Re: One of the dumbest creationist arguments I've read in a longtime (letter to the editor of my local newspaper)

Inez wrote:
> Josh M. wrote:
>
>>I found this on my local newspaper's website. Oddly enough, the heading says
>>"Both theories or neither should be taught," but the author of this letter
>>is clearly very much against the teaching of evolution. My comments are in
>>brackets.
>>--------------------------
>>To the editor:
>>
>>Evolution 101. Ready, class?
>>
>>As you know, the Wright brothers built the first flying machine. We know
>>that it was more or less glided with power downhill, but it did fly. This
>>single-place aircraft has evolved into the passenger jet of today, able to
>>carry hundreds of passengers.
>>
>>Also, we know that Henry Ford's Model T, able to travel 10-15 miles per
>>hour, has evolved into cars and trucks capable of 80 miles per hour-plus.
>>Now, the part that has been left out and continues to be overlooked is what
>>had to be done before any of these things could happen. Before the Wrights
>>could build their airplane and Ford could build his car, they had to design
>>all the nuts, bolts, fasteners, pieces and parts and the blueprint of what
>>wouldmake up the machines. In other words, the intelligent design part. This
>>phase cannot be overlooked, hidden, or denied.
>>
>>[The above is the typical creationist bullshit we've seen time and again.
>>What follows is one of the most bizarre, inane, creationist arguments I've
>>ever read.]
>>
>>By a stretch of our imagination, we could use magician Harry Houdini as an
>>example. Let's say we watch as he cuts a length of rope, ties it together
>>and then, presto, it is once more one strand, with a knot sliding back and
>>forth on it. For the next trick he takes his hat and turns it over and
>>around, sets it on the table and then, reaching in, pulls out a rabbit.
>>
>>The rope reconnecting and the rabbit evolving from nothing into a grown
>>animal would definitely be evolution.
>>
>>Many have witnessed these or similar things, but do they believe them? No.
>>We knowtricks such as these have to be thought out and planned and practiced
>>until perfected.
>>
>>[The rest is typical creationist stupidity.]
>>
>>Now, class, the test: Take a vacuum of nothing but space--no air, elements,
>>or gases--and have something evolve from it. You have two choices:
>>Everything has evolved through intelligent design, or some magician had to
>>begin everything.
>>
>
> That is quite a curious way to use the term "evolve."
>
>
>>[Um, "evolved through intelligent design" or "some magician..." What's the
>>difference? Is there a difference? Who's to say? This is more incoherent
>>than the usual creationist arguments!]
>
>
> Perhaps he means the universe was either created by an intelligent
> magician or an unintelligent magician. Or perhaps it is an argument
> for mental health parity, using himself as an example of one who might
> benefit from it.

Now feel free to explain why people that don't buy the ToE are mentally ill.

While you're at it, why do you feel so threatened?

Nicolas
>
>
>
>>I suggest that because we do not have reliable, substantiating proof of
>>evolution from nothing, we should teach either both or neither to the
>>students.
>>
>>[Name witheld, out of mercy, by yours truly]
>>---------------------------------
>>
>>Fortunately, the other two letters published were very much against ID.
>
>

.

Relevant Pages