Darwinism imaginative and dangerous…

People are not aware of some of the biggest flaws in Darwinism…
Expelled (movie) only begin to point out some of the issues.

One that continues to bother me is the bad science of pure Darwinism.

But there is more. If you apply Darwinism logically to life, you find that it…

Undermines morality and devalues human life

Darwinism is the main theory taught in High Schools and Universities….
Why are we teaching bad science that has the potential to corrupt society?

People have suggested that an easy solution is not necessarily to eliminate Darwinism
But just change the way it is taught….
While others suggest that it is not the way it is taught, but the real problem is that Darwinism is wrong and it is the ONLY thing being taught in schools today…why not allow for free speech and so all sides not just one way Darwinism.

Problem: ignorance

So after the past week you have seen posts agianst Darwinism, about Expelled (the movie), about academic freedom, and the differences between Creationism and Intelligent Design (ID). Constantly I remind you that I am a Creationist and not a proponent of ID.

Why am I supporting it or giving it a fair chance? Why do I care? I am fighting for academic freedom. I believe in knowing all sides of the issues. I believe they should teach the controversy. I believe that idea of religion should be pushed aside a little bit and the science should be taught in classrooms. What I mean by that is I believe that in a classroom a teacher can be politically correct and teach Creationism, ID and evolution (all three sides of the debate) without pushing one side over the other. It must be done. The controversy must be taught without bias. Forget about religious views and show what each group believes.

Today more and more students are coming out of schools ignorant. They are without knowledge and do not even know the difference between ID and Creationism. Students are coming out brainwashed in the ideas of evolution. People are afraid that if ID and/or Creation is taught in schools that their kids will come out brainwashed in those ideas….but they what they missing their own point, students are currently being brainwashed! We need science taught objectively and all angles need to be presented. Yeah it would be difficult for a teacher to do, but it MUST be done!

If students want to be religious that is fine. But in the classroom they should learn ALL sides. They can study and or be a part of the religion outside of class period, that is great. I want people to know that facts and know the truth. I think the truth will really set people free. I believe that when presented with ALL angles, ALL sides, that people will make their own choices. People will follow the evidence and find what really is Truth, but when only ONE side of the story is giving at school, students are ignorant. Society is ignorant.

All I am asking is that we should have the freedom in America to study ALL vantage points in schools.

Teaching the controversy [regarding evolution versus intelligent design] is good education,” Laursen says, adding that he is “not shocked” to see such groups as the American Civil Liberties Union “opposing academic freedom and promoting censorship.”

Ravi Zacharias said it well: “To the extent that you can make your opponent’s position look ridiculous, to that extent you probably do not understand it.”

False theories and academic freedom

If professors do not have the right to study intelligent design, how will the general public ever legitimately study Intelligent Design (ID)? Also how will we anyone illegitimately come up with “evidence?” If you believe that there isn’t any credible evidence why do you care if people study it or not?

The point is that I am angry about the close-mindedness and elite “big science” that does not even allow for study of ID. In all seriousness I am not an ID proponent. I do not believe in it at all. I am a Creationist. But I want to know what it is about. I want everyone to have the right and freedom in America to study ID freely, just as they should have the right to study evolution or Creationism or whatever.

You might say that “there is no credible evidence for Intelligent Design.” Well that is fine, why though should people be kicked out of a job for mentioning ID? If the evidence is so bad why not encourage people to study it? What do you have to loose? Are you afraid that evidence will destroy your beloved “evolution argument!?” And if it does, so what? Why not allow people to follow where the evidence leads? Maybe it will lead to evolution, my point is let people study all angles and all sides of the debate!

I am ticked because there are plenty of false lies that Universities are teaching as facts, and people are free to learn about them! For example, theories in social sciences like psychology and sociology. Everyone learns about them and yet everyone studies them. They are even told how these theories are flawed and sometimes these theories are supported with evidence.

The point is both sides of the story are presented and professors and students are free to learn about them… but ID on the other hand is not allowed. My heart is crying out about academic freedom! Please do not be so close-minded and say that because there is no credible evidence that no one should be allowed to learn about it, because that is elitist and close-minded.

Theories that are not supported are the foundation to everything we have every studied. Our nation is build on learning and having the freedom to learn and study everything. Science in American history shows that experimenting and studying theories that might be false is the best way to learn what is true. I want to have the freedom to find out what is true. I want to study all aspects freely in America.

See evolutionnews.org

How is it that Evolution and Darwinism are just theories and the are not supported with hard evidence but no one is giving them a hard time?

Yet when people mention other unsupported theories say Intelligent Design, minds are closed, institutions lock the doors and theories are crushed..

Problem : people do not know what ID really is

A lot of people do not even know what Intelligent Design(ID) is, how it differs from Creationism, and what kind of evidence exists for it.

The truth is Creationism and ID are 2 completely different things. People try to say that ID is just a watered down version of Creationism, it is just a political way to slide in Creationism….well frankly both of these are just plain false!

The truth is Orthodox Christians are not ID proponents, I am not. Most Christians honestly do not even know what ID is about!!!!!
And the for the ID proponent’s sake….most of them are NOT Christians or religious at all!

True Christians cannot nor will not support ID. Scientologists are more likely to support it than Christians are. In fact Richard Dawkins is more likely a supporter of ID than a your informed practicing Christian.

What is ID? (well Expelled did not do so good at explaining terms…for any term, really!)
1. “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection”.
2. It is a modern form of the traditional y and philosophical arguments for the existence of a designer
3. that designer could be anything, not necessarily even “god”
4. supported by The Discovery Institute (which is NOT a Christian Institution) Sure they take money from Christians (wouldn’t you?) who want to support it and Christian Apologists have worked with the Discovery Institute on projects but the they are 2 independent groups with 2 independent views and beliefs.

What are the differences between Creationism?

Intelligent Design adherents believe only that the complexity of the natural world could not have occurred by chance. Some intelligent entity must have created the complexity, they reason, but that “designer” could in theory be anything or anyone.

Creationism comes in many varieties, from the strictest biblical literalism to the theistic evolutionism of the Catholic Church . Between those extremes, there are “Young-Earth” and “Old-Earth” creationists, who differ over the age of the planet and the details of how God created life. But in all cases the Designer is the Christian God. They are based out of the Bible.

At a recent completed trial Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board:
Creationism they claim, is inextricably linked to the creation story in Genesis. ID, by contrast, is a solid scientific theory resting upon a firm foundation of biological fact. And while theological inferences could certainly be drawn from it, such inferences are unrelated to the theory itself.
This is key!

People are adding theological implications that are not necessarily being claimed by the ID supporters…Why?
“the easiest way for Darwinists to discredit intelligent design is to push it off as a theory or political theory for “creationism.” It is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists to delegitimize ID theory without actually addressing the merits of its case. It is laziness.

The scientific method (for ID) is commonly described as a four-step process involving observations, hypothesis, experiments, and conclusion. Intelligent design begins with the observation that intelligent agents produce complex and specified information (CSI). Design theorists hypothesize that if a natural object was designed, it will contain high levels of CSI. Scientists then perform experimental tests upon natural objects to determine if they contain complex and specified information. One easily testable form of CSI is irreducible complexity, which can be discovered by experimentally reverse-engineering biological structures to see if they require all of their parts to function. When ID researchers find irreducible complexity in biology, they conclude that such structures were designed.

Where does one draw a line between science and religion?
According to intelligent design network people should and can be objective when studying science. People can make their own personal decision on religion but all sides can be taught equally and p in a politically correct fashion at our schools. This is part of academic freedom. That we should fight for!

Like I said I am not a ID proponent, I am a Creationist. I believe in the Bible and that God created all that is in 7days, but I can and will support and express this view in more detail at a later date. But I am all about academic freedom and letting people be free to study all sides of the debate.

Most prevalent reaction to Expelled: anger

Why can’t we follow WHERE the EVIDENCE leads????

Some people loved the movie, some hated it. Sure it was propaganda, but it was fighting for something worth fighting for. It angers me how close-minded people are. The reaction from “big science” has not been good since the release of Expelled. Many are trying to sue Expelled, some are just firing away their propaganda agianst the movie and others are not even willing to see the movie or talk about the REAL ISSUES in a realistic, justly manner.
I do understand why some would want to sue “expelled” because of the whole “Crossroads” situation and some of the content being “out of context” but those are NOT the REAL issues.

The REAL action needs to be happening in institutions. Institutions that stress and say they view academic freedom need to step up to the plate and investigate the issue, they need to decide how “free” they really are. they need to open up to FACTS instead of being dead to the TRUTH and letting big science have their way.

I was and still am anger about closed minds in institutions.
There is a sick cycle happening big science leaders are pushing out any ideas that go agianst what THEY believe. Ironic? How free is that? People should be able to research and discuss ALL aspects and theories and not be limited by whoever is in the dictating the leadership positions of the institutions. the whole point of learning is to see the FACTS and make a decision for yourself, not being forced into ONE belief system!




Scientists are fatally proud of their reliance on peer-review to ensure that only good science gets funded and published. Yet it has been shown that peer review does not increase the quality of studies11,12 and because the anonymous reviewers generally represent established ideas it is an effective way to suppress innovation 13,14 .

Censorship is most effective when the censor’s hand is invisible. Modern science has developed an effective hierarchy for disseminating ‘acceptable’ information and, perhaps more importantly, for excluding work that threatens mainstream scientists and the governments and industries that fund them. Luckily, there are still publications and websites outside this web of self-censorship. You should take advantage of this information, use it to formulate your own opinions, and discuss them with friends, family and colleagues. Small donations of your time and money can make a tremendous difference to the world’s excluded scientists.

From http://www.suppressedscience.net/

Please sign