CBN.com–There are thousands of biology books targeted for everyone from toddlers to graduate students. In all their diversity, they have one thing in common. They support Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.
But do these biology textbooks support true science or science fiction?
Most people think that high school and college biology textbooks reflect the latest and most accurate scientific information.
But according to biologist Dr. Jonathan Wells, books that deal with evolution are the exception. Wells, who holds doctorates from both Yale and the University of California at Berkeley, recently wrote “Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?”
Wells evaluated ten major textbooks on seven examples of evolution. Out of the seventy total grades, the books earned 25 Ds, but mostly Fs–40 of them to be exact. In other words, all the books flunked the truth test.
For example, the books discuss an old experiment supposedly showing how chemicals came together to begin life. They won’t admit the presence of oxygen in the early atmosphere because oxygen would prevent evolution from even getting off the ground.
And how about Charles Darwin, the primary founder of evolution, and his tree of life idea. This theory says life forms branched off from each other step by step. The books call this a fact, but in fact, there is really no evidence for such connections.
Or how about a human arm and the appendages of cats, whales and bats. Did all these limbs evolve from one kind of ancient creature? The books say “yes,” the evidence says “no.”
And what about the missing link bird archaeopteryx? The facts are what are missing: the archaeopteryx is older than its supposed dinosaur grandparents.
And then there is evolution’s grand claim: you are nothing but a monkey’s uncle. Yet experts in human origins acknowledge their theories as the most subjective and speculative in all of biology. You’d never know that by the bold assertions of the textbooks.
Without good evidence, evolutionary Darwinism becomes philosophy or religion, not science, according to critics. That may explain why the media treated the recent oil spill on the Galapagos Islands almost like the desecration of a holy temple.
“The Galapagos Islands, of course, is a shrine. It was where Darwin supposedly got many of his ideas when he was aboard the Beagle and they stopped there on his famous voyage,” said scientist Dr. Daniel Faulkner.
Faulkner, who is a professor at the University of South Carolina at Lancaster, says evolutionists should not have minded an oil spill; that’s an environmental stress that should bring on even more evolution.
“They should have welcomed the opportunity for evolution to take even more jumps, quantum leaps during this time. So, I find that their concern is a little inconsistent with what they’ve been preaching all this time,” said Faulkner.
The finches of the Galapagos are now called Darwin’s finches because they appear to support evolution. Scientists did find larger beaks in response to a drought, but when the stress of drought ended, so did the big beaks.
Faulkner said, “And so if you have supposed microevolution one direction and then later it reverts right back to where it started from, that’s not evolution, it can’t be.”