Creationist Wisdom #941: Mere Theories

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of St Louis, Missouri. It’s titled Media, academia biased against alternative scientific theories. The newspaper has a comments feature.

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 Kevin. We’ll give you some excerpts from his letter, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this].

He begins by referring to an earlier column written by a different Kevin:

Kevin McDermott’s column “Medieval America” (Feb. 24) says, “The theory of evolution… has virtually complete support among the world’s scientists.”

Today’s Kevin didn’t like that column. He says:

I can provide McDermott a list of thousands of trained, degreed scientists who support neither Darwin’s theory of inter-species evolution nor the theory of human-induced global warming.

Ooooooooooooh! He’s got a list! We’re in trouble now. After that he tells us:

The reasons most Americans never hear about the science-based alternative theories is that the news media, academia and governments are biased against them, making it challenging for them to be widely distributed.

Egad, they’re all biased! We’re so fortunate that Kevin is courageous enough to speak out and tell us The Truth. He continues:

Our entire public education system is biased against alternative theories and requires students to accept theories of inter-species evolution and human-induced global warming as scientific facts rather than theories.

This is an outrage! Let’s read on, as he continues to criticize the other Kevin’s column:

Mr. McDermott’s statement that human-induced global warming “isn’t significantly more debatable than the theory of gravity” shows his fundamental misunderstanding of science.

Fortunately, today’s Kevin does understand science. He explains:

The scientific method depends on experiments to confirm theories. This can easily be done in the case of gravity, and no sane person would argue against it.

On Earth, yes. But elsewhere? Has Kevin tested gravity on Uranus? Anyway, he ends his letter with this:

However, theories of human-induced global warming and inter-species evolution have not been confirmed with experimentation. Science itself, by definition, relegates these ideas to debatable “theories.”

Wow! If they’re only theories, then phooey on them! Great letter!

Copyright © 2019. 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

20 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #941: Mere Theories

  1. Once again, the linking of evolution and global warming, and the attempt to exclude them by giving privileged status to experimental science over anything else

  2. I can provide McDermott a list of thousands of trained, degreed scientists who support neither Darwin’s theory of inter-species evolution nor the theory of human-induced global warming.
    I doubt than there is such a list.
    In the first place, even a greatvdeal of the Young Earth Creationists insist that there is Biblical backing for inter-species evolution They have their own words for that, “micro-evolution” within “kinds” (or “baramins” from Biblical Hebrew) which are described as “someting like taxonomic families” (that is, evolution producing new species and even probably genera or more).
    And if there are so may experts in evolutionary biology, this raises the question as to what they have shown their expertise by producing an alternative to “inter-species-evolution”.
    You see, The reasons most Americans never hear about the science-based alternative theories is that no one has produced an alternative to inter-species-evolution. It isn’t for lack of places for someone to describe an alternative. The reason that we haven’t heard about aternatives is the simple, obvious reason that there is are no alternatives. To paraphrase a famous physicist, speaking in another context, “Where are they?” Where are the alternatives to evolution?

  3. I imagine Kevin wearing a MAGA hat as he was writing this manifesto.

  4. “making it challenging for them to be widely distributed.”
    Yeah, it;s shocking that there is such a shortage of creacrap sites on the internet.

    “inter-species evolution have not been confirmed with experimentation. ”
    BWAHAHAHAHA! Kevin never has heard of Canis Lupus Familiaris, an experiment that has been going on for some thousands of years!
    Also

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution

  5. “The scientific method depends on experiments to confirm theories. This can easily be done in the case of gravity, and no sane person would argue against it.”

    No, I’m quite sane, but I have serious doubts about gravity. I’d like Kevin to demonstrate it please, by stepping off the roof of the nearest high-rise apartment building.

  6. ”Our entire public education system is biased against alternative theories …
    Indeed it is! The flat Earthers, the hollow Earthers are completely locked out, just as the poor creationist are as well. Imagine the benefits to the world if anti-Vaxers were given equal time, same for ID supporters. Progress on the scientific frontiers would expand exponentially!

  7. Given that people like Kevin want religion in public schools, let’s do it – let’s include every alternative to Christianity we can find. Let’s do alternative lifestyles, history, economics, you name it. Let’s remove all standards and use random searches for a text.

  8. I suggest that in the sports programs that we follow Ecclesiastes 9:11, that the win is not to the swift or the strong.
    It is merely an arbitrary decision that the higher number is the win in soccer or basketball, while the lower number wins in golf or running.
    Why not Calvinball?

  9. @ChrisS, like so many people you fail to distinguish between microgravity (studied scientifically since Galileo) and macrogravity, beyond the range of satellite orbits, where we cannot do experiments and so we cannot do science.

    And don’t go mentioning planetary probes. They don’t count, because their trajectories are intelligently designed.

  10. Micro- vs. micro-gravity is an old idea discussed in talk.origins many years ago. Yes, it is a joke, but, like any good joke, it has a valid point to it. Newton had no “here and now science” for the motions of heavens being affected by the force which called the apple to fall. Nobody was capable of performing an experiment until the Apollo 15 astronaut David Scott dropped a hammer and a feather during a Moon walk.
    https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo_15_feather_drop.html
    This tells us something about the reality of science. No serious person was in doubt about “macro-gravity” in the early 20th century. Scott, btw, said that he was testing Galileo’s theory of gravity, but the hammer-feather expiriment was a commonplace on Earth, just not outside the Earth (and, of course, rockets had been expanding the domain of gravity for several years before that).

  11. “the hammer-feather expiriment was a commonplace on Earth”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Philoponus

    AfaIk he was the first guy to practice Popper’s falsifiability principle. It’s a pity that he shared the fate of Aristarchos of Samos.

  12. FrankB says: “Inevitable”

    It was anticipated by your Curmudgeon, years ago. See Gravity Is a False Theory!

  13. The talk.origins Jargon File dates at latest October 24, 1994
    http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/jargon/jargonfile_m.html#microgravity
    Back in the Dark Ages before Wikipedia.

  14. @TomS Egad. Really, I did not expect you to perpetuate this myth of the Apollo moon landings. What ere you thinking, man! Surely you aren’t going to deny that Apollo15, and in fact, all of the Apollo “moon landings” were staged and filmed in a studio at Area 41.

    Apollo 13 was a red herring. It’s astronauts WERE aboard the capsule launched into space but only so that they could be “rescued” and shown to the world; but it was never intended that they should land on the moon.

  15. My dear SC, it’s not exactly an achievement to anticipate in 2017 what happened twelve years before. If you don’t believe me, please click the link to the Onion article and take a close look at the date.

    @Ted: the Moon itself is a red herring. Here you can find all the evidence you need.

    https://phdn.org/archives/revisionism.nl/Moon/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

    Plus Belgium is fake.

    https://www.zapatopi.net/belgium/

  16. @FrankB, I could make a very good case for saying that Belgian is fake, having been carved out of French and Flemish-speaking territories in 1830, and perpetually threatening to come apart at the seams

  17. Eric Lipps

    I can provide McDermott a list of thousands of trained, degreed scientists who support neither Darwin’s theory of inter-species evolution nor the theory of human-induced global warming.

    “Trained” and “degreed,” maybe–but degrees from diploma mills or Bible colleges don’t count as legitimate qualifications for serious scientific work, nor does “training” offered by the latter.

    Even quite legitimate degrees don’t necessarily prove anything. The late and unlamented (at least by me) Duane Gish had a Ph.D. in biochemistry, but devoted his career to peddling creationism, often venturing far from his degreed field to do so. In effect, he used hhs genuine academic credentials for fraudulent purposes.

  18. @Anonymous [Eric Lipps]
    But always be careful about accepting anything that a creationist says, no matter how plausible or harmless it sounds. They get their training in Bible-bashing and hone it in quote mining.
    There is a list of a thousand or so people who singed on to A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism, which one can read about in Wikipedia. It does not say anything about “inter-species evolution” nor about anything meteorlogical.

  19. On the subject of Intelligent Falling:
    I would counsel Kevin to remember Douglas Adams’ advice: There is an art — or rather, a knack — to flying. The knack is to throw yourself at the ground, and miss.

    Either that, or learn to do the micro-macro gravitational dance in mid-air.