After months of rarely seeing a letter we could use, suddenly there seems to be an ark-load of ’em. Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Lewiston Tribune of Lewiston, Idaho, the ninth-largest city in the state. The letter is titled No evidence for evolution, and it’s the third letter at that link. The newspaper has a comments feature, but there are no comments so far.
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 Fritz. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!
Professor Don Matteson, your scientific credentials are impeccable and I’m sure you have a “pretty good grasp of what science is.” Thank you for your many years working as an educator. I have great respect for teachers and professors as I have had some great ones during the years.
We searched around and we can’t find anything in that newspaper that Fritz might be referring to. But there is an emeritus professor of chemistry with that name listed at the website of Washington State University — see Don Matteson. Anyway, Fritz says:
In my letter of April 18 [We didn’t look for it!], I cited well-known scientists in different fields of science. More and more scientists are speaking out and standing against evolution because there is no solid evidence. [Gasp!] As a chemist, do you accept Charles Darwin’s idea that under the right circumstances a bear could turn into a whale over time? [Huh?] What is the evidence for that statement in the “Origin of Species”?
Can a bear “turn into” a whale? What’s Fritz thinking of — the transformation of a man into a wolf, or a bat, the way it’s done in the movies? Is that his idea of evolution? We’ll soon find out. He tells us:
That speculation was so outlandish that Darwin’s friends prevailed upon him to leave it out of future editions of “Origin.” What evidence is there that any animal changed into another animal?
The Discoveroids wrote about that whale thing a year ago, and in response we wrote Discoveroids Say Darwin Was a Whale of an Idiot. But Darwin’s bear-whale speculation isn’t even remotely a rebuttal of evolution. Anyway, Fritz continues:
I had a year of chemistry in high school. [Very impressive!] The chart of the elements is real physical science validated by research, observation and experiment. Now compare that chart with the evolution charts.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We’re not going to bother with that. Let’s read on:
Every evolution chart from professor Ernst Haeckel’s embryos to horse evolution, ape to man and terrestrial animal to whale chart have all been shown to be invalid. [They’re all invalid!] They are invalid because there is no hard physical evidence for change.
Fritz really wants to see documented transitions like Dracula changing into a bat, and if he doesn’t see it, evolution is refuted. He ends his brilliant letter with this:
Evolution is not science; it is the speculated history of the diversity of life. Is there anything certain about evolution?
Well, dear reader, do you have anything that could convince Fritz that there’s any merit to the theory of evolution? And if you don’t, then why don’t you just give it up and admit that you’ve been a fool?
Copyright © 2021. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.