Thursday, April 3, 2014

To Which I Say LOL

So I've been thinking about the age of the earth, and I have to admit that I think it's time we got past the archaic and old-fashioned idea of evolution.

And though I worded that in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, I'm quite serious.  I think it's high time we stop taking evolution seriously and empowering and validating the "scientific community."

Evolution is a spiderweb of hypothesis and conjectures.  It is not proven; it is not scientific; it deserves no more serious consideration than any given fairy tale, and probably a good deal less.

It's kinda like "flat-earth" theory; it's hanging around long after it has any reason to do so.

I have no intention of insulting my atheist and evolutionist friends; many of the proponents of evolution are very, very intelligent.  However, the theory that they advocate is not intelligent at all, and the presupposition that they start with, their amazing mental capacities aside, still renders them fools. (Psalm 14:1)

Furthermore, the truth of evolution necessitates the irrelevance of everything else.  If evolution is true, then the intelligence of our atheist friends becomes meaningless.  What does intelligence mean, if the world is random?  What can you know, and why would you care to?  Science becomes a study of what happened at the time that the experiment was run, and not a study of how the world truly and fundamentally works.  Because if this is all an accident, then the world doesn't work.  It just happens.

The only way an atheist can do good science is if he does it like a Christian- assuming continuity and law in the universe.  And the only way law exists is if there is a Lawgiver.

Then there's the whole big-bang thing.  Millions and millions of years ago, there was this stuff, and it blew up, and made more and better stuff over the course of millions and millions of years.  This is indeed a fairy tale; yet it is far more deadly, for it has as its aim the dethroning of God.  God will not be dethroned; any society that tries will find itself hanging from the gallows it built for its Creator.

The questions regarding this fable abound; where did the first stuff come from?  The stuff that had to be there for the big bang to happen- who made that?  Or did it just always exist?  If it always existed, how do you know that?  Doesn't that mean you assume that?  Which means you have faith?  Which means that you are religious, and that those prehistoric celestial rocks are your god?

And then there's life- when did non-living matter become living matter?  How could we prove any answer to that scientifically, if it was a historical event?

And then there's morality and truth- how can we know anything?  How can anything be wrong?  Was Hitler a bad guy, or just a guy we disagree with?  Or was he actually assisting the evolution of the species?

As others have said, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.  Every facet of reality testifies to the genius, the reality, and the necessity of God; it is not and never was a matter of evidence.  It is a matter of faith.  The atheist starts with the faith presupposition that there is and can be no god, and he mangles all the evidence to support that- even to the point of hilarity.

I know my atheist friends have plenty of responses and evidences that they would love to (and probably will) give me; I expect the response to be a barrage of multisyllabic words and suggestions for further reading (that's not to mention the insults, vulgar jokes, and name-calling).

A lot of that will go over my head, and I don't plan to spend much time trying to decipher it.  Not because I, or any of us, couldn't decipher it, but because I don't think it's worth the time.  If evolution had anything real to say, it wouldn't have to hide behind big words and ponderous tomes.


An atheist on Twitter responded to one of my statements on this issue, mockingly suggesting that tacos were the ultimate proof of God.

I thought about this (maybe a little more than I should have) and came to the conclusion that he was right.

Maybe tacos aren't the ultimate proof of God, but they're all you need.

Consider the taco.

You take some corn which came from dirt, and you put it in a pan made out of metal which came from dirt, and you put that pan on a flame, and you fry it in the blood of smashed olives, which also came from dirt, and if you do so for the right amount of time at a certain temperature it becomes crispy and remarkably delicious.  Then, you put the shredded muscles of a cow into this corny creation along with bits and pieces of plants and maybe some minerals that you sucked out of the ocean.  Now, before you beheaded the cow, hopefully you used some of her milk to make cheese, which also belongs on there.  Throw on some diced tomatoes, and some onions, and maybe some lettuce, all of which came from dirt.

Then you eat the thing, and it both brings you pleasure and keeps you alive.

To say a cosmic whoops was the mastermind behind the taco is beyond hilarious.  It is ridiculous- worthy of ridicule.  The prophets of evolution have joined the prophets of Baal, cutting themselves and prancing madly about the altar of man.  Neither of them deserve to be taken seriously.

I am beginning to believe that the best response to the sesquipedalian scientificalness of evolution is a cacophony of hearty laughter.


Therefore.  Evolution: In Response to Which I Say LOL


Bailey said...

The problem is that you're arguing philosophically. Many of those philosophical questions go away when you combine theism and evolution.

Evolution may be bogus in your view, but there is evidence for it that makes sense of really hard scientific facts. Certainly not enough evidence to constitute making it the LAW of the scientific community to the exclusion of creationist and intelligent design viewpoints, but there is evidence.

I personally disagree with evolution, theistic or not. But I don't feel free to totally LOL at evolution and the people who support it. There are many Christians whom I know personally who believe in creationism on a philosophical and Biblical basis yet struggle to make a compelling scientific case for it.

So LOL at the philosophy behind atheist evolution, but don't LOL at the people who agree philosophically with you and are trying to show integrity to scientific facts. I just don't see how scorning the opposing viewpoint will make Christian beliefs about evolution any more credible. :P

In short, you should come hang out with the Hillsdale College community and be challenged by a more nuanced discussion of creation vs. evolution from people who all hold the same philosophical presuppositions. ;)

Gabriel Hudelson said...


First of all, hi! :-D

"So LOL at the philosophy behind atheist evolution, but don't LOL at the people who agree philosophically with you and are trying to show integrity to scientific facts."

Well, I have no desire to LOL at those folks. But I don't think there are any facts that we have to "account for" or "explain." It all makes sense from the Bible, and none of it does from anywhere else.

"I just don't see how scorning the opposing viewpoint will make Christian beliefs about evolution any more credible. :P"

Well... I don't think the focus needs to be our credibility. Christianity is credible, period. It makes sense, period. The evidence is there, period. My point here isn't the credibility of Christianity; it's the incredibility of evolution. And at some point, after Ken Ham and Ray Comfort and so many others have amply and kindly responded to the "science," I think it's good to take a moment for the Elijah treatment. :-)

And that sounds like a discussion which I would very much enjoy!

Kelsianne said...

Good post! Also so true regarding morality and truth, in light of evolution. We could also consider the recent school shootings as an example. If the offenders consider themselves and those around them no more than "evolved creatures", (desperately lacking some form of law to restrict), who can accuse them as wrongdoers? What they "feel" is right, is. They are taught this, through our school system, from a very young age. What you sow, you shall reap...

Austin Harrison said...

The issue of evolution is not so much a head issue, but a heart issue. The true core desire of people who trust in evolution is to provide an explanation apart from God. There is "scientific" evidence for both, but in the end, it all boils down to what you put your faith in.

While I always appreciate a good sarcastic mind, I've found a lot of times, especially when addressing core beliefs of people ideas, that we (me included) to often mock when we should be meek. Don't get me wrong, some ideas are worth mocking, but that doesn't always mean we should either. While we should always strive to avoid being soft headed, I know I have to strive to avoid being hard hearted.

Your post has truth I appreciate, but is is also on the harsher/mocking side which doesn't drip in love where perhaps some of those drips could fall on people of the mindset which you're speaking.

Gabriel Hudelson said...

Austin, thank you for reading and for commenting! I definitely agree that it is a tough line to walk; we are supposed to speak the truth in love, and correct those in opposition with gentleness.

And you have done so very well in your comment. I appreciate your thoughtful suggestion.

Bush Maid said...


This. The utter ridiculousness of evolution is easily exposed if you put the concept in layman's terms. Makes me think of N.D. Wilson in "Death by Living", which is too good not to share a part of:

"Atheist Fortune Cookie: There is only the material world. Don’t ask me where hyper-hydrogen came from, but I am pretty sure it blew up because I am here (I think). The ‘laws’ of nature and reality and logic and morality are non-binding and are merely internal descriptions of the accidental explosion by another part of that same explosion and are likely to further explode or implode into something else as stuff continues to splatter around. You have no soul, and love and loyalty are chemical by-products of the accident and have no authority as the explosion neglected to accidentally create any. You have no purpose, no deeper meaning, and are no more valuable than any other mobile composting machine, engulfing and expelling until you are engulft and expelt. Also, as you have no soul, the concept of you it itself shaky, as your self-identity is simply the result of an arbitrary atomic boundary imagined by static electricity in spongey tissue inside a spherical bone that appears to be proud of any carbon-based meat that happens to be electronically connected to it. You’re not important. Your molecules prefer fragmenting to binding and will inevitably and absolutely fly apart. So suck on that, sucker of thatness. Also, you should be open to new opportunities of the month."

And I wonder why I'm still not convinced.

Gabriel Hudelson said...

Aussie- thank you for sharing that. Love N.D. Wilson. And this: "So suck on that, sucker of thatness."


Jennifer said...

Great post! I'd appreciate it, Gabriel, if you could provide some Creationist hard-core scientific responses. I do think a bang happened when God said, "Let there be light"; of that, there seems to be proof. But it's the flat, boring and ludicrous stuff that atheists claim happened afterward that's..sad/

Gabriel Hudelson said...

Hey Jennifer! OK, in response to thusly: "I'd appreciate it, Gabriel, if you could provide some Creationist hard-core scientific responses. I do think a bang happened when God said, "Let there be light"; of that, there seems to be proof."

Here's the difficulty with answering that question.

All science is proof of creationism.

All of creation is proof of The Creator.

There is no evidence that is not evidence for God.

So hard-core scientific responses run the gamut! You can start with the laws of thermal dynamics- stuff breaks down over time (which implies that stuff doesn't evolve into better stuff over time!).

You can look at the scientific method, which requires testable, provable, and repeatable events, none of which can be done for either historical events or for evolution.

You can look at irreducible complexity; animals cannot evolve gradually if they need more than one evolutionary development simultaneously to even have a chance at survival!

You can break things down into their littlest parts- and then ask, "What are those made of?" Atoms are made of protons and neutrons. What are protons and neutrons made of? We don't know; they're foundational elements. They make up everything. What holds them together so that they don't just fly apart and reduce reality to nothingness?

The Word of Christ. (Heb. 1:3)

The same question works with time. What was at the beginning? A big bang. But what was in that big bang? Some kind of matter, right? Where did that matter come from? And what was before that?

There is no possible way to answer or explain that scientifically. It must be a guess- a presupposition- a faith.

Evidence in the fossil record for the flood abounds.

Scripture was correct about scientific discoveries before science discovered them.

And that brings me back to my foundational premise- that it was never about evidence. They have no evidence, no science, to prove or support evolution. They have a story which they call science because of their faith presupposition. We need to start calling them on that faith presupposition instead of granting them the right to set the boundaries of the discussion!