Science should be taught in school. Ask anyone why, and you will likely get similar responses. Because children will ask questions, teachers must be prepared to answer them. Imagine the frustration and confusion a child would have if he/she was given a different answer from every teacher in every classroom for the same question. This is one of the reasons why public schools have what is known as a curriculum. Ideally, the public school system is meant to teach accurately, without biased opinions or religious viewpoints. This is why evolution is taught in science classes when it comes to explaining our origins. After all, evolution is backed by scientific evidence, right? If it didn’t, it wouldn’t be taught in the schools of North America. At least, that’s what we’re told.Foreword: I wrote this essay when I was in grade 12 and presented it in front of my class along with visuals and video content, followed by questioning from the class. My views have since changed and no longer reflect the views I so strongly expressed herein.
First, let’s look at the origin of the Evolution Theory. Long before Charles Darwin’s time, people began questioning the age of the earth. Up until the late 1700’s, the majority of people believed the Bible and that it suggests that the earth is about 6000 years old. Then James Hutton came along, and said that the earth was in fact, billions of years old. Hutton claimed to be a christian, so logically, if he said the Bible was wrong, he would be the one to know. In 1831, Charles Darwin took a trip to the Galapagos Islands. Charles loved worms, so he shot birds. Some of which, were finches. So Darwin collected them and studied the variation in the shape of the beaks. He developed a theory called natural selection. A Scottish lawyer named Charles Lyell observed microevolution, and believed in macroevolution. His hate for the Bible was evident in his studies.
Fortunately, Evolution is not the only belief with regards to the origin of the earth. There is another theory, Creationism. Creationists believe in the Bible. The Bible states that the earth was created in 6 days, not billions and billions of years. Furthermore, Christianity has a definite geographical origin. No other religion has that. Creationists spend a lot of time debating Evolutionists. So far, they have managed to tear apart every shred of evidence supporting evolution. In fact, it not only disproves evolution, but proves creation. Take for example, the fictionous ‘Ape Men’. All any paleontologists ever found of Nebraska Man was a single bone. A tooth, for that matter. It was later found after careful study, that it belonged to a peccary (a close relative of a pig). Or take the Piltdown Man. It was declared a 500,000 year old ape-man by many British scientists. Four decades later, it was found to be consisting of a very recent orangutan jaw stained to look old, with its teeth filed down to make them more human-looking, planted together with a human skull bone, also stained to create an appearance of age. Pithecanthropus, Darwin’s missing link of the evolutionary scale, was actually a human thighbone found close by the skullcap of a chimpanzee. The bones were found in volcanic sediments, which were responsible for the fissilization, not old age. As for Peking Man, few students learned that the skulls had been found in scattered little fragments, with missing fragments substituted with plaster. Neanderthals were long portrayed as ape-men, stooped over. This misconception was largely the result of a faulty reconstruction by French paleontologist Marcellin Boule, who mistook the skeleton of a man with kyphosis (hunchback) for an ape-man in the process of becoming upright. Human ancestors are shown going back almost 6 million years. But no chimpanzee or gorilla ancestors are depicted before a million years ago.Why does every bone fragment turn out to be a human ancestor? Where are all the fossils of chimpanzee and gorilla ancestors? "The problem with a lot of antrhopologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." - Dr. Tim White, anthropologist.
Radiocarbon dating, especially the Carbon 14 method, is the primary source of proof for evolution. C14 dating is very accurate when used for wood from up to about 4,000 years ago. After that, the method becomes very unreliable for the following reasons: (1) This method is only accurately used when it is calibrated with objects of known age. Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content. (2) To assume a particular level of Carbon 14 in an organism requires a precise determination of environmental (atmospheric) levels of the same. That is, to presume a particular level in a living thing requires a precise knowledge of the ambient amount of Carbon 14 in the air and environment. Scientists pervorming radiocarbon dating assume that the amount in the environment has not changed. This is compelling for several reasons, not the least of which is the convenience with which "science" apparently operates; we hear of massive changes in the earth, ice ages, catastrophic events that killed the dinosaurs, etc., but the environment never changed according to the same scientists.
Evolutionists talk a lot about the Geological Column. But the only place where the Geologic Column exists is in the textbooks. Dinosaurs are not aged by Carbon dating, but they are aged according to how deep they are found in the rock layers. The funny thing is, the rock layers are aged by determining what kind of fossils are found in them. Talk about circular reasoning.
It is evident that the Evolutionists have a biased judgement against Creationists. After all, was the theory not developed to disprove and offer an alternative to the Bible? Any evidence disproving the Evolutionist Theory is simply ignored, and is still printed in school textbooks all over North America.
President Washington’s face is carved in a rock. Could that be done by chance? No, it had to be designed. Knowing that, could Washington himself have happened from chance? They both came from a rock, right? It seems almost comical that an Evolutionist will argue that a human being can come from a rock, but a mere image of one cannot. Since Evolution was introduced into our Public School System, suicide rates have skyrocketed. It could be just a coincidence, or perhaps the thought that life was an accident is really getting to the students of today’s school. If eliminating the study of evolution in our schools would allow children to live long and prosper, would it not be a worthwhile endeavor? Do the kids a favour: tell them there is a reason for life. After all, if it’s about keeping religion out of the schools, why is the Theory of Evolution being taught? Is that not just an idea? A hypothesis? A belief? Before Evolution was introduced, Creation was the common belief. So why don’t we get back to the basics? Or here’s another suggestion, eliminate both theories. If you really want to get rid of the religious aspect to our education system, don’t teach anything. It’s better than confusing the students with two theories on how the earth originated. Of course, it would be a shame to eliminate the theory of Evolution from the Education system entirely, so maybe it should be taught. But not in Science. If anything, it should be taught as History, or World Religions.
