Whether you’re an evolutionist or a creationist you have probably eaten at a family restaurant at least once. Usually we abstain from mingling with patrons and their annoying children. That is, people of an older generation who have already raised their families do. And when we go to dinner, we seek to enjoy it with peace and quiet. Accordingly we generally choose to be seated as far from children as possible. We don’t want to hear or be subjected to five rowdy, uncontrolled children annoying us, peering at us while we eat from the top of their booth or in some cases standing right in front of us watching us like some hungry animal.
Perhaps we have misjudged family restaurants as a reclusive place to enjoy peace and quiet
In thinking of recent experiences, I am reminded of the argument of whether our human origins are based on Darwin’s theory of evolution or the Bible’s theory of creationism
The Bible promotes the system of belief that God created man in his image and that from man God created woman, the story of Adam and Eve. But Darwin, in advocating for the scientific community, argues that man evolved from a primate species. Notwithstanding both theories, evolution and creationism are thought as opposing hypotheses of our origins, and both may have some common ground identified in our own offspring.
Darwin’s theory can seem true just by observing people in everyday activities. Surely we can surmise that this is the result of either evolution or creation.
For example, watch as I have how children act in family-oriented restaurants. They practically bounce off the walls, make ape-like grunting sounds, test their vocal cords by yelling and screaming, and experiment with making horrible faces. They run freely through the restaurant, jump up and down in the booths, and even in some cases hang from the chandeliers! (Well, maybe the chandelier part is somewhat of an exaggeration.)
To quiet them down, like we do at the zoo and with all animals, we give them food and distractions, and between writing on the wall with the crayons the restaurant management provides them and picking at their food, they will be somewhat calm for a few minutes before resuming throwing food at a sibling.
The adults generally ignore their young and are engrossed in their own distractions, like smartphones!
The restaurant management ignores this obnoxious display out of a generalized fear of losing a customer; so they have their repair personnel ready to fix the torn seats and their staff ready to clean the crayons off the walls, and the cycle begins again with a smile for the next family, and fresh crayons for the young apes.
This to me demonstrates that Darwin had a hypothesis that is provable!
But so does the Bible.
If we are to believe that one couple, Adam and Eve, populated the world, this incestuous relationship and the lineage therefrom could account for the same behavioral patterns observed by Darwin’s advocates.
We have also observed from a historical perspective the Egyptian pharaohs, who by interbreeding became so genetically inferior that disease and insanity overtook them. I surmise their inbred offspring acted out in the same fashion as our current offspring do.
As an observer, I would speculate this may be another explanation for our unconventional human behavior.
The socially erroneous idea advocated by pseudointellectual elites that correcting children somehow stifles their individuality has led to a war between the young apes and the older apes, illustrating that Earth is truly the Planet of the Apes!
Be mindful that children are not to be given free reign. Children must have and understand boundaries. Being substantially new to this world, they have a lot to learn, and it is up to those humans who have brought them into this world to act as teachers. That does not mean how to text, it means etiquette!
I suggest the author review the definition of the word “curmudgeon” and paste a picture of himself next to it.
While I agree that some parents do not provide their children with appropriate boundaries, the tone and condescending nature of this post aren’t necessary to make his point.