If you know me at all, you know that I favor rational thought over traditionally-held beliefs pretty much exclusively. It’s because of this that I never really hold much stock in what the so-called “Intelligent Design” movement says. Most of their energy goes into attempting to disprove a system they are scripturally-obligated not to believe — evolution — rather than providing any rational arguments for just what it is they’re arguing for: that everything as we know it now was designed by someone intelligent, just not necessarily God.
I’ve pretty much dismissed out of hand that they could actually be right (which, I suppose, is no better than them dismissing my argument of “Couldn’t an Intelligent Designer use a system of evolution as part of his design?”), but I’ve just encountered some new evidence that has completely blown me away. It seems like every other day the IDers present some new argument for just why the idea of evolution is more silly than that of an Intelligent Designer, none of which have had any impact at all on my sense of rationality. Until today.
This new argument, which I’ve dubbed “The Peanut-Butter and Banana Sandwich Conjecture,” is pretty much irrefutable — and, might I say, delicious as hell. But I digress. Consisting of two separate arguments, which I’ve presented below in video form for your convenience (and also for my convenience), the PB&B Sandwich Conjecture simply and concisely proves not only that life can’t spontaneously happen, but that all life on earth is the result of a designer who made intelligent decisions about even the tiniest of details.
Now, as I’m sure you’ll agree, each of those is somewhat compelling on its own, but the combination of the two is what really hammers the point home. Game, set and match.
As far as I know, I’m the first person to have combined these two lesser arguments into a single irrefutable one, so I’m now going to go ahead and take credit for proving that evolution is inferior to Intelligent Design as a theory.
It’s been quite a journey… I, for one, would never have predicted that someone would prove the IDers to be right, let alone that it would be me. You might think that I’d feel bad about this sudden shift to the other side of the argument, but I don’t; science is all about changing your argument in the face of new evidence, and the fact that I can do so with no qualms is just further testament to my abilities as a rational thinker. I’m now an IDer, and proud of it.
(All press inquiries regarding this ground-breaking theory should be directed at jer@nyquil.org)
The adult part of me (the part that has spelled it that way both as a result of typos and because the broken "i-e"-center of my brain) tries to avoid pointing out that particular thing.
The part of me that likes frosting, though? Is right there with you.
I feel rather cheated. I have spent the best part of the last decade opening jars of peanut butter in my search for new life. I guess I am going to have to divert my attention to pealing bananas now.
Well, science is all about continued exploration. It would be pretty closed-minded to just decide "well, there’ll never be life in a jar of peanut butter, so I better stop looking."
It’s like the old adage says: Trust in God; But check your peanutbutter.
The author lives in Vancouver, Washington, USA with his girlfriend and a menagerie of cats, rats, fish, birds, guinea pigs and robots.
Among other inanities, he strives to use investigative techniques to work young starlet breasts into every aspect of rational discourse — focusing on the discourse, thus making it not perverted. Also, has recently begun a career as “Internet hairstylist.”
He can be contacted via email and Jabber IM at ‘jer@nyquil.org’. He likes to be contacted.
(All press inquiries, however, ought be directed towards the author’s agent, Alistair Hoel, via email to ahoel@nyquil.org.)
Comments to this entry via RSS
jer@nyquil.org
