Action & Reaction - October 1996

Swap Sheet Ads

We placed the three ads shown here in the September 19, 1996 issue of the Swap Sheet.

I ALMOST STARVED working as a stand-up science comic. Science just isn't that funny. It's tough to put a funny spin on angular momentum. You can make the obvious joke about the Ideal Gas Law; but what can you say after you have talked about the Ideal Bean? I was just about to quit. Then I discovered the Theory of Evolution. Now the jokes just write themselves. The tough part is keeping a straight face. How can you describe how a cow evolved into a whale without laughing yourself silly? To learn about the wacky world of evolution, write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556 and ask for a sample copy of our newsletter. SEX IS HARD for the theory of evolution to explain. Why would simple organisms, which can reproduce all by themselves, evolve into creatures that need a mate? What is the advantage that sexual reproduction gives that results in a victory in the struggle for survival? How could male and female varieties evolve simultaneously? Why would the opposite sexes be drawn to each other? How would they know what to do once they found each other? It doesn't make much sense. It makes more sense to write for a free copy of our newsletter. Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556. MISSING LINKS WANTED by evolutionists. You can obtain fame and fortune by selling missing links (genuine or not) to evolutionists. Take a human skull, an ape's jaw, stain them to make them look old, and call them Cro-Magnon Man! With nothing more than a single pig's tooth and lots of imagination, you create Nebraska Man. Take some ape bones and human bones, claim they were found together, and you will have skeletal remains of Java Man and Peking Man, just like you find in the museums! Yes, you can make big money selling missing links to evolutionists, but you must act NOW! The theory of evolution is crumbling fast, so you must sell your phony artifacts while there is still time. For more information write to Science Against Evolution, P.O. BOX 923, Ridgecrest, CA 93556.
Your ad in the swap sheet made me laugh. Why do I laugh? It was not your attempt at humor, but your stupidity. When people like you try to convince me that the theory of evolution is the work of the devil you only show me that your faith is weak. You don't even bother to learn what it is you are afraid of. I believe in both the bible and the theory of evolution. How is that? It's because my faith is strong. And I studied both the theory of evolution and the bible. I didn't just read the bible, I studied the bible. I understand the word of GOD. God does not work by magic, God uses science. God not only wrote the bible, God also wrote the book of physics.

[Signature]

We received the letter at the left on September 21.

Did you notice that in his 133-word response he wrote "bible" [sic] five times, "God" five times, "faith" twice, and "devil" once? If you do the math you will see that 9.774% of the words in his response were religious terms. Can you find any reference to religion in the three ads we placed? Can you find any statement of scientific fact in his response?

Science Against Evolution is a secular, non-profit public benefit corporation organized for educational purposes. We are not associated with any church or religious organization. We want to acquaint the public with the scientific arguments against evolution and make the general public aware that the theory of evolution is no longer a credible theory for the origin of life. We hope that this will encourage more research on other origin theories, which should result in a more accurate understanding of life.

The letter writer responded to factual observations about weaknesses in a scientific theory by defending his religious beliefs and attacking what he presumed to be our religious beliefs. This happens all too often. Evolutionists often try to dodge the scientific issues by bringing religion into the argument, as the letter writer did. A more appropriate response on his part would have been to deal with the issues raised in the advertisements.

The I ALMOST STARVED ad was mostly a fluff piece that was intended to establish the idea that we are going to use humor to encourage people to take a serious look at the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution isn't sacred. It must stand the same scrutiny any other scientific theory has to withstand. Yes, we run a negative ad campaign, but we do it with a smile! ;-)

The I ALMOST STARVED ad contained more than just fluff. It referred to the evolution of the whale. We used a little sarcastic license when we said it was a cow that evolved into a whale. It is more correct to say that museums and science text books say that some unspecified ancient land mammal (whose fossil remains have never been identified) turned into a marine animal by evolving through several intermediate stages (whose fossil remains have never been found) by a process that has never been observed to happen. The proper rebuttal to the ad would have been to present a detailed explanation (with supporting factual data) describing how this hypothetical land animal turned its legs into flippers, its tail into a fluke, got its nose to move to the top of its head, and discovered how to make love under water, without making the audience snicker at least once. The ad implies it can't be done. Prove the ad wrong by doing it.

Similarly, a proper rebuttal to the SEX IS HARD ad should include some plausible explanation of where the first Y chromosome came from and how the creature knew what to do with it when it got it. Instead of laughing at my stupidity, the letter writer should have given me a little sex education and answered the questions I posed in the ad. He didn't do that because they are questions for which evolutionists don't have satisfactory answers.

What is the appropriate response to the MISSING LINKS WANTED ad? Can anyone deny that evolutionists have shown a great lack of critical discernment whenever anyone claims to have found a human ancestor? The only evidence for Nebraska Man really was a single tooth, which eventually was identified as having come from an extinct pig. But they made a mountain of evidence out of a molar, and pictures of the ape-like Nebraska Man appeared widely in science text books and museums. The other cases of proposed human ancestors cited in the ad are also valid examples of times when scientists looked with their hearts and not their minds.

These ads are designed to point out that the theory of evolution isn't as sound as most people have been led to believe.

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