For many years, my only contact with Creationist linguistics was through a parody – a parody of intelligent design in general more than of Creationist linguistics at that. I’m pretty sure that q_pheevr, the author of “The Wrathful Dispersion controversy: A Canadian perspective“, meant to ridicule Intelligent Design proponents by translating their arguments into a realm where they are even more blatantly absurd than otherwise.
Apparently, that’s still not absurd enough for some real folks out there. I particularly love the knots this guy (Wieland, 1999) has to get into within one and the same paragraph:
I think it is misleading to talk about any ‘evolution of language.’ Changes in language come about mostly from humanity’s inventiveness, innate creativity, and flexibility, not from random genetic mutations filtered by selection. And languages studied today in the process of change appear mostly to be getting simpler, not more complex. […] Perhaps ‘devolution’ of language would be a better term.
His factual errors are only icing:
[…] the Sino-Asiatic language family, which includes Chinese, Japanese and Korean […]
Duursma (2002) is if anything even funnier.
(With a nod to Anatol Stefanowitsch at Sprachlog (German))