Creationist letter of complaint

Debunking Creationist arguments

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#21  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Dec 13, 2014 6:07 am

All the points are appeals to ignorance and/or incredulity.
Nice of people like Cali to explain the facts, but the above is all that is needed to refute the letter.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 31088
Age: 31
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#22  Postby bert » Dec 13, 2014 8:54 am

ADParker wrote:
Chief Wiggum wrote:4. Where did the 7 day weekly cycle originate? Scientific indicate that the body works best on the 7 day cycle which includes a day of rest.

Image

The 7 day week is a human invention though, it doesn't otherwise exist in nature as far as I know. Other length weeks have been known thought history.


There's 7 days between the four phases of the moon. Does allow one to make future appointments without having to keep track of every day until then.

Bert
Who doubts 7 would be in the bible if the moon had rotated in 24 or 32 days about the earth
Promote rational thought on religion by telling other people to download this free booklet. Read it yourself and you may well learn new arguments and a new approach to debunk religion
bert
 
Posts: 517
Male

Netherlands (nl)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#23  Postby Chief Wiggum » Dec 13, 2014 12:52 pm

Thanks for clearing up my tallness confusion. And for the comprehensive skewering of Creatiograndpa. I shall see whether the publishers wish to respond with this information.
Chief Wiggum
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Dave Bromage
Posts: 11

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#24  Postby Calilasseia » Dec 13, 2014 1:59 pm

I wrote a couple of pieces elsewhere on the matter of increasing body size in humans, and I think it's apposite to pull together the apposite parts of those two posts, and combine them here.

If you pay a visit to the Bronte Parsonage Museum in Haworth, which is dedicated to the three literary sisters, you'll find that some of the dresses worn by those women are preserved. When you look at those dresses, you'll wonder how an adult woman could fit into them, because to modern eyes, they look as if they'd burst at the seams if a 12 year old tried to wear them.

Well, there's a reason for this. Wind the clock back to the early years of the 19th century, and agriculture was still a relatively primitive affair. Scientific advances had yet to make their impact, even though yields were still much greater than those in, say, mediaeval times. We had to wait for such developments as the haber process for synthesising ammonia, which forms the backbone of the modern fertiliser industry, and the developments in scientific crop and livestock breeding that, in part, arose from Darwin's work on evolutionary theory, which guided a number of key developments in the 20th century. We also had to wait until fairly recently for modern weather forecasting, allowing better planning of crop planting, and a host of other developments that made modern agriculture the vast, burgeoning producer of excess that it is today.

Likewise, we had to wait for the late 19th century to bring us the first true, in-depth understanding of several major diseases, such as tuberculosis, which wasn't finally brought under control until the advent of streptomycin in 1946 (as an aside, my brother, currently living in Australia, was the first UK citizen to be saved by this drug, a little family milestone I sometimes wheel out to surprise people with).

So, in Charlotte Bronte's day, not only was the countryside stalked by the spectre of famine, but major diseases ran rife amongst the population. People could be felled, seemingly capriciously, by tuberculosis, cholera, smallpox, or any of a dozen other serious diseases. Those that survived childhood encounters with these pathogens, frequently bore the signs of such encounters, including stunted growth. It's one of the reasons why reaching six feet in height has for a long time been considered an achievement for men - because all too often, disease and famine made this all the harder to attain. Likewise, famine and disease exerted their toll upon women, who also had to bear additional burdens, in the form of primitive or non-existent antenatal care, and the privations arising from second-class status in society at that time.

To give an indication of the frankly daunting conditions that were the norm in Charlotte Bronte's day, I turn to here, from we learn the following:

The death toll within the Brontë family was not unusual and left little impression on the village population, who were confronted with death on a daily basis. When Patrick Brontë arrived, the parish suffered from unemployment. The men sought work in the quarries and local handicrafts. The only businesses were the pharmacy which supplied Branwell, and John Greenwood's stationery store in which the Brontës were the best customers.

Haworth's population grew rapidly during the first half of the 18th century, from hardly 1,000 to 3,365 in 50 years.[123] The village did not have a sewage system and the well water was contaminated by faecal matter and the decomposition of bodies in the cemetery on the hilltop. Life expectancy was less than 25 years and infant mortality was around 41% of children under six months of age.[124] Most of the population lived from working the poorly fertile land of the moors and supplemented their incomes with work done at home, such as spinning and weaving wool from the sheep that were farmed on the moors.[124] Conditions changed[125] and the textile industry, already present since the end of the 17th century, grew in the mills on the banks of the River Worth, whose waters turned the wheels which consequently required fewer people to work them.

Food was scarce, often little more than porridge, resulting in vitamin deficiencies. Public hygiene was non-existent and lavatories were basic. The facilities at the parsonage were no more than a plank across a hole in a hut at the rear, with a lower plank for the children. In her thirties, Charlotte was described as having a toothless jaw, by such persons as Mrs Gaskell, who stated in a letter dated 25 August 1850 to Catherine Winkworth : […] large mouth and many teeth gone […].[126] However, food was reasonable in the family. Well filled plates of porridge in the morning and piles of potatoes were peeled each day in the kitchen while Tabby told stories about her country or Emily revised her German grammar, and sometimes Mr Brontë would return home from his tours of the village with game donated by the parishioners.


The irony is that the Bronte sisters were considered to be better off in those surroundings than many of their fellow inhabitants of Haworth, yet still suffered the privations of nonexistent public sanitation, and both Emily and Anne Bronte are recorded as having died in their 20s from tuberculosis, whilst Charlotte is considered to have been sufficiently weakened by tuberculosis to have succumbed to typhoid fever, arising from the execrable sanitation in the village.

We also have to factor into the equation, in the case of the Bronte sisters, that they (initially numbering five, incidentally) were all sent to a school that would later become the inspiration for the dreaded Lowood establishment in Jane Eyre, and indeed, Charlotte certainly maintained the view that the inhumanly harsh conditions at that school were significant contributory factors to the early deaths of two of her sisters. Those conditions were such an assault upon the body, that the three surviving sisters emerged therefrom suffering the ravages of tuberculosis, which of course felled Emily and Anne Bronte in fairly short order in adulthood.

Now, if this was the sort of fate that awaited the daughters of a clergyman, in an era when the clergy were relatively well protected from destitution by virtue of status, then one shudders to think of the sort of horrors that befell the destitute poor at that time. But I digress.

However, once scientific advances made their impact, this all changed. Children became better fed, and healthier, than at any previous time in human history. The advent of mass vaccination, effective antibiotics, scientifically planned nutrition, scientific agriculture and several other influences, led to children in developed nations from around 1950 onwards, enjoying standards of nutrition and healthcare, that even the wealthiest of kings and emperors of the past would have eyed with envy.

As a consequence, body sizes have been increasing, in accordance with this enhanced nutrition and freedom from serious disease. Once upon a time, a six foot tall man was someone to look up to: now, it's practically the norm, and the men who stand apart from the crowd are those over 6ft 6ins tall. 200 years ago, a six foot tall woman was practically unheard of: today, I see teenage girls in the local supermarket who are making a mockery of the past in this respect, and indeed, a newspaper recently reported that the tallest teenage girl in the UK was now 6ft 5ins, a stature that Charlotte Bronte's contemporaries might possibly have regarded as the product of witchcraft. Yet, all that has happened, is that the benefits of scientific agriculture and modern medicine, have combined to produce a population that enjoys a level of largesse that would have been the stuff of science fiction in Jules Verne's day.

Quite simply, we're bigger and taller than ever before, because we've never had it so good, from the standpoint of the benefits of scientific agriculture and medicine.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
RS Donator
 
Posts: 22091
Age: 59
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#25  Postby orpheus » Dec 14, 2014 12:50 am

Good to have you back with us, Cali! :cheers:
“A way a lone a last a loved a long the”

—James Joyce
User avatar
orpheus
 
Posts: 7274
Age: 56
Male

Country: New York, USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist letter of complaint

#26  Postby orpheus » Dec 14, 2014 12:54 am

Chief Wiggum wrote:My wife works for a children's non-fiction publisher and today received this letter, which she forwarded to me, thinking I would 'enjoy' it. Even as a novice, I could certainly have a pop at debunking each and every one of his points but I would welcome expert opinion also.
Surely the human body works best on a 7-day cycle with 7 days off?!

--------------------

Dear XXXXX,

Yesterday I was in a bookshop and picked up your book '1000 Scientific Facts. It is beautifully presented with all the illustrations and I thought what a wonderful book for my 10 year old grandson. And then I turned to the chapter on evolution. What a shame that it is in this book as evolution is a theory and not a fact, and with the information available these days it is evident that life could not have simply evolved.

I believe that the earth and everything in it was created in 7 days as described in Genesis.

Here are just a few reasons:-

1. The rotation of light. When light passes through certain organic molecules, it is rotated to the left (levo) or to the right (dextro).
When these compounds are formed in a laboratory there is an equal mixture of levo and dextro molecules. In a livinf cell all the molecules are levo. How could these have been formed by chance chemical reactions?

2. There is a valve (mitral valve) between the left and right auricles in the heart and in the foetus this valve is open so that the blood bypasses the ventricles and the lungs. At the moment of birth this valve must close so that blood flows through the ventricles and the lungs. How did this happen - by chance or designed?

3. How did male and female reproductive organs occur? How did reproduction take place before then?

4. Where did the 7 day weekly cycle originate? Scientific indicate that the body works best on the 7 day cycle which includes a day of rest.

With evolution there is no basis for morality, no accountability and no hope for the future.

As a 73 year old with a Christian faith I have a great future to look forward to with life in a perfect world with no end.

I would hope that you too could enjoy this hope.

Kind regards -

Revelation 14:6-12, chapters 21-22,


Welcome, Chief! :wave:

Others have fielded your question very well indeed; I just wanted to say hi and offer you a free housewarming box of popcorn.

:popcorn: (Uncle Orph'sTM popcorn - "seek and ye shall find!" )
“A way a lone a last a loved a long the”

—James Joyce
User avatar
orpheus
 
Posts: 7274
Age: 56
Male

Country: New York, USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest