The Most Dumbderful Time Of The Year

« December 2007 »
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
1
2
8
9
12
15
16
17
22
23
28
29
30

Memo to Creationists: WHAT IS IT ABOUT DECEMBER?

I remember thinking this around this time last year - that the creationists were getting uppity. I can't explain it, but there seems to be an increase in young-earth stupidity during December. I don't know why this is, but I've developed several hypotheses. For any creationists reading this, a "hypothesis" is something that has most of the properties you ascribe, inaccurately, to a "theory".

My first hypothesis is hibernation. During the winter months, a number of mammals go into a state of drastically reduced metabolism. Their heart rate and brain activity drop to negligible levels. I propose that at some level, creationists realize this is happening, and think they're better able to compete now that the mammalian average intelligence level has been lowered by all those napping bears.

My other hypothesis is that December caps several months of creationists being, on the one hand, bombarded with imagery that reinforces the cultural dominance of their particular subspecies of superstition; and on the other hand, being constantly told by Bill O'Reilly and such that their cultural dominance is threadbare and constantly under seige. This emboldens them to step forth and spray their ridiculous ideas like a diseased hyena marking its territory.

Both hypotheses have their merits, but I like the hibernation one better, because it's loosely based on biology as opposed to sociology. And biology confuses and angers creationists, as is evidenced by Kelly Cote Jasper of Edina, the latest in a string of creationists to get their screed on in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. Unlike the student I wrote about a couple of weeks ago, and the fellow creationist student who wrote in to defend him a few days after that, Jasper's ramblings were relegated to the online-only second-tier of reader opinion, and it's not difficult to see why. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"The Dec. 13 article, 'Why pregnant women don't topple over' was fascinating. Thank goodness for "evolution" of my spine or I might have toppled over during my three pregnancies. I had no idea. I am just so thankful that my 'ancestors' walked on all fours, or, before the evolution of the spine they would have toppled over and killed all their unborn apes, and then I would not be here. Whew! It is amazing to think that I am just a hapless accident that evolved from a Big Bang millions of years ago and yet, for some reason here I am, fancy spine and all. Even more amazing is that some people, who have eyes to see, can still be so blinded and not see God."

This is why creationists can't be trusted with sarcasm. Jasper accidentally got the whole fucking thing right up until the last sentence. Her distant ancestors walked on all fours. Of her more recent ancestors that walked on two legs, the ones where the females had a wedge-shaped lower vertebrae and larger hip bones thrived while others didn't, allowing more offspring to survive and thus propagating those traits. She really is a hapless accident that evolved. OK, you don't "evolve" from the Big Bang, that's mixing cosmology with biology, which creationists tend to do because they both disagree with Genesis. And the Big Bang wasn't millions of years ago, but what's a few orders of magnitude when we all know the first three decimal places are the only three that matter?

The point is, she really does get the gist of it. She just derisively dismisses it with what passes for snark amongst her people. She does this because, well, in the grand scheme of things, some accidents are more hapless than others. Scientists at the University of Texas spent a few years studying fossils, comparing anatomical structures, and doing engineering tests showing weight distribution, and drew a conclusion. That conclusion got sent out in a press release, and written up by an Associated Press writer that used the word "evolution" enough times to trigger a primal response in what passes for this Edina woman's brain. She then instinctively dismisses those years of work because they don't agree with the first chapter of her favorite novel, and having done so, comes to the conclusion that it's US who are blind.

Now that I think of it, I hope the sociological hypothesis is true. Because if it is, these brain-sloths will shut up again come January. If it's the hibernation thing, they'll keep yammering until the bears wake up in the spring.