Evolution in the News - August 2007
by Do-While Jones

Dropping the Façade

Evolutionists admit their goal is to attack Christianity.

In the past, evolutionists have claimed that there is no conflict between the theory of evolution and religion. That’s nonsense, of course. If that were true, why would religious leaders object to the teaching of evolution in public schools? Realizing that many people no longer believe that lie, evolutionists are starting to openly attack Christianity.

Last month the journal Science published a special section about science education around the world. The page on the United States was especially revealing. All you really need to read is the article’s title and subheading.

'This Is the Front Line … Where I Can Really Make a Difference'
Lisa Park and her colleagues take on creationism and other antiscientific attitudes in the classroom--and in the voting booth
1

If you read the entire article you will learn,

… Park and her colleagues often confront mainstream attitudes toward science, including creationism. In recent years, Park has seen a tide of creationism rising both on campus and off. 2

When evolutionists say “mainstream attitudes toward science” they really mean “mainstream attitudes toward evolution.” Mainstream America isn’t against science, but mainstream America is against the unscientific theory of evolution.

Why is creationism rising both on campus and off? It is because evolutionists are being less and less able to censor the science curriculum. They aren’t able to prevent the public from hearing all the evidence. The more mainstream America hears about the theory of evolution, the more America rejects it.

Creationist speakers visit the campus fairly regularly, sponsored by religious groups or a "critical thinkers club." In her geology classes, Park explicitly debunks the idea that the biblical flood formed the Grand Canyon. 3

Notice that Science put “critical thinkers club” in quotes as a way to deride it. Universities are supposed to encourage critical thinking, but they don’t want any critical thinking about the theory of evolution. They want just one side of the issue presented. Presenting both sides “confuses” the students.

Mainstream secular geologists have accepted the rapid erosion of the Grand Canyon 4 (a scenario that is consistent with a global flood) since 2000. Since modern geological thinking is consistent with the Biblical flood, why would Park feel a need to explicitly debunk it? Clearly, she has religious motivations.

Last fall, Park and her colleague, biology professor Stephen Weeks, worked nonstop to elect a pro-science candidate to the Ohio Board of Education. "I could not stand by and do nothing," says Park. 5

Was there an anti-science candidate? There probably was an anti-evolution candidate, but we doubt there was an anti-science candidate. Evolutionists like to equate “science” with “evolution” because most Americans are very much pro-science. Science is good. We would not have iphones TM without science! She worked to elect the pro-censorship candidate, who would prevent any criticism of the theory of evolution in the science classroom.

The really amazing admission, however, is this one:

Park and Weeks each missed a January deadline for submitting research proposals to the National Science Foundation (NSF). "To me, fighting for evolution is part of my job," says Weeks. "But the system is not set up to benefit those who make this kind of move."

Park has been funded by NSF, despite a low success rate in paleobiology, and by other sources--enough to support research by a small group of undergraduate and master's students. 6

The NSF, and other unnamed sources (we wonder who they might be), continue to fund Park despite her “low success rate in paleobiology” and the fact that she missed a January deadline. She is so involved in politics that she doesn’t get much work done, and can’t even submit a proposal on time; but they funded her because the NSF thinks attacking Christian beliefs is more important than paleobiology research.

This is in sharp contrast to what happened to Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez at the University of Iowa. 7

Dr. Gonzalez is primarily interested in studying the late stages of stellar evolution through the use of spectroscopic observations. Recent work includes spectroscopic abundance analysis of post-AGB supergiants and RV Tau variables. He has also undertaken a study of the parent stars of the recently discovered extra-solar planetary systems. The results indicate that these stars have anomalous chemical abundances, suggesting some sort of unusual formation history. 8

He was recently denied tenure for publishing the book The Privileged Planet, which supports the idea of intelligent design, even though he never expressed these views in the classroom. If he had expressed these semi-religious views in the classroom, should that have been reason to deny him tenure? Lisa Park was rewarded for her anti-Christian classroom attack on the Biblical flood. Why should there be a double standard?

The question we most often get is, “If science is against evolution, why do some scientists believe it?” Part of the answer is, “Their belief is based on philosophy or religion, not science.” Lisa Park is a poster girl for the evolutionists. The NSF funds her despite her admittedly poor research performance and inability to meet deadlines because she attacks Christianity in the classroom and works to elect pro-censorship candidates.

The other part of the answer is that the public has a distorted perception of the number of scientists who believe the theory of evolution. Scientists who disbelieve the theory of evolution are reluctant to say so because, when their belief is made known, they are punished by the evolutionists who have control the NSF and universities, as Dr. Gonzalez was.

Quick links to
Science Against Evolution
Home Page
Back issues of
Disclosure
(our newsletter)
Web Site
of the Month
Topical Index

Footnotes:

1 Elizabeth Culotta, Science, 6 July 2007, page 67
2 ibid.
3 ibid.
4 Disclosure, October 2000, “Grand Canyon Breakthrough
5 Elizabeth Culotta, Science, 6 July 2007, page 67
6 ibid.
7 David Klinghoffer, The Weekly Standard, 8 June 2007, “Tenure Trouble” http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/733rlosv.asp
8 Iowa State University Department of Physics and Astronomy web page http://www.physics.iastate.edu/web/researchgroups/astronomy/faculty-and-staff/gonzalez