THE
LITERAL CREATION OF MANKIND
AT THE HANDS OF YOU-KNOW-WHAT
by Lloyd Pye
In 1905, a 25-year-old patent clerk named
Albert Einstein demolished the 200-year-old certainty that
Isaac Newton knew all there was
to know about basic physics. In a technical paper only a few
pages long, Einstein sent a huge part of his current “reality” to
history’s dustbin, where it found good company with thousands
of other discards large and small. In 1905, though, Newton’s
discard was about as large as the bin would hold.
Now another grand old “certainty” hovers over history’s
dustbin, and it seems only a matter of time before some new Einstein
writes the few pages (or many pages) that will bring it down
and relegate it to history. And, as was the case in 1905, every “expert” in
the world laughs heartily at any suggestion that their certainty
could be struck down. Yet if facts are any yardstick—which
should always be the case but frequently isn’t—Charles
Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is moving
toward extinction.
Please note this: not everyone who challenges
evolution is automatically a Creationist. Darwinists love to
tar all opponents with that
brush because so much of Creationist dogma is absurd. Creationists
mulishly exclude themselves from serious consideration by refusing
to give up fatally flawed parts of their argument, such as the
literal interpretation of “six days of creation.” Of
course, some have tried to take a more reasonable stance, but
those few can’t be heard over the ranting of the many who
refuse.
Recently a new group has entered the fray,
much better educated than typical Creationists. This group
has devised a theory called “Intelligent
Design,” which has a wealth of scientifically established
facts on its side. The ID’ers, though, give away their
Creationist roots by insisting that because life at its most
basic level is so incredibly and irreducibly complex, it could
never have simply “come into being,” as Darwinists
insist.
Actually, the “life somehow assembled itself out of organic
molecules” dogma is every bit as absurd as the “everything
was created in six days” dogma, which the ID’ers
understand and exploit. But they also suggest that everything
came into existence at the hands of a God or “by means
of outside intervention,” which makes clear how they’re
betting. “Outside intervention” is a transparent
euphemism for (with apologies to J.K. Rowling) You-Know-What,
which to Darwinists, Creationists, and ID’ers alike is
the most absurd suggestion of all. Yet it can be shown that You-Know-What
has the widest array of facts on its side and, in the end, has
the best chance of being proved correct.
Resources
Audio/Visual
Discussion & Chat
Information
Keep Up To Date
Fun & Games
Submitting
Spread The Word
Rules & Help
Personal
