5 Questions Your Science Teacher Doesn't Want You to Ask

            Evolution breaks the laws—of true science.  Yet, the model of evolution is still taught in state schools as THE LAW in science education.  The result:  science education is dying.  As a friend and Ph.D. candidate in epidemiology concluded, “We teach science as if everything is random, but we do science as if there is order in the universe.”  Thus, there is a disconnect between the classroom and the laboratory, between the learning and the doing of science.

Evolution Breaks the Law of Biogenesis

            Evolutionists must break the laws of science in order to indoctrinate students and persuade them of the pseudoscience of evolution.  Evolution is no less a pseudoscience than was the long-accepted myth of phrenology.  Well-educated, well-respected scientists of the 19th and even some 20th century scientists believed and taught in acclaimed universities that the measurement of bumps on one’s skull were predictive of one’s mental capabilities.  Just as phrenology has been dismissed and rejected as true science by modern scientists, so should they reject the pseudoscience of evolution.  Evolution breaks the laws—of true science.

            In biology students read early in the textbook about The Law of Biogenesis which states, “Life only comes from life.”  Another way of stating the same principle is, “Life does not come from non-life.”  Prior to Louis Pasteur’s famous goose-necked flask experiment which still stands today in Paris, France, at the Institut Pasteur as evidence of the Law of Biogenesis, people used to believe that mice spontaneously appeared in open containers in which someone had left grains of wheat.  People believed that dead meat left in open containers were the source of flies.  Louis Pasteur completely debunked the prevailing myth of spontaneous generation.  Check out your biology textbook yourself.  You don’t have to take my word for it.

            Yet, later in every biology textbook in state schools one will read about the theory of evolution which relies totally on the same myth of spontaneous generation.  Somehow, somewhere on earth or in a galaxy far, far away life just happened spontaneously, by chance from non-living, dead-as-a-doornail chemicals. 

Evolution Breaks the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics

            Not content with just breaking one law, evolutionists become habitual lawbreakers.  The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics basically states that usable energy becomes lost or unusable energy.  Heat (energy) degenerates into cold resulting in entropy.  In a closed system, the universe, heat energy declines into disorder, or what is called entropy.  As usable energy is irretrievably lost, disorganization, randomness, and chaos increase.

            Just think of the amount of effort one must expend in preserving and conserving information, let alone the amount of energy one must expend in retrieving information.  Think about crashing a laptop and the energy required to restore that laptop.

            So, any system left on its own will go from order to disorder.  Yet, evolutionists teach that the universe did just the opposite.  The universe started out as a chaotic mess and became more ordered and complex evolving from single celled organisms to more and more complex creatures.

If evolution were true, scientists should observe a continued increase and diversity in the animal kingdom going from one animal prototype to greater diversity of life in the animal kingdom.  Yet, when one studies the fossil record, one sees a greater diversity of life existed in the past than today.  In fact, species go extinct all the time causing concern among those wanting to preserve that diversity. 

SO, WHAT DOES ALL LAW-BREAKING LEAD TO…?

Evolutionists must prop up this pseudoscience of evolution with lies, lies and more lies.  They claim evolution is science, but what is science?  Better yet, how does one DO science?

According to the Science Council, “Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.”  (1)

Yet, scientists cannot produce a single piece of testable, observable, repeatable hard evidence for students.  Scientists cannot DO evolution.  They can only describe the model of evolution.   Evolution is not even a good theory for it cannot be falsifiable.  Thus, it should be called a model which is merely an attempt to explain reality.  Think of a model train or car or those models of the universe that one finds at every grade school science fair.  Those are merely attempts to explain reality.  Evolution is not a fact, just an interesting model. 

Evolution is not science, never has been science and never will be science.  Evolution should be taught in philosophy class as one possible model of the origin of the universe, but it should not be taught in science class as good science.

SO, WHAT IS THE BEST PIECE OF EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION?

Colin Patterson, senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Science, confessed years ago, “(F)or over twenty years I had thought I was working on evolution in some way.  One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that there was not one thing I knew about it.  That’s quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so long.  Either there was something wrong with me or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory.  Naturally, I know there is nothing wrong with me, so for the last few weeks I’ve tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people.

“Question: ‘Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing, any one thing that is true?’

“I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence.  I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, ‘I do know one thing—it ought not to be taught in high school.’” (2)

The best piece of evidence for evolution is the assumption that evolution is true.  Students should begin challenging their instructors with this question, “Since there is no hard evidence supporting evolution, why not teach both models of origins and let us scientifically decide which model better fits the evidence?  Is that not good education to give us both models and let us investigate and choose which model?”  To only teach only one model is indoctrination, not education.

 How one answers the question of origins determines how one ultimately views the meaning of life itself.  If people are merely a random collection of molecules, then man is merely matter in motion without purpose or meaning.  However, if people are the intentional creation of a loving Creator, then people have purpose and value as individuals, and they are accountable to Him, the Creator.  His laws, all his laws—physical, moral, emotional, and spiritual—then matter significantly.  So, don’t be like the evolutionists.  Don’t be law breakers.

1.     https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-science/

2.     Colin Patterson, Keynote Address, American Museum of Natural History, New York City, Nov. 5, 1981.