Evolution, while being conceivable, has not been confirmed and never will be. But most evolutionists are not interested in testing the gradualism of Darwin but rather in protecting their dubious hypothesis (guess). You can imagine the academic chaos if every honest scholar admitted that evolution never took place!
What would it do to every secular university science faculty if creationism was accepted and evolution proved a fraud? They would finally be considered uneducated, unscholarly, and unnecessary. And maybe they would become unemployed! They would fall into the same category as flat-earthers, astrologers, new age gurus, and snake handlers! (That is exactly my attitude toward the sooth-sayers of science.)
Bigoted judges who have ruled in favor of the myth-tellers would feel the sting of public embarrassment and join the ranks of the unemployed and maybe return to chasing ambulances!
Scientists would no longer seek to confirm the theory of evolution (now presumed to be a fact before beginning an investigation!) and they could get on with the business of true science. Scientists would no longer see only what is “respectable and acceptable,” and would look at the evidence, making judgments based on that evidence even if it contradicts popular theory. They would decide that truth is more important than denigrating, denying, and denouncing creationists.
Clergymen and theologians would sheepishly have to apologize to their followers for leading them into the swamps of theistic evolution, day-age theory, gap theory, progressive evolution, and other unscriptural nonsense. Such religious leaders might once again preach that the Bible is reliable in to-to as we creationists have been saying for many years.
I can see an assortment of prestigious scientists, clergymen, professors, pub-lishers, film makers, media personalities, and others holding a televised news conference where they apologize profusely to the youth of the world for teaching fraud, falsehood, fakery, and foolishness while calling it “science.”
Now, a word of advice: Don’t hold your breath for that news conference to take place. It won’t, because many evolutionists are vain, venal, and venomous people. They are especially venomous when dealing with or discussing creationists.
Evolutionists, not being very bright and living in a permanent fog, have not understood that creationism has not been disproved, only disbelieved. Evidently they can’t make that distinction. Many of them think that making a statement makes it a fact, and by denouncing creationism, they discredit it! Of course, they only discredit them-selves in the eyes of informed, honest people.
Evolutionists have been discrediting themselves for many years, but especially in recent years. And it often takes place in formal public debates with creationists.
The Institute for Creation Research in California has been a pioneer in scientific research, education, and apologetics. Dr. Henry Morris, Dr. Duane Gish and others have gone into universities and faced evolutionists in public debate–on their turf!
Dr. Morris spoke of those debates: “We are always careful to stick to scientific arguments, especially using the fossil record to show that macro-evolution has not occurred in the past….The evolutionists, however, more often than not, do not stick to scientific arguments. They will attack the Bible, show that creationists have religious motivations, argue that one can be religious and still believe in evolution, contend that creationism is not scientific, or attack our personal character or credentials.
“But one thing they will not do is give any real scientific evidence for macro-evolution. This is because there isn’t any real evidence for macro-evolution! This is why creationists almost always win the debates. We win, not because we are better debaters, but because creation is true, evolution is false, and real science confirms this.
Evolutionists have learned that creationists are not simply “Bible thumpers.” They expected creationists to quote a few Bible verses then sit down, but evolutionists have discovered that it doesn’t work that way. The creationist deals with geology, biology, paleontology, and other branches of science, and they ask questions that evolutionists cannot answer. The creationists also provide a model that proves to be far more acceptable to thinking people than the claptrap of evolution.
Dr. Henry Morris was scheduled to debate a professor at the University of Houston, but a university official cancelled the debate at the last minute because he did not want scientific creationism discussed on his campus! Wait a minute! I thought a university was a place for various ideas to be disseminated, debated, and discussed by inquiring minds. Surely it is not a place for propaganda–or is it? Could it be that only what is politically correct is permitted at the University of Houston?
At the National Academy of Sciences all but one person agreed that debating with creationists should be avoided! Well, wonder what they are afraid of? Could it be the truth? If evolution is really as scientific as evolutionists claim, they should be eager to engage creationists in debate. Maybe, just maybe, the evolutionists are not so sure of the correctness of their cause and are embarrassed to face creationists in formal debates.
Maybe that is one reason many evolutionists get mean-spirited when they discuss creationism. They don’t have the answers so they attack.
2 comment(s) on this page. Add your own comment below.
Hoho, and you have the gall to ask for the comments to be civil after being so uncivil as to tar an entire group of people with one oversized brush.
Oh, and please, PLEASE post some examples of creationists winning a debate honestly. I suspect any “victories” had much goalpost shifting going on. Also, being on the side that you’re on, you’re being incredibly hypocritical complaining that “evolutionists” (what the heck does that mean anyway? There are no “evolutionists” just as there aren’t “gravitists” or “electomagnetists”) defend themselves by attacking religion, when seeing as creationism/ID has no evidence whatsoever it defines itself purely in attacking real science.
Please, take your “Ph.D” and use it for something else other than belittling people.
You assertion that Evolution is false is as fictional as the book used by creationist for their “scientific” data. They will not debate because it would like debating a 7 year old on good driving skills.
This is just more religious propaganda used to make believers comforted in their faith. If your faith is so strong then what are you worried about?