Worst. Creationist. Argument. Ever.

One of my Facebook friends posted a link to this online debate. He knows one of the participants in the debate and has dealt with the one I’m going to quote and he assures me that this is not a Poe, that this guy really believes stuff like this. You’re gonna love this one:

the reason why I say Evolution is false is because Evolution say’s a fish can turn into a monkey but a fish dose not have the voice of a monkey and Evolution says a monkey can turn into a fish but why don’t we see sea monkeys under water evolution says a rock Turned into a Fish witch has sex with a Monkey in a Mud Pool that was struck by lighting and then the fish grew legs and walked and gave birth to a Human so the big question is what was the fish shoe size before it grew feet lol ahhahahahahah Evolution is false checkmate

You’re welcome.

48 comments on this post.
  1. reasonbe:

    As they say, that isn’t even wrong.

  2. rowanvt:

    …. What did I just read???? My brain is broken now. ;_;

  3. Akira MacKenzie:



    WHAT???

  4. busterggi:

    Damn, now I’m going to fantasize about fish witches!

  5. anteprepro:

    Mrs. Garrison?

  6. Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant):

    One of your Facebook friends is Sarah Palin?

  7. erk12:

    So this guy watches South Park and thinks the bit where Mr. Garrison “explains” evolution, was not mocking creationists, but was in fact a decent critique of evolution?

  8. timberwoof:

    Somewhere a village is grateful to have lost its idiot.

  9. Synfandel:

    It’s a poor argument against evolution, but it’s a great argument against using the Internet while high.

  10. dean:

    Perhaps, if our current evil overlord covert Muslim commie fascist president hadn’t secretly enacted a punctuation tax, the person who wrote that screed could have afforded to use more than a single apostrophe. That would result in the argument being crystal clear, I’m sure.

  11. eric:

    I’m going with @5 and @7. The guy clearly pulled his argument from South Park. He could be sincere, but given the source there’s a reasonable chance your facebook friend has been fooled.

  12. peterh:

    It’s stuff like that which gives stupid a bad name.

  13. TCC:

    so the big question is what was the fish shoe size before it grew feet

    This may be the first time I’ve ever seen a complete moron inadvertently write a zen koan. Bravo.

  14. Marcus Ranum:

    Shorter form:
    WTF! Therefore god!

  15. lldayo:

    I think I see the error! Witches don’t have sex with monkeys in mud pools because mud has water and witches melt from water! I know that for a fact because I watched this documentary about Oz…

  16. twosheds1:

    Well, then, I guess evolution really is false. Glad he cleared it up for me.

  17. bbgunn:

    Koko communicated more effectively than this creationist.

  18. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    Yes, thank you. I no longer needed those brain cells.

  19. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    Okay, this is beginning to annoy me.

    Poe != satire.

    Poe == a statement which raises the question of whether it is genuine or a satire.

    This post raises that question. Regardless of the ultimate answer had we all the info we needed, the post is a Poe.

  20. Modusoperandi:

    …..,…,….,..,”.,,.,.,.,.,”,.,.,,,.,,.,.’.*
     

    * (Shh! I’m hoarding them)

  21. matty1:

    Here you go Sea Monkeys underwater.

  22. John Kruger:

    It surely is a bad argument. Quite possibly the worst argument in creationism, which would put it high in the running for worst argument world-wide.

  23. Rodney Nelson:

    Does someone have a Gibberish to English dictionary so we can interpret the guy’s argument?

  24. Kevin:

    @20

    Thanks for letting some loose. I needed an ‘.

  25. Lise Stanley:

    God in heaven, next time warn us before we plunge into those depths of stupidity. I now need a whiskey, my jammies ans possibly a teddy bear to recover.

  26. baal:

    Someone should let the guy know that monkeys don’t like wet willies and fish* don’t mind since they don’t have them?

    *Men fish don’t have penises. Faintly shocking that they manage to get through the day with out them.

  27. IslandBrewer:

    Hey, all you detractors! I find his argument every bit as cogent and nuanced as William Dembski’s or Casey Luskin’s!

  28. Trebuchet:

    @baal: Some fish, e.g. guppies, DO have penises, or at least the functional equivalent.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonopodium#Internal_fertilization

  29. dugglebogey:

    “so the big question is what was the fish shoe size before it grew feet”

    Four. Game Set and Match.

  30. jnorris:

    My frontal lobes are hiding in the back of my skull quaking in fear I will read it again.

  31. Karen Locke:

    I have asthma, and laughing hard can sometimes start me coughing. This morning I’ve got a cranky lower gut for some reason, and coughing just makes the cramps worse. So this idiot has physically hurt me (a little). Assault by creationist!

  32. cptdoom:

    Come on, you’ve all missed the best part – “checkmate.” Yeah, because there’s no way anyone could argue against that brilliant piece of logic. This must have been what it was like to hear Einstein speak (in his sleep).

  33. Ogvorbis:

    Wow, Ed. I had no idea that my neighbor is one of your Facebook friends.

  34. Abby Normal:

    I can honestly say I never looked at it from that point of view before.

  35. Michael Heath:

    Let’s not be too hard on this person. The quality of this person’s argument is closer to the best YEC arguments out there then the best YEC argument is relative to the theory of evolution.

  36. Sastra:

    Okay, I read that title as a challenge. “Worst?” Oh yeah, I bet I have some worse ones in my li’l ol’ creationist quote file. And then I read on.

    Okay, some of them may be worse arguments. It’s hard to tell, since we’re getting to the area now where we have to decide one value over another, and pit one piece of fuckwittery against something that is fuckwittery in a more distinct, or unique, or encompassing way. Which is worse: Manos, Hands of Fate or Troll 2? Matter of taste, really. When you get right down to a certain level and get right down to it, there’s no just objective way to measure.

    But you wouldn’t want to watch them back-to-back unless you’re really in that sort of mood. And, as Rev. Chimpy points out, some of us need to hold on to our brain cells as long as we can. So I am not even going to try to accept and meet your challenge. I’ll let the Argument from Fish-Monkey-Shoes stand as is.

  37. dingojack:

    No No. the best cretinous creationist argument evar!
    If we promote it as such people will read it as being the best they can do*. It will set the creationist back a couple of centuries. :)
    Dingo
    ——–
    * Not entirely a lie, is it?

  38. laurentweppe:

    You’re welcome.

    You just killed twelve of my beloved neurons: I do NOT thank you

  39. jaxkayaker:

    The argument qua argument is craptacular, but the existence of said argument may constitute evidence against the existence of natural selection, since the arguer is obviously dumber than a box of rocks, and should have been eliminated by natural selection.

  40. pHred:

    Well, since I think I just laughed myself sick I guess it qualifies as something special. What I am not sure but definitely in catagory all it’s own. Now I just need people in the cafeteria to stop looking at me funny.

  41. pHred:

    Hey – my boxes of rocks make much more sense than that! On behalf of all geologists I take umbrage with that remark!

  42. shouldbeworking:

    That made a welcome change from marking final exams. My high school physics students are rocket surgeons compared to that maroon.

  43. w00dview:

    And people like this vote.

  44. John Hinkle:

    Evolution is false checkmate

    Well, in this dude’s case, he may be right.

  45. Maximus Decimus:

    This one obviously had his/her evolution classes teach by Mrs. Garrison:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/155351/retard-babies-butt-sex

  46. Epinephrine:

    Okay, this is beginning to annoy me.

    Poe != satire.

    Poe == a statement which raises the question of whether it is genuine or a satire.

    This post raises that question. Regardless of the ultimate answer had we all the info we needed, the post is a Poe.

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

    Poe’s law specifically refers to the impossibility of creating a parody of a fundamentalist that will not be mistaken for a fundamentalist’s rant. Thus the word “Poe ” can be used to describe parodies of fundamentalists. The descriptivist approach would dictate that this is acceptable, and I can’t see your assertion being true given the origin quote.

  47. Nibi:

    Evolution is false checkmate

    Yet another example of why you should never play chess with a pigeon.

  48. Forbidden Snowflake:

    Actually, the worst creationist argument ever is “If we came from one-celled organisms, why can’t we grow a whole person from one cell?”

Leave a comment

You must be