Response to the National Academy of Science's (NAS) release of its anti-Christian, anti-Science book Science, Evolution and Creationism

 

The high priests of the religion of evolutionism at the NAS are once again hard at work trying to brainwash the youth of America with evolutionary dogma, and to strengthen their stranglehold on the American public education system.  The NAS is an organization who's members are 93% atheists and agnostics.   The remaining 7% who claim to have a belief in a personal God either are not real Christians, or appear to be Christians who have compromised with evolutionism instead of using their scientific knowledge to expose it for the myth that it is. This time their attacks against honest science and Christianity came in the form of a book titled "Science, Evolution and Creationism".

On Thursday, January 3, 2008, ABC News and other media outlets did a story about this book.  As far as we know, only ABC News contacted a creationist organization for an opposing view and then aired that view.  They contacted Answers in Genesis (AiG) and featured some images from their new Creation Museum.  AiG has published an initial response to the media reports about this NAS book on their web site. We encourage you to read it at the link below for an important opposing view:

http://answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/01/05/news-to-note-01052008

After they've had a chance to review the book in more detail, they'll be publishing another more in-depth response at a later date.  We'll provide a link to the second article as well once it's available.

It is important to understand a few important points about the NAS.  First, while the NAS claims to promote and support the scientific method, they are in fact working very hard to cripple it in the public schools systems as far as evolutionism is concerned.  Their goal is to continue to replace objective science with one-sided evolutionary indoctrination. Honest science allows for the open minded, careful examination of all of the relevant scientific evidence. In the case of evolutionism, it means they should also fully support the consideration of the mountains of scientific evidence against this failed theory.  Instead, they prefer to have a high wall of protection built around their religiously based science because it simply would not survive as a viable theory if students were given access to all of the opposing scientific evidence by teachers who had opposing views.  

Evolutionists at the NAS, in the news media and in the academic community have a standard bag of tricks they use to deceive the public with.  It includes mocking scientists who present opposing scientific views, omitting important scientific evidence from textbooks and classrooms, hiding their own anti-Christian biases, mischaracterizing the debate as one between science and religion, etc.  Our link about media bias gives a good overview of how evolutionists, including those at the NAS, try to deceive the public.

Another important point to consider about the NAS scientists is that for at least 93% of the scientists who are members, evolutionism is their world view, their religion.  No matter how much they pretend to deny this, it is still the truth.  Here are several quotes from leading evolutionists that provide some insight into this thinking.  We don't know if any of them are or were NAS members, but it is important that students and parents are aware of, and properly understand, that many evolutionary scientists harbor the goals of spreading humanism and atheism through evolutionary indoctrination.  Given the rabidly anti-science (against honest science) and anti-Christian nature of the NAS, it's not much of a stretch to suspect that this kind of thinking could be prevalent in the NAS membership. If it is, it is highly unlikely they'd openly admit to it en masse.

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, and in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
Richard Lewontin (1)

"Atheism is science’s natural ally. Atheism is the philosophy, both moral and ethical, most perfectly suited for a scientific civilization. If we work for the American Atheists today, Atheism will be ready to fill the void of Christianity’s demise when science and evolution triumph. Without a doubt humans and civilization are in sore need of the intellectual cleanness and mental health of atheism. Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god. Take away the meaning of his death. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing!"
G. Richard Bozarth (2)

"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." (3)

"Paleontologists have paid an exorbitant price for Darwin’s argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life’s history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study." (3)

"But our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. The stereotype of a fully rational and objective ‘scientific method,’ with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots, is self-serving mythology." (4)
Stephen J. Gould

"I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. Faith, being belief that isn't based on evidence, is the principle vice of any religion.” (5)

“Now, as I say, when it is put to me that science or some particular part of science, like evolutionary theory, is just a religion like any other, I usually deny it with indignation. But I’ve begun to wonder whether perhaps that’s the wrong tactic. Perhaps the right tactic is to accept the charge gratefully and demand equal time for science in religious education classes." (6)
Dr. Richard Dawkins

 

References

1 Lewontin, R., "Billions and Billions of Demons," The New York Review, January 1997, p. 31.
2 Bozarth, G. Richard, "The Meaning of Evolution," American Atheist (February 1978), page 30.
3 Gould, Stephen Jay, "Evolution's Erratic Pace," Natural History, vol. 86 (May 1977), page 14
4 Gould, Stephen Jay, "In the Mind of the Beholder," Natural History, vol. 103 (February 1994), page 14
5 Dawkins, Richard, "Is Science a Religion?" The Humanist, vol. 57 (January/February 1997), page 26
6 Dawkins, Richard, "Is Science a Religion?" The Humanist, vol. 57 (January/February 1997), page 27

Home