Creation vs Evolution

Report on Cobb County Georgia  and Kansas School Board Attempts to be Honest about Evolution

 Evolution Disclaimers in Cobb County

U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper ordered Cobb County schools to remove evolution disclaimer stickers from

 their science textbooks at the end of this school year. The school system requested a stay on having to comply with

 removing the stickers until an appeal is decided. The judge’s order affects some 34,000 textbooks in which the stickers

 have been placed. The appeal will be heard by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and they may not rule on the

 appeal until the end of the year.

Michael Manely, attorney for the plaintiffs referred to the stickers as forcing children to "…swallow the school

board's religious dogma." Judge Cooper said in his Jan. 13 decision that stickers disavowing evolution violate

 federal and state law because they convey an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. So what do the stickers say?

They say "evolution is a theory, not fact." The exact quote is "This textbook contains material on

 evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached

 with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

If the people involved on the evolutionary side of this debate were honest they would

 admit that it why it is called “the theory of evolution.” Actually it does not reach the

 scientific level of proof that justifies something being referred to as a theory.

It barely could qualify to be called the hypothesis of evolution, but do not expect anybody

 on evolution’s side do be honest about the matter.

The judge said the stickers were an unconstitutional endorsement of religion: The disclaimers were put in the books by

 school officials in suburban Cobb County in 2002.

"Adopted by the school board, funded by the money of taxpayers, and inserted by school personnel, the sticker conveys an

 impermissible message of endorsement and tells some citizens that they are political outsiders while telling others they are political

 insiders," U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper said in his 44-page ruling in Selman v. Cobb County School Dist. In other word

s Judge Cooper was saying that telling the truth about evolution is unconstitutional because it endorses religion. Apparently, as is

 the case with so many federal judges these days, the truth does not enter into the equation.  And what is this about people being

 political insiders and political outsiders? In this age truth is to be sacrificed for the sake of inclusion? My way of looking at it is

 that the Judge excluded the people who hold the truth and enfranchised those who choose to believe a lie.

      Michael Manely, who represented parents who brought the suit said of Cobb County students, "They're going to be
 permitted to learn science unadulterated by religious dogma." No sir, you are wrong. They are going to be taught pseudo-science
 encumbered by the dogma of humanism, which has been found to be a religion in itself. It is a religion where man becomes his own 
God. Of course the God hating American Civil Liberties Union has been neck deep in this whole thing. The ACLU is an organization
 whose very name is a lie. They are not about American ideals and they certainly are not about liberty, unless you count the liberty
 of the libertine. Dr. Gary Cass, of the Center for Reclaiming America said, Once again, ACLU attorneys are behind
 this ban. The ACLU will stop at nothing to force its agenda on our schoolchildren. They will not 
even allow evolution to be taught as a theory!”

            Lawyers for Cobb County said the school board had made a good-faith effort to address questions that inevitably arise during

 the teaching of evolution. "Science and religion are related and they're not mutually exclusive." School district attorney Linwood Gunn said.

 "This sticker was an effort to get past that conflict and to teach good science." The schools placed the stickers after more than 2,000

 parents complained the textbooks presented evolution as fact, without mentioning rival ideas about the beginnings of life. The judge’s

ruling demonstrated that the concerns of the majority about how there children are educated mean nothing when they interfere with

the agenda of evil he is serving.

            The case is one of several battles waged in recent years in the ‘Bible Belt’ over what role evolution should play in science

 books. Last year, Georgia's education chief proposed a science curriculum that dropped the word "evolution" in favor of "changes

over time." That plan was soon dropped amid protests by teachers who have themselves been brainwashed in the process of getting

an education.

Lawmaker proposes 'just the facts' for Georgia classrooms

State lawmaker, Rep. Ben Bridges, introduced legislation designed to prevent the theory of evolution from being taught in

Georgia's classrooms. The bill introduced on Jan. 27, 2005 requires only "scientific fact" be taught in public schools.”

 If this were to become the law of Georgia it would rule out the theory of evolution. "It's in the book that it's a theory,

but these teachers teach it like it's a fact," he said. "Let's teach them the truth or don't teach them anything." Democrats

in the Georgia Legislature blasted the proposal, particularly the measure's use of the word "theory" to suggest evolution

 is an unproven assumption. One smart aleck Democrat state Rep. Tom  Bordeaux, tried to equate evolution with gravity

 as a theory. Get real!

A year ago, nearly 80 years after the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee, Georgia's schools superintendent also

 caused an upheaval when she proposed to replace "evolution" with "changes over time" in the Georgia science

 curriculum. Jimmy Carter, the well known religious liberal, weighed in on the side of the evolutionists. So much

 for him being a Bible believer.

Lawmakers in Kansas have also wrestled with how to teach evolution. Efforts to expose students to stronger and

more honest criticisms of evolution were rebuffed by a committee rewriting science education standards, setting up

 a potential confrontation with the more conservative State Board of Education. The state board appointed committee,

 is revising Kansas' standards for science education, which currently describe evolution as a key concept students

should learn. Some members of the state board questioned whether the committee had properly considered views about

teaching creationism or intelligent design. The state board will likely review the committee's recommendations in April of

this year. The Kansas Board of Education is standing by its science-education guidelines that de-emphasize scientific

theories, even though it will now have to rewrite them after three science associations pulled their materials.

On Oct. 12, the board voted 7-3 to reaffirm its revised science-education standards downplaying the teaching of

evolution in public school classrooms. The guidelines delete not only evolution but also the "Big Bang" theory of the

 universe's creation. (The Big Bang theory was refuted by the unmanned space exploration vehicles sent flying out of

our solar system several years ago. Since then evolutionists have conveniently forgotten what those vehicles taught us

about the origins of the universe.)  The guidelines were drafted partly by the nonprofit Creation Science Association,

which claims the Bible's creation story is in fact the way the universe was created. The board's latest vote was

 prompted when three science-education associations refused to allow the board to incorporate portions of their

recommended state science standards into the Kansas standards.

Last September, the National Science Teachers Association, the National Research Council and the American

Association for the Advancement of Science rejected requests from the Kansas board to include some of their

guidelines, standards and other materials in its state science standards, a move that was plainly intended to be

 coercive. The groups denied the request because of the board's intent to discourage the teaching of evolution.

 This tells you where these organizations are at and go to prove past criticism questioning their credibility and

 whether they should even be allowed to have an input into the education of children since those organizations

prefer indoctrination to education. Gerry Wheeler, executive director of the National Science Teachers Association

 said "We cannot allow groups like the Kansas State Board of Education to grossly misrepresent the vision of quality

science education." “Cannot allow!” “Cannot allow!” The supreme elitist snobbery and egotism of these organizations

 were revealed in that statement. Who do he and his organization think they are? What great insight to they have

that they should be entrusted to be the dictators of what should and should not be allowed?

The Kansas School Board has of course received unfavorable national attention and apparently has prompted

 other states to re-examine their science-education standards. Recently, Kentucky education officials voted to

remove mention of evolution from state standards, while the New Mexico Board of Education voted to teach only

 evolution in science classes. New York Times columnist Anthony Lewis, questioned concerns of some Christians

 who believe evolution undermines faith and retards morals. As usual, his assumptions about Christians rejecting such

things as the scientific method, was wrong. He also erred in treating working scientists who are creationists with

 contempt. But this is the way of the unbeliever. They never let the truth get in the way of their agenda, and are not

 above twisting semantics to emotionally influence people when logic fails.

Justice Abe Fortas wrote in the 1968 Supreme Court decision, "There is and can be no doubt that the First Amendment

does not permit the state to require that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any

religious sect or dogma," Epperson v. Arkansas. That statement is a far cry from saying that children must be taught lies,

 but the way things are going we are getting to the point I expect this to be plainly said any day.

Compiled by

Michael L Ford

1 March 2005

Read on for more interesting information.


What book raises major problems for evolution?

A: It’s called Darwin’s Black Box, written by Michael Behe, who is not a biblical creationist. Behe is a biochemist. He started

 to question the possible evolutionary origins of the complex bio-chemical systems that are necessary for life. He examined many

systems, including the biochemistry of vision and the blood-clotting systems. These structures turned out to have “dozens or even

 hundreds of precisely tailored parts,” according to Behe. For example, a system in an organism that just senses light must begin with

 an array of cells that, according to Behe, “make the complexity of a motorcycle or a television set look paltry by comparison.”

Behe also describes the molecular systems within living organisms as “complex machines,” and that each machine relies on other

complex machines. As to the origin of these complex micro machines, evolutionary scientists don’t have a clue. Behe points out

that even if he were to avoid mentioning the supernatural, he’d still have to introduce an intelligent designer behind all these systems.

We can’t get away from creation that we find in Genesis.


Evolutionist Quoted

“[The human brain is] the most complex structure in the known universe, complex enough to coordinate the fingers of a concert pianist

 or to create a three-dimensional landscape from light that falls on a two-dimensional retina”. A few lines further on, the author says

“the current version [of the brain] is the result of millions of years of evolution. It is difficult to understand the brain because, unlike a

 computer, it was not built with specific purposes or principles of design in mind. Natural selection, the engine of evolution, is responsible.”

– Gerald D. Fischbach,

Mind and Brain,

Scientific American


September 1992.


Is there any evidence that suicide is a result of evolutionary thinking?

A: There certainly is. Following is a testimony from one of our Answers in Genesis staff.

“I grew up in a church that taught me to believe in God and that He used evolution to make everything. Sadly, this had a

devastating effect on my life. By the time I graduated from high school, I realized that we were products of chance and there

probably wasn’t a God at all.

“A couple of years later, while in college, I came to the realization that all there was to life was working till you retired, grew

old and died. And for what? I just really didn’t want to go through all of that. So I planned my own suicide.

“But God intervened and used another person to lead me to the Creator of the universe—Jesus Christ. I found out that life with

Christ had a purpose and I no longer wanted to die.”

Sadly, many young lives are being destroyed daily because of evolutionary teaching and its consequence of hopelessness and

purposelessness. Think about the public education system that teaches children all day long: “There is no God; therefore there

is no basis for any hope whatsoever.” If only they found their answers in God’s Word, beginning with Genesis.


Noncreationist Quote

“Research on the origin of life seems to be unique in that the conclusion has already been authoritatively accepted ... .

What remains to be done is to find the scenarios which describe the detailed mechanisms and processes by which this happened.

“One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth

 by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written.”

– Yockey, H.P., A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical
 Biology 67:377–398, 1977; quotes from pp. 379, 396.

Why would old fossils be a problem for evolutionists?

A: According to evolutionists, the oldest fossils ever found are a blue-green algae that lived along the coast of Australia

and South Africa. These fossils have been dated by them to be 3.5 billion years old. But when they examined these fossils

 under the microscope, they found that they were identical to the blue-green

algae that are still living today. Dr. William Schopf, a leading evolutionist, says that this presents a tremendous problem for

 evolution. You see, evolution is based upon change, and yet these algae don’t appear to have changed at all in their

supposed 3.5 billion years. If evolution is based on everything changing, why do we find these oldest fossils to be identical

 to the living algae today? And it’s not just the blue-green algae—scientists continue to find many living animals that appear

 to have hardly changed at all compared to their fossils that are allegedly millions of years old.

The answer is in Genesis. God made all living things—including blue-green algae—only thousands of years ago. They’ve

 always reproduced after their own kind, as commanded by the Creator.


Quotable quote:

“The neo-Darwinist is now reaching the point of dignity in the history of science that the Ptolemaic system in astronomy,

the epicycle system, reached long ago. We know that it does not work. And that is interesting. Because from the actual

 structure of the chromosome we can demonstrate that the human species did not come from a progressive humanisation

 of a pre-human.”

– Professor Jérôme Lejeune

(chair of Fundamental Genetics,

University of Paris, France),

The Beginning of Life, October 1975.


How could Neandertal man be too advanced for evolution?

A: In southern France, they recently found evidence of human habitation hundreds of feet deep within a cave.

What makes this find so important is that it’s been dated as the earliest signs of humans in Europe. Only the

Neanderthals were thought to be the inhabitants of Europe at that time. What they found in the cave was astonishing

 for such so-called “primitive” people. They found a “complex quadrilateral artificial structure consisting of specially

arranged pieces of stalactite and stalagmite.” Also found was a piece of burned bear bone. Now for the problem.

 The items were so deep in the cave, that the people would have had to have some kind of artificial light, such as a

 fire, torch or lamp. Also, the structure they found was so complex, it would have required the builders to be able to

 communicate with each other. Such language skill and technological know-how easily fits the creationist understanding

 of Neanderthals. They were a line of early humans living after the Flood and descended from Noah—but evolutionists

have long held that Neanderthals could not possibly have done these things. Neanderthals may be a problem for the

evolutionists, but not for those who believe in Genesis.


Quotable quote:

“For use in understanding the evolution of vertebrate flight, the early record of pterosaurs and bats is disappointing: Their most primitive representatives are fully transformed as capable fliers.”



– Sereno, Paul C., The evolution of dinosaurs,

Science 284(5423):2137–2147,

June 25, 1999.

Sereno goes on to claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs—see Archaeoraptor—phony “feathered” fossil for evidence against this theory.


If evolution is ‘survival of the fittest,’ why would evolutionists even bother to care for others?

A: If we’re just a part of this struggle for survival—animals ripping each other apart—and as the poet said, ‘nature red (with blood) in tooth and in claw,’ then why would we care for others—particularly the old and sick? It’s interesting to note that it was really the Christians who started our modern hospitals, orphanages and schools, to care for others. That’s because our God is a God who loves and cares. Recently, a doctor from Europe, which is just saturated in evolutionary humanism, related what happened when he took his father to the hospital. The doctors prescribed morphine. But when this man looked at the prescription, he realized, as a doctor himself, that it was a lethal dose! He explained to us that many old people don’t want to go to the hospital in these places any more because they’re worried they’ll receive a lethal injection!

This will start to happen in other countries if people don’t return to God’s Word, beginning with Genesis.



Quotable quote:

'Darwinism can be used to back up two mad moralities, but it cannot be used to back up a single sane one. The kinship and competition of all living creatures can be used as a reason for being insanely cruel or insanely sentimental; but not for a healthy love of animals ... That you and a tiger are one may be a reason for being tender to a tiger. Or it may be a reason for being cruel as the tiger. It is one way to train the tiger to imitate you, it is a shorter way to imitate the tiger. But in neither case does evolution tell you how to treat a tiger reasonably, that is, to admire his stripes while avoiding his claws.

‘If you want to treat a tiger reasonably, you must go back to the garden of Eden. For the obstinate reminder continues to recur: only the supernaturalist has taken a sane view of Nature.'










– Chesterton, G.K.,


John Lane, London, pp. 204–205, 1927.


Isn’t evolution much more than the idea of millions of years, fossil men, and so on?

A: In a very broad sense, evolution is really a whole philosophy of life that teaches that man, by himself, can determine truth. Most people, when they consider evolution, think about millions of years of earth history, or transitional forms, apemen, or life evolving from chemicals. But this is just a part of what evolution is all about. People who don’t accept the authority of God’s Word have to find an explanation about where the universe and life came from. Because they reject the Word of God, they’re saying, in effect, that man by himself can determine truth. On the other hand, Christians should recognize that man can’t find truth by himself—we must start with the One who is truth, Who has given us all the answers we need to come to right conclusions. Sadly, Christians who accept evolution are really saying that man can come to truth by himself, and then fallible man can reinterpret God’s Word accordingly. Christians need to realize that evolution is an anti-God religion—it’s not the answer!


Quotable quote:

‘If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents—the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts—i.e. of materialism and astronomy—are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting that the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milkjug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.’










– C.S. Lewis (1898–1963),

The Business of Heaven,

Fount Paperbacks,

U.K., p. 97, 1984.


            Jonsquill Ministries

P. O. Box 752

Buchanan, Georgia 30113