Creationist Wisdom #959: Stars Aren’t Alive

We have a second letter-to-the-editor for you today. This one appears in the News-Gazette of Champaign, Illinois. It’s titled Stars aren’t able to produce life, and the newspaper doesn’t have 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 Bill. We’ve posted about him before — see #942: Eternal Consequences, and before that see #907: Science Is a Fairy Tale. Excerpts from his latest letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

I would like to respond to the letter “Something worth sharing for Easter” by Durl and Jan Kruse.

We can’t find that earlier letter, but it really upset Bill. He says:

There is a scientific law called biogenesis, which means life only comes from life or life produces life.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! As we said in Common Creationist Claims Confuted:

That so-called “law” which allegedly disproves evolution is a childish misunderstanding of Louis Pasteur’s work on spontaneous generation. This distortion of Louis Pasteur’s work is found only in creationist literature. Pasteur demonstrated that sealing food from airborne contamination would end the supposed “spontaneous generation” of mold and such. This has nothing to do with Darwin’s theory of evolution or with the ultimate origin of living things. Some fool or freak or fraud posted a crazed misinterpretation of Pasteur’s work at a creationist website and it’s been endlessly repeated ever since.

After that great start, Bill tells us:

Stars are not alive; they cannot produce life. This goes directly against the scientific law of biogenesis.

We assume he’s saying that it would it go against the “law” if stars could directly produce life. Well, that’s certainly true. But stars do produce and disburse complex molecules when they go nova — see Nucleosynthesis. Ultimately — after a long chain of events — organic molecules on planets with the right environment will produce life. Anyway, Bill continues:

There is no difference between the ancient Egyptians bowing down and worshipping Ra the phony sun god in ancient times and these people attributing supernatural powers to stars. They actually worship nature instead of our creator.

What’s he talking about? Who attributes supernatural powers to stars? We’re not told. Then he quotes scripture:

Romans chapter 1, verses 22-23: Claiming to be wise, they become fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

That was certainly helpful! Bill’s letter goes on:

Evolution is worship of self and the worship of nature, the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth, animals and plants.

Aha! So that’s what evolution is. And if you worship those things, the bible says you’re a fool! You’ve been warned, dear reader. And now we come to the end of Bill’s letter:

Only the true and living God possesses supernatural powers and not the non-living universe.

Now you know. And don’t forget it, because if you do, you’ll regret it for eternity.

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

17 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #959: Stars Aren’t Alive

  1. Eddie Janssen

    I have a suggestion for a new category:
    Not good enough for Creationist Wisdom

  2. @ Eddie Janssen – I agree. Even Ken Ham wouldn’t approve of Bill’s output.

  3. Bill says,
    ”Only the true and living God possesses supernatural powers and not the non-living universe.”

    That’s right – only the living part of the universe possesses god-like supernatural powers. Now excuse me as I go out and worship a squirrel.

  4. Michael Fugate

    But neither evolution nor abiogenesis necessarily need supernatural power to work….

  5. Egyptians bowing down and worshipping Ra the phony sun god in ancient times and these people attributing supernatural powers to stars.
    I’d venture to say Bill is referring to astrology and related methods of divination. Does he likewise acknowledge such references exist in his bible as well? But the fact is is that astrology, etc. are still with us.

  6. images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things
    Remember this when you hear complaints about ignoring Christmas. Christmas cribs (or creches).

    “When the mornng stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy” Job 38:7
    “The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.”
    Psalm 136:9

  7. Michael Fugate

    True God – any god Bill worships
    Phony God – any god Bill doesn’t worship

  8. Just wait until my god Ra gets down done with this guy. He’ll be sorry.

  9. If Bill had been an ancient Egyptian, he too would have venerated Ra the phony sun god. At least then Bill might have produced something genuinely useful, like, I dunno…maybe quarrying a block of limestone to make up one of the pyramids, something like that?

    Instead, we must share the misfortune of living in the same era as Bill, where he can roam free, boring us all blind by quoting scripture that most of us skip over, anyway. And confusing evolution with paganism. That’s always a big accomplishment.

  10. docbill1351

    The True Bill venerates Bastet, the one and true God.

  11. Dave Luckett

    Bill is a demonstration of one fact about ignorance: that it applies even to itself. The truly ignorant are ignorant of their own ignorance.

    This is someone whose understanding of science does not rise to the rudimentary who nevertheless has the gall to address the public on science; whose ignorance of religion is profound, but he parades it. He is unembarrassed by his ignorance – for he is simply unaware of it.

    But such ignorance cannot be explained by mere inadvertence. It is not that Bill has not had the good fortune to be exposed to the simple facts about the theory of evolution or the stars or the history of religions or the context of Paul’s words. That is insufficient, considering the ubiquity of the information, should he have ever wished to acquire it. No. To be this ignorant requires active avoidance; to be this hostile to knowledge requires actual malice.

    Bill’s surname – I shall respect SC’s rule – does not recall the Scots-Irish diaspora. Nevertheless, he shares their contempt for learning. It’s difficult to account for that unless it was an attitude absorbed in childhood. If so, it’s a worry. The meme is spreading.

  12. @GPF
    The Flying Spaghetti Monster could crush Ra with a single touch of a noodly appendage. All should bow before pastafarian superiority and fund the divinely ordained pirate ship:

  13. Hans-Richard Grümm

    Monotheistic gods are not alive: they neither metabolize nor reproduce. How could a non-living god have created life on Earth ? :p

  14. Eddie Janssen

    @Dave Luckett
    “Bill is a demonstration of one fact about ignorance: that it applies even to itself. The truly ignorant are ignorant of their own ignorance.”

    That is the main pillar of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome. The second one is that sufferers are also unaware of the knowledge on the subject in others and will debate experts as an equal. Even when the expert is giving evidence of his/her superior knowledge on the subject the D-K sufferer will not accept the information when it conflicts with their own opinion.

    Strangely enough they will call a plumber and not a barber when something is wrong with their faucet.

  15. Our dear SC doesn’t get it: “Who attributes supernatural powers to stars?”
    According to Busy Bill “Ultimately ….. will produce life” is a supernatural process with his favourite god being omitted, hence false.

  16. @EddieJ wants to be charitable: “Not good enough for Creationist Wisdom.”
    According to Merriam-Webster wisdom means “good sense : judgment” or “accumulated philosophical or scientific learning.”
    Our dear SC is guilty of some subtle mockery. Creationism and wisdom by definition don’t go together. So all creacrap is “good enough” for the category Creationist Wisdom.

    @DaveL quotes some wise words: “The truly ignorant are ignorant of their own ignorance.”
    While the vile ignorant prefer to stay ignorant of their own choice. The line between these two categories is so blurred that’s close to non-existent. Creacrappers like Bill never ever consult sources like TalkOrigins.

  17. Eric Lipps

    So if their argument were correct, God couldn’t have “formed man from the dust of the earth” (Genesis 2:7).

    Oh, but that’s God, of course, who can do anything, even make pi equal 3.

    Pasteur’s experiment demonstrated that complex life (flies) couldn’t spontaneously arise from unliving matter. It did not show that life itself could never do so.