough atmospheric oxygen to sustain multicellular life — what *was* God thinking?

  7. The major component of the atmosphere is nitrogen at about 78%, then oxygen 21%, argon 1%. And then trace gases with CO2 0.04% etc.

  8. “DNA is in every cell of your body (about 37.2 trillion in the average person)”.

    Lois just went with the science on this one; it was too much trouble to sit down and actually count all the cells yourself, just to make sure. That freed up time to polish such gems as: “The idea of evolution wants you to believe that time plus nothing equals everything.”

    Einstein searched his entire life for a formulation as concise as this but — alas! — he was hamstrung by things like intelligence and sanity.

  9. Lois asks if it’s a coincidence that the earth rotates at the velocity it currently does, which she thinks is somehow the “perfect speed”, despite the fact it was faster in the past and will be slower in the future. No Lois, it’s due to the great god Coam (conservation of angular momentum) who rules a whole bunch of things in the universe.

  10. You do have faith Scott. People don’t reject God because there isn’t enough evidence for His existence. They deny Him because to acknowledge Him means they would need to follow Him and the majority of people just want to be god of their own lives.

    In other words, they’re sinners! They reject God—that is, they don’t believe every word in the Bible exactly as written in the plain English in which God dictated it to Moses—because they’re Satan’s pawns! Get those racks and stakes ready, folks! We’ll save ’em yet—and if not, we’ll send them back to Hell where they belong! So there!

  11. @KeithB and others think they’re smart: “I wonder if she knows that there used to be over 400 days in a year.” ….
    Guys, guys, guys, I really have to correct you once again, because for the gazillionth time you think you can beat creacrap – and are totally wrong.
    365,… days in a year is perfect right now, so over 400 days was perfect back then, unless the Earth is 6000 years young, in which you simply talk nonsense. The same for the ratios of nitrogen, oxygen, argon and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – they are always exactly right for that specific moment.
    The exception of course is manmade climate change, but that’s not a problem for creacrap either. The cause is obvious: 0riginal Sin. It one way or another is prophetized in the Bible etc. etc. Mark my words – as soon as a creacrapper can’t deny manmade climate change anymore this explanation will pop up.

    @Beastwood: and who created god Coam and fine-tuned the entire shenanigan so that Mother Earth rotates with the perfect speed at any given moment (whether the Universe is 13,7 billion or 6000 years old)? Exactly.

    @EricL: such a relief that I’m not the only one on this nice blog who gets the insanity of creacrap and fundagelicalism.

  12. This is the puddle argument, stated and possibly independently formulated by Douglas Adams in The Salmon of Doubt, but earlier used by Updike’s Professor Kriegman in Roger’s Version; the enormously erudite Updike was clearly familiar with its formulation by Feinberg and Shapiro (Life Beyond Earth):

    “The environment we inhabit is optimally designed for life. Its water remains at about the same temperature at all times. The balance of acidity and alkalinity is exactly right for living things because of the small amounts of nitrates and phosphates dissolved in the water. The mud at the bottom of the Puddle contains just the right amount of sulfate essential to our metabolism.” And so on.

    More, if you want it, at https://paulbraterman.wordpress.com/2017/03/23/the-little-puddlian-philosophical-society-and-the-fine-tuning-argument/

  13. And the fine-tuning argument proceeds from a premise which denies the premise of the impossibility of natural origin of life argument.

    The creationists have had enough time.
    When are they going to get serious?