Creationist Wisdom #1,050: Infinite Oogity Boogity

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Aspen Daily News of Aspen, Colorado, and it’s the opposite of intellectual gold. Your Curmudgeon is too polite to state directly what that is, but you can figure it out. The letter is titled Where does Darwin fit?, and the newspaper has a comment feature.

Unless the letter-writer is a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name — but today we’ve got a politician —Nathaniel Weeks. He was recently a candidate for the school board of Buena Vista, Colorado, but he lost — big time. See Newly Elected Members to the Buena Vista School Board. This article from just before that election — League of Women Voters candi-dating draws school board hopefuls — refers to him as a “former educator and school administrator.” With that and his recent campaign, Nnathaniel qualifies for full-name treatment. We’ll give you a few excerpts from his letter, enhanced with some bold font for emphasis and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Okay, here we go:

Nathaniel begins by referring to George Floyd, whose recent death has resulted in nation-wide political unrest:

Is it legit to blame George Floyd’s death on public school education? [What?] Do public school science teachers help students master the scientific method or speculate on Darwin’s report that certain Indians are still in the monkey stage?

Wowie — this stuff is really bonkers, and he’s just getting warmed up. Then he says:

“The Descent of Man” (1871), Darwin popularized white supremacy, “At some future period … the civilized races … will almost certainly exterminate … the savage races … the negro or Australian and the gorilla” (“The Origin of Species,” Charles Darwin, John Murray, London, 1901, pages 241-242).

What an ark-load of creationist nonsense! That wildly out of context quote about extermination of races was speculation about the absence of transitional fossils in the geological record — see WorldNetDaily — Worthless Creationist Rag!

After that clunker, Nathaniel tells us:

Steven J. Gould of Harvard admitted, “Biological arguments for racism … increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.”

We can’t find that alleged quote, but even if Gould ever said anything like that, we’re confident that Nathaniel has distorted it wildly out-of-context. He continues:

The Bible only talks of one race, the human race, confirmed by the human genome. Only one skin color; we’re all brothers and sisters with different amounts of melanin, but not according to the public school curriculum; blacks evolved from gorillas, Asians from orangutans, and whites from the intelligent chimps — a scientific “fact.”

That’s what public schools teach? Let’s read on:

Eugenics was The Final Solution for the genetically second-rate poor. Over 10,000 Australian Aborigines were murdered, their remains shipped to British museums proving the “missing link.”

Has anyone ever heard of that before? We never did. As for eugenics, see Racism, Eugenics, and Darwin. Anyway, Nathaniel isn’t done yet. In fact, the “best” is yet to come. Here’s another excerpt:

Stalin and Mao used evolution to justify genocide such as the world had never seen. Evolutionary thinking inspired Hitler’s slaughter of inferior races by his “master race.” The Columbine shooters made similar arguments.

Wowie! Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and the Columbine High School shooters — all in one crazed paragraph. We have separate posts on each of those — see, e.g.: Marx, Stalin, and Darwin, and then Klinghoffer: Darwin and Mao (Attila Next?), and then The Ultimate Hitler-Darwin Debunking, and also Discovery Institute: Columbine Was Darwin’s Fault!

Wild stuff, huh? Well, relax — it’s almost over. Here’s the last of it:

If science teachers would only stick with pure science.

What does Nathaniel mean by “pure science”? We don’t want to speculate, but maybe you do. If so, tell us what you think he has in mind, dear reader.

Copyright © 2020. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

15 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #1,050: Infinite Oogity Boogity

  1. No speculation needed. “Pure science” = creacrap.

  2. I read this blog for entertainment and enlightenment, but this letter is a dozy. For an educator to have such a gross (one might speculate willful) misunderstanding of science is frightening. Thank the “gods” he lost the election.

  3. The alchemists tried to change lead into gold, so I guess that they thought that lead was the opposite. The old idea of ages of man started with men of gold, then silver, then copper/brass/bronze, then iron. The Bible has the dream of Daniel with a man with head of gold, and feet of clay.

  4. Michael Fugate

    This candidate seems to have retired and moved to Buena Vista (pronounced Boo-na Vista) while most of the other candidates grew up there. Who knows where or what he taught – let’s hope it wasn’t science.

    The idea that different “races” had different ape ancestors is a new one on me. Anyone know from which hindquarters it was pulled? Pseudo-Lamarck?

  5. … and this guy was once an “educator”? Sheesh! I pity his poor former students.

    If nothing else, his letter should disqualify him from ever being within 1,000 feet of any school, library, or internet connection. He is C. R. A. Z. Y.

  6. I think that it was around the time of Linnaeus that the idea of different
    races of mankind being related to different species of apes.
    The Bible had the idea of different
    tribes being descended from different male ancestors (maternal ancestry didn’t count that’s why raping the women of an enemy was a good idea).
    (But when white men raped black women, the offspring weren’t recognized as white. Racial thinking isn’t all that clear.)
    The Bible, and Europeans before about the 1700s didn’t know about chimps, gorillas and orangutans.

  7. Michael Fugate

    In 1758, the 10th ed of Linnaeus’ Systema Naturae, one can find a Homo troglodytes which he also names as Orang-Outang
    The descriptions of races are – not surprisingly – very Eurocentric
    Homo is the ultimate purpose of creation

    Later English translation 1806 – shifts orangs from Homo to Simia

  8. chris schilling

    “Stalin and Mao used evolution to justify genocide…”

    Stalin and Mao were Marxists. I doubt Marx understood anything much — or cared — about ‘Darwinian’ evolution, other than what served his preconceived notions of historical progress and class struggle.

    Natty isn’t troubled by racism — he’s troubled by the thought public schools aren’t teaching “pure science.” Translation: “not enough Bible.”

  9. Dave Luckett

    The remains of some Aboriginal people were sent to British museums, although I doubt that any were murdered for that specific purpose. I believe most, if not all, of those remains have now been returned to their descendants, for proper disposal on their own land. I hope that is the case, at least.

    Many Aboriginal people were murdered. That, and other aspects of our colonisation of this continent, are carried on the national conscience to this day. More immediate are the current and on-going issues of ill-health, infant mortality and lower life expectancy among Aboriginal people, and their rates of arrest, imprisonment and death in custody. We had a Royal Commission on Aboriginal deaths in custody a generation ago, and its recommendations were accepted. I thought that might resolve – or at least much reduce – the problem. It has had some effect, but not nearly enough. The deaths go on.

    I am NOT saying that there is no truth to Week’s accusations. What happened to the Aboriginal people is a national disgrace, and the worst of it is that we cannot fully redress it, no matter what we do. We took their land. We cannot give it back. We killed many of them to do it. We cannot return their lives.

    Yet to ascribe those lamentable effects to Charles Darwin or the Theory of Evolution is an idiotic perversion of reality so radical as to cause doubt that its author is capable of rational thought at all. When all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. And Weeks hasn’t even got a hammer. All he’s got is a dementedly skewed view of history and science, in a head I wish he would use for driving nails. At least that might be slightly useful, instead of directly counterproductive.

  10. @ChrisS: “I doubt Marx understood ….”
    What Marx did and did not understand about evolution theory is impossible to check. But Darwin and he had a solid, professional relation.

    Of course this is more than enough “evidence” for creacrappers to draw a direct line from Origin of Species to the Gulag and the Cultural Revolution.

    @DaveL is charitable today:

    “Yet to ascribe those lamentable effects to Charles Darwin or the Theory of Evolution is an idiotic perversion of reality so radical”
    A while ago I read a history about 18th and 19th Century Australia; systematic killings of Aboriginals began before the release of Origin of Species.

    “as to cause doubt that its author is capable of rational thought at all.”
    How do you mean doubt? A not particular bright six years old is more rational than NattyW and also has a firmer grip on reality. Assuming that he has been upraised “Biblically” he’s a fine example of religious education being child abuse.

  11. Being a LIAR4Money (politician) it does not surprise me that he lies about evilution and then turns around and really lies about the buyBull as it is filled with hate and bigotry!

  12. Eddie Janssen


    A pseudo-Wolpoff is more likely: the different groups of people nowadays are descendents from the different regional homo erectus groups from 2 million years ago until half a million years ago.

  13. Natty’s probably lucky his science teachers didn’t stick to “pure science”. Quantum mechanics would probably confuse him.

  14. Eddie Janssen

    It certainly confuses me. Collapsing wave-functions, brrr.

  15. Techreseller

    This one is a winner. If you were to rank these sort of letters this one is easily in the Top 5. Wow. Just wow. I wonder if his neighbors look at him funny.