Cy the Creationist Kitten
Status: News
Cy the one-eyed kitten, whom many people refused to believe was real, has found a permanent home at the Lost World Museum, a creationist museum that will be opening later this year in Phoenix, NY. John Adolfi, owner of the museum, will use Cy to support his argument that mutations can not be the driving force of evolution because "The mutations I have seen, like Cy, are either neutral or negative." Evidently Adolfi has never bothered to read a Biology textbook (or he only reads creationist-approved ones) because every explanation of evolution that I've read states quite clearly that the vast majority of mutations are negative. But the more I think about it, the more appropriate it seems for a blind, one-eyed kitten to be a symbol for the Creationist view of the world. So maybe Cy has found the right home. (Thanks to everyone who sent me links about Cy. I got quite a few emails about this.)
|
Categories: Animals Posted by Alex on Sat Apr 08, 2006 |
Comments (8) |
| More from the Hoax Museum Archives: | |||
Maybe Mr. Adolfi can get an option on that baby from Dolakha. Just his sort of thing, I would think.
Posted by Big Gary in Glen Rose, Texas on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 02:59 PM
Oh look at the opinions coming in now, screw science, remember we must hate America, whitey, and anyone who thinks differently.
Posted by Lonewatchman on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 03:22 PM
Bah.. if there were an advantage to be gained by being one-eyed, blind, and.. well.. dead.. Cy and his mutant armies would be taking over the world right now. Praise Darwin!
I've noticed the creationist/ID people do that a lot.. they hold up some small quibble and say 'because *this* bit here is unknown or wrong or we chose to interpret it that way, your entire logical reasoning is false, and therefore, all of science is false!'. Pointing out the fact that Cy is likely a birth defect rather than bona-fide mutation isn't likely to sway them either.
Mutations are those which can be passed on genetically. Had he survived to breeding age, Cy might have passed on his fur color, but probably not his good looks.
Yes, 99.999% of all mutations are either neutral or harmful. It's a random process. But every so often, a critter will get an extra fold of tissue that makes it possible to store food a little longer than its buddies, and will survive a famine, or that annoying fungus kills off all of a certain species of plant except for one or two particularly resistant specimens.
Evolution isn't instant. Mutations are subtle, small, and only really come into play when the entire rest of the species gets wiped out because they lack it, or at the very least, they don't do nearly as well.
Posted by Robin Bobcat on Sat Apr 08, 2006 at 06:28 PM
I've noticed the creationist/ID people do that a lot.. they hold up some small quibble and say 'because *this* bit here is unknown or wrong or we chose to interpret it that way, your entire logical reasoning is false, and therefore, all of science is false!'. Pointing out the fact that Cy is likely a birth defect rather than bona-fide mutation isn't likely to sway them either.
Mutations are those which can be passed on genetically. Had he survived to breeding age, Cy might have passed on his fur color, but probably not his good looks.
Yes, 99.999% of all mutations are either neutral or harmful. It's a random process. But every so often, a critter will get an extra fold of tissue that makes it possible to store food a little longer than its buddies, and will survive a famine, or that annoying fungus kills off all of a certain species of plant except for one or two particularly resistant specimens.
Evolution isn't instant. Mutations are subtle, small, and only really come into play when the entire rest of the species gets wiped out because they lack it, or at the very least, they don't do nearly as well.
Know what's scary? There's actually a gene in humans which, if you've got two recessive alleles, will make you a cyclops. It's a growth gene or something.
Posted by Perseus on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 07:06 PM
"...he more I think about it, the more appropriate it seems for a blind, one-eyed kitten to be a symbol for the Creationist view..."
Don't forget DEAD!
Posted by Matt on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 03:17 PM
Don't forget DEAD!
" But the more I think about it, the more appropriate it seems for a blind, one-eyed kitten to be a symbol for the Creationist view of the world." Very funny and very true.
Posted by Dave on Mon Apr 10, 2006 at 09:22 PM
aww no picture?
Posted by kj on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:47 AM
put about 40 0's after a one. That's probably about how many generations of living things have existed before humans (i.e. before monkeys, fish, protozoa etc.) Even if 99.99999% of mutations are negative, that .00001% of mutations amounts to several million mutations in terms of absolute numbers. If you are a creationist, you think in small terms, so maybe to those people less than 1% is like saying less than 1. But, OBVIOUSLY to people who are a) not deluded and b) intelligent, evolution is. Period. It's not a theory, it's not 'uncertain'. Unless you think the Earth turning around the sun is an 'uncertain theory' too.
Posted by trish on Fri Jul 22, 2011 at 03:53 PM
{stupid336x280}
Get MOH Blog Posts by Email
Our Sister Sites
