Tina Dupuy recently called on government, or maybe voters (she never made clear), to “save our schools from Creationism.” I’m sure Ms. Dupuy believes her argument is based on logic and credibility. It is not. She has been fooled by censorship masquerading itself as science.

To be clear, any theory regarding origins can never meet the required criteria for empirical science. To do that, data that supports a theory must be repeatable, observable, falsifiable, and predictable. Therefore, since origins cannot be neither repeated nor directly observed, neither creation nor evolution can claim to be empirical science.

Evidence invalidates evolution

Contrary to what evolutionists would have you believe, even though we cannot go back in time and observe creation, the observable data that exists and the predictions made both lean heavily against the concept of evolution. For instance:

• Evolution predicts that things evolve as they adapt to their environment. Observation tells us that things do not adapt but instead become extinct.
• Darwin’s predictions stated: “The number of intermediate and transitional links between all living and extinct species, must have been inconceivably great…” (Origin of Species, 6th edition.) It has been over 150 years since Darwin made such predictions and no such evidence has been discovered. Carl Sagan once said and others have quoted: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” When it comes to the concept of Darwinian Evolution, paleontologists have been diligently searching for evidence to prove their ideas for over one and a half centuries. So just when will they concede that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence? Perhaps never.

In a very real sense, Darwin’s theory has been tested and shown to be false, although you would never know that if you attended many of our academic institutions.

To date, every transitional fossil that has been celebrated in the news has turned out to be either a hoax or simply an extinct creature. Seldom do you see the buried retraction stating that the headline was incorrect. This results in the public believing the real “myth” that there is much evidence that supports Evolution.

Creation predicts future observation

Today, man decides truth whatever. From the AiG Creation Museum

On the other hand, the creation account makes prediction-like statements that have proven to be correct. For instance:

• There are a total of 17 verses in the Old Testament and Genesis that tell us that God expanded and continues to expand the universe – four in Isaiah alone (40:22; 42:5; 44:24b; 51:13).

In 1929 Edwin Hubble discovered that the universe is expanding.

• On Days 5 and 6, God creates the sea, air and land animals and tells us that they reproduce according to their own kind.

In 1962 Francis Harry Compton Crick and James D. Watson were awarded the Nobel Prize for discovering DNA. In 2003 the Genome Project announced that it discovered over 3,000,000,000 letters of genetic code that make up our DNA. In other words, they discovered there are over 3,000,000,000 safeguards that assure that living organisms reproduce after their own kind.

Additionally, there were numerous statements made by Moses, Job, Isaiah and the Apostle Paul regarding Creation that have been substantiated by modern-day science.

Censorship masquerades as argument

Many arguments against teaching creation are nothing more than censorship in disguise. For instance, the argument against teaching Intelligent Design is that it is “Creationism-lite” and that it infers there is a Creator/God. However, if Intelligent Design is “Creationism-lite” then Evolution is “Atheism-lite” since it infers there is no God. Therefore, if Intelligent Design should not be taught in a government-run school because it supports a viewpoint regarding the existence of God, then neither should Evolution, which supports a viewpoint regarding the non-existence of God.

Since Evolutionists have been successfully arguing that Evolution is Science, students across America are led to believe that “Science” teaches that everything evolved through natural causes. This relegates a Creator/God to be nothing more than a myth.

Evolutionists have prevailed for four reasons:

1. they have been successful in censoring opposing viewpoints;
2. they have managed to keep known evolutionary errors and hoaxes in textbooks, such as Haeckel’s embryos and the Peppered Moth, just to name a few;
3. opposing scientific voices are silenced. Read the Slaughter of the Dissidents by Dr. Jerry Bergman; and
4. people who should be defending the creation account (like members of the clergy and parents) often don’t know the facts.

Additionally, many have bought the argument that this is a scientific argument – something that often sends shudders up and down the spine of those who have an aversion to Science. They fail to realize that this is not a scientific argument; it is a theological one. And so our children are left with one side of the argument.

In closing, I must ask: if Creationism is just a myth, why do Evolutionists fight so hard to keep it out of the classrooms? What are Evolutionists so afraid of? As a former court reporter I can tell you that when listening to one side of an argument, you can often be convinced that argument is the truth. It isn’t until you hear both sides of an argument that the truth can be discerned. Until that happens, people will go on believing the real myth, that Evolution is well-supported by the evidence.

RoseAnn Salanitri

[subscribe2]