Pharyngula

i-ccbc028bf567ec6e49f3b515a2c4c149-old_pharyngula.gif

Can you stomach a little more Jim Pinkoski? He’s ranting in the comments most amusingly.

You guys LIE about Java man, you LIE about Lucy, you LIE about the horse ancestary chart, you LIE about fetuses mimicking evolution stages, you LIE about upright trees sticking through different geology layers, you LIE when you ignore the arguments about the earth’s magnetic field, you LIE when you respond to the rotation of the moon orbiting the earth — SO WHY SHOULD I EVER CONCLUDE THAT ANY OF YOU ARE ACTUALLY “RIGHT” ABOUT ANYTHING? All I see is repeated pathological LYING done by evolutionists in the evolution vs. poor old Kent Hovind’s Creationism!

Those are his words, but I added the links myself—each one addresses these old creationist canards. Evolutionists are not lying; rather, the creationists are not comprehending.

His comic book flings out absurd claims at a frenetic pace, in exactly the same way. He just babbles, echoing tired old creationist stories, each of which does nothing but reflect the ignorance of these people. Here is a partial list of some of the crap he flings at the wall in the space of 15 pages. None of it sticks; I’ve linked to a refutation for each from the Talk.Origins archive.

Pinkoski isn’t exactly lying. He’s merely pretending to a competence that he does not have, in matters that he doesn’t understand at all. He’s just not very bright.

When he isn’t making up bogus arguments against evolution, he’s inventing silly fantasies about his creation model. Pinkoski is a big fan of the pseudoscientific “vapor canopy” idea of Walt Brown, even though it doesn’t make sense, wouldn’t work, and is completely unsupported by the evidence.

He’s inconsistent and more than a little hypocritical. Note that above he attacks the fossil record in multiple ways, but here’s an interesting reversal:

FACT: The FOSSIL RECORD shows that nearly everything grew LARGER before the flood—“GIANTISM” flourished—(they’ve found 18 inch cockroaches, 3 ft. dragonflies, 2 ft. grasshoppers, 8 ft. beavers, 15 ft. turtles, 80 ft. sharks, etc., etc.!) ACCORDINGLY, THIS CONDITION COULD ALSO APPLY TO MANKIND!

This is one of the hallmarks of creationism, cherry-picking the data. He only accepts the scattered bits of the fossil record that fit his predetermined view. At the same time, while rejecting the reasonable, consistent, and tested interpretations of evolutionary theory, he feels free to hare off and make up any ol’ bit of nonsense he wants. For example…

i-a3dffdd1912ea0baa96c0c1bdc19e866-pink_giants_in_the_earth.gif

I gotta say, though, that that little “note” is one of my favorite bits of the book, and it tells us so much about Pinkoski’s illogic. In case you can’t read it, it’s his supporting evidence for his claim that Adam was 15 feet tall:

NOTE: If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??

Man, the existence of pygmies and dwarfs has nothing to do with whether men were 15 feet tall 6000 years ago, and I had to laugh out loud. It’s an incredibly useful phrase that’s going to come in handy.

Ever wonder how the hell a moron like George W. Bush got elected? “If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??

How can people be so gullible to believe the nonsense peddled by the Discovery Institute? “If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??

“Kids, go clean your rooms.” “Awww, do I have to?” “If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??

There are more ridiculous creationist fantasies in the book, including his devil-driven dinosaur assault on Noah’s Ark and some malarkey about how T. rex could breathe fire, but it’s the same old evidence-free babble. Or rather, the evidence is all along the lines of, “If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??

Comments

  1. #2 Magnus
    August 9, 2006

    If there are PYGMIES + DWARFS, then why are there still humans?

  2. #3 Ginger Yellow
    August 9, 2006

    What’s with the resurrection of all the Pinkoski posts? Is it his birthday?

  3. #4 wintermute
    August 9, 2006

    Is the Modern man in that diagramme a Sikh? It’s kind of hard to tell, but I get the impression he’s wearing a Sikh turban…

    Also, I love “Adam […] may have been around 15 feet tall”. That’s “may have been” as in “Superman may have been a real person”.

    It’s worth noting that one of Jack Chick’s tracts have everyone laughing at how stupid Muslims are, because the Qu’ran says that Adam was 90 feet tall (as an aside, does anyone here know if it actually does?). When you’re proposing ideas that even Chick thinks are lunacy, it’s a good indication that you’er taking too much medication. Or maybe too little…

  4. #5 Jeebus
    August 9, 2006

    According to Pinkoski’s logic(!), pygmies and dwarfs actually come from the future – where, in about 5,000 more years, everyone will be only about 3 feet tall.

    Is he also implying that pygmies and dwarfs are godless heathens, seeing as though they survived the rapture?

    Bastard.

  5. #6 HP
    August 9, 2006

    Ah, the birth of a meme. Thanks for the memories, PZ. I’m glad you reposted this Pinkoski series.

  6. #7 Alan Kellogg
    August 9, 2006

    Creationist: Humans came after monkeys and apes, right?

    Scientist: Correct.

    Creationist: So why are monkeys and apes still around?

    Scientist: Nobody thought it was necessary to fire them.

  7. #8 rew
    August 9, 2006

    man, it looks like I need to stop getting all of my book learning from comics…

    But PZ, if you doubt this is possible, how is it there are B.C + HAGAR?

  8. #9 Jokermage
    August 9, 2006

    I’m glad you reposted this. It is one of your best ever.

  9. #10 bernarda
    August 9, 2006

    Pinkoski can start on another subject, light. If he maintains that the world, and the universe, was created 6,000 years ago, he has a little problem.

    If god created light, presumably it created the speed of light at the same time. Since the speed of light is limited, that means he must think that the universe is 6,000 light years wide. How does he then explain that the universe is actually many billion light years wide? In fact, the universe is even bigger than one might at first think, but I won’t go into the details.

    I look forward to his comic book on relativity.

  10. #11 PZ Myers
    August 9, 2006

    That’s an old argument, easily dismissed. God also created the photons en route to their destination, giving the appearance of age.

  11. #12 False Prophet
    August 9, 2006

    Um, Genesis 6 refers to the Nephilim, the purported offspring of angels and human women. The author is not implying all of humanity were giants. This is apparent if you look it up in a translation other than King James. This argument is not only unscientific, it’s not even good theology.

  12. #13 Blake Stacey
    August 9, 2006

    PZ scripsit:

    That’s an old argument, easily dismissed. God also created the photons en route to their destination, giving the appearance of age.

    Actually, God hasn’t done any creating at all, yet. He won’t get around to that until 12:00 PM Mountain Standard Time next Tuesday, at which point He will ejaculate the entire Cosmos into being, perfectly faking all photons, fossils and memories to indicate otherwise.

    (-:

  13. #14 Your Name's Not Bruce?
    August 9, 2006

    Reading this stuff, I’m afraid my brain is going to explode. Fortunately only 10% will be destroyed…..

  14. #15 Peter McGrath
    August 9, 2006

    “God also created the photons en route to their destination, giving the appearance of age.” And man created quantum theory, so the photons knew how fast they were going, but weren’t sure where they were any more.

  15. #16 Mena
    August 9, 2006

    So what he is saying is that humans evolved from being 15′ tall and will continue to evolve until they are 3′ tall? Am I totally not understanding this “logic”?

  16. #17 decrepitoldfool
    August 9, 2006

    I have a comic book on relativity (and related concepts). It’s called A Cartoon History of Time by Kate Charlesworth and John Gribbin. Maybe Pinkoski should pick up a copy.

  17. #18 Watchman
    August 9, 2006

    A Cartoon History of Time

    Yes! I haven’t seen it in years, but I recall that it’s fun and not-stoopid.

  18. #19 Gregory
    August 9, 2006

    One thing I have always found weird is that creationists propose no mechanism for this giantism. If it was genetic, we should be able to find some ancient gene that if we turn on, we’ll grow to be 15 feet tall. If it was some sort of chemical, what chemical was it, and how did humans get exposed to it.

    Of course, if there was an actual mechanism for this, there wouldn’t be any PYGMIES + DWARFS!!

  19. #20 prufrock
    August 9, 2006

    Don’t any of you find it nerve-shreddingly scary that there are mega-churches full of dangerous fools like this specimen?

    Well, I’m sure you do…. the thing is…what to do? I wonder if they are going to start burning people at the stake again for questioning their “science.”

  20. #21 Orange
    August 9, 2006

    That ain’t Adam–I recognize that manly chest from The Spongbob Squarepants Movie. That’s David Hasselhoff, and everyone knows he’s five times the size of the average PYGMY.

  21. #22 greensmile
    August 9, 2006

    How dare that dirty SOB say anyone lies about the evolution of equids..I read a book that may have been titled “Your Pony’s Trek” that traced fossils from eohippus [with its separate toes] to modern horses. I read it around 1960 way before I had to read any extensive bible stuff…ruined me completely in some folks eyes. Can I put out his eyes now;?) He sees nothing with them anyway.

  22. #23 bernarda
    August 10, 2006

    I partially understand the “photons en route” argument, but even that is insufficient. Just how large was the universe that god is supposed to have created at the time?

    The known universe is expanding as well as having things in it moving at the speed of light. I won’t go into the details, but if you are interested there is an explanation here.

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html

    Be sure to click on to some cgi’s that illustrate various stages of the process.

  23. #24 SN
    August 10, 2006

    I’m 6’2 and surprised to learn that I’m less degenerated than, say, Einstein.
    How tall is this Pinkoski bloke, by the way?

  24. #25 eric taylor
    August 10, 2006

    One thing I have always found weird is that creationists propose no mechanism for this giantism. If it was genetic, we should be able to find some ancient gene that if we turn on, we’ll grow to be 15 feet tall. If it was some sort of chemical, what chemical was it, and how did humans get exposed to it.

    If I understand my “canopy theory” correctly, the reason that adam & eve were giants was that they lived under a canopy of rain clouds which prevented them from getting any sunlight, this abscence of any UV rays made them grow to be giants and live extremely long lives. After the canopy broke, the sun rose for the first time on earth, and the UV radiation did two things, it shrank people and it made them live much shorter lives.

    I believe the canopy theory says that if you raise your child in total darkness he’ll become giant, long-lived and superhuman. Maybe you have to keep your baby moist too, I can’t remember right now.

  25. #26 Ichthyic
    August 10, 2006

    According to Pinkoski’s logic(!), pygmies and dwarfs actually come from the future – where, in about 5,000 more years, everyone will be only about 3 feet tall.

    ahh, that explains it. Dorothy wasn’t sent to “OZ”, she was simply bounced into the future!

    thank god flying monkeys will have evolved by then. I’ve been waiting ever so long.

  26. #27 George Cauldron
    August 12, 2006

    “How is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??” is in fact an example of a ‘snowclone’.

    See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone

  27. #28 Kel
    September 23, 2008

    It’s nice to see the origin of the meme.

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.