Evolution or Intelligent Design?  A Reality Check: 

On Friday, August 5^th 2005, the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette printed a well-written and logical Sacramento Bee editorial “Science classes shouldn’t teach religion”.  It is only one example of a flood of editorial articles that have been sweeping across the nation, followed only by the printing of strong supporting letters and a few weak opposing letters - because the good ones are deliberately censored.  Unfortunately, most of the underlying suppositions and facts in these articles are wrong, thus logically arriving at wrong conclusions.  Indeed this is their intent: to deceive the public about the entire nature and content of the debate, and so force their desired conclusion.

Hypocritically, teaching religion is exactly what science classes have been doing for decades - sometimes telling students quite directly that science proves evolution and that a belief in created life (and God) is only a myth for the foolish and uneducated.  But the truth is that over 80% of high school science teachers and more than 60% of medical doctors seriously doubt evolution, AND believe that Intelligent Design should be taught either exclusively or alongside Evolutionary theory. 

The Intelligent Design thrust is simply an attempt by the quiet and peaceful majority of Americans to end force-fed, one-sided, junk-science religious indoctrination that leaves its followers without purpose or explanation of heart, reason or morality, and restore such things to the classroom as free speech, presenting of scientific facts, and encouraging critical (logical) thought.  Intelligent Design certainly poses a threat to religious atheism and pseudo-science.  But REAL science has nothing to fear from either Intelligent Design or biblical Christianity: worldwide history shows the overwhelming majority of scientific discovery has been advanced by scientists with a firmly biblical viewpoint.  

The fortress of evolutionary doctrine is merely the government’s unconstitutional (illegal) establishment of a required national religion whose pagan priests pretend to be scientists, yet suppress proven scientific evidence on the subject and deny free-speech debate – mainly for the simple but covert reason that if we admit the universe is designed, then we must consider a moral debt and allegiance to our Designer.  That prospect is so dreadful that religious atheists (“scientists”) over the decades have fabricated every one of the many “missing link” fossils, while suppressing obvious geological evidence that the fossil record was formed during a relatively short time by repeated rapid underwater depositions in a flood(s) of massive scale, all to persuade the gullible (including themselves) that evolution is fact, or that evolutionary theory is alive and well. However, the scientific evidence supports the exact opposite of those conclusions.

Consider just a few of the thousands of scientific facts being censored from textbooks and withheld from the public:  “older” fossil layers are sometimes ABOVE “younger” fossil layers – extending for MILES; some of the most complex bottom-dwelling marine creatures are those in the deepest (“oldest”) layers (example: trilobytes); many fossilized tree trunks have been found around the world upright and extending undisturbed through “millions of years” and multiple “ages” of prehistoric rock layers - originally used as proof of "uniformitarianism" - they actually prove rapid underwater sediment burial in successive layers over a short period of weeks and months; Carbon and Argon dates are worthless or fraudulent;  oil deposits are still pressurized;  the moon’s thin skiff of “space dust” means it can’t be over 15,000 years old; the simplest of lifeforms such as bacterial flagellum are marvels of molecular-level nano-engineering, with an acid-powered outboard motor, drive shaft, universal joint and propeller; even staunch evolutionary biologists quietly admit that the research calculations are irrefutable which pegged “Mitochondrial Eve’s” age (the first human DNA) at six thousand years ago. 

Get that? They quietly admit that the evidence of original human DNA beginning 6,000 years ago is unassailable, so... they simply ignore the evidence. 

Yet, swimming against the current of official, purposed blindness, are huge numbers of citizens who’ve educated themselves beyond public indoctrination and are highly supportive of restoring a full-disclosure discussion of scientific fact, rather than outlawing critical thinking and free speech.  The last decade has seen several hundred evolution debates across the college campuses, with the majority of attendees coming to lean strongly toward Intelligent Design.  Why?  They are struck as much by the overwhelming evidence for Intelligent Design as they are by the unsupported claims, weak logic, and rampant censorship of known scientific evidence that are so broadly characteristic of evolutionary power centers throughout the scientific disciplines.  

The ruling elite in the media and higher education regularly insist that only the ignorant or uneducated are skeptical of Evolution.  But in fact, surveys have shown that over 80% of high school science teachers, and over 60% of medical doctors support teaching both Evolution and Intelligent Design in classrooms that encourage review of the scientific facts.  When you consider that both these professional groups are obviously saturated in scientific fact and evolutionary theory, the validity of evolution becomes quite suspicious indeed.  For them, the nagging problem is typically their broad exposure to the incredibly complex and delicate systems that permeate every aspect of biology.  When curiosity researches the facts, it leads to the inescapable conclusions that evolution is far more religion than science, and that Intelligent Design is the gigantically obvious and logical solution to the origins of life.  The problem is that professionally they can't talk about the real scientific facts, because atheists exercise great control over both science cash-flow and scientific reputations, not to mention the media.  More.

Landmark books such as “Evolution: A Theory in Crisis” (1996), “Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution” (1996), and Werner Gitt’s “In the Beginning Was Information” are bringing some of the world’s most renowned atheistic scientists to abandon a lifetime of evolutionary belief.  They are being gripped by an inexorable scientific conviction that the only rational explanation for the ingeniously simple and massively complex content of DNA’s genetic digital language code is DESIGN, from a being with god-like intelligence.  Dean Kenyon now says “This new realm of molecular genetics (is) where we see the most compelling evidence of design on the Earth”.  Famous former atheist Antony Flew – in a letter to Richard Carrier – wrote of “the apparent impossibility of providing a naturalistic theory of the origin from DNA of the first reproducing species.”  

There are an overwhelming number of embarrassing facts and questions which completely riddle evolutionary theory.  Looking for any scientific discipline which can provide even a small measure of logical legitimacy to Evolution?  It's like hunting for a glass of water in the desert.  But ironically it seems to be the shocking content of genetic DNA which has struck the death blow and is authoritatively burying Darwinism in the graveyard of wrong theories.

Why is the DNA code language so shattering?  In a nutshell, it’s written in THE most efficient way possible (using a 4-character base code), yet is immeasurably more intricate than the most complex supercomputer program ever devised, spelling out every detail of how to create life and how it will function and reproduce, and then executing that design with the efficiency of a PERFECT automated factory. 

Molecular biologist Michael Denton says DNA contains artificial languages and a decoding system, memory banks for “storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principles of prefabrication and modular construction… capable of replicating its entire structure within… a few hours.”  Further, the precision is such that the average uncorrected mistake is about 1 in ten billion code letters – a good thing, since just one error in the DNA code is often fatal to organisms.  How could such a DNA code language possibly have evolved?   Former atheist Patrick Glynn says “Today the concrete data point strongly in the direction of the god hypothesis.  It is the simplest and most obvious solution…”  Yet Intelligent Design means exactly that – not preaching God, but having freedom to acknowledge and critically discuss all the scientific evidence and the fraudulent evidence in all the theories of origin – whether they involve God, a super-alien species, or “blind chance”.

Darwin’s theory was good to explore, but it’s been exhaustively researched for many decades and remains completely empty of logically supportive evidence.  A longstanding $100,000 reward for ANY evidence of evolution remains uncollected while thousands of facts strongly suggest that evolutionary theory is completely impossible.  Evolution doesn’t explain the observed data – it sticks its head in the sand and pretends it will go away. 

Put up, or shut up?  Since evolution advocates can’t “put up” a reasonable defense based on facts, why tolerate their rude and shrill insistence that everyone else should “shut up”? 

Isn’t it time to abandon blindly exclusive faith in the doctrine/fantasy of evolution, and move on by returning to an honest search for the truth, with open dialog?  THAT’s what Americans want to see restored to the arena of public discussion and education.  Perhaps honest, truthful, open dialog is what atheists dread most.

 

Brian Dobben

8/12/2005

Additional Links for more facts on this scientific debate that the media won't discuss:

http://www.christiananswers.net

http://www.icr.org
(Note: The Institute for Creation Research sounds and looks religious to those who are philosophically allergic to the possibility of a god-answer, but it is primarily a scientific educational and research endeavor, and is staffed by dozens of PHD scientists who were educated in the mainstream politically-correct Universities.  The key difference seems to be that ICR's environment doesn't muzzle freedom of speech or censor scientific research, and they cater to people who aren't desperately running from a god-answer to life, love, hope and peace.)