Darwinists: Your Ignorance is Their Bliss
BY: RODDY BULLOCK, JD
Mar 30, OHIO, USA (SUN)
The heart has reasons that reason cannot know. - Blaise Pascal.
Reasoned decisions can lead to a shock,
Like building on sand when told it was rock.
Expect devastation with every new storm,
When teachers of science refuse to inform.
Organizations and institutions of science have spoken: students are not to be informed of any data, any studies, any scientists, or even any books, the knowledge of which might in the slightest weaken, question, or otherwise disparage evolution. Currently over seventy scientific societies, institutions and other professional groups have issued statements supporting evolution education and opposing any challenge to Darwin's ineffable sovereignty. Seventy. Seventy scientific organizations fretting that evolution is fact, cackling that there is no controversy, and begging us to please, oh please, just believe them. How many of these seventy have a statement supporting gravity? Or heliocentricism? Zero. The show of force on the topic of evolution is evidence itself of contrary facts, a genuine controversy, and reasons to doubt. One wonders what reason drives organizations to compel unquestioning belief in a theory so bullet-proof it's practically a law. Reason, it seems, is the problem, not the answer.
Totalitarian attitudes toward all thoughts that somehow evolved free of Darwin's dogma are striking. Totalitarians in Dover, Pennsylvania objected to verbal notification of a book in the library that would inform students of evidence unsupportive of Darwinism. Totalitarians in Atlanta, Georgia objected to students being informed by a sticker in a book that evolution is a theory and not a fact. Last year totalitarians in Ohio removed the state's critical-analysis lesson plan that informed high school students of scientific challenges to Darwin's theory. Just last week faculty totalitarians at Southern Methodist (Methodist?) University (University?) demanded the school shut down a student-initiated debate entitled "Darwin vs. Design" lest students be informed by a conference said to have "no place on an academic campus." And not to let mere wannabes steal the spotlight, the totalitarian faction of the state school board in Kansas, ground zero in this debate, last month lost all semblance of pedagogical good sense, and formally removed the state's responsibility to inform in science education.
Don't believe it? Compare the two mission statements below, and find the difference:
Old Mission Statement:
Kansas science education contributes to the preparation of all students as lifelong learners who can use science to make informed and reasoned decisions that contribute to their local, state, national and international communities.
New (Current) Mission Statement:
Kansas science education contributes to the preparation of all students as lifelong learners who can use science to make reasoned decisions that contribute to their local, state, national and international communities.
Make no mistake, the removal of "informing" as a goal of science education was purposeful, made in direct response to the previous standards that encouraged objective science education. Spooked by apparitions of intelligent design cleverly hidden in science standards requiring objective analysis of current evolutionary theory, the Kansans decided a knee jerk is preferable to a knee bow to anyone other than Darwin. Under the guise of combating intelligent design (which never was in the state standards) the marionette majority of the State Board of Education obeyed the noisy voices on high, and exchanged objective science education for non-objective, un-scientific indoctrination.
Ironically, by letting ideas they despise govern what they apprise, hard core Darwinists signal their demise. Equating the natural world with the physical world and believing science can explain the cause of the physical world solely in terms of "matter, energy, and forces" begs the question like never before: How do Darwinists know the physical world can be explained solely in terms of "matter, energy, and the forces"? Where does this knowledge come from? Of course they don't know, but they believe it, and like all good believers in a philosophical idea, they are convinced their belief is right, and you must believe as well. Never mind that the belief-induced idea that science can only consider "natural" causes is a relatively new concept, one that never occurred to most of the world's great scientists from Aristotle (yes, back when one was free to reason one's way to an uncaused cause for all of nature) to Newton and beyond. The relatively recent insistence by Darwinists that "science" can only consider natural causes is an anomaly, a non-scientific falsehood driven more by fear of truth than love of truth.
Demanding students believe on the faith of their pedagogical fathers that they are not created because science cannot consider such an idea is like forcing students to believe a circle is a square because "squareness" is all science can consider. But circles are self-evidently not squares, and no number of "Statements on Squareness" can make a circle square. True free thinkers see science education that seeks to explain why "apparent" circles seem to have four sides as something odd and curious at best, and false and deceptive at worst. And when the growing evidence suggesting circles are actually circles continues to be systematically shut down, censored and banned, it can only be a matter of time before the naked truth supplants the naked emperor of Darwinism.
Beyond odd and curious, however, demanding that a student be informed only that he or she is an occurrence rather than a purposefully designed creation suffers from a more significant and beautifully ironic flaw: it is unnatural. Darwinism woefully misstates and misunderstands the nature of human beings. Having matter alone to work with, Darwinism logically forces Darwinists to insist there is no non-material component of human beings, thereby denying the existence of a soul and, in fact, a mind. We are, say honest Darwinists, just a particular arrangement of matter, atoms arranged just so in our brains to make us think that we are thinking, imagine that we are imagining, and contemplate that we are ... well, that we are (their thoughts, imaginations and contemplations being better than ours, mind you). But at bottom in the Darwinian scheme we humans are no different in essence, in our nature, from any other collection of atoms, living or non-living. Fortunately few (and maybe fewer) of only the most indurate of Darwinian dogmatists really believe this nonsense. Ordinary people know intuitively, in their hearts, minds, and souls that they are in fact designed. No amount of one-sided informing from one brain to another can stop the mind-informing function of a reflective heart.
Believing in their we-are-gods arrogance that they are the source of all truth on this issue, Darwin-loving materialists unwittingly provide the stimulus for reflective hearts everywhere. Part of the human spirit (sorry Darwinists, but you have one too) loves truth and objects to any fettered freedom, any taboo topic, and any forbidden field. By making public displays of their intolerance and close-mindedness, Darwinists only invite the curious to question and the honest to wonder. Seeming to obsess on this issue, they appear as charlatans with something to hide. Those who appear to have something to hide usually do, and it is the non-material truth detectors of intuition, mind, and conscience that aid the reflective heart in exposing deceivers and deception alike.
Hearts, minds and souls--each defies a materialistic explanation, and each nurtures a powerful witness to purposeful design. No amount of "non informing" by the likes of today's arrogant provocateurs of science can change the image we each carry within us, an ancestral image infinitely more noble than that of every brute beast Darwin's disciples would have swinging, slinking, or swimming in our family line.
Truth will prevail, soon perhaps. In the words of a leading intelligent design scientist, "It is then immediately evident that Darwinism is indeed on its last legs, held up by a combination of intellectual inertia and social pressure. No judge or politician or reporter--or scientific society, for that matter--can change the lack of nature to conform to Darwinian expectations." But in the meantime don't expect any slack from the those of the full blooded materialist sect of Darwinism. Because when pain is measured against the social pressure of comfortable careers and the intellectual inertia of research funding, what you do know can hurt them.
Roddy Bullock, JD, BSME, is the Executive Director of the Intelligent Design Network of Ohio (www.idnetohio.com ) and is the author of The Cave Painting: A Parable of Science, published by Access Research Network. Send comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Copyright 2007 Roddy M. Bullock, all rights reserved. Quotes and links permitted with attribution.
Statements on Evolution: