Our Websites

Are You Being Brainwashed By Your Science Textbook?

Brainwashing: Indoctrination into a new set of beliefs by use of force or deception.

Evolution:Theory that has six stages. See Eric’s Creation Minute on the “Six Types of Evolution.”

Science: Knowledge gained by observation, testing, and experimentation.

I hate being lied to! After teaching high school science for fifteen years and speaking on the topic of creation/evolution over 800 times per year for another fifteen years, and after 90 public debates with professors who believe in evolution, I am convinced that all of the “evidences” that are currently being used to support the evolution theory are errors. Most have been proven wrong many years ago. These errors are being kept in textbooks because someone wants you to believe their pet theory that we all came from a rock that came from nothing 18 billion years ago. Sometime is trying to brainwash you using your own science textbook.

Here are some of the lies that you will encounter in your textbooks:

  • The Grand Canyon took millions of years to form (See Eric’s Creation Minute on the Grand Canyon).
  • The geologic column is a fact.
  • Natural selection causes evolution.
  • Vestigial structures exist.
  • Dinosaurs evolved into birds.
  • The Earth is billions of years ago.

I won’t go into detail here, but I explain all of these lies (and many more) in “Lies in the Textbooks” (watch for free) and in my booklet, Are You Being Brainwashed.

,

Leave44 Responses to testAre You Being Brainwashed By Your Science Textbook?

  1. Jay Liemowitz September 23, 2010 at 8:02 am #

    Encyclopedia Britannica describes brainwashing as follows:

    “Systematic effort to destroy an individual’s former loyalties and beliefs and to substitute loyalty to a new ideology or power. It has been used by religious cults as well as by radical political groups. The techniques of brainwashing usually involve isolation from former associates and sources of information; an exacting regimen calling for absolute obedience and humility; strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation; physical and psychological punishments for noncooperation, including social ostracism and criticism, deprivation of food, sleep, and social contacts, bondage, and torture; and constant reinforcement.”

    Now I ask anyone who is willing to be honest with themselves, which better fits the above description: The theory of evolution as taught in science textbooks and classes, or creationism as taught by fundamentalist Christians?

    Let’s do a quick point by point comparison.

    1. “isolation from former associates and sources of information”

    I’ve said many times that I strongly encourage anyone and everyone to read both creationist material as well as materials that teach the theory of evolution (and inflationary big bang cosmology, plate tectonic geology, paleontology, archeology, general relativity, quantum physics, and all those other fields of science that Kent and Eric continue to incorrectly label “evolution theory” despite having been corrected multiple times). I also encourage everyone to read the Bible with an open mind. I am not alone in this either. In my experience, this is the attitude of most people who accept the theory of evolution and reject creationism, as well as most atheists.

    Contrast that with what the Hovinds would like. They want to have evolution removed from textbooks, or at least they want what they claim are lies removed, which would constitute removing most of the knowledge humanity has gained through scientific inquiry. They don’t want you to have access to the information that refutes they’re claims and they claim it is dangerous to even read such material.

    2. “an exacting regimen calling for absolute obedience and humility;”

    Nowhere have I ever heard a proponent of evolution (or science in general, since you reject most of it) asking for obedience or humility whatsoever. Nor have I ever heard a proponent call for any regimen of meeting at any particular time and place, or performing any specific rituals or practices.

    Eric and Kent however, would unabashedly call for each of us to attend church services, pray on a regular basis, and practice absolute obedience to the deity they espouse.

    3. “strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation”

    The Theory of evolution offers no rewards for accepting what it proposes, nor does it offer any punishment for not doing so. In fact, this is a central point in the Hovinds attack on science: that it offers no reward nor punishment for proper or improper moral behavior.

    I feel it’s unnecessary to spend time expounding on the fact that that Creationism of this variety claims to offer very strong rewards and very strong punishment based on your response and acceptance (e.g. Heaven and Hell).

    4. “physical and psychological punishments for noncooperation”

    Again, the theory of evolution offers no punishment for noncooperation.

    I do believe however, that telling children and adults on a weekly basis that if they do not strictly adhere to the tenants of particular 3000 year old book, they will be endlessly and excruciatingly tormented for an eternity after they’re death, in addition to a constant reinforcement of the notion that they are despicable individuals, capable of doing nothing good (unless they accept Jesus), constitutes nearly the textbook definition of both psychological abuse and brainwashing.

    5. “constant reinforcement”

    I’ve never seen an “evolutionist church” as you might call it. Rarely, if ever, do proponents of the theory call for regular meetings to reinforce belief in what science teaches (again I use science in general, as you reject most of it as noted above)

    Again it’s probably unnecessary to point out weekly church services to reinforce belief in creationism.

    I will certainly concede that creationism and Christianity in general constitute a relatively mild form of brainwashing, if at all (some groups more or less so than others). I will also concede that none of what I wrote above could be used as proof or strong evidence that Christian Creationism is necessarily wrong (there are plenty of independent lines of evidence that do that rather well apart from the points in this post). But among the two beliefs contrasted here, Creationism/Christianity fits the textbook description of brainwashing far better than any scientific theory, including the theory of evolution.

    Jay

  2. Jeff Brace September 23, 2010 at 11:02 am #

    Jay – I submit as proof of brainwashing: your post.

  3. Gary Hendricks September 23, 2010 at 11:45 am #

    Hi Jay.

    I am a Christian and absolutely believe the universe had a creator. With regards to your post however, I agree with you 100%. The modern church and many of the tenets espoused, especially among very fundamental groups, in my opinion bears very little resemblance to the church Jesus established.

  4. Julie Collins September 23, 2010 at 1:42 pm #

    i 100% agree, i do not think lying to kids is a appreopriot thing to do for any theory. let alone call lies “facts” or “theories”

    “Nowhere have I ever heard a proponent of evolution (or science in general, since you reject most of it) asking for obedience or humility whatsoever.”

    i have, many times.

  5. Julie Collins September 23, 2010 at 1:43 pm #

    besides, creationist are not “science haters”, the REAL: science haters are evolutionist. as they are destroying science with their lies and fairy-tales.

  6. H. Bosma September 23, 2010 at 2:10 pm #

    I have been quite reluctant to respond lately because of all the misrepresentation of science and biased blogs on drdino. This curent post again is a sad example.

    First of all “Dr.” Hovind can’ seem to distinguish between atheism, the theory of evolution or the big bang theory.

    All posts against evolution on this site are in fact against atheism. Atheism is a disbelief in a higher power. The theory of evolution explains the diversity of life, and tells us nothing about the origin of life.

    Stating the theory of evolution is wrong because it does not explain how life came into being, is the same as stating the bible is wrong because it does not explain how God came into existence. The bible is based on the existence of a God, just as the theory of evolution is based on existence of life.

    As a scientist I’m really offended by the deliberate misrepresentation of the work of millions of people. And that just because it doesn’t fit in your literal reading of the bible.
    I know a lot of devote christians who acknowledge the theory of evolution and see the bible as a book of wisdom and tells the story of their religion, but not literal.

    As “dr.” Hovind states that textbooks are wrong. Well, they reflect the current state of knowledge. We can’t teach our children about the ongoing scietific discussion is all field. It would be too much in dept to go into that.
    The only thing why the theory of evolution is the subject of this kind of discussion is because some christians do not think it strokes with their reading of the bible.

    There is no way the Grand Canyon is form by the flood. That can be scientificly proven. However, the Hovind clan does not accept any scientific explanaition.

    Please “dr.” Hovind, be honest and stop spreading your lies. I know your literal reading of the bible does not leave room for evolution, but science tells us otherwise.

    Do not mix up atheism with the theory of evolution. That alone proves to me that you do not know any thing about science. Science is about differentiating between the whats important and what not. What does seem to be related but isn’t and vice versa.

    So stop acting like you have a degree in science. You have a degree in christian teaching, which is quite different. I’ve seen your “theisis” online, well it looks not even like something a bachelor student in pedagogics would hand in. After your thesis is finish, it’s finished and not worked on anymore. You can extend your knowledge on the subject and publish new results in journals or even in a new bok. But you NEVER use the same manuscript as your thesis.

    The problem is that your onesided view that your religion is the right one (which by the way is highly cultural and regionally based). A real scientist dares to look outside his own box and admit when something is different from what he previously thought.
    Science does change, yes that the principle of it.

  7. Nigel McNaughton September 23, 2010 at 4:02 pm #

    “These errors are being kept in textbooks because someone wants you to believe their pet theory that we all came from a rock that came from nothing 18 billion years ago.”

    Eric, can you find a scientist, heck even a non-scientist, who thinks that is true?

    Straw-men don’t really get much bigger than that.

    You list of examples is quite funny, because you always have to ignore that people (very often Christians) came to those conclusions after observation, testing & experimentation.

    Just to hit a few of the funnier ones.

    Eric’s Creation minute is quite hiliarious. Especially when he pretends that people think the river flowed uphill. You can always rely on Creationists to misrepresent others.

    The Geologic Column is a Concept, and examples of it (including full examples) can be found all over the earth. Google it.

    Natural Selection is part of the cause of evolution. Even someone who postulations Microevolution would have to accept that. Put it certainly isn’t the be all and end all. Sexual Selection and Genetic Drift are 2 other examples.

    I guarantee Kent/Eric is using the ‘creationist’ definition of Vestigial rather than the actual definition.

    Now we went over this on Eric’s blog, so I he should know better.

    Vestigial does *not* mean useless.

    Now lets see if Julie snarks at Eric/Kent for “The Earth is billions of years ago.” or if it’s reserved only for the non-creationists?

  8. Nigel McNaughton September 23, 2010 at 4:07 pm #

    postulations? lol that was a weird one! replace with accepts, wouldn’t want Julie to thinks I weresn’t smert enuf!

  9. Jeremy F September 23, 2010 at 4:57 pm #

    There is a fundamental difference between the mind of the evolutionist debater, and this creationist, and that is that the creationist has settled in his/her mind that there is a God, and that His word is true. The evolutionist has settled upon a point of “prove it”. For any of these debates it seems to have been forgotten that there is such a fundamental difference of mind here. Most of what Kent Hovind does, and those now running his ministry, is attempt to “prove it”. There is simply an offering of the facts, and should you care to listen, a theory to connect them together in a logical method. It seems that the facts have been pushed aside in most of these ‘comment debates’. Personal attacks and criticism, slurs and generalizations have taken over instead, on both sides I might add. Please, if anything is to be accomplished, the calm presentation of facts should be the order of the day.

    Christian Creationists: As it is God’s will that none should perish, then please administer both admonishing and teaching with love and patience. Very few have come to know Christ due to fierce arguments and debates. It is true that they will know you by your fruits.

    Evolutionists: If “The Theory of evolution offers no rewards for accepting what it proposes, nor does it offer any punishment for not doing so” then why do you get so worked up about it? Why is it such a big deal if someone is asking you to prove something that you believe in?

  10. David McCrea September 23, 2010 at 5:05 pm #

    Jay,

    You had some very legitimate points right up until you hit the “Post Comment” button.

    Your personal attacks against the Hovinds are WAY over the top. You accuse them of things they’ve never said or even hinted at. They reject science? If they had their way, they would force everyone to pray, attend church, blah, blah, blah?

    Not only are you wrong, you’re confusing the Great Commission of Christianity with the essential tenets of Islam. Well played.

    Then I read your Point # 2: Quote: “Nowhere have I ever heard a proponent of evolution (or science in general, since you reject most of it) asking for obedience or humility whatsoever. Nor have I ever heard a proponent call for any regimen of meeting at any particular time and place, or performing any specific rituals or practices.”

    Wow, where to begin?

    How about we start with Madelyn Murray O’Hare, Eugenie Scott, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, Sam Harris, Kitzmiller v. Dover, and every government school across the country, where young minds are held captive in a particular time and place in order to be force-fed evolutionary dogma.

    For countless more examples, watch Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled – No Dissent Allowed.”

    No one EVER forced me into a church. But I was forced UNDER PENALTY OF LAW to sit day-after-day in a government school being brainwashed into believing the state-sponsored religion of evolution.

    You owe the HOVINDS an apology, big time.

  11. Mike Ayala September 23, 2010 at 5:42 pm #

    Praise God for the brain washing action of the word of God!!!!!!!

  12. Jennifer Preston September 23, 2010 at 6:30 pm #

    I always find the comments an interesting read. Much more so than the actual blog. While I am not going to give my personal position on the creation/evolution topic, I do find these blogs interesting and people’s reaction to the blogs fascinating. It is also fascinating reading others reaction to the other comments.

  13. Gary Hendricks September 23, 2010 at 7:39 pm #

    Wow Julie…”lies and fairy-tales”…so glad you cleared that up for us all.

    Look up the word objectivity. Meditate on it for a while. It’s a big word so ask God to help you figure out what it means.

  14. Todd Harrison September 23, 2010 at 10:51 pm #

    Jay,
    you have obviously not listened to any of the Creation Seminars, nor considered what passes for science these days. Let’s review what you said, and answer the questions objectively. Please forgive my dislexic writing.

    Now I ask anyone who is willing to be honest with themselves, which better fits the above description: The theory of evolution as taught in science textbooks and classes, or intelligent design?

    Let’s do a quick point by point comparison.

    1. “isolation from former associates and sources of information”
    Every time I have heard of a student being turned from creationism to evolution by a teacher, it is by creating doubt about the church and its teachings, though intelligent design can exist apart from any church or religion. Scientists have rejected evidence when writing text books, if such evidence, like living trilobites and dinosaurs exists. Also, evidence that refutes the geolgic column is rejected. By belittling the idea that there is a creator, and setting up a false dichotomy between science and religion, students are isolated from their previous associates who taught them intelligent design. By relegating the Bible to being strictly a religious book, the “scientists” ignore the accurate statements found throuhgout the Bible, which is isolating the student from a valid historical source of information. This fits teh definition in your original question. BTW, the Hovinds want to allow the theory of evolution to be taught, but not with falsehoods, half-truths, or outdated and inaccurate data. Use the latest, most accuate data, and teach any theory you wish. Teach them all, I’m sure they would agree. I’m sure they would not want any falsehoods taught in support of any theory.

    2. “an exacting regimen calling for absolute obedience and humility;”

    There are numerous cases where teachers have been fired for even raising the possibility of intelligent design or creation by God. It is not hard to Google them, or look at the CSE website. This is what is meant by absolute obedience. Also, Government grants and funding is based on toeing the line about evolution, with loss of funds for those who dare to deviate from the evolution otrthodoxy. This is the humility referred to. Humble yourself before the great evolution, or be out of a job. A teacher dare not question the geologic column, though one has never been observed in any semblance of completeness. Circular reasoning is regularly used in evolution theory, and openly required to be accepted wihtout question. How does that not fit the definition of brainwashing?

    3. “strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation”

    The theory of evolution does nothing on its own. It is the proponents of it t\who wield the power through social pressure and rewards to adopt and accept it. A child has to pass tests that are based on evolution theory, and if they answer differently than the theory would dictate, they receive bad grades. If one believes, based on evidence, that the earth is young (4,000 or so years,) and answers so on a test, they get it wrong. That provides powerful reward for cooperation. Scientists who question the evolution orthodoxy, are rejected from tenure, denied funding, and rejected when submitting articles for peer review. Sounds like strong social pressure to me. As Julius Huxley admitted, (I paraphrase) I suppose we reject creation and the God of it because to accept that there is a creator woudl impact our sexual morals. The perceived freedom to have sex without consequences is a major reward for cooperation with evolutionary theory. If evolution is true, God’s morals mean nothing, and our sexual behaviors mean nothing, no matter what they are. There woud be no objective standard for morals, and therefore no limits on what one could do sexually, or how often.

    4. “physical and psychological punishments for noncooperation”

    Again, rejection of scientists who reach conclusions that things were intelligently designed, or who are driven to the conclusion that the earth is not as old as it is theorized to permit evolution to be possible, is psychological punishment. Science is supposed to follow the evidence, and prove or disprove theories, and five of the six types of theorhetical evolution cannot be proven, and the sixth type, micro evolution, is accepted by most who ascribe to intelligent design or to the Biblical creation account. Anyone who has watched the Hovind Seminars knows this. The theory of intelligent design does not inflict any punishment. The theory of creation by God does not inflict any punishment. God may punish people, but theories do not punish anyone.

    5. “constant reinforcement”

    Peer review groups who reject articles and studies that contradict evolutionary theory could constitute an “evolutionist church” as you might call it. Every museum of natural history has a copy of the geologic column posted prominently on the wall, much like the Ten Commandments are written in churches and synagogues. There is not one actual geologic column that evolutionists can point to occurring in nature. It woudl have to be miles thick to be billions of years old, but I digress. Universities teach evolutionary theory as fact in many cases, much like a church teaches its doctrines as fact, and they do so constantly. Evolutionary theory is woven into many political ideologies, which utilizre the concept that evolution will improve man, so man can be improved by nature. Also, evolutionary theory is reinforced by environmental groups who constantly teach that man is an animal, and that we are no better than animals. Animal rights groups reinforce the theory by teaching that animals have rights equal to those of humans, because we all evolved from animals. This certainly fits the description of “constant reinforcement”.

    So Jay, in conclusion, there is much evidence that evolution is being brainwashed into the world. Neither thoery under consideration brainwashes anyone, people brainwash people. As a scientific person, I conclude that evolution is being brainwashed into students in particular, and scientists as well. Are you a scientist? Can you refute my facts? You may differ with my conclusions, as I disagree with yours. Be objective, please.

  15. Jack Napper September 23, 2010 at 10:46 pm #

    I would like to thank all the Creationists who read this blog. You have taught me that in order to make an argument that apparently is so utterly thought provoking it must be nothing more than an extremely short sentence or even a single word with no supporting material what-so-ever. Better yet make childish assertions.

    So here goes…

    Uh, huh, evolution is too science.

    Religion is lame!

    Ha Ha I win!!!

  16. Duane September 23, 2010 at 10:52 pm #

    Julie, sweetie. You are not the best advertisement for home schooling.

    I watched this movie the other day called Where the Lillies Bloom. It was about these rural children whose parents died and they tried to keep it secret as long as they could. They earned money wildcrafting (collecting herbs and old timey wild medicines and selling them). They would even post to the internet in their dad’s name but forgot to update some of his posts, like how Darwinism is 140 years old when last year was the 150th anniversary. But I digress.

    Jay makes some excellent points, echoing what I was saying the other day. Only the Church, with its dependence on keeping its membership as ignorant as possible, would deny reality. If critical thinking were to be come rampant, they would lose their source of income and the seat of their power. Don’t trust your senses. That’s Satan trying to fool you.

    Without exception, every single point made on this site by the Hovinds has been refuted and dismissed long ago. Even the Discovery Institute says not to use most of these arguments. Genesis is a collection of fairy tales passed down 1000s of year before they were even written down. They have no more validity than Pecos Bill or Paul Bunyan. They are the property of a small desert tribe. Every other tribe in the world had their own myths and they are no more compelling.

    Now, I don’t have a fancy 1 year Bible school degree that gives me qualifications to call into doubt all the scientific advancements humanity has achieved in the past 500 years, with special emphasis on the past 150 years. But I do know that I would call into question the authority of someone who can pretty much dismiss all of science and yet not know the rudiments of the tax code.

  17. David McCrea September 24, 2010 at 2:39 am #

    I watched an episode of Gangland on the History Channel recently. I don’t watch it very often because the violence and total lack of reverence for life just wears me out physically, emotionally, and spiritually. This despite the fact I’m a retired law enforcement officer.

    In this particular episode, the producers were spotlighting the Latin Kings, and the episode began by showing the leader throwing gang signs and yelling obscenities at the camera. He threw in the horned hand for good measure.

    And then he did exactly what I expected him to do. He screamed, “There ain’t no God! We’re God, and we can do whatever we want!”

    I teach junior high Sunday School, and I use the analogy that human beings are a lot like hand grenades. (Think in terms of our fallen nature and the weakness of the flesh to place this analogy in its proper perspective). The hand grenade is relatively safe to handle as long as you leave the pin in place. Once the pin is pulled, you and many of those around you are probably going to die a violent death.

    What force “pulls the pin” in most human beings? Sin. And what force is most likely to lead us to sin? Unbelief. And what force is most likely to lead us to unbelief? Evolution.

    Probably the most disengenuous comments I read on the CSE blog are from evolutionists who literally claim sainthood for themselves and their brethren while falsely claiming that our prisons and jails are full of Christians. Satan is the father of lies and evolutionists are his worker bees.

    Of course Christians commit crimes, but don’t you dare claim their rate of criminal activity outstrips that of the unbelievers. The Columbine massacre, MS-13, the Hell’s Angels and other outlaw motorcycle clubs, drunk and riotous college students, school bullying, violent street gangs, drug cartels, the Connecticut murders, Charles Manson and his deranged followers, serial killers; these are all examples of unbelievers whose “pins” were pulled, and I’ll bet if you dig deep enough the theory of evolution played a role in their unbelief.

    I spent 25 years in law enforcement, and I arrested hundreds of suspects for untold numbers of crimes, violent and otherwise. Many of these criminals were drunk or high when they committed their crimes. Although I never asked them about their religious worldviews, I can attest that virtually none were God-fearing, Bible-believing, born-again CHRISTIANS. Don’t question me about this. I was there. You weren’t.

    They were lost souls with no hope, and it broke my heart to see their shattered lives on full display.

    Thanks a lot, Charlie. And thanks to all those who bought into the big lie and have cast aside the truth of Christ in order to bow down and worship at the feet of evolution. And to make matters even worse, we’re ALL reaping the destruction of what you have sown.

  18. Gary Hendricks September 24, 2010 at 7:47 am #

    Above you list a handful of what you shamefully refer to as “lies”. One of which is “The geologic column is a fact” Like most creationists you seem to imply that there is no such thing in existence and is only a compilation weaved together from various locations from a bias of an old Earth.

    Actually Dr. Hovind…you would be wrong.

    The W. H. Hunt Trust Estate Larson #1 will in Section 10 Township 148 N Range 101 W was drilled to 15,064 feet deep. Here is a detailed listing of the layers in sequence.

    Tertiary Ft. Union Fm ……………………..100 feet
    Cretaceous Greenhorn Fm …………………..4910 feet
    Cretaceous Mowry Fm……………………… 5370 feet
    Cretaceous Inyan Kara Fm…………………..5790 feet
    Jurassic Rierdon Fm……………………….6690 feet
    Triassic Spearfish Fm……………………..7325 feet
    Permian Opeche Fm…………………………7740 feet
    Pennsylvanian Amsden Fm……………………7990 feet
    Pennsylvanian Tyler Fm…………………….8245 feet
    Mississippian Otter Fm…………………….8440 feet
    Mississippian Kibbey Lm……………………8780 feet
    Mississippian Charles Fm…………………..8945 feet
    Mississippian Mission Canyon Fm…………….9775 feet
    Mississippian Lodgepole Fm………………..10255 feet
    Devonian Bakken Fm……………………….11085 feet
    Devonian Birdbear Fm……………………..11340 feet
    Devonian Duperow Fm………………………11422 feet
    Devonian Souris River Fm………………….11832 feet
    Devonian Dawson Bay Fm……………………12089 feet
    Devonian Prairie Fm………………………12180 feet
    Devonian Winnipegosis Grp…………………12310 feet
    Silurian Interlake Fm…………………….12539 feet
    Ordovician Stonewall Fm…………………..13250 feet
    Ordovician Red River Dolomite……………..13630 feet
    Ordovician Winnipeg Grp…………………..14210 feet
    Ordovician Black Island Fm………………..14355 feet
    Cambrian Deadwood Fm……………………..14445 feet
    Precambrian……………………………..14945 feet

    Not only does the entire geologic column exist in this well, intact and in the proper sequence, but in no less than 25 other basins around the world that have been identified thus far. All complete and intact. They are as follows.

    The Ghadames Basin in Libya
    The Beni Mellal Basin in Morrocco
    The Tunisian Basin in Tunisia
    The Oman Interior Basin in Oman
    The Western Desert Basin in Egypt
    The Adana Basin in Turkey
    The Iskenderun Basin in Turkey
    The Moesian Platform in Bulgaria
    The Carpathian Basin in Poland
    The Baltic Basin in the USSR
    The Yeniseiy-Khatanga Basin in the USSR
    The Farah Basin in Afghanistan
    The Helmand Basin in Afghanistan
    The Yazd-Kerman-Tabas Basin in Iran
    The Manhai-Subei Basin in China
    The Jiuxi Basin China
    The Tung t’in – Yuan Shui Basin China
    The Tarim Basin China
    The Szechwan Basin China
    The Yukon-Porcupine Province Alaska
    The Williston Basin in North Dakota
    The Tampico Embayment Mexico
    The Bogata Basin Colombia
    The Bonaparte Basin, Australia
    The Beaufort Sea Basin/McKenzie River Delta

    Now what troubles me the most is that I cannot believe that a man who has made a career out of promoting your young earth theories would be ignorant of this widely available information. You state that this has been “proven wrong many years ago” when in actuality it is exactly the opposite that is true.

    This is but one from your simple list of “lies” above. But they are all just as easy to dismiss. Perhaps you would like to discuss ANY of your “30 Proofs” for a young Earth.

  19. Doktor Benway September 24, 2010 at 11:48 am #

    i 100% agree, i do not think lying to kids is a appreopriot thing to do for any theory. let alone call lies “facts” or “theories”

    “Nowhere have I ever heard a proponent of evolution (or science in general, since you reject most of it) asking for obedience or humility whatsoever.”

    i have, many times.

    I thought it was a sin for Christians to lie. July… Prove to me that you’re not lying. Show me the many times…

  20. Julie Collins September 24, 2010 at 1:40 pm #

    Gary Hendricks September 23rd at 7:39 pm

    “Wow Julie, lies and fairy-tales, so glad you cleared that up for us all.

    Look up the word objectivity. Meditate on it for a while. It’s a big word so ask God to help you figure out what it means.”

    sure, i will get more answers from him than the rock you say was your ancestor.

    once you grow up, you may be a reliable candidate for debate.

  21. Caleb Fielding September 24, 2010 at 6:14 pm #

    response to H. Bosma

    “As “dr.” Hovind states that textbooks are wrong. Well, they reflect the current state of knowledge. We can’t teach our children about the ongoing scietific discussion is all field. It would be too much in dept to go into that.”

    I would like to point out that what we teach our children are the basics. For example math two plus two equals four. Science a lever is a simple machine. Language your abc’s. And each of these basics are very easily demonstrated.

    when we get to the basics of evolution change of one species to another, what examples do we get in school. How do the text book demonstrate evolution? When I was in school they taught us that embryos had gill slits, and that the embryo goes from a fish stage to another stage and another stage till it turns human. That was just ten years ago (in my eighth grade science class) with brand new books! They show horse evolution (well at least the front foot and head of what they call the horse evolution, wonder why they dont show the rest). They also had a critical thinking question on how do you think the giraffe evolved? I only remember this one because it was the only question I ever had in school that had two pages worth of pictures to help ask the question. If they had so much evidence for this basic stuff why did the book ask the question instead of giving the answer?

    I personally am sick of the evolution people loosing out on the basic questions so they say well I have a collage degree why dont you deal with the collage stuff. My answer is that if two plus two equals five, I dont much care for your collage math.

  22. Jonny September 24, 2010 at 7:31 pm #

    How are you posting from jail?

    I didn’t know they gave people in jail internet access!!!

  23. Mark James September 25, 2010 at 3:27 am #

    Hi Gary,

    So they’ve found 26 places on earth where the rock layers are in the order predicted by the geologic column. If they had only looked in 26 places this would be significant but they haven’t. The vaste majority of the planet does not have even 3 layers in the correct order. It is very easy to ‘prove’ a theory if you are willing to ignore evidence that doesn’t fit the theory.

    (By the way, if you took the time to look at some of Kent’s material you would know that he acknowledges these 26 places)

  24. Mark James September 25, 2010 at 3:47 am #

    H Bosma states:

    “There is no way the Grand Canyon is form by the flood. That can be scientificly proven.”

    Please present this scientific proof. The last I heard was that geologists can’t reach any sort of agreement on how it formed.

  25. Mark James September 25, 2010 at 4:30 am #

    Gary,

    A question for you. If the layers of rocks were laid down over millions of years, why is it that, in most cases, the only soil layer is the one on the top (i.e. the present)? Were there no plants around to form soil when the deeper layers were formed and if that is the case, what did the animals, fossilised in the rocks, live on? Generally the only sign of vegetation in the layers are coal deposits but these are few and far between.

  26. Mike Ayala September 25, 2010 at 5:42 am #

    Hi Jay,

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that natural selection can produce changes that morph one species into another species given enough time.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that mutations can produce new information.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that acquired characteristics can be transmitted to offspring.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that all life systems are evolving into greater complexity.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that loss of information in DNA transcription can produce beneficial attributes.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that evolution is supported by verifiable evidence.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that observed limited change and adaptation can be extrapolated into unlimited change.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that information can arise out of nothing or as a result of surprise effect.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that an information storage mechanism on the molecular scale vastly more complex than an hard drive with vastly greater storage capacity than an hard drive can arise by random chance.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that non-randomness can arise out of randomness.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that anti-biotic resistance is evidence of evolution.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that an animal stretching its neck long and often enough will cause its offspring to inherit longer necks.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that genetic entropy does not exist.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that natural selection reverses genetic entropy.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that natural selection is unlimited.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that adaptation is evolution.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that life can morph regardless of it’s internal genetic specifications.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that mutations are variation rather than damage of genetic code.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that mutations are the fundamental factor of life, the raw material of evolution rather than the primary source of human suffering through disease: the primary basis for cancer, aging, miscarriages, birth defects and genetic disease.

    You’ve been brainwashed to believe that your life is an accident of nature and the only value to your life is what you can sequester to yourself in material or in name.

    Jay, you’ve been brainwashed!

    So why don’t you try washing in the water of the word? Why don’t you allow yourself to be washed clean of your sin in the blood of Jesus?

    Grace and blessings to you,

    Mike Ayala

  27. Julie Collins September 25, 2010 at 12:05 pm #

    “Without exception, every single point made on this site by the Hovinds has been refuted and dismissed long ago.”

    duane hun, no point made by the hovinds has been refuted. in fact, when told to evolutionist, all they do is try to go on “talk origins”. every argument made by hovind is legitimate, he even shows you sources of where he gets it from. and no, the discovery institute does not say “do not use these arguments” that is a complete lie. now Duane, you are not the poster child of intelligence, do not act that way, it is embarrassing.

    “I thought it was a sin for Christians to lie. July, Prove to me that you’re not lying. Show me the many times.”

    i do not think i have to prove anything to someone who cannot spell “julie” correctly, OR “Doctor”. i do not have to prove i am right, you have to prove you are. i am talking about “evolution” not your wimpy ad hominem statements.

    Gary Hendricks September 24th at 7:47 am

    you refuse to list a source, sop your “data” is useless. also i suppose all the “layers” strewn all over the world are all the same? if not than your theory is off. also, no actual scientist, not even Richard dawkins, has ever used this data before. i wonder why? and even so, with the recent discover from stanford university that shows that you cannot date rocks because the suns rotation changes the rocks decay rate is also big, so now you have a bunch of layers with no way to tell how old they are.

    also no amount of science possible can explain the sudden change in material from “layer” to “layer”, no science can explain how a perfect layer of limestone can automatically shift and change into sandstone or some other rock. ALSO if you are right, you will need to list evidence that volcanoes erupted in the past. i have not seen any evidence produced for a lava flow or any form of dormant or extinct volcano found under these “miles and miles” of sediment. also, there is no evidence of ANY meteorite impact below several layers of sediment. as if all the volcanoes and craters just so happened to appear during the past few thousand years.

    also, there should not be that many uniform layers in the ground AT ALL because of mountains, caverns, caves, hills, dikes, sills, stocks, liquidation, and many other geological events that you ignore.

  28. Jack Napper September 25, 2010 at 11:52 am #

    “When I was in school they taught us that embryos had gill slits, and that the embryo goes from a fish stage to another stage and another stage till it turns human. That was just ten years ago (in my eighth grade science class) with brand new books!”

    I love this claim the Haeckel’s drawing are still being used. Oh sorry were still being used at least up to about 10 years ago. Oddly enough no such drawings did appear in my textbooks beyond historical information about Haeckel (ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny). As for gill slits on human embryos the next time you type it into GOOGLE I suggest adding “inner ear” don’t forget those quotes.

    “They show horse evolution (well at least the front foot and head of what they call the horse evolution, wonder why they dont show the rest).”

    Without knowing the full context I can’t really comment on this. Of course I’m sure asking you to provide such a thing is wishful thinking.

    “They also had a critical thinking question on how do you think the giraffe evolved?”

    Lemme guess, you’re gonna have us believe that your textbooks from only 10 years ago were teaching kids that Lamarkism despite having been disproven more than a century earlier was still being taught as science? Again, I don’t recall this in any textbooks from when I was in school.

    You would think that if you were in 8th grade only 10 years ago and I was in 8th grade before that your textbooks would have newer and better information. So do you honestly think I’m about to believe what you wrote about your textbooks?

    Kent Hovind likes to claim he has a massive collection of textbooks filled with ‘lies’. Some of the printed within the last few decades. Oddly enough he always tells the audience they are back at his house. Apparently neither Kent nor Eric have watched the documentary Flock of Dodos (according to Eric on his blogspot page had a hard time getting through even ONE excerpt video on ExtantDodo’s Youtube page). The last instance they were able to find of Haeckel’s drawings being taught beyond a historical mention was in 1901.

    “If they had so much evidence for this basic stuff why did the book ask the question instead of giving the answer? ”

    Probably because education is not about spewing facts (or in the case of YEC, baseless assertions).

    “I personally am sick of the evolution people loosing out on the basic questions so they say well I have a collage degree why dont you deal with the collage stuff. My answer is that if two plus two equals five, I dont much care for your collage math.”

    Collages are nice. Colleges are better.

  29. Julie Collins September 25, 2010 at 12:12 pm #

    also, in the atlantic ridge, this is what happens, materials is pressed away by the lava escaping from the ridge, thus new lava comes up and makes a new layer, these layers cannot be aged, as of course, no dating method can date the age of rocks due to stanford universities discovery and other huge issues with the “dating method”. so. i see no evidence at all for common ancestry.

  30. Mike Ayala September 25, 2010 at 3:18 pm #

    H. Bosma
    September 23rd at 2:10 pm

    Hi Mr. Bosma,

    I could not help but notice your statement, “All posts against evolution on this site are in fact against atheism.”

    Would you point to any of my posts which are against atheism, please. I thought I was directly addressing the fatal flaws of evolutionary dogma.

    I think you will find that real atheists are vanishingly rare. For the most part, those who claim they are atheists really worship their own intellect out of pride, but they are blinded by their pride, so they do not recognize it as such.

    Also, you wrote,

    “Stating the theory of evolution is wrong because it does not explain how life came into being, is the same as stating the bible is wrong because it does not explain how God came into existence. The bible is based on the existence of a God, just as the theory of evolution is based on existence of life.”

    I do not remember anybody “Stating the theory of evolution is wrong because it does not explain how life came into being” but rather evolution is wrong because there’s nothing right in it; Because it’s based on an 1850’s ignorance of microbiology, information theory, and metabolism. Evolution is wrong because it is based on the false ideas that:

    – Randomness can produce machines to store quantum fluctuations after the supposed big bang where nothing but randomness exists.
    – Information and code can arise from randomness by surprise effect.
    – The machinery to store, process, and execute the information and code of life can arise from randomness.
    – Observed limited change is extrapolated into unlimited change over time.
    – Adaptation is evolution.
    – Genetic entropy does not exist.

    Each of these fatal flaws upon which evolution is based listed here is sufficient to kill evolution and all its dogma dead in its tracks, but the proponents of evolution do not want to discuss them. Rather they seem to want a propaganda war or just run away and hope it all goes away.

    I would cherish any of the die-hard evolutionists who post on this site to actually honestly address any or all of these issues.

    Incidentally, in what area of science do you specialize?

    Thank you, and God bless you,

    Mike Ayala

    

  31. Mike Ayala September 25, 2010 at 4:00 pm #

    Gary Hendricks
    September 23rd at 11:45 am

    Gary Hendricks
    Attacking the Atheists Foundation on the streets

    Hi Gary,

    I am please to hear that you are “a Christian and absolutely believe the universe had a creator”. Even so, I’m not surprised by your response on the “Attacking the Atheists Foundation On The Street” page. It once again confirms what I wrote. So thank you for your help to that end.

    Please realize that I’m not doubting your salvation or your sincerity. That is between you and Jesus.

    What I am calling into question is your maturity, self-control, judgment, and discernment. Doing the works of the Devil does bring a cloud over your integrity, and continuing in that behavior is revealing to all. Remember, Satan is also known as the accuser of the brethren. Idly accusing members of the body of Christ seems to be one of your trademarks.

    Moreover, you (and many others here) seem to intentionally confuse the message of Kent Hovind and CSE in general with the ill deeds of various entities of the past who are labeled as the Church or a part of the Church. This is disingenuous at best and is nothing more than a smokescreen.

    My impression is that you are afraid to trust completely in the word of God. Can you honestly say that you believe that “in six days the Lord made the heavens and earth, the sea, and all that is in them”? If not, please ask the Lord to settle this issue in your heart.

    Remember, no Hebrew scholar respected among his peers will ever say that Exodus 20:11 means anything different than what it appears to mean to us in English taken at face value.

    God bless you, and I pray that you yield to the Holy Spirit as He works in your life in the coming days and weeks.

    Mike Ayala

  32. Peter Lake September 26, 2010 at 8:50 am #

    After having now perused the recent posts and comments with a critical Christian eye trained to take advantage of rational thought, I will say this: I cannot find, anywhere in this place, calm and rational consideration of all the facts–the evidence, the hard bits that you don’t just wish into existence when necessary–regarding the issues. I am equally pained by the tone of commenters on both sides. Civility is not the watchword. Neither is “respect”, nor “politeness”.

    Enough. I shall not be visiting again soon.

  33. ant bourdon September 26, 2010 at 9:44 am #

    To Gary Hendricks;

    We are all aware that the geologic column exists, but it doesn’t exists for the reasons you think. What do you do with the human tools which were found in coal which would make the human kind older than dinosaurs. Like it was said before, the geologic column was created mostly by the flood. That’s why we find impossible fossils for the theory of evolution. Why are certain fossils not found on some other levels? First of all, Have you thought about any other possibilities than the theory of evolution before concluding? Is it scientific to conclude before studying any possibilities. So, some suggests that certain animals are found on specific levels depending on their habitat, their speed and maybe their density when they fled a universal catastrophe which in this case resemble the most what water would have done (geologic column). You’re free to disagree with me, but then you’ll have to explain why we find impossible fossils such as human tools in coal.

  34. ant bourdon September 26, 2010 at 9:48 am #

    I meant older than many dinosaurs. Sorry. The fossils was some millions of years old, I don’t remember all the information about that specific example. But the fact is that the fossil was millions of years old which is something impossible for our current “knowledge”.

  35. Nigel McNaughton September 26, 2010 at 2:30 pm #

    Only Creationists pretend people evolved from Rocks, it’s a weird obsession. like their obsession with Darwin.

  36. Eric Idle September 26, 2010 at 7:43 pm #

    ‘Brainwashing: Indoctrination into a new set of beliefs by use of force or deception’ – that’d be dragging your kids off to church then wouldn’t it.

  37. Gary Hendricks September 27, 2010 at 7:13 am #

    Julie Collins – September 24th at 1:40 pm

    “sure, i will get more answers from him than the rock you say was your ancestor.
    once you grow up, you may be a reliable candidate for debate.”

    Clearly you are not listening to either one of us. I am a Christian Julie…who happens to believe science points TO God not away from Him. The fact that I am not running around proclaiming the Earth is flat because my Bible says so simply means I also made it past the 3rd grade.

  38. David McCrea September 27, 2010 at 4:11 pm #

    Nigel,

    The Triceratops never actually existed, it was a young version of another type of dinosaur, so the apostle Paul was definitely not a Triceratops, although he might have ridden a dinosaur occasionally to the synagogue.

    The Brontosaurus never actually existed either.

    I wonder how many other dinosaurs scientists have gotten wrong? I thought this was settled science? Just a rhetorical question.

    Peter Coyote narrated a documentary in which the scientific investigator concluded after years of “exhaustive research” that our common ancestor was a sponge (true story). Nigel, do you believe our common ancestor was a sponge, not to include the human variety, of course?

    Can evolutionists agree on what was our common ancestor, other than a single-cell Whatchamacallit?

    If we evolved over time from a common ancestor, does that make us cannibals?

  39. David McCrea September 27, 2010 at 4:45 pm #

    I took the time to Google “Ring Theory.” It demonstrated the process of speciation where one end of the ring was no longer able to interbreed with the other end. The examples shown were not only birds, they were all gulls.

    So Ring Theory demonstrates how varities of the same kind of animal may arise. It didn’t change a bird into a head of cabbage.

    Nigel, if you removed the word “strawmen” from your posts you’d cut your vocabulary nearly in half. And I will continue to ask questions about evolution as often as I please, thank you. Just like you are encouraged to continue raising questions about Creationism.

    And the debate continues!

  40. Mike Ayala September 27, 2010 at 6:30 pm #

    Hey Nigel,

    Are you so embarrassed by Darwin that you would disown him? Where would evolution be if Darwin had not appeared upon the scene? Maybe you’d be born and would propose an alternate idea that would remove the need for God in creation instead.

    Maybe it would be known as Nigelian Evolution. (McNaughtonian Evolution would be too much of a mouthful.) “Darwinian evolution” has kind of lost its shine lately with the development of the Genetic Revolution. Pangenesis and Gemmules were a bit much to swallow, but I’m sure it sounded good in the 1850’s, you know, before folks knew about microbiology, metabolisms, and information theory.

    So, from what would you propose people evolved? Are you claiming to be smarter than the whole evolutionary community? Go back and review the recipe for primordial soup. Or are you embarrassed by the whole primordial soup idea too? I sure would be embarrassed if I believed in it.

    Creationist do not need to pretend. We leave that for the evolutionists. Just think what would be left of evolution without pretense? Nothing!

    Creationists know that God created the heavens and earth: He stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him – that includes you, Nigel.

    Wake up and say “Thank You” to your Creator.

    God bless you, Nigel.

    Mike Ayala

  41. David McCrea September 27, 2010 at 6:44 pm #

    Eric,

    Dragging your kids to church 1 day a week is brainwashing but dragging your kids to a government school 5 days a week is not?

    Nigel,

    Creationists aren’t obsessed with either life emerging from rocks or Darwin. THEY are the center and essence of YOUR worldview, not ours.

    I can never tell when you evolutionists are joking around. Take your theory, for example.

  42. Nigel McNaughton September 27, 2010 at 10:12 pm #

    Julie says “you refuse to list a source, sop your “data” is useless”

    Wow my irony meter just exploded, in a post where she berated someone else’s spelling too!

  43. Dominique Dos Santos September 28, 2010 at 5:46 am #

    I don’t believe there is a God. I know there’s a God, I’m a reborn Christian. God did create the world and everything on it in six days.

    If you want to scientificly proof how the grand canyan was created, show us the proof. i have one word to say about the canyon. Flood! and i can proof it. if you take dry ground somewhere on a slope and take a glass of water and throw it on the ground. You’ll see that it makes scar like marks on the ground like the canyon. in fact take aerial photos of an area where theres lots of mountians, you’ll see such marks but much bigger.

    If we are really ancestors of rocks then basicly we are…. unpetrified rocks?
    A human body is a complex organasm. a rock in the other hand is simple earth. BIG diffirence.

    Anybody that wants or insulted Dr Hovind should give him an apology. Before you even question creationism have you wached even one of his dvd’s?? i have 19 of them, i havent even wached all of them and i get a clear picture of this evolution nonsense

    Yes like Jay said that the theory of evolution offers no rewards for accepting what it proposes, nor does it offer any punishment for not doing so. And that God will punish you if you dont follow him. God doesnt punish you, you will be judged. and depending on how you live your life you will go to heaven or hell. God is a gentlemen, He will not force you to become a Christian. but instead he wants you to be his sheep. See God is a Shepard and we are sheep. right now most of you are lost sheep. he just wants you to be found.

    If you live your life believeing that we came from a rock or “soup” then that is an insult to God, God created the world six thousand years ago. he created you and me and everything else, every animal and plant, water, heavens grass everything. and if you read that 6000 year old book called the Bible you’ll read the truth.

    Most of you probably wonder what is the odds of there really being a God. it goes both ways, there could be a God, and if you do not stop living in sin and accept God as your saviour you will go to hell. on the other end there might not be a God and it will all be for nothing. in my case im not gonna live in sin and wonder, I know there is a God, i also know Jesus Christ died on the cross for all of our sin. i know it because i read about it in the bible and i know because of God’s miracles in my life and of testimonials.

    You can live like you please and believe what you like, but come judgement day what will you do. and its not about being scared of God’s wrath, its about serving Him and doing God’s will, it’s really nice, i help in my local Church here in South Africa. what will you do? Start with watching Dr Kent Hovind’s Dvd’s. It will change your life for ever.

    Dominique

  44. Gary Hendricks September 28, 2010 at 6:53 am #

    Mark James –
    “So they’ve found 26 places on earth where the rock layers are in the order predicted by the geologic column. If they had only looked in 26 places this would be significant but they haven’t. The vaste majority of the planet does not have even 3 layers in the correct order. It is very easy to “prove” a theory if you are willing to ignore evidence that doesn’t fit the theory.”

    Love your comment about ignoring evidence that “doesn’t fit the theory”. It is truly another one of those statements where the irony of your hypocrisy is overwhelming…

    The Grand Morgon in the French Alps has a recumbent fold giving a strata sequence like D-C-B-A-B-C-D. Common sense suggests that the strata have been folded, and careful mapping bears that out. Footprints, mudcracks, ripple marks, cross laminations, and various other clues found on the surfaces of bedding planes often confirm beyond any shadow of a doubt that a given sequence of strata have been overturned.

    When geologists look at areas which haven’t been seriously disturbed for great ages, such as the Grand Canyon, they always find the strata in the right order. Some strata may be missing, but the order will be correct. Such studies soon made it abundantly clear to the early geologists that the earth’s strata has a very specific order. Thus arose the concept of the geologic column.

    Ant Bourdan –
    “We are all aware that the geologic column exists, but it doesn’t exists for the reasons you think. What do you do with the human tools which were found in coal which would make the human kind older than dinosaurs.”

    The creationist claim of misplaced fossils, i.e., fossils (or manufactured items) in the “wrong” strata, is scarcely more than a collection of dime-a-dozen rumors that are completely lacking in scientific documentation. The one, shining exception, the supposed man-tracks along the Paluxy River in Texas, which had enough “substance” to be the subject of a creationist movie, has proved to be an embarrassing bust. It is an embarrassment to all but the most die-hard, head-in-the-sand creationists.

    I am glad though that you allow me the freedom to disagree with you. This is certainly more mature of you than most of the young earth creationists represented here.