Creationist Wisdom #1,042: The All-Time Worst

About seven months ago we wrote #986: The Worst Ever? It was bad, but back then we had no idea what we’d find today.

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in Taft Midway Driller of Taft, California. Wikipedia says the town was previously named Moron (which explains a lot), Moro, and Siding Number Two. They also say that “Taft is situated in a major petroleum and natural gas production region in California,” which probably explains the newspaper’s name.

The letter is titled Blind appointment of time, and the newspaper has no 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 Kae. 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!

A blind appointment of time is where the most relished of moments considers only the wayward solace of dreams that determines our place in the moment and the actuality of today, and of that fantasy called yesterday, where the future resides in the fragment of memories called truth, which is the greatest of all chimeras, and further, the abstruse sleight of hand we call history.

That massive, impenetrable, multi-syllabic ark-load of gibberish is only the first sentence! The whole letter is like that, and it’s not a brief letter. What we’re going to do is skip a lot of it, and pluck out only the parts that are obviously creationist. For example:

But bring up nature versus nurture in the formation of human character and you immediately run into an argument as contentious as the origins of mankind that creationists find in the god sent writing of their various faiths, and secular scholars in the pages of Darwin’s Origin of Species. One will never agree with the other because faith is indigent [Indigent?] to each, and faith is the core and structure of life itself.

That was bad, but there’s more of the same quality. For example:

But there is the unusual but not uncommon but disquieting disruption in all this nice tidiness which throws everything in disarray [Wow!], a dissimilarity of variation behind a doubt as to what is or is not inherited from our forbears, and what our culture impinges on us, modifying the outcome.

That “unusual but not uncommon but disquieting” mess was one sentence! Then she says:

One begins to suspect that evolution is wholly dependent on such alterable outcomes of existence in order that what is most functional becomes the most relevant, and that you can’t have the one without the other.

Don’t deny it, dear reader. You’re impressed! That’s why you’ll be sorry to know that we’ve come to the end of Kae’s letter, which is:

Evolution thus becomes technology, and where technology – before it and evolution were concepts or words – was suggestively predicted by Michelangelo’s painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome of the finger of man not reaching out and touching god’s. but god’s reaching out and touching man’s.

If you’re wondering how in the world that pile of poo ever got published, remember that the newspaper is located in a town that was once named “Moron.” Suddenly, it all starts to make sense.

Copyright © 2020. 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

36 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #1,042: The All-Time Worst

  1. Hats off to Kae. She has shown that “she’s not even wrong” can be an understatement.

  2. Michael Fugate

    Based on this Kae is male

    What kind of dressing would be most appropriate for a salad of that type?

  3. Great sermon !

  4. Hmmmm, MichaelF, intriguing question. I am inspired by Josephine Baker and her costume. Replace most of the bananas with all kinds of fruit and vegetables. It doesn’t matter whether Kae is male or female or otherwise.

  5. chris schilling

    Kae’s letter is very inspiring but difficult to emulate but worth trying but hopelessly unattainable but hope springs eternal but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but pastiche is contemptible but the best things in life are free but you can save them for the birds and bees…

    Some evangelicals tell us hell is separation from God. But maybe it’s really proximity to Kae?

  6. Dave Luckett

    Kae presumably means “indigenous”, not “indigent”. “Indigenous”: native to, in-born, and by extension, characteristic of a specific region or population. “Indigent”: poor, needy. Saying that faith is poor and needy would seem to be somewhat opposed to saying it is “the core and structure of life itself”. It makes slightly more sense if you assume that Kae is trying to say that faith is inborn, an essential characteristic of humans; that everyone must have faith in something.

    But who am I to know what Kae is trying to say? Who is anyone? To the extent that the words can be reduced to sense, they are banal. However, in Kae’s case we obviously move in regions of meaning beyond the poor ability of mere words on the page to convey; that what is discussed is so profound, so sublime, so ineffable, as to defeat the very concept of “meaning” entirely.

    One has the same awesome experience when one attempts to penetrate the works of Jacques Derrida. It is truly wonderful that the techniques and tools that served the French post-modernists so well have been seized in Taft (or Moron), California and wielded to the same effect.

  7. Almost close enough to be a Turing Test winner

  8. To your reply, faith is as vulnerable as hope, as is love, as prayer, and the absolution of specious inquiry, because each is always a confrontation of a reality of being bereft of fact. Indigent therefore is proper, meaning that you have to work damned hard each and every day to make it at least probable, giving you a Pandora’s box empty of all things except that remarkable word and concept called hope, which is the indelible watchword and concept of faith itself.

  9. Good of you to visit us, Kae. Your writing style is truly unique.

  10. Nope. The love I foster for my female counterpart and she for me is not “a confrontation of a reality of being bereft of fact” at all. On the contrary, all kinds of facts confirm it. Faith has nothing to do with it; (mutual) trust everything.
    Your writing style may be unique, its content is simply wrong as far as it’s understandable.

  11. I find this amusing:
    creationists find in the god sent writing of their various faiths, and secular scholars in the pages of Darwin’s Origin of Species.
    No, scientists do not search for the answers by poring over “Origiin”. They search nature for answers.
    But then, creationists don’t search the Bible, either. Nobody would ever come up with the idea of super-micro-evolution after the Flood by reading the Bible, would they? Or variation of the speed of light. Or “the absolution of specious inquiry”.

  12. Michael Fugate

    Throw shade on science because one doesn’t want something to be true. If genes can be traced from mother to daughter, then they can be traced from species to species – whether there is a god is irrelevant to whether we share common ancestry with all other living things. Stop trying to put the natural world in the same category as the supernatural.

  13. @MichaelF recommends to “stop trying to ….”
    We can always hope, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

  14. Michael Fugate

    I know, I know. The problem is, in part, that some scientists keep thinking they can find god through science. It is mostly physicists who try this approach – getting their physics PhD and then floating off to acquire theology degrees.

  15. kae quante

    It’s lovely, to see such immediate and intelligent and heart-felt replies from people that have a divergent, sensitive yet sometimes rebelliously ignorant application of morality and self-instruction of their simplistic voyeuristic and preposterous ideas of a place they call life. If you can get out and hitch-hike the vast highways where American bums, drunks, and the junkies that inhabit hospital mental wards and the concrete flops of road overpasses in every City of the Plain then spill me a poem of righteousness, and pray for me and everybody, because if you ain’t got it, then nobody else has, the sky a repository for stars only, our souls a debauch of yesterday lost in a tomorrow of emptiness.

  16. que quante should perhaps be pensamientos profundos – they are beyond my understanding

  17. @KaeQ demonstrates some typical christian love:

    “rebelliously ignorant”
    “simplistic voyeuristic and preposterous”
    I always think it lovely when christians forget about “Judge not, that ye be not judged”.

    “here American bums, drunks, and the junkies”
    Where I live there are precious few of them, fortunately. Our Dutch ones already suffice, thank you. Ah, KaeQ is another American believer who thinks everything non-American is extraterrestrial.

    “and pray for me”
    No way, I’m not a christian. However I do think every comment gets more amusing.

    “our souls a debauch of yesterday lost in a tomorrow of emptiness.”
    Perhaps this applies to KaeQ’s soul. Fortunately as a non-believer I don’t have any, so I’m fine. I can’t lose what I don’t have.

  18. Dave Luckett

    Kae’s discourse is not quite word salad, though it is close to incoherent and unintelligible. “Word salad” consists of strings of words related only by inadvertent and random connections between one and the next. Here, fragments of sense larger than single words exist. However, those fragments do not follow in any meaningful sequence. All you can really infer from the example above is that Kae disapproves of us, and even that is by implication, assuming the multiple adjectives in the first three lines to be ironic.

    I can only speak of vague impressions, but Kae appears to think us conventional and mechanistic, and our views the product of a “righteousness” and “morality” that are unacceptable. Possibly the fragment “the sky a repository for stars only” invokes Lennon’s lyric from “Imagine”, “Above us, only sky”, with disapproval. Kae appears to think that we are indifferent to the plight of the homeless, the poor, the despised, and the clinically insane, but how that conclusion was reached, I cannot say. As for what “it” is, in “if you ain’t got it”, I have no idea. Faith, perhaps? In that case, what is meant by the continuation “then nobody else has”? We might not have faith, but we know for certain that some people do. Or is Kae saying that we think that nobody has faith? That’s a shaky and insecure extension built perilously over a windy gulf, but I can make nothing more of it. If that’s the intention, then the idea is false to fact.

    What can make a soul a “debauch of yesterday”? What does “a debauch of yesterday” even mean? Does Kae think that our tomorrow will be empty, or is that the case for everyone? Is Kae saying that without faith tomorrow is empty? Maybe. If so, again the idea is palpably false.

    Careful exegesis can take me no further. Parsing this recalls two separate references from “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”: Marvin the Paranoid Android’s “Life? Don’t talk to me about life”; and Vogon poetry. The only connection I can see with the acceptance or otherwise of the theory of evolution is that Kae utterly rejects, or is unable to process, rational consideration of reality altogether. No wonder Kae rejects evolution, then.

  19. Michael Fugate

    The stock argument of the 60 and older conservative is the 1960s are to blame for everything wrong in the world today. If we could just go back to the time before…. ahhh heaven on earth. This lack of historical knowledge always dooms the conservative argument that the past was “better”. That humans are products of descent with modification had little impact on morality – it didn’t invent any of the crimes well documented in the Old Testament, for instance. Not rape or murder or adultery or drunkenness. Funny thing is belief in God and Christianity didn’t prevent these crimes from continuing unabated.

  20. Anonymous

    I think a small splash of levity would be nice to softly balance the often onerous weight of the booming rhetorical missives of cannon-shot from distant ink-stained battle grounds that emblazon these pages. Thus: Beards…
    The latest fashion in men’s attire seems be the bearded face. No matter how good or how ridiculous looking, how scrawny, how scruffy, ill advised, misleading, tasteless, a mimicry or imitation of something or of someone else in the past or present, it somehow strikes a discordant note that suggests a subliminal measure of unease with the American male’s idea of stud hood, his testosterone-fueled fantasies losing their edge with society’s acceptance in law and daily life of the homosexual, the bisexual, the gender afflicted.
    Throw in the subjugation to men’s dominance in the workplace, in sports, in entertainment, politics, the military, and plain old social intercourse and you’ve got the perfect excuse to flaunt that fraudulent but persistence noun called manliness – short of wearing a cod piece, popular in the French court of Louis the XIV in the 17th century – by adopting a beard. But remember, too, that Louis made fashionable the wearing of shoulder-length curled wigs, of high-heeled shoes and facial makeup by his entourage, which became adopted by the French soiree. We may not be so far away, history having an uncanny way of repeating itself. You just might want to shave this morning.

  21. Dave Luckett

    In the words of the great Jimmy Durante: “Everybody wants to get in on the act”.

  22. Dave Luckett – a great name you have, and possibly only a very few know the perfection of. But thank you for being on top of this lovely but ironic and beautiful and projective idea of thought in writing. You are a true profit of the existential need of the word writ in promise, decay, and resurrection. Thanks for being there, and here.

  23. “You just might want to shave this morning.”
    No. Too much work. Like reading your ramblings. So I dedicate to you this picture of one of my favourite composers:

  24. kae quante

    To keep the matter of your exigent philosophical outlook of this or that equation in the consequence of what the f*%# it’s all about, you need a person like myself who can challenge those poor specious suck-tit bubble heads of mommy loves you personages that decorate the landscapes of our daily boredom of reality, and that has become the daily quantum of the so-called news of local and world events and the predictions of tomorrow’s declination of yesterday’s hopeful design of a future of hope and stability.
    You have a forum of explicable design based on the fallible ignorance and specious remonstrance of people who are ill educated and born of a collective of trashed inheritance of the poor and ignorant and denial that our government refuses to grant to the impoverished majority the realization of, and that has become endemic to the social order of our future.
    You have a forum that can at the very least challenge the conservative and religiously determined idealization of time and places that have won the popular demand of people that simply don’t have the voice to speak, and therefore become exploited because of their ignorance exploited by governments that deny them free speech and an education that enables them to reach for a better life.
    You have a design of imagination that is witty and intelligent and observant of ideas that are difficult to assimilate except in the most outrageous of social and historical definitions of the meaning not only of place and time but of the prediction of historical realities that project the meanings of tomorrow, which are just as fugitive as yesterday’s imperatives of today.
    So give me a place to speak. I won’t disappoint.

  25. kae quante

    So nice of you to allow a ramble of rambles. In this time and place of the most deliberate and consequential and defining of realities resulting in the deaths of not only nameless but whole cultures of named and unknown people who go about their daily routines on the simple but joyous faith in the believing of the sun’s rising in the morning and going to a job that supports not only their family but a place among other people like themselves, just got junked by the very people they allowed to speak for them on a national and international stage where only the most ardent of demagogues are able to defile thousands of years of simple wisdom and the commonality of common sense.
    viruses that streak through whole communities wreaking the most dreadful of consequences have an intelligence of dismembering thousands of years of social discourse, and that of the keep hood of human embrace defining the very essence of life itself.
    It has been said that viruses have been as consequential as genetic absolutes that have and continue to alter what we are as humans have arrived at, and that the future of we as homo sapiens is a dreadful but unalterable outcome that becomes god’s predicate of a future beyond comprehension. Rejoice then for living in god’s embrace, for we will eventually become then, at the minimum, a reflection of his grace, no matter how imperfect.

  26. kae quante

    Mourning is no longer a private emotion. to be borne with dignity and the sanctity of a shared suffering with loved ones In relative solitude. Now, it has entered the realm of public exposure vis social media, an obscene transmogrification of grieving for those who have died, like Jackals circling their wounded prey, only in this case they are the friends, lovers, relatives showing their distress at the news of the recently deceased. But if the wake is big enough beginning with eulogies of great laudation comparing it all to a tragic and irreplaceable loss then you know that nobody has the foggiest notion of what it really means, or cares to, having established for themselves illusions of immortality, if not in heaven, then in digitized format on the internet. So rather than engage with this social insult, let us otherwise lift a glass to the wayward and the unsound, who after all our brothers and sisters, and like us, fallen on the drift.

  27. @kae
    I feel I must reiterate DL regarding the the word salad:
    With apologies for the emphasis on the mental disorder, I have talked to people with injuries to Wernicke’s area or Wernicke’s encephalopathy and they are more comprehensible.
    You can and should to better.

  28. “you need a person like myself”
    Well, Kae, if you somehow manage to cross the Atlantic you’re welcome.

    “denial that our government”
    Apparently it has escaped your attention that “our government” is not my government.

    “governments that deny them free speech and an education that enables them to reach for a better life”
    No matter how much I love to criticize my government – which, I repeat, is not your government in any meaningful way, regarding free speech and education I’ve got nothing to complain.

    “I won’t disappoint.”
    I am sure you won’t. See, I don’t expect anything sensible and meaningful from you.

    @TomB is overoptimistic: “You can …. do better.”
    I doubt it highly.

  29. kae quante

    Obviously, none of you read Mourning. And the comments I made of your comments evidently didn’t make the so-called evening news, being too controversial.
    I ended it with a portion of a poem of a long-ago poet, who wrote, ”The flesh is bruckle, the fiend is slee. Timor mortis perturbat me.’ I prefaced it with a long diatribe against each of your comments, which are far too simplistic and harrowing of ignorance to repeat, each of you having been stewed in that broth of immediate adoration of fawning scribes who haven’t even the faintest blush of originality, being the crows and ravens of the dropped animals they feed on, the latter who at the very least had a passion for the originality of their species.
    So read Mourning in its entirety, and think on it, and then tell me the name of the poet mentioned above, his name, the place of the country he was born in, the year in which he was born, and the language the words were written in. Without having to look it up.
    You are nothing but pretenders if you have to.

  30. Dave Luckett

    “Drinking whisky by the peg,
    Singing songs of drunken glee,
    I thought to swallow half a keg,
    But Tim R Mortiss disturgled me.”

    – Navarth, the mad poet.

    Ravens? Crows? Three of the former, twa of the latter. Which is the more original? The former, conventional and sentimental, or the latter, cynical and realistic – and a response to the first? How can a response be the more original?

    The same way Jack Vance responding to William Dunbar can be. Or James Joyce responding to Homer. The end is in the beginning is in the end. And this is it.

  31. “Obviously, none of you read Mourning.”
    No, why would I? You provide sufficient entertainment. Like here:

    “being too controversial”
    My dear Kae, flattering yourself is a form of vanity. You’re sinning.

    “immediate adoration of fawning scribes ”
    And which scribes would that be? Man and horse, please, as we Dutch like to say.

    “So read Mourning in its entirety”
    No way, I know better ways to waste my time. Like reacting to you.

    “You are nothing but pretenders if you have to.”
    Self-awareness is not your forte, dear Kae.
    And thanks for totally ignoring my invitation.
    But I have a little present for you.

  32. Michael Fugate

    Life is sacred and profane, oh and we are all going to die. Or eat, drink and be merry. But do we die if our genes live on?

  33. kae quante

    Well spoken, each of you. You did not disappoint, a small brevity of adulation in the swarm of personal exposure, which you, dear Curmudgeon, know the comforting pat of on your brow from the dearest of mommies. You were so lucky but loving and comforted in your childhood, which most of all designed you and designated you for a future of simplistic – but I offer the following – a meaningful place of actuality.
    To all of you then who spoke and explicated your wisdom and the most important of all, your joy and wisdom in the grant of life and speaking of it in that medium called the writ of Old English, the speake of words.
    You did not disappoint. You are to be complicated in the mimetic mewings of your collective scratch of a dog’s itch that spells a reverse of god, and that if you reach back far enough in your DNA to perceive it, that it is true.
    Thank you, Curmudgeon.

  34. kae quante

    Silence. A lovely gesture, that. You have built a lovely piece of wisdom that can never be altered by what I always call and refer to as the alteration of the ignorance of people by defaming them as intelligent. Because ignorance is the most evil of conditions, spawning the most ridiculous of ideas, but in the end, ignorance at least lends itself to an awareness of that gleam at the end of that long tunnel called life, where the emergence of stars beckon a place without beginning or end, and that man will eventually recognize as the perfection of being.

  35. kae quante

    A remarkable piece of work you’ve done, a calculation of personas that are the cultural mainstays across that lovely but bumpy road called life. So allow me this small but well-intentioned of ramblings that brought us a desire of the written word as a proof of existence –
    A Thought on Histrionics
    Part I
    The ruffling of the high grasses on the swell of the hills approaching the mountain behind our house in the early months of Spring during those first weeks when winter on the high ground of the more distant and higher mountain ranges to the south and west are still blanketed with snow, is not unlike when you visit the ocean and you see the roll of waves breaking near the shore, but then looking at the wind-ruffled sweeps of grass moving across the languid hills down to the valley floor is to realize that it is all perfect in and of itself, and that an analogy only cheapens it, with the comparisons and the metaphorical finds of footprints stalking an artificial premise, telling me this, and only this: that everything that inspires we humans is inherently based on theatrical circumstance and special effects.
    If you read newspapers, magazines, medical, scientific, historical or religious journalism, watch television or listen to radio, search the internet of electronic social mediums, use various types of phones and come away from it utterly bewildered by it all as being sententious, demagogic, and seriously prevaricated, or if you believe in an organized religion, cult, or sect, or belong to a political party, or are a participant in the legislative process