This
month we have a guest “Fact of the Month" by; D.L Snyder
Director, OVCEA (OVCEA is described at the end of the article)
Public education in the realm of
science/evolution, for many years now, has been hijacked by the Darwinist
interpretation of the world that apriori rules out Intelligent Design (a creator
being, we normally refer to as God) in favor of a naturalistic world view
that insists nature is all there is and all there ever has been, or will be.
Nature supplants any god. Nature, not God, clearly exists and therefore through
scientific evaluation and extrapolation (they say) we can begin to give answers
about origins and life processes. But this view has several critical, fatal
flaws. One being that microbiology only observes adaptation and variation in
kind –never Darwinian (macro-) evolution (molecule to man) so commonly
claimed. Another is that nature provides not even a hint of evidence of
biogenesis, i.e. life from non-life, regardless of time involved. In fact, from
a scientific viewpoint biogenesis and macro-evolution evolutionary claims have
never been observed and when subjected to mathematical and sound scientific
scrutiny, can be readily refuted.
Whatever one likes or dislikes about
Intelligent Design theory, and it’s place for consideration in the public
classroom, one can easily debunk, and should distrust the standard evolutionary
claims posing as science. But because they claim their theory is a work in
progress, they insist the public must be educated in "evolution", inferring
it to be the only valid (naturalistic) explanation on the table. They further
make big claims for a Big Bang to further their naturalistic origins fantasies.
But the more we learn about stellar physics and analyze the structure and bodies
observable in the universe, the more the Big Bang becomes a big bust. It too is
losing ground as a viable explanation because the more information we get, the
more the theory becomes impossible. Given this, the apriori claim that
evolutionary explanations should be the only publicly authorized approach to the
origins question, is as much a philosophically based claim as any
creationist model could ever be. All past and current Darwinian evolution
based models for origins and life development can now be clearly shown to be
driven by philosophy, (even religion), but certainly not sound analytical
science.
Furthermore, the incapacity of any evolutionary claims to
provide the necessary first cause INFORMATION, genetically for ANY new
development in life ---- renders any Darwinian explanation for new species
impotent and groundless. Information can only arise from intelligence, not from
a random or energized combination of chemicals. This is a scientific fact, not a
supposition. There simply is no adequate explanation in the world of evolution
to provide the initial INFORMATION necessary and the accompanying causal
mechanism(s) for even the most basic forms of life and structuring. No mechanism
of chemistry or biology including mutation has ever been shown to PRODUCE the
new and beneficial blueprint of information necessary for the start-up or
advancement of life and complexity. In fact, it can be shown that all life
systems from bacteria to the brain possess certain characteristics of
irreducible complexity that preclude the idea of their formation piece by
gradual piece over eons of time. Either they were virtually instant and complete
in their initial appearance as a functioning whole, or they simply would not
exist from any known processes or forces of gradualism in nature or
chance. Additionally, the limited variation we now see and the needed
transitional forms between kinds we never see, also effectively slam the
door on Darwinian hopes.
Given this, whatever one wants to do with ID, it
is clear the Darwinian claims do not constitute good science. The auxiliary
science that wraps itself around Darwinian claims, is loaded with disconnected,
unproved, often irrational assumptions that are based not on supportable
data drawn from evolutionary 'facts', but on the premise that
they MUST somehow be true because there is no other acceptable alternative. And
therefore the thoughtful and educated person is one who is willing to wait (by
faith) on further discovery to validate evolutionary claims which "have to be
true, eventually" in spite of any evidence to the contrary. Simply stated it is
the only game in town. Whole careers, millions of dollars in public funding and
research grants, whole libraries of books (that would immediately become
irrelevant), whole segments of university research programs, rest upon the
eventual validation and full acceptance of Darwinian based evolutionary models.
The evolutionary academic elite have for many years given expert analysis to the
courts and various levels of government assuring them the several Darwinian
based models they have proposed through recent decades represent the most
reliable science and have insisted they should be the only explanations for life
and the universe to be taken seriously. And that they should remain safely in
the custody of evolutionary scientists. Any other explanations, including
Intelligent Design, would be a step backward from science to myth, or worse,
faith. So at all costs, and without any compunction, this educational syndicate
has for the past 50+ years continually perpetrated lies and obfuscated the facts
in order to "own" the issue and defeat debate for their own professional and
personal philosophical ends. (It reminds me of the 1960's and the preposterous
propaganda and statements that issued forth regularly from the thugs at the
Kremlin during the cold war that were designed to secure Soviet interests, keep
their people in check, intimidate their adversaries, and puff up their
agendas---all at the expense of truth. And further it is now laughable in
hindsight that the western world media and "experts" would often take seriously
their absurd pronouncements).
If the above is true, it means if ID
is allowed to share "shelf space" in the curriculum of public education along
side the typical Darwinian evolutionary claims, the evolutionary scam will be
exposed and Darwinian evolution will find itself in the category of various
other quack potions of the 19th century that have long been abandoned because
not only did they not work, they were found to be vehicles of fraud perpetrated
on a naive public who were separated from their money and given false hopes---
and sometimes even exposed to dangerous concoctions. No less can be said for the
continual purveyance of evolutionary quackery in it's many forms and fruit. It
is riding on a shameless continuum of false marketing by the evolutionary elite
who know the only alternative to naturalism is some manner of Creator God. At
some point, American society—will need to tell it's government and it's
educational leadership, "we want the truth about origins evidences, not lies and
obfuscation". The big deal about ID is that it will help hasten this
eventuality. It represents a serious threat and wedge in Evolutionism's
lock-hold on public education.
The controversy however is slowly waged
and marked with pitfalls. The fact is, the evolutionary minded educational elite
will never willingly back down from their position, no matter what facts may be
presented. History has shown they have an endless list of groundless
speculations they produce in self-serving scientific jargon and routinely cloak
their suppositions in technical verbiage that might sound impressive and
thoughtful, but actually falls far short on substance or proven science. They
unashamedly perpetuate unsubstantiated claims as plausible science, (the whole
Leaky–Lucy-hominid thing is an example) while casually and routinely dismissing
without a second look, most scientific assessments by creationist scientists. As
long as this situation continues, the uphill battle to get truth out will be
tedious and segregated from mainstream channels. Couple this with the fact that
roughly 50% of the U.S. population will gladly believe a lie, almost any lie, if
given the alternative of believing the truth of God. This has been documented
for many years in the polls regarding the nature of the unborn and when life
begins. Also the polls during the Clinton-Lewinsky debacle clearly illustrated
over 40% of the public were comfortable with lies if it meant maintaining a
preferred status quo. Until, or unless there is a revival of truth and
reformation of thinking, the false evolutionary claims will continue to get a
pass from the general public, and the evolutionary elite will continue to own
the debate, and will successfully squeeze out any competitor on the subject of
origins for authorization in the classroom. As a professional cadre they will
unashamedly continue to avoid holding themselves accountable for their false
scientific claims, the media will continue to be in their corner as long as it
is politically correct to do so, and the public, left to themselves, will remain
blissfully ignorant trusting in the "experts".
Should the ID movement
press ahead and attempt to get an authorized hearing in the public classroom?
Yes, by all means, but everyone must realize it will be a slow and hard fought
transition. When a group asks for equal time at school etc. for ID or any other
non-Darwinian based explanation for origins, the evolutionists see it as giving
the enemy a key stronghold within striking distance on their own turf
that will expose them and finally defeat them. This they will not do with out a
fight. They simply will not yield one inch of ground on the turf they now own
almost exclusively--namely Government, Public Classroom, Mainstream Media. It is
naďve to think they will yield "equal time" for the sake of balance, or science,
or truth or rational thinking no matter what the evidence may be. Those ideals
were compromised by the effort to supplant a Creator with naturalism more than a
century ago, and they haven’t looked back. This generation’s evolutionists are
losing ground slowly but they are not yet willing to just give it away. But this
is what we are asking them to do when we want any non-Darwinian based teaching
given equal time in a public school setting. We will see a better acceptance of
non-Darwinian based origins explanations 20 years from now when:
Should the public schools accommodate
teachings other than the current evolutionary view? Yes. Of course. Should
public schools and state curriculum controversies be the focal battle-ground for
the re-establishment of creation oriented public education? No, not exclusively.
The recent Kansas State Board of Education conflict is a case in point. When the
Board did the right thing in de-emphasizing macro-evolution as a fact on state
science proficiency standards, the educational elite revolted, mobilized the
public, voted the offending board members out, and returned the state standards
back to the evolutionary status quo. A lot of heat was generated but the fire
was soon extinguished.
I am not saying it was a waste of time--on
the contrary, it was an important effort and an honorable and honest attempt to
bring science standards up to what we now know about biology from science in
2000. It had nothing to do with the Bible, or Genesis or Christian philosophy,
and everything to do with beginning to be honest and throw off the worn out and
disproved assumptions of a has-been 19th century philosophy posing as science.
But--- the entrenched evolutionary educational elite eventually carried the day
along with help from the public at large. It demonstrated the educational elite
are unrepentant and the public continues to be uncaring and misinformed and
duped. The focus needs to be on convincing the next generation of educational
leaders, and saturating the public with this issue, until they are truly willing
to run the propagandists out of town. Sadly though will take much time and
effort.
Battles at local school boards and state
school boards and classroom confrontations are but brief skirmishes that raise
tempers and attack the "middle man" (school administrators, teachers, and
boards) while the upper echelon (science educators, courts, and high ranking
government) and the lower echelon (parents, students, churches, and the general
public) remain as they are---unmoved and unconvinced. They watch the battles in
the schools with amusement and figure nothing will ever really change. Even if
they really have grave doubts about the integrity of evolutionary claims, unless
they are personally confronted at some level, they see the dogma of evolution as
this unstoppable juggernaut of the science world that is too big to uproot or
even challenge. The middle men are public servants and thus vulnerable to our
grass roots demands for fair and honest education in science, but in the end
they can only do what the upper echelon permits them and what the lower echelon
expects them to do. ALL THREE echelons (including the Church) must be
transformed. It is possible to do-- but it may take up to 20 more years of
sustained and strategic focus at EACH level.
Written by; Dave Snyder
OVCEA (OVCEA@1st.net)
740-984-4845 www.orgsites.com/oh/ovcea2/
OVCEA
is an association of fellow citizens, lay and professional, throughout the
» provide and staff an exhibit/display with free materials in area
fairs, trade shows and misc. events.
» provide no-cost trained local speakers for area churches and
groups.
» provide quarterly meetings - forums - and conferences for training
and self education - with guest speakers.
» encourage placement of creationist publications in local
libraries.
» maintain a resource list of creationist web sites, publications and
topical info sheets.
» establish a lending library for area pastors, teachers, and OVCEA
membership.
» publish a free quarterly newsletter on current Creation-Evolution
issues.
» submit editorial articles—letters in local news
papers.
» sponsor and coordinate, local and/or regional conferences, debates,
involving such groups as ICR and AiG. ICR -Institute for Creation Research --
Henry Morris / Duane Gish and Associates in CA and AiG- Answers in Genesis --
Ken Ham and Associates in KY
» encourage the establishment of Creation Clubs in schools and
churches.
» provide materials and resources for small local groups to have
displays in their local areas, for events such as fairs, and church
events
» network with other creationist
organizations.
» maintain the OVCEA website http://www.orgsites.com/oh/ovcea2/
» produce a monthly newspaper column.