This gem of a letter was published in the opinion section of our student newspaper today. It’s kind of hilarious until you realize that it probably isn’t a Poe, and this student is attending a Big Ten university that prides itself in science.
Evolutionists fear possibility of God’s existence
In reference to Ms. DeWeese’s March 31 column, thank you so much for writing on an important subject. Unfortunately, Ms. DeWeese’s approach does not permit open debate about the origin of our universe and of mankind. Evolution has many gaps that should be openly discussed in the classroom. The Darwinists are terrified of scrutinizing evolution and fear the possibility that God exists. Fossils don’t even prove that an organism reproduced, let alone evolved. Evolution is a theory that argues that everything came from nothing. Knowing this, they are justified in their fear of debate.
I thought that the foundation of science was questioning. If schools insist on teaching the philosophy of evolution, then there should be an open discussion. Darwin’s book was not called “Adaption of Species”; it was called “Origin of Species.” If you choose to believe that you came from nothing, where did you get your value? If evolution is true, then people are just an accident. Evolution says the strongest should live, and the weak should die. I believe that all people have intrinsic value because they were created by God. I recognize that my belief in the Bible is faith, just as evolutionists’ belief in “Origin of Species” is faith. If evolutionists are so confident that their theories are factual, then wouldn’t they encourage discussions about the weaknesses of evolution?
As a high school student, I bought into the ideology of believing in God and evolution. After exploring opposing arguments, I realized that belief in God and evolution are logically incongruent. A director cannot use an undirected mechanism to create. While this discussion cannot be settled in 300 words, it’s a reminder that there are two sides. Even though evolutionists will attack the intelligence of theists, there is another side of the story. It’s worth considering.
John Westercamp
Junior, School of Management
I don’t even know if it’s worth replying any more, but I feel duty-bound. I’ve had about three pro-evolution letters published since I started school here. The idea that people can spew this kind of imbecilic bullshit and not have someone lay the smack down on them saddens me. At the same time, I have physics homework to do, and the only response I can come up with is “You are an ignorant baffoon, please do not procreate.”
I have a feeling that wouldn’t help the situation much.
Ah, he’s in the management school that makes a lot of sense. I’ve found that at IU the individuals who are often the most intellectually devoid are in the business school.
Yes, thank FSM that he’s not in the college of science. Or education, for that matter.
management school…But that doesn’t explain the BIOLOGY major interested in biological RESEARCH (not premed) who just won the Goldwater scholarship, and who is adamantly certain there is no such thing as evolution. I’m just a little confused.
Oh no, at Purdue? Who won it? Do I know them?I didn’t bother applying because I already have a full ride (plus laziness). The idea that I could have thwarted an anti-evolution person from getting it, though…
Oh dear FSM. I came in on the Professor-and review and started poking around. I’ve been enjoying your blog, but man o man your subject matter is depressing!
John Westercamp had many important things to say about the scientific method and the importance in questioning all types of research and information presented in academia. I am a Neurobiology and Physiology major at Purdue and agree with Mr. Westercamp that it is necessary to continuously review data considered “fact.” While your opinions are your own, consider that his response to the original letter was an opening to discussion. Calling him an “ignorant baffoon” only makes me question your reasoning of civilized argument and “open-mindedness” that is so often considered a fault of non-atheists. It disappoints me that, because a person uses their personal beliefs to defend their argument, they are considered ridiculous for their “imbecilic bullshit” when they are using similar ways of knowing that has caused researchers to discover many of the theories and solutions to the physical world. Please consider your own ignorance before posting such attacking comments.
Creationism does not use even remotely similar ways of knowing as science, and deserves to be mocked for the silly, unfounded idea that it is. If someone argued that God was holding planes up in the sky instead of the laws of physics, they would be rightfully mocked.Not to mention this is my own personal blog. Notice how I didn’t send my reply to the Exponent, and how I even stated it would not do any good in the debate. It was me venting. If your sensibilities are offended by it, don’t read it.