Our efforts in squelching the Cincinnati Zoo/Creation “Museum” connection have yielded extra dividends. Ken Ham is weeping over the after-effects.

As a result of all this flak and the ending of the joint promotion after only two days, a prominent national travel group ended its conversations with our museum staff last month about a possible arrangement where our Creation Museum would be given a higher profile in one of its travel guides, along with a museum discount if a visitor presents their membership card. Here is what we heard from this particular travel organization:

From: KXXXXX
To: John Eytchison, Creation Museum
Subject: RE: Creation Museum

Hi John,

Unfortunately, I think [official’s name deleted] is just too leery after the incident with the Cincinnati Zoo to bring in the consignment tickets. [Name of travel org. withheld] used to sponsor a NASCAR race car and believe it or not, there were a couple members who actually dropped their memberships because of that affiliation-one which is a perfect fit for [name of travel org]. I think she’s afraid of putting something out there that has the possibility of causing a stir among some members at this time. . . .

I’m sorry things have not worked out, but I do wish your museum success and I hope that you have a Merry Christmas.

Thanks,

R—

Well, gosh, what can I say?

QQ MOAR, KEN HAM!

And of course, to everyone here — Happy Monkey!

The fine state of Mississippi is about to be led astray by the cretins they’ve elected to congress. They have introduced yet another textbook disclaimer bill, which will require that all school books that mention “evolution” be slapped with this sticker:

The word ‘theory’ has many meanings, including: systematically organized knowledge; abstract reasoning; a speculative idea or plan; or a systematic statement of principles. Scientific theories are based on both observations of the natural world and assumptions about the natural world. They are always subject to change in view of new and confirmed observations.

This textbook discusses evolution, a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things. No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered a theory.

Evolution refers to the unproven belief that random, undirected forces produced living things. There are many topics with unanswered questions about the origin of life which are not mentioned in your textbook, including: the sudden appearance of the major groups of animals in the fossil record (known as the Cambrian Explosion); the lack of new major groups of other living things appearing in the fossil record; the lack of transitional forms of major groups of plants and animals in the fossil record; and the complete and complex set of instructions for building a living body possessed by all living things.

Study hard and keep an open mind.

Sound familiar? They all kind of run together into one blur of noise, don’t they.

This is nothing new. Here’s the textbook disclaimer they tried to push in Cobb County, Georgia.

This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.

Here’s the disclaimer that was read to classes in Dover, Pennsylvania.

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.

Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.

Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.

With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the Origins of Life to individual students and their families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on Standards-based assessments.

They all have some things in common: in particular, the pettifogging and incorrect attempt to hide behind the word “theory”, as if that somehow discredited the idea; the pretense of open-mindedness, when these are actually attempts to slander good science; the setting aside of evolution as a special case, when all scientific ideas are supposed to be regarded critically; and just the general notion that the fact that evolution is discussed means the whole subject must be treated gingerly.

The Cobb County and Dover disclaimers have something else in common: they were slapped down hard by the courts. The Mississippi disclaimer should join them soon, and it’s a little surprising that the backers of this bill didn’t bother to consider legal precedent.

The differences are also interesting. Mississippi tries to get specific, and offers a list of topics that are not discussed in the textbook. This is very peculiar, because all of those items are topics that are discussed in some detail in the college-level textbooks with which I am familiar. The creationists have been campaigning for decades to strip out the evolutionary content of our public school science texts, and now they are using the absence of substantive discussion of select issues as an argument for further damning them? The lesson to authors and publishers should be clear: you don’t gain anything by caving in to these troglodytes.

Maybe the message to the Mississippi school board now is that they should pick out science texts that carefully discuss the evolutionary context of the Cambrian, describing the pre-Cambrian antecedents that led to the tens-of-millions-of-years “explosion”. Then they can describe how the majority of animal phyla (but not all forms!) diversified over the next 500 million years into the different patterns we see now, and how there are many transitional forms on record illustrating portions of this process, and how we are now discovering the details of molecular complexity that further reinforce the idea of common ancestry. These are the conclusions of modern science, and we shouldn’t allow the history of censorship by public school boards stand in the way of letting these stories be told in the science classroom.

The message should be to broaden and deepen the coverage of evolution in our schools, so that we stop seeing ignorant clowns like Representative Gary Chism foisting their inanity on our children.

This looks interesting: a group of geologists have organized to write a book that specifically shows the fallacies of intelligent design creationism from a geological perspective. This should be good.

The letters to the editor section of our local newspapers is where you find the proud regalia of the American boob in prominent display. Here’s a fine example of creationist inanity from Dothan, Alabama. Try to count the misconceptions about evolution here.

Grade school textbooks teach evolution as fact. It is a monstrous lie that harms our children.

The evolution theory says we evolved from the original Big Bang and later crawled out of a green slime from the ocean.

Here is one example of its ludicrous hypothesis.

Of all the mysteries surrounding evolution, the one that is most baffling to the evolutionists, is “water.” Where did all the oceans come from?

As explained on the National Geographic program, it came from a massive collision in space. As the Earth was cooling from the Big Bang, it was approached by a stray planet that was teeming with water. It collided with Earth, spilled its water onto the Earth, then careened off into space.

Talk about fairy tales. By the way, where did the stray planet get its water?

Come on evolutionists, surely you can develop a more plausible explanation that can be easier to swallow. Until then, I accept the Bible’s answer. After all, the 4,000-year-old book has a perfect track record.

The evolution theory is only 140 years old.

Bill DeJournett
Dothan

Where to even begin? Evolution only starts once you have chemical and biological replicators; the Big Bang preceded it by a few billion years. We didn’t crawl out of a green slime, other organisms evolved in the oceans that preceded us.

I have never heard of the “ludicrous hypothesis” he’s talking about, and I rather doubt that NatGeo advocated anything of the kind.

His 4,000 year old book actually has a miserable track record — it’s just that gullible fools keep making excuses for it. It also doesn’t describe how earth got its water, other than to claim a god poofed it into existence.

It’s an interesting strategy, though, to invent unbelievable claims for the other side of the argument and then laugh snarkily at how crazy they are. For another example of such disinformation, take a look at what Wesley dug up.

The state of erv now has an embarrassing distinction: Oklahoma has put up the first anti-evolution bill for 2009. The year isn’t even a week old and they’re already pushing this nonsense.

Senate Bill 320 (document), prefiled in the Oklahoma Senate and scheduled for a first reading on February 2, 2009, is apparently the first antievolution bill of 2009. Entitled the “Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act,” SB 320 would, if enacted, require state and local educational authorities to “assist teachers to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies” and permit teachers to “help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught.” The only topics specifically mentioned as controversial are “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.”

Expect these so-called “academic freedom” bills that are really stealth creationism bills to pop up like crusty pimples all over the country all year long.

Would you believe that Nick Lally has responded — well, reacted might be the better word — to our criticism of his silly letter? This is a reply to one of the editors to whom he had sent his original mail.

Dear “Yo”, for lack of a name….since you have not yet given me yours while you put me out there for others to read.

With the exception of a few bright guys who challenged my facts, the rest of the responses were lame, personal and disrespectful. So typical of you atheists.

But I must admit, I did get a laugh of myself for miss-typing “Louis Pasteur”.

But for now, allow me to explain my position on only one of the responses I read….and later I will respond to the other responses that are worthy:

Your writer wrote: “Actually, we do have transitions between single-celled and multi-cellular organisms. We do have transitions between invertebrates and vertebrates — look up protochordates sometime. Your ignorance of these basic facts is not evidence”

I tell you the following about Choanoflagellates: These one cellular animals are designed with a propulsion system that is similar to an outboard motor. They have a propeller (whip) shaft, etc, etc. Just look at this diagram and you would think you were looking at a motor. [he included a standard cartoon of the bacterial flagellum]

Now, just take away any one part of this motor and ask yourself: Could this machine work? The obvious answer is “no”. So my question to you atheists is simple: How could a one cellular animal that houses a complex design come into existence with all its parts working simultaneously through a natural process called mutation and natural selection?

Isn’t it clear to you that this machine was designed instantaneously by intelligence with a futuristic purpose…and a finished product in mind?

Yo, I tell you the truth: There is a designer. His name is God. I may not understand all there is to Him right now, but one day we all will understand.

Typical creationist, we should say. Note the usual evasion, focusing on the disrespect given to him rather than the content. Note also the goal-post shifting. He said there were no transitions between single-celled and multicellular organisms; I gave him one, the choanoflagellates, so what does he do? Ducks and runs and throws out a different claim, in this case falling back on the tired old ID claim that the bacterial flagellum could not have evolved (it certainly could have: it has homology to other organelles, and there are pathways by which it could have evolved).

Oh, wait…bacterial flagellum? Choanoflagellates do NOT have the rotary flagellum of bacteria. They have the eukaryotic flagellum (also called an undulopodium) which is completely different. Eukaryotic flagella do not rotate, instead consisting of a bundle of fibers that slide past one another to generate a bend in the whole structure.

He really doesn’t know what he’s talking about. And he was a science teacher?

A while back, I posted some email from Debra Rufini that had been forwarded to me — a long list of stupid arguments for creationism. Now, almost 6 months later, she has discovered my posting, and she is hoppin’ mad.

Hello there Mr. Myers,

I must say that I’m incredibly flattered that you’ve gone to all the trouble to ‘attempt’ to tackle my 50 points. One would assume that seeing as tehy were so ridiculously stupid, that you’d rather fob me off as yet just another ‘religious fool’. Had I written to you (Which I hadn’t even done), representing the Flat Earth Society, I could guarantee that you wouldn’t waste your time on a response. If you did, you’d look pretty stupid.

It’s obvious that you really loathe me without even knowing me, and to be honest with you, I reckon I’d be a pretty miserable, angry person with a chip on my shoulder if I also believed that I was no more than worm meat at the end of the day. I do find it interesting that almost all athiests tend to have this angry & patronising streak in them. If only you would find the love of Christ, and it would all be gone.

It’s not a very professional approach to call people rude names, simply because tehy don’t agree with you, is it?! Sounds like you were the sort of child who threw a tantrum whenerver he didn’t get his sweeties. I would have respected you far more, had you given an adult approach, and responded in a civil manner, in the process not making yourself look so immature.

This ‘thick as bricks’ author has the commpon sense to believe that a mind is responsible for the complexity of life, as opposed to a vast volume of mindless time. Unaided time alone cannot be the great magician that you seem to believe is the case.

It takes a fool to believe that a randomly chewed up piece of chewing gum plus a whole load of time – hey presto; da da – results in a fully functioning Porshe!

Jesus called us to love those who persecute us, so that’s exactly what

And it just kind of ends there.

If you look at my original post, you’ll notice that I didn’t waste any time on it — I just posted her list with little attempt to address the flamboyantly obvious inanity of her arguments. It was like a letter from the Flat Earth Society.

I am not surprised that atheists in the vicinity of Debra Rufini seem angry and patronizing. They’re probably also annoyed and exasperated.

Raise your hand if you think chewing gum for a long time will produce a fine German-engineered automobile…

Yes? You in the back? Oh, you were just scratching your nose.

Hmm. Guess there aren’t any fools here. OK, is there anyone here who thinks biologists believe in gum-to-car transmutation?

Debra! Of course! OK, there is one fool here. Maybe she’ll give us the joy of her commentary in the thread down below.

---

Hang on! I just got the remainder of her message!

Sorry, something happened there – don’t know what!

I was just saying that as Jesus taught us to love those who persecute us, I shall do the same. I pray for you, just as he did for those who crucified him.

Kind regards,

Debra.

P.s. This was typed in a rush, so should there be any spelling mistakes, it’s not because I have the intelligence of a flea. I would like to also point out to you that should this get put on your website, (as I’m sure you’d like to rip me to shreds even further), I shall be deleting any abusive or hate mail I receive either from yourself or any of your other bitter friends.

What a relief. It just wouldn’t be creationist hate mail without the “kind regards” signoff.

A newspaper editor sent me this bizarre little letter. Apparently, the writer, a Mr Nick Lally, was spamming it all over the place, and his copy was also sent to addresses at these domains (actual email addresses stripped to protect the already put-upon):

@ncnnow.com, @krcb.org, @krcb.org, @californiaconnected.org, @humboldt1.com, @ksee.com, @telemundo.com, @koce.org, @cbs.com, @nbc4.tv, @angnewspapers.com, @modocrecord.com, @arcataeye.com, @pulitzer.net, @goldcountrymedia.com, @bakersfield.com, @bakersfield.com, @berkeleydailyplanet.com, @eastbayexpress.com, @canyonnews.com, @bhweekly.com, @bigbeargrizzly.net, @paloverdevalleytimes.com, @carmelpinecone.com, @carmichaeltimes.com, @chicoer.com, @chicoer.com, @triplicate.com, @gte.net, @svcn.com, @svcn.com, @svcn.com, @svcn.com, @svcn.com, @davisenterprise.net, @independentvoice.com, @ivpressonline.com, @herburger.net, @nctimes.com, @eurekareporter.com, @timesstandard.com, @dailyrepublic.net, @pressbanner.com, @fontanaheraldnews.com, @goldcountrymedia.com, @mcn.org, @fresnobee.com, @herburger.net, @gilroydispatch.com, @theunion.com, @hmbreview.com, @pulitzer.net, @thevalleychronicle.com, @freelancenews.com, @pinnaclenews.com, @hb.quik.com, @pe.net, @pulitzer.net, @valleysun.net, @kvsun.com, @recordbee.com, @compuserve.com, @lodinews.com, @pulitzer.net, @gazettes.com, @jewishobserverla.com, @laopinion.com, @dailynews.com, @DowntownNews.com, @latimes.com, @losbanosenterprise.com, @paloaltodailynews.com, @maderatribune.net, @maderatribune.net, @malibutimes.com, @MammothTimes.com, @mantecabulletin.com, @mcn.org, @almanacnews.com, @modbee.com, @modbee.com, @montereyherald.com, @morganhilltimes.com, @mtshastanews.com, @ktsftv.com, @sainte.tv, @indiancountry.com, @napanews.com, @marinij.com, @sierrastar.com, @ojaivalleynews.com, @dailybulletin.com, @dailybulletin.com, @ocregister.com, @palipost.com, @hax.com, @avpress.com, @paradisepost.com, [email protected], @arguscourier.com, @arguscourier.com, @mtdemocrat.net, @bizjournals.com, @angnewspapers.com, @ptreyeslight.com, @portervillerecorder.com, @busjournal.com, @redbluffdailynews.com

That looks like he had found a directory of California newspapers and was sending his important missive to all of them. Lally is not from California, which makes me wonder if he flooded all the other states in the same way…let me know if you see some garbage with his name in it in your local paper.

Anyway, you’d think that such a widely disseminated letter must contain very important information, but I doubt that the gang here will be surprised at all to learn that it is a poorly written collection of creationist crap. I’ve put it below the fold for your grisly appreciation.

By the way, the author claims to have been a science teacher. I wonder how many young minds were poisoned and how much inquiring curiousity was stifled by this ignorant know-nothing.

[Read more…]