Category Archives: Evolution

ICR: The Mosquito Is a Miracle

This tragicly silly article from the creation scientists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is the best thing we could find this evening — and that’s good news. It means that it’s the best the creationists have to offer. You can get a sense of the article’s brilliance from its title: High Frequency Mosquito Flight Shows Design.

It was written by Frank Sherwin, M.A. (Note that he touts his Master’s degree.) At the end of the article he’s described as “Research Associate, Senior Lecturer, and Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.” This is his writeup at the Encyclopedia of American Loons. ICR has a bio page on the guy: Frank Sherwin. Here are some excerpts from Sherwin’s post, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

The fossil record shows that the amazing variety of insects has remained similar with no compelling evidence of insect evolution. … In addition, secular entomologists must suppose flying insects somehow came from non-flying counterparts despite the lack of evidence.

It appears that Sherwin doesn’t have access to the internet. If he did, he could look at Wikipedia’s article on Evolution of insects. Then he says:

Meanwhile, science itself has shown mosquitos (Diptera) have always been mosquitos. Like all insects, there is no evidence of their supposed evolution from a non-mosquito ancestor, so they continue to fascinate and confuse entomologists with their incredible design.

After that revelation he tells us:

ICR has speculated on what they might have fed on prior to the Fall.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! He has a footnote that mentions an article he wrote, but we won’t let ourselves be distracted. Sherwin continues:

Nature magazine recently published a fascinating article on high frequency mosquito flight.

He’s referring to this: Smart wing rotation and trailing-edge vortices enable high frequency mosquito flight, but you can’t read it without a subscription. Here’s what Sherwin says about it:

Mosquitos are tiny, but their narrow, long wings can flap as much as 800 flaps per second! Bees flap at a mere 230 per second, and hummingbirds at a sluggish 50-60 per second. God created two sophisticated mechanisms to enhance the mosquito’s lift that seem to be unique to these pesky creatures.

Amazing! Let’s read on:

The last paragraph of the article [in Nature] has the required nod to evolutionism [Hee hee!] with the authors saying,

[Sherwin quotes Nature:] It remains an open question as to why mosquitos have evolved to operate far outside the usual bounds of kinematic patterns used by other insects.

It may be an open question for those godless scientists, but Sherwin isn’t stumped. In his final paragraph he announces:

“Far outside the usual bounds,” as if these researchers really understand the limits of creation. Perhaps it’s the Creator’s way of informing secular researchers (and their readers) of the incredible case for creation seen in the smart wing rotation of the common mosquito.

Sherwin is right, of course. The mosquito is great evidence for creation — if you’re a creationist.

Copyright © 2017. 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

Discoveroids Say Science Is a Cargo Cult

We’ve often said that the creationists at the Discovery Institute have created an imitation of the accouterments of science. They have their own, in-house “peer reviewed” journal, BIO-Complexity, their own creation science research facility, the Biologic Institute, and their own “peer reviewed” vanity press operation, (Discovery Institute Press). This has caused intelligent design to be described as a cargo cult.

Keep that in mind as we look at the latest item at the Discoveroids’ blog: Science as Cargo Cult – More Thoughts on the “March for Science”, written by Klinghoffer. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

When even Slate turns against a “progressive” event like this weekend’s March for Science, you know something’s wrong. Harvard Medical School instructor Jeremy Samuel Faust complains about the weird, mindless cult-like atmosphere infusing much of the adulation directed at “Science.”

He’s talking about this article at the Slate website: The Problem With the March for Science. It’s just what Klinghoffer has been looking for. He quotes from the thing:

Being “pro-science” has become a bizarre cultural phenomenon in which liberals (and other members of the cultural elite) engage in public displays of self-reckoned intelligence as a kind of performance art, while demonstrating zero evidence to justify it.

[…]

[T]he march revealed the glaring dissonance of opposing that trough of ignorance by instead accepting a cringe-worthy hive-mind mentality that celebrates Science as a vague but wonderful entity, what Richard Feynman called “cargo cult science.” There was an uncomfortable dronelike fealty to the concept — an oxymoronic faith that information presented and packaged to us as Science need not be further scrutinized before being smugly celebrated en masse. That is not intellectually rigorous thought — instead, it’s another kind of religion, and it is perhaps as terrifying as the thing it is trying to fight.

See what happened? Feynman’s remark is described in this Wikipedia article: Cargo cult science, which says: “Cargo cult science comprises practices that have the semblance of being scientific, but do not in fact follow the scientific method.”

The Discoveroids, who are running a cargo cult, found someone who wasn’t impressed by the crowds at the March on Science, and who suggests that the crowd’s attitude toward science resembles a cargo cult. That’s all we have here — and it’s an observation that could probably be made about any crowd at any public demonstration — but it’s a gift from heaven to the Discoveroids. Klinghoffer readily admits:

This is…well, frankly it’s remarkably close to our own take on the event.

Isn’t this great? From one guy’s blog article criticizing the crowd at a public demonstration — which had nothing to do with any specific scientific teaching — Klinghoffer feels that his creationist career has been vindicated, so he unleashes his hatred of science itself:

And then there’s the very different view that says science has closed all the books and figured out everything in need of being figured out. The debate is over, and properly so. Thus the public needs only to absorb a set of doctrines, while scientists themselves engage in a kind of apologetics campaign. The conclusions are preset and only need to be conveyed for the public’s benefit. In this perspective, that of many of the science marchers, science is rendered as a kind of religious faith. That may explain why it treats rival religions the way it does.

Science is a religion? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Now Klinghoffer sounds like ol’ Hambo. After that he refers to some Discoveroid video that says:

[A]dvocates of materialist ideology habitually portray science as being in a state of perpetual warfare with Judeo-Christian faith.

The Discoveroids, whose view of the world is inherently mystical, certainly agree with that. This is the end of Klinghoffer’s brief post:

In fact, the latter tradition [religion] was the “seedbed” of science, as Jay [that’s Jay Richards, a Discoveroid “fellow”] points out, not its persecutor. But the rival religion, Science as Cargo Cult, feels an imperative to compete with and blacken the reputation of its competitor. Hence the myth of unending warfare between the two.

It’s incredible. Now that someone has described some crowds at a public demonstration, the Discoveroids can promote a whole new dogma. They’ll be saying that all of science, especially “Darwinism,” because of its “materialism” — i.e., its disregard of the supernatural — is a cargo cult. “True” science (which would certainly include the Discoveroids’ “theory” about a supernatural designer) grew out of and is compatible with religion, and that’s why materialist science is at war with it.

All clear now? We’re the cargo cult, and the Discoveroids are the true scientists. Yes, it’s beyond bizarre, but we can expect to see more this theme in future Discoveroid propaganda.

Copyright © 2017. 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

Creationist Wisdom #761: The Fence Sitter

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Kingman Daily Miner of Kingman, Arizona. It’s titled Science vs. Evolution: A third view. The newspaper doesn’t have a comments section.

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 Connie. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

Let me say I am a “fence sitter.” I have trouble with religious blind faith, especially when there is scientific fact everywhere I turn. I understand for a lot of people, Christianity is a way of life that carries them through from day to day and helps them through life’s obstacles, and that’s wonderful. However, I guess I am a “fence sitter” with evolution as well.

Connie explains why she’s on the fence regarding evolution:

Evolution teaches us that we have all evolved from one tiny, tiny amoeba or something close to that, and that over the years we have continued to change or evolve. I’m sorry, but no one is going to ever convince me that the butterfly, the Brahma bull and I are all related. Nope, not a chance. (Hmmm, my husband says I am bullheaded sometimes.)

Nice personal touch there. She does a lot of that, but we’ll omit the rest to keep this brief. After that she tells us:

I choose to believe that we came from somewhere else, that this is a planet of different species from different worlds. Maybe worlds that were ending or dying, different species brought and left here to survive and create new life by someone or something much more advanced than we are.

Hey — it makes more sense than evolution! Connie continues:

OMG! I bet a bunch of you are rolling on the floor laughing and saying how ridiculous it sounds … . But, before you hang up, leave the room, or burn the paper, just think about it. We know there are aliens (and I don’t mean from other countries) that have visited earth, we have proof of that. There are also cave drawings from thousands of years ago that show a “space man” type drawing.

Yes, we have proof of aliens. Let’s read on:

Wait a minute! What did Ezekiel see? Whatever it was, it came down from the sky and had shiny metal and wheels. … So, if you look at the millions of different species here on this earth, so many of which don’t resemble each other at all, my theory makes the most sense … to me.

Okay. Then she says:

When I look at all the different religions … I really get confused. And they each have their own set of rules, Bibles, beliefs, the way they pray, to whom they pray, etc. Which one do you pick?

[…]

Which one is real? There are too many. … The earth is flat, the earth is not flat even through the Bible tells me it is, but that’s not what they meant … on and on and on. Whew, I’m exhausted. Trying to figure out what to believe in is hard.

Indeed it is hard. But Connie has solved the problem:

So, for me, it’s easier to make sense of my “alien theory.” No one can prove or disprove it, just like God or no God.

Good thinking! And now we come to the end:

Everyone has their own belief, and I truly respect each and every one of you for your belief. We have a right to choose, in this God Bless, America, USA, red, white and blue, mom’s apple pie country, what we want to believe in. As I stated before, whatever your belief is that gets you through the day and gives you hope for a wonderful life, then so be it. It’s one of the many things that makes our country so great – we’re all allowed to be different.

Connie is not only a brilliant and witty thinker, she’s also a patriot. Great letter.

Copyright © 2017. 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

AIG Proves You Ain’t No Kin To No Monkey

Tthe creation scientists at Answers in Genesis (AIG) — the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the ayatollah of Appalachia — are once again battling something that bothers all creationists. It’s the genetic similarity between humans and apes — chimpanzees, specifically.

They’ve written about it before — see AIG Ain’t No Kin To No Monkey. Now they’re at it again. Their new article is The Untold Story Behind DNA Similarity, written by Jeffrey P. Tomkins , a new name to us. At the end it says he “earned a PhD in genetics from Clemson University and served on the genetics and biochemistry faculty there. He is now director of life sciences at the Institute for Creation Research.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

“The DNA of humans is 98% similar to chimpanzees.” Who hasn’t heard that claim before? It’s usually stated as a settled fact and quoted to prove indisputably that we share a common ancestor. But what does this kind of statement really entail, and how do we really know how similar one creature’s DNA is to another? The answers from my field of research — genetics — might surprise you.

Jeffrey is going to surprise us! He devotes the next several paragraphs to telling us how difficult it is to sequence a genome. Then he says:

[I]n the case of the chimpanzee sequence, they lacked good genetic resources and funding. So they used the human genome as a framework. They also based this choice on the evolutionary presupposition that humans and chimps evolved from a common ancestor. This is a belief, not a fact of science. The obvious outcome of this approach is that the chimp genome they constructed would be very human-like even if the actual genome is not.

Aha! The research was flawed from the beginning! But wait — it gets worse:

Moreover, newly published research indicates that the chimp genome is not only misassembled but likely contains significant contamination from human DNA. It is now well documented in the scientific literature that many DNA sequence databases contain significant levels of human DNA from lab workers. … Of course, having human DNA mixed in would make the final product more human-like as well.

After those startling revelations, Jeffrey tells us:

As you can see from the way genomes are sequenced, any claims of similarities demand major caveats. When the genome of one creature is used to construct the genome of another, then we have a serious problem that philosophers call “begging the question.” In other words, evolutionists have produced a chimp genome based on humans and then say it looks similar to the human genome.

Yet another example of why those godless evolutionists can’t be trusted. Jeffrey continues:

While we won’t know what the chimp genome really looks like until more accurate research is done, I recently did a study of the chimp reads that have lower levels of human DNA contamination, and in this newer study the chimp DNA is only 85% similar to human at best, not 98%.

Wow — that’s amazing! Unfortunately, Jeffery doesn’t provide any references or footnotes. He doesn’t need them. We’ll take his word for it. Then he asks:

Yet they’re still “85% similar.” What does that mean?

Good question! We were specially created in God’s image, so why should our genome be even remotely like that of anything else? Jeffery explains:

[A] good example is the similarity among computer programs that come from the same programmer. The programmer doesn’t start from scratch each time he develops a new program. Instead, he uses the same general commands that he used for other projects. It shows the creator’s efficiency and ingenuity. We see the same pattern of both similarity and differences in organisms’ genomes.

Yes — that explains it! Let’s read on:

Biblical creationists say the similarities in DNA arose because the same Creator adapted the same basic code for separate created kinds. If a gene in different creatures encodes a similar protein for a similar biochemical pathway, it’s not because of evolution, but because of a single programmer. This similarity is a hallmark of all human-engineered systems, so why would we not expect to see it in God’s creation?

Makes perfect sense! One last excerpt:

Any time we hear claims that conflict with God’s Word, we need to stop and carefully unpack the facts. Then we need to identify the evolutionary presuppositions that drive many scientists to interpret the facts in a way that is contrary to Scripture.

So there you are, dear reader. You ain’t no kin to no monkey! Isn’t that wonderful?

Copyright © 2017. 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