Yet another creationist twit (2008-09-17)

[Darth Wong]

Here's another moron for your amusement:

Name: Loraine Blackwell
E-Mail: lorraine_blackwell@hotmail.com

Good Afternoon,

I'm surprised I've never seen anything written on the simple illogic of the possibility of at least 3,000,000 different kinds of animals living on earth (this is the figure estimated in the 1950's. Who knows what it is now) (not to mention all the other forms of life on earth) of which probably a very high percentage reproduce sexually, how all of them just happened to "evolve" at the same rate and at the same time and in the same locality in order to reproduce.

Now there's been so much written about just the simple(?) protein and DNA and the horrendous improbability of just ONE of these evolving and the statistics for just one of these in terms of probability are simply mind boggling. But now take a look at the at least 2+ million animal life forms that reproduce sexually and now there is a problem that probably couldn't even be calculated mathematically.

Sadly, I find the continued blindness of people who cling so tenaciously to the “evolution theory” in spite of all the knowledge that has been gleaned over the last 30 or so years in molecular biology as well as all the other sciences, a confirmation, once again, that the Bible is right where it says:

They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

I will pray that God will give you the genuine desire to honestly know the truth about this world and about the being who actually created it.

You might want to put this question up on your arguments page to see what feedback you get. But I suspect you probably won't because it might jog some people out of this illogical, non-nonsensical evolution mindset, and we couldn't have that now, could we?

God Bless and Guide You,
Lorraine



------ eviromental variables ------
REMOTE ADDR: 70.41.217.203
BROWSER: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1

I responded like so:

On September 16, 2008 02:53:44 pm Lorraine Blackwell wrote:

Good Afternoon,

I'm surprised I've never seen anything written on the simple illogic of the possibility of at least 3,000,000 different kinds of animals living on earth (this is the figure estimated in the 1950's. Who knows what it is now) (not to mention all the other forms of life on earth) of which probably a very high percentage reproduce sexually, how all of them just happened to "evolve" at the same rate and at the same time and in the same locality in order to reproduce.

That's because they didn't need to all evolve at the same rate, or at the same time, or at the same locality. You obviously don't know anything about evolution theory.

Now there's been so much written about just the simple(?) protein and DNA and the horrendous improbability of just ONE of these evolving and the statistics for just one of these in terms of probability are simply mind boggling. But now take a look at the at least 2+ million animal life forms that reproduce sexually and now there is a problem that probably couldn't even be calculated mathematically.

The fact that it's been written does not necessarily mean it was done correctly. In fact, I have an entire section discussing the fallacies they use in those arguments, and you obviously didn't bother reading it.

Sadly, I find the continued blindness of people who cling so tenaciously to the “evolution theory” in spite of all the knowledge that has been gleaned over the last 30 or so years in molecular biology as well as all the other sciences, a confirmation, once again, that the Bible is right where it says:

Have you ever tried talking to an actual molecular biologist?

They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

By this asinine pseudo-logic, since I have seen thunder, I have no excuse for not knowing Thor, the Norse Thunder God.

I will pray that God will give you the genuine desire to honestly know the truth about this world and about the being who actually created it.

You might want to put this question up on your arguments page to see what feedback you get. But I suspect you probably won't because it might jog some people out of this illogical, non-nonsensical evolution mindset, and we couldn't have that now, could we?

That's a pretty ironic thing to say, coming from someone who obviously couldn't bother reading my site before deciding that all of my arguments were wrong. You're projecting your own flaws and fear of hearing that which you can't handle onto others.

God Bless and Guide You,
Lorraine

------ eviromental variables ------
REMOTE ADDR: 70.41.217.203
BROWSER: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.1)
Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1

You've never taken a postsecondary science course in your life, have you?

These people are always so confident, even though you can tell they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Massive intellectual bluffing on a scale of tens of millions of people.

PS. I also received about a half-dozen other E-mails today, but they were all just variations of other people who did not give a valid E-mail address, leaving mindless insults. So uncreative that they're not even worth mocking, so I just deleted them. Here's one example of the brilliance:

YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE! GO DIE!!!

------ eviromental variables ------
REMOTE ADDR: 87.41.191.154
BROWSER: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; InfoPath.2)

And here's another:

It seems to me that you love hitler, you should go back in time and marry his ass, I like Snickers bars and melting them into your face! You should get along with Hitler you fag!

------ eviromental variables ------
REMOTE ADDR: 87.41.191.154
BROWSER: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; InfoPath.2)

Just so everyone understands why I only occasionally post these Creationist E-mails. I'd say the bulk of them are so mindless that they're not even good for mockery. BTW, this guy sent 4 E-mails in a row, all from the IP address 87.41.191.154. According to ip2location.com, that IP address happens to be in Ireland (I know you were wondering). And yes, he used a different made-up name and address each time, which is why I didn't bother quoting them.

[Lusankya]

I dunno. Melting Snickers bars into someone's face seems pretty creative to me. I certainly would never have conceived of it as a punishment.

I like this quote, though:

they can clearly see his invisible qualities

I wonder how Ms Blackwell copes with going shopping. Why, when I went shopping the other day, I would have seen maybe 500-1000 people. What are the odds of those 500-1000 people being alive and well and all deciding to go shopping at the exact same time. The chances against it must be astronomical.

[Ted C]

Possible reactions from Lorraine:

1. Realize that you are not going to be converted, and never email you again.
2. Send a huffy email about how mean you are, seeking to cling to the moral high ground.
3. Blather more about praying for you, completely ignoring your arguments.
4. Spew more stock creationist gobbledy-gook.

I wonder which she'll choose.

[Kitsune]

I really wish there was a "key" which could be used on teh creations who don't simply tell you "Shut up and die"

I watched the other day on Discovery abut how they were able to create various "Primitive" aspects in bird fetus such as tooth structures and extending tails. How can creationist hear about such things and still be supporters of pure creation - maybe I could see guided evolution (Where is where I try to bend creationist to and try to explain why god does not need to be taught in school)

[Kitsune]

edit: I mean "Creationist" not "Creations"

[Kanastrous]

I like this quote, though:

they can clearly see his invisible qualities

Now, if Mike can see thunder, it's only fair that she can see 'his invisible qualities.'

[The Spartan]

Possible reactions from Lorraine:

1. Realize that you are not going to be converted, and never email you again.
2. Send a huffy email about how mean you are, seeking to cling to the moral high ground.
3. Blather more about praying for you, completely ignoring your arguments.
4. Spew more stock creationist gobbledy-gook.

I wonder which she'll choose.

You don't think it'll be some combination of the last three?

[Kodiak]

Wow. Just. Wow.

I can't believe that people go out of their way to send hate-mail to a Canadian Engineer who debunks logical fallacies in their world view. I guess because I attend church and yet recognize that Intelligent Design, Young Earth Creationist "theory" and all the other baloney has no basis in science it seems it should be obvious to everyone. Mike, though we don't agree on religion (obviously) I'd simply like to say thanks for putting your website together and making a concerted effort to put truth out there. Religious doctrine is no substitute for science academia or any other earthly endeavor. Anyone who tries to use religion to dictate anything beyond their own personal moral code is, in my opinion, breaking the golden rule. Again, thanks for showing us the idiocy that is fundamentalism.

[Kanastrous]

Just out of curiosity...if you recognize that the teachings of whatever faith have no utility in describing the real world (am I overstating your perspective?) why would you invest time in sitting through that faith's ceremonies, once a week...?

[General Zod]

Just out of curiosity...if you recognize that the teachings of whatever faith have no utility in describing the real world (am I overstating your perspective?) why would you invest time in sitting through that faith's ceremonies, once a week...?

Being ostracized by a community for not practicing their brand of superstition when the community is small is a great motivator for people to remain ignorant. Yay for peer pressure?

[Kanastrous]

Just out of curiosity...if you recognize that the teachings of whatever faith have no utility in describing the real world (am I overstating your perspective?) why would you invest time in sitting through that faith's ceremonies, once a week...?

Being ostracized by a community for not practicing their brand of superstition when the community is small is a great motivator for people to remain ignorant. Yay for peer pressure?

My first though is, move someplace else, if you have to walk barefoot and carry a bindle, but I know that's easier said, than done.

[Kodiak]

Just out of curiosity...if you recognize that the teachings of whatever faith have no utility in describing the real world (am I overstating your perspective?) why would you invest time in sitting through that faith's ceremonies, once a week...?

Because I believe that there is something more to life than what we find in the real world. I joined the LDS church when I was 18 because I received a personal, spiritual, totally unquantifiable confirmation that it was God's Kingdom come to earth, and that I should join. The weekly rituals and services help me to be a better person (some need help, and some don't) and teach me how to be a better husband and father. It brings a sense of community and friendship into our (my wife and I) lives and brings us closer together as a couple.

I believe that God speaks to people today through a living prophet, and that's why I go to church. This belief is based solely on personal experience and anecdotal evidence which I have observed in my own life and therefore does no good to anyone else. I can for a fact say that I believe it is the Truth, much like a crazy person may believe they are Napoleon, Jesus, or the King of Neverwas, but I can say that I don't let religious fundamentalism blind me to the truths of science, logic, or the words of those who's opinions on faith differ from my own. I don't force my religion on anyone, and I didn't when I served my 2-year mission. Likewise, I appreciate that there are people in the world and this internet board who are open minded and participate in intelligent discourse. I hope this doesn't start any "xian bashing" because I have no scientific or empirical defense for my faith. I attend church and participate in my religion because I can feel God at work in my life when I do.

[Kanastrous]

I don't force my religion on anyone, and I didn't when I served my 2-year mission.

What does one do on a Mormon mission, exactly?

[Kodiak]

I don't force my religion on anyone, and I didn't when I served my 2-year mission.

What does one do on a Mormon mission, exactly?

For 2 years, 6 days a week, 12 hours-a-day you go find people who are interested in learning about how they can be baptized. This is done in several ways:

1. Going door-to-door like a salesman
2. Going to teach the friend's of church members who have expressed an interest
3. Talking with people on the street
4. Setting up displays in high-traffic areas and answering questions
5. Taking people on tours of the local church building (works well in areas where people are impressed by running water)
6. ???
7. Profit!
Wait, scratch those last two.

So, when you find someone who's interested you teach a 30 minute lesson about who God is, why he's important, why He cares about us, and then what He asks of us. If they're interested in learning more we come back 2 to 3 times a week and teach further lessons (there are about 8 depending on the person), get them to come to church, introduce them to the bishop and church members, and help them develop habits in line with the church doctrine (quit smoking, drinking, etc). If the person isn't interested or is hostile, I hand them a pamphlet and leave without any argument. If they don't want the pamphlet, I wave as I walk out the door

I was privileged enough to help many people who were interested turn their lives around and get baptized. Dozens of people quit smoking, quit gambling away their paychecks, started spending time with their kids, and became people who enjoyed their lives. Does everyone need to go to church to be a good person? Absolutely not. There are some people though, who need a higher authority to teach them the habits of a good person. I loved my mission and would recommend it to anyone.

[Darth Wong]

A couple of Mormon missionaries came to our house once. Rebecca met them and invited them to give their spiel. They described the organization of their church for a bit, and she asked to see a picture of their Quorum of the Twelve:

She looked at the picture and then asked them point-blank: "Why is every single one of them an old white male?" She found it pretty offensive that this church claims to have a message of divine hope for all of Earth's 7 billion people, yet its leadership is entirely composed of rich old white men.

They said they would come back with an answer. They never returned.

PS. Seriously, look at the picture. Is that not the single whitest group you have ever seen?

[Darth Wong]

Wow. Just. Wow.

I can't believe that people go out of their way to send hate-mail to a Canadian Engineer who debunks logical fallacies in their world view. I guess because I attend church and yet recognize that Intelligent Design, Young Earth Creationist "theory" and all the other baloney has no basis in science it seems it should be obvious to everyone. Mike, though we don't agree on religion (obviously) I'd simply like to say thanks for putting your website together and making a concerted effort to put truth out there. Religious doctrine is no substitute for science academia or any other earthly endeavor. Anyone who tries to use religion to dictate anything beyond their own personal moral code is, in my opinion, breaking the golden rule. Again, thanks for showing us the idiocy that is fundamentalism.

What's interesting is that I used to have a far more sympathetic view of the church. That was because I was living in Waterloo, where the churches catered to young, idealistic university students and their message was all about generosity, caring for others, helping the sick and the poor, etc. Who can't get behind that? Actually, having read Glenn Beck's writings about the moral importance of making people suffer for their mistakes, I should say "Who apart from Republicans can't get behind that?"

But in subsequent years, after moving away from university, I ran into a lot more traditional churches, and this really opened my eyes to how destructive the church can be. These churches were ALL about exclusion: the mentality of exclusion permeated every sermon and influenced every decision. They even tried to counsel my wife to separate from me, once they found out that I was not a believer.

[Kodiak]

But in subsequent years, after moving away from university, I ran into a lot more traditional churches, and this really opened my eyes to how destructive the church can be. These churches were ALL about exclusion: the mentality of exclusion permeated every sermon and influenced every decision. They even tried to counsel my wife to separate from me, once they found out that I was not a believer.

Holy fuck, that's awful. It drives me nuts when any group, religious or not, decides that their standards are the bar that everyone has to meet. If forced with an option of exclusionary churches or no church at all, it wouldn't be a tough choice. I can't think of anything more hypocritical than a church that teaches a woman to leave her "infidel" husband and at the same time talks about a man who's main message was "Come follow me".

[Darth Wong]

The really sick thing was that they knew they couldn't counsel divorce, because churches are pro-marriage. So they simply told her that she should stop spending time with me, and try to keep my own son away from me (something that's pretty much impossible unless she moves out). I guess it's OK to tell people to separate as long as you don't officially use the "D" word.

[Kodiak]

The really sick thing was that they knew they couldn't counsel divorce, because churches are pro-marriage. So they simply told her that she should stop spending time with me, and try to keep my own son away from me (something that's pretty much impossible unless she moves out). I guess it's OK to tell people to separate as long as you don't officially use the "D" word.

"You can't divorce him, but drive him insane to the point where either HE leaves YOU or he abuses you then call the cops!"

Mike, I have no words to express my disgust at such a church. I can say with certainty that that is nowhere in the Bible.

[Alyrium Denryle]

If you guys want, I can respond with this...

I'm surprised I've never seen anything written on the simple illogic of the possibility of at least 3,000,000 different kinds of animals living on earth (this is the figure estimated in the 1950's. Who knows what it is now) (not to mention all the other forms of life on earth) of which probably a very high percentage reproduce sexually, how all of them just happened to "evolve" at the same rate and at the same time and in the same locality in order to reproduce.

Hi Lorraine. My name is Ben, and I am one of the resident biologists on Mike Wong's messageboard. I am a grad student in behavioral ecology at the University of Texas, Arlington. I must say that your email to my friend was full of misconceptions about biology and evolution that I feel compelled to clear up.

First the current figure of species on this planet is around 1.5 million described, but between 10 and 50 million extant, with billions having existed in prior geologic time periods.

Sexual reproduction evolved once, in one lineage of single celled eukaryotes (organisms with a cell nucleus)

There are several theories for how this happened, but my personal favorite is that it happened via a mutation that botched cell division so it happened twice instead of just once, but didnt replicate the chromosomes. One of the daughter cells then ate one of the others and incorporated its DNA. A few million rounds of division, and eating and you get sexual reproduction that can then evolve into its variety of forms that we see today. And there are several forms, different sex determination systems, etc that we see in nature. There is pretty good evidence for this, as well as other possible explanations.

It does not require and two animals evolved sexual reproduction at the same time, or that all animals evolve at the same time. They dont, as the fossil record and data from genetics shows us.

Now there's been so much written about just the simple(?) protein and DNA and the horrendous improbability of just ONE of these evolving and the statistics for just one of these in terms of probability are simply mind boggling. But now take a look at the at least 2+ million animal life forms that reproduce sexually and now there is a problem that probably couldn't even be calculated mathematically.

Except that sexaul reproduction did not evolve in animals. it evolved in single celled organisms before aniamsl or plants existed. If you would like, I can give you a basic primer in how evolution works, and the evolutionary history of life on this planet.

As for proteins, you are operating on a flawed understanding of protein evolution. They dont just snap together all at once like what is assumed in the statistics you refer to. Yere, I am going to link you to a quick video that explains basic protein evolution and the origin of life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

The point is, self replicating nucleotide strands (like primitive DNA) started out not doing anything but increase the possible size of lipid vesicles. But they started to be folded into shapes and started to do things, and eventually could have started to assemble proteins (your ribosomes in your cells are RNA that do just this, and they can be broken down into even simpler macromolecules that do the same thing, but less efficiently) that performed functions for the hyper-primitive cell, like let nucleotides in through the bubble, or helped them attack other bubbles.

All of this can be demonstrated to work in a lab.

Sadly, I find the continued blindness of people who cling so tenaciously to the “evolution theory” in spite of all the knowledge that has been gleaned over the last 30 or so years in molecular biology as well as all the other sciences, a confirmation, once again, that the Bible is right where it says:

Except that molecular biology is the strongest confirmation of evolution we have. We can cross reference divergence times we get with genetics against geologic events and the fossil record, and they jive perfectly

They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.

Actually, life on earth is jury rigged, redundant and inefficient. Are these qualities you associate with an engineer? No. In fact, if you want to start basking in the glory of god, the sword cuts both ways. What kind of god do you worship that created gamma ray bursts that can wipe out life across hundreds of planets, diseases like Ebola, AIDS and Small pox, even inluenza has killed more people than every war in human history combined.

You might want to put this question up on your arguments page to see what feedback you get. But I suspect you probably won't because it might jog some people out of this illogical, non-nonsensical evolution mindset, and we couldn't have that now, could we?

Hello from the actual biologist.

Benjamin Allen
Formanowicz Lab
University of Texas, Arlington

[rhoenix]

Aly, I say do it, after some proofreading (a few mis-spellings, and some lack of periods). Send it to her, and post what she says. I'd be very curious to see what she says.

[Kodiak]

I recommend to everyone to view the youtube link Aly posted ( repeated here ). I had no idea there was such a simple yet comprehensive explanation to abiogenesis. Please do send this woman your article and post her response. I'd like to think there are some more Christians out there who aren't so close minded that they can't watch a 10 minute youtube video or read an explanation without assuming "they've heard it before".

[Feil]

Mike, I have no words to express my disgust at such a church. I can say with certainty that that is nowhere in the Bible.

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

2nd Corinthians 6:14, KJV

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I have no problem with Christianity. It's Paulianity that I think is a blight on humankind.

[Darth Wong]

Alyrium: that's nicely done.

[Kodiak]

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I have no problem with Christianity. It's Paulianity that I think is a blight on humankind.

Agreed. Jesus words: "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Matthew 19:6