Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Monday, May 11, 2020

More Evolution and the Coronavirus Pandemic

It will be nice to be able to stop writing and posting about COVID-19, but we have to keep going so we can provide useful information and also refute falsehoods that tinhorns for Darwin are spreading.


Evolutionists are still trying to shove their views into the COVID-19 crisis, and their entire worldview is incoherent and unlivable. Also, their morality itself is dubious.

We saw this in "Evolution and the Coronavirus Pandemic" and "COVID-19, Up Jumps Incendiary Darwinist Opportunism". Now we have a bit more from opportunists who believe in not allowing a good crisis go to waste — may as well propagandize, huh, Darwinists? Following that is a second article showing how their worldview is inconsistent.

Before we get to the two articles linked below, there is something that I have not seen discussed in creationist material. That is the concept of herd immunity (also known by the cumbersome title of community immunity). We saw in another article that the Wuhan Virus is something for evolutionists to celebrate, since it mostly kills the elderly and those with preexisting medical conditions. Correct me if I'm disunderstanding or misrepresenting the concept, but I reckon that herd immunity means most people get a virus like this, build up immunity, and move on. Sure, some will die, but that's the way it goes. Isn't herd immunity something else that Darwinists would applaud?

Some evolutionists insist on applying "survival of the fittest", a term that is nonsensical (may as well say, "survival of the survivors") and spoiling good research. Although debated, most scientists do not consider viruses to be living things. They are more like machines. People with the best immune systems (which our Creator engineered, but no credit is given) are the fittest. (That is, until the next contagion comes along and kills off other people.) Letting those deemed "unfit" die is contrary to the sensibilities of most people, since we are wired to give love and render aid.
Two Darwinians inject “survival of the fittest” into the current crisis. So if the virus kills a patient, is it the fittest?

Across America and the world, volunteers are working hard to help those affected by the COVID-19 crisis. On Special Report (Fox News) today [May 5, 2020], host Bret Baier interviewed Chef Jose Andres, whose organization World Central Kitchen is providing 225,000 meals a day to people across America, regardless of politics, religion or age, who just need a plate of food to keep going. With help from restaurateurs and chefs in cooperation with governors and mayors, they have already served more than 4.5 million fresh meals in 200 cities. Jose’s passion to serve his fellow Americans to help the country get through the crisis is evident in his expression and gestures. Injecting Darwinism into this scene would be like playing white noise so loud that the host and guest would have to run for cover.

That’s essentially what two Darwinians from the University of South Carolina have done. Look at the title of their piece at The Conversation above a huge picture of Darwin’s hoary face with baggy eyes: “What does ‘survival of the fittest’ mean in the coronavirus pandemic? Look to the immune system.” Pragash and Mitzi Nagarkatti offer this blessing to the likes of Jose Andres:
To read the rest of this first article, click on "Keep Darwinism Out of Pandemic Response". Come back for the next item if you've a mind to. I hope so.

"Nature doesn't care about you", wrote Stephen Asma. Neither does my car, an office building, or a light bulb. None are sentient beings, despite the animistic and pantheistic malarkey of some Darwinists. Come on, man! Asma also tried to slap leather with God by firing at God and Christians. But his entire diatribe is irrational and inconsistent. Rejecting the Creator doesn't make him go away. Nor does mockery and misrepresentation. His evolutionism is his religion and his epistemology is incoherent, revealing that his basis for morality is shifting sand.
As of the time of writing [May 5, 2020], we are in the midst of a global viral outbreak (a pandemic) known as COVID-19 (the “coronavirus”). The majority of us are being confined to our homes in an attempt to mitigate the spread of the disease (“shelter in place”), the goal of which being to save human lives, and protect the most vulnerable in our communities such as the elderly or immunocompromised people.

Commenting on this situation, the New York Times featured an article called:

Does the Pandemic Have a Purpose? Only if we give it one. The coronavirus is neither good nor bad. It wants only to reproduce.
Yes, that is a lengthy title. This is an opinion piece by Mr. Stephen Asma, a professor of philosophy. Obviously an attempt to capture an uplifting tone in the midst of this crisis, Mr. Asma’s opening line is, “Nature doesn’t care about you.”
To finish reading this enlightening article, click on "The deep inconsistency of evolutionism, revealed amid the COVID-19 crisis".



Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Labels