Gerry Rzeppa: Yet another clueless loon
5/27/2008 | 10:00 PM | Evolved Rationalist
Gerry Rzeppa, a creationist loon, sent me an e-mail a while back about his short children's book which he claims refutes Richard Dawkins' arguments. Although I do not think that his book answers anything or makes any coherent points whatsoever, I am reproducing his first e-mail so that my readers could check it out for themselves:Hello.
We started exchanging a few e-mails, and I was amazed by the breathtaking stupidity and utter theistarded logic he soon started spewing. Here is a sampling:
A metamorphosis from a fish to a bird?! Now I've seen it all - until the next theistarded loon comes along, of course.
For all the huffing and puffing that this loon is doing claiming that he has answered Dawkins' objections to the theistarded belief in an imaginary sky-daddy, he is hopelessly ignorant about the basic facts of evolutionary biology. Leaving aside the fact that my imaginary mentally retarded six-year-old half-brother could write better books than this loon, his statement shows us that most creationists don't have the slightest clue as to what they are arguing about.
My extremely polite response:If we were to claim that 'oh, this looks designed and it could not have evolved, so there is a god', we are not going anywhere because someone else can say that it was 'designed' by the FSM, a unicorn, aliens, Allah, Zeus, Baal, a green goo ball, etc. Anyone can insert their own designer into their perception of design. Isn't this god-of-the-gaps argument also bad theology? There was a time when rain was considered an act of god, but nowadays few people still think that god controls the water cycle. By your own theology, the place for god to hide seems to be shrinking as science marches on.
There you have it folks. This self-aggrandizing and publicity-seeking loon is just like most other creationists. All those inflatable gasbags have on their side are stupidity, misinformation, and lies, and no matter how much they try to pretend otherwise, they merely shoot themselves in the foot time and time again with their inane statements. If creationists keep giving us gems like the above, we have part of our work cut out for us.
About the fossils: The theory of evolution does not posit a direct lineage from fish to birds. I think you must have been confused there about how evolution works. As for your argument that fossils are only speculative, you might find it interesting that fossils are only one of the ways that show us that evolution happened. Even without fossils, we could draw evidence from various fields to show that evolution is a fact. We are lucky to have as many fossils as we do, in any case. Even with the abundance of fossils and other lines of evidence, nothing seems to convince creationists.
Creationists, keep it up. We are loving your theistarded spectacles of stupidity and ignorance, and we are laughing while you loons crash and burn all over the place.
In addition to some remedial science classes, I think Gerry (and a whole bunch of other creationists) need one of these:
*snicker*
Posted in
Creationism,
Evolution,
Lunatics
|
This whole thing was impressively polite.
He stopped corresponding with me after a few e-mails because I called him a loon on a comment thread at Pharyngula.
*double snicker*
Rzepa could not even get his scientific terms straight.
Leaving aside the fact that my imaginary mentally retarded six-year-old half-brother could write better books than this loon
Shalini, marry me, you!
Evolved Rationalist, you are so rude, fucking cunt.
Anonymous, thanks for proving my point that cretinshits do not actually have anything of substance to say.
Dude! I cannot believe Evolved Rationalist actually wrote that reply! Even I wouldn't have been able to compose such a cool, polite reply to such a retarded mail.
Marry me! :P
Ace, you are right. Evolved was incredibly polite with that loon. It's so unlike her....maybe it's his beard?
Marry me! Marry me!
I am a sciencefreak!
Me! Pick me! Marry me!
I am impressed evolved rationalist, you didn't swear once in that response. You did better then I did once.
Love your blog, and reply, but one small point about the fish->bird evolution.
Isn't the water-living ancestor of the first thing to crawl out of the ocean onto land, actually correctly described as a "fish" ?
Not the same type of fish that are alive today, sure, but still a fish.
In that case, it would be possible to start at an ancient fish, go through amphibians, eventually dinosaurs and then birds, right ?
Chris,
Gerry Rzeppa wanted fossils that shows a metamorphosis from fish to birds.
There is of course, no such thing.
Shalini, you were so hot when I saw you last Sunday. Please marry me. Pretty please?
Yes it is impossible to get from a fish to a bird because evolution did not happen!!!!!!!! It is impossible!!!!
Darwinism EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!!
I am a scientist at AiG!!!
Disgusting, nobody would ever want to marry Shalini!!!! She is a Nazi and a DARWINIST!!!!!!!!!! EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!!
Shalini's fans are atheist Darwinists!!!!! All are being EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!
Creationist:
With all this "exposure" you have going on, someone's liable to get arrested. Anybody up to date on their vice crimes?
This Darwinist is in danger of hellfire. Repent!
What's with the purple font at Rzeppa's page? Whoever uses a huge gif file for an index page? Yeesh.
Pharyngula - King of the nitwits. Even Richard Dawkins is less of a nitwit then him. He's pretty good reading if you prefer the "my-mind's-made-up-don't-try-to-confuse-me-with-any-facts-that-oppose-my-position-because-by-definition-there-cannot-be-or-else-I-wouldn't-believe-it-would-I" school of thought.
This site is worse and more vile than Pharyngula! Repent, Darwinist!
I like to shag my dog!
I am a closet faggot, like all other Republicans.
"my-mind's-made-up-don't-try-to-confuse-me-with-any-facts-that-oppose-my-position-because-by-definition-there-cannot-be-or-else-I-wouldn't-believe-it-would-I"
Can you say..."projection", boys and girls?
TEEHEE!
I love the new tagline!
You are all wrong. She will marry me.
sciencefreak,
Yes, Gerry did say he wanted a metamorphosis from fish to bird, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt of his poor choice of language.
evolved rationalist seemed to do the same thing, because he said: "The theory of evolution does not posit a direct lineage from fish to birds".
And that's the bit I don't necessarily agree with. I'm pretty sure that every land vertebrate descended from fish. See the good book "Your Inner Fish" for example...
Chris
They did your right, I think what she meant was that birds were ver distantly related to fish being the offshoot of the dinosaurs which are pretty far down the line from fish
Yeah, you're right. I think I sometimes bed over backwards to assume that people mean something reasonably intelligent when they ask a question.
I'm pretty wrong in this case. He did want to see a fish turn straight into a bird it's true... He probably even wanted it to be the exact same animal, rather than descendants....
It's Rzeppa. What did you expect?
The subterfuge with which you qualify your disdain for religion is brilliant: you never get a Christian or Orthodox Jewish Astro-physicist to respond because you interpose provisos, such as, 'some,' 'most,' or 'fundamentalists [fundies].' I do not like the idea that the aforementioned IDs have as little faith in science as you have in G*d. When a scientist forms a hypothesis or tests a theory that turns out to be wrong, she doesn't say, "Oh, well, nature must be wrong." On the contrary, she assumes that there must have been some flaw in her methodology, her conclusions, or her initial theory or hypothesis; and she produces a new theory that includes all observable phenomena (ZZzzz). Christians and Orthodox Jews must reconcile a paradox: The Tanach says that spiritual truths are seen in scientific observation of the universe -- NOT THE REVERSE! I am embarrassed at the blindness of believers who -- unlike a good scientist -- would deny physical science and question biblical exegesis before examining their own interpretations and methodology. Furthermore, to criticize evolution without a reasonable knowledge of it is preposterous; as is your dismissal of all religion bereft of knowledge. You can be sure that the same mistakes these 'fundies' are making with science, both you and they are making with scripture: 1) dismissing not disproving; 2) ignorant presuppositions. Science gives those of us who can believe a greater understanding of the events that transpired as the primal force willed the universe into existence from an as-yet-unknown dimension. You don't believe what they say about anything else... why should you believe anything they say about the scripture which remains the only "holy" discipline which actually got cosmology right? Oh, yeah, I forgot... you would have to actually read it yourself... and probably need to study Hebrew.