SCHOOL SCIENCE

By Martin Lightfoot

True Science is knowledge based  on experiment and/or  observation.

Transmutation of life forms; frogs into princes etc. was once confined  to myths and children’s fairy tales. It is-now  thoroughly reinvented,  badged  up  as  a ‘science’ subject  (evolution theory) and taught as fact in all mainstream media  and education.

The  GCSE Biology Module  B3 – ‘Life On Earth’ schools syllabus  embeds blind  chance evolutionis giving the impression that it is a proven science.

B3.1.13 states: “Know and  understand that  the combined effect of mutations, environmental changes and natural selection  and isolation can produce new species”

Decades of scientific observation and experimentation has demonstrated that:

Chance mutations are defects which cause a loss  or  corruption of  DNA information, do  not enhance species and:  “often confer  some  serious malfunction” (Enc. Britannica).

The evolutionist idea  that  small  step  mutations over vast periods of time can  result in increased meaningful complexity has been  totally discredited. All biological  structures including the  ‘simple cell’ exhibit irreducible complexity. The component parts are interdependent and need  to be in placed  rapidly and simultaneously in order for the organism to function.

Could a series of chance mutations, produce an eye in a creature that has never had eyes before?

Natural selection (survival of the fittest) tends to reduce species as Darwin observed: “Whether natural selection has really thus acted in nature, in modifying and adapting the various forms of life to their several conditions and stations, must  be  judged  of by the general tenor and  balance of evidence given in the following chapters. But we already see how it entails extinction; and  how largely extinction has acted in the worlds  history”  (Darwin,  ‘Origin of Species’, ch.4).

The definition of ‘species’ has been changed over time.  It no longer  refers  to fixed  types or  kinds  of creatures but  is  now  more   narrowly defined  as: “related organisms that  share common characteristics and  are  capable of interbreeding” – Enc. Britannica).

The  “combined effect of mutations, environmental changes etc. “may produce variations in organisms (including  restrictions on their ability to breed) but not, as claimed by evolutionists, that they can  produce more  advanced or new  types or kinds of plants  and  animals. That  sort  of change would require additional spontaneous  and  meaningful information in the  DNA code, over  and  above  the existing genetic information provided  by the parents.

Black, white and speckled Peppered Moths are all Peppered moths.  Snails  with dark,  light or banded shells are all snails.

B3.1.3  states:  “Know and understand  that evidence for evolution is provided by the fossil record and  from analysis  of similarities and  differences in the DNA of organisms.”

Fossil  evidence shows abrupt appearance of species with no transitional  intermediates. Arranging fossils in order of perceived progression and claiming an ancestral taxonomy is supposition, not science. Fossils do not show any evidence of change over time. To interpret the  fossil  evidence as  demonstrating speciation (new species) does not originate from the actual fossil evidence.

Fossils  are  simply  dead creatures which  were trapped in mud/sediment and  hardened through pressure over  time indicating  that  they  have  been trapped quickly. They are evidence of catastrophe not evolution.

DNA molecules, common to all living organisms, carry meaningful precise information that defines organisms. It is simply  not  true  that  “evidence  for evolution  is provided  … from analysis  of similarities and differences in the DNA of organisms “. Evolutionists argue that DNA provides evidence for a common origin of all organisms from less advanced forms of life rather  than  from a common originator. Again, this would  require the  ‘magic’ of additional meaningful information  in  the   DNA code and evolutionists don’t have a magician.

Blind chance evolutionism does  not belong  in a science syllabus. It is not science.

As an ideology  it is no improvement on the worn out  superstitious speculations by so called philosophers of the ancient past.

The Greek Philosopher Aristotle (384- 322) wrote his Scala Naturae,  or Ladder  of Life, to explain  his concept of the advancement of living things from inanimate matter to plants,  then animals and  finally man.

(Historia Animalium,  University of Virginia Library Book8-1-X7v)

Heraclitus of Ephesus (535 – 475 BC) describes steps  in an imaginary process from air to water,  and thence to earth.

In Fragment 30, he wrote:

“This world-order … no god nor man  did create, but it ever was and is and will be

Anaximander of Miletus (611 -54 7 B.C.) imagines the development of living beings from moisture under the influence of warmth, and suggests the view that men originated from  animals of another sort. (Censorinus De Die Natali, IV, 7)

Thales  of Miletus (624 – 547 BC) asserts that  all things originated from water.

(Bertrand Russell- ‘A History of Philosophy’, ch. 2, p.13)

As a young first century church  leader in the Greek city Ephesus,  Timothy probably had to deal with such superstitions masquerading as science.

The apostle  Paul’s advice to him is equally relevant to church leaders and  educators today:

“keep that  which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20)