Believing Evolution Is Dumber than Flat Earth

This one is an oldie. In fact, it’s two years older than your Curmudgeon’s blog. We found it at the website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) — the granddaddy of of all creationists outfits, the fountainhead of young Earth creationist wisdom. It’s titled Is Earth Really Round?, and it was written by John D. Morris,  son of the founder of ICR. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Without a doubt, Earth is round, or nearly so. Using careful measurements from the ground and observations from space we can be certain it is essentially a sphere, with only minor bulging near the equator. If reduced to the size of a billiard ball, it would be perfectly smooth, and we wouldn’t even be able to feel the highest mountains or deepest oceans.

That’s rather shocking, considering the numerous statements in the bible to the contrary. We discussed most of them in The Earth Is Flat!, which you have probably seen before. It’s rather amusing that most creationist websites claim they’re not flat-Earthers, as if doing so will give them some credibility. Anyway, Morris says:

By the way, the Bible has always taught a spherical Earth. [BWAHAHAHAHAHA!] There are, of course, instances of phenomenological language, where the author refers to what the viewer can see, just as we do today when communicating. We talk about “flat” terrain or a “flat” ocean even though we know they follow Earth’s curvature. It is flat to our eyes and to our listener’s eyes. But when the issue of Earth’s shape is addressed in Scripture, the Hebrew wording implies sphericity (see Isaiah 40:22, etc.).

Creationists always point to that — which (in English) refers to the Earth as a circle — but which should be translated as disk (not sphere) — and they ignore the dozens of unambiguous flat-Earth passages in the bible that we cite in our old post. After that, Morris tells us:

This may seem unimportant, but evolutionists often belittle creation thinking by comparing it to belief in a flat Earth. [Who would do such a thing?] Certainly most who do so are merely repeating catchy insults from others, even though there are many who make the claim maliciously and purposively. While this may make them feel superior it belies a great misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of creation and of the nature of science itself!

Morris accuses us of misunderstanding or misrepresenting creationism. We’ll shrug that off. He continues:

Of course creationists and evolutionists agree fully on Earth’s shape. It involves observational science. Earth can be observed to be round. This is not a matter of interpretation. This is simply an observational fact. To deny it is to deny observation, and no one does.

Fair enough. We all agree on the shape of the Earth — in spite of what the bible says. Let’s read on:

Compare this with macroevolution, the theory that basic plant and animal types have changed into others. This is not and has never been observed. [Egad!] Instead, we observe stasis, that things “stay” the same, with only minor adaptations to the basic types. Evolutionists recognize this fact of the present too, but they claim things underwent major changes in the unobserved past when no one was present to observe it, and that all of life experienced these major changes. Indeed, their claim is that all of life came from a common ancestor. They argue about the mechanism by which this happened, but not the truth of the claim.

Isn’t this great? Skipping a bit, we come to the end:

So in reality, evolution claims bear more resemblance to flat Earth claims than does creation thinking. [Gasp!] Based as it is on a rather unsupported view of the past, and a denial of present observations, its supporters really shouldn’t be throwing stones at those who are doing better science.

So there you have it. Evolution is as dumb as flat-Earth, and you’re the dummy, dear reader.

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

14 responses to “Believing Evolution Is Dumber than Flat Earth

  1. In one of Morris’s many goofball books he explained how he is living in the last days and why everyone else who predicted it was wrong and he was right. Wait for it… yep you know how it goes… he isn’t living in the end times any more. How hilarious can burble thumpers be. (Pretty hilarious.)

  2. Beginning with book 40 of Isaiah there is the 6th century DeuteroIsaiah. By coincidence, Pythagoras is credited with the belief in the spherical Earth also in the 6th century. Is it possible that that idea was heard of, in a confused form, in Mesopotamia, and to the author of DeuteroIsaiah?

  3. chris schilling

    “Instead, we observe stasis…”

    He’s right, you know. Creationists only ever give birth to creationists, never evolutionists.

  4. Charles Deetz ;)

    The father of modern creationism sounds dumb and unconvincing. I don’t even know where to start.

  5. TomS: We westerners give too much credit to the Greeks. That the Earth is a sphere, or very close to one, was known in Mesopotamia well before Pythagoras proposed it, and from far better evidence than his.

    The Babylonian astronomer-priests had been observing lunar eclipses and the apparent trajectory of the sun and moon for millennia, and knew that eclipses occurred when the sun, the Earth and the moon were in a straight line, so that the darkness on the moon must be the Earth’s shadow. But no matter the height of the moon in the sky when the eclipse took place, the curve of the Earth’s shadow was always the same. There is only one shape that throws the same curved shape of shadow no matter the angle of the source of light. The Earth, therefore, was a sphere.

    There are illustrated clay-tablet cuneiform documents that make that point, and they go back to at least 1000 BCE.

    But of course the people who knew this were astronomer-priests, and it would never have done for their sacred knowledge to have become common. Why, if the laity became aware of how the clergy knew when the demon was about to assault the Moon-goddess, they might begin to doubt that the gods spoke directly to the priests. We can’t have that. Why, that would cause impiety, loss of belief, and a fall in the Temple revenues. Unthinkable!

    Could a Temple scribe in Jerusalem about 600 BCE have had some inkling of this knowledge? Been to a beery banquet with his brother-scribes in Babylon, perhaps? It’s possible.

    But this does not change the fact that SC cites. The translation of the phrase in question in Isaiah 40:22 is not “the circle of the Earth”. Translations vary somewhat, and whether the writer is referring to the Earth itself or God’s high seat on its vaulted roof is difficult to say , but there is absolutely no implication that the Earth is spherical. The most that can be wrung from those words are that IF they refer to the shape of the Earth, they call it a flat circle, a disk.

    Henry Morris probably believed the falsehoods he uttered. Does that excuse him?

  6. @Dave Luckett
    Thank you.
    I agree that the proof text of DeuteroIsaiah is not clear. Perhaps the author did not understand the rumor that he heard. There are lots of round things: the vault of the heavens, the paths of the heavenly bodies, the shapes of the Sun and the Moon. What might an outsider make of a report of something round concerning the Earth?
    Somehow there was a leak of the secret which Pythagoras heard, perhaps. The Pythagoreans were secretive, themselves. I think that they tried to keep it secret that there was no rational square root of 2.

  7. @SC, You are not quoting “Morris (1918 — 2006), the founder of ICR”; that’s Henry. John D. is his son, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Morris, b.1946 and current (since 2006) president of ICR. His book, The Young Earth, argues (correctly) that Niagara Falls cannot be many millions of years old. He also explains why God took six days rather than creating everything in an instant; it was to establish the Sabbath

  8. Thank you, Paul Braterman . I’ll make some kind of fix.

  9. Why would anyone worship a self-absorbed temperamental tyrant that demands your money and worship all day, and I don’t mean Henry VIII?

  10. Off topic. In theconversation.com there is an esssy about the exoplanets known as super Earths, how common they are, and perhaps more favorable to life.

  11. @Paul Braterman: Randy J. Guliuzza has been the ICR’s president since 2020.

  12. @Glenn Branch, thanks. Wikipedia on John D Morris needs an update if anyone can be bothered

  13. “Compare this with macroevolution, the theory that basic plant and animal types have changed into others. This is not and has never been observed.”

    Ironically only one Observer could possibly observe a long period of time such as that, and that Observer shall be be called Immanuel, one time, and then the rest of the time called Jesus.

  14. If Jesus were Native American, his name would be “Immanuel One-Time”.