Truth is Truth - Observational Science versus Forensic Science

Linked to curriculum is the concept that “Truth is Truth”. We do not agree with constructivist education philosophy that encourages students to construct whatever meaning they wish out of the information given, thereby encouraging each student to construct their own version of “truth”. We believe in absolute truth which comes from God. He is truth, one of the names of the Son is “the Truth”, and the Holy Spirit has promised to lead His people into all truth. It must be very confusing for some students in this country to go out of a Religious Education class and into a biology class to learn atheistic evolution, or a history class which teaches dates inconsistent with the scriptures.

Biblical truth, scientific truth, historical truth, and mathematical truth, etc, must always be in perfect harmony as they have the one Author who is Truth. When there appears to be an inconsistency, it is apparent only, and the error is in the human interpretation.

The starting point in historical dates and science at this school must always be the Word of God: “the truth of the LORD endureth for ever,” Psalm 117:2. Even non-believing archeologists are now learning to take Biblical history more seriously. We believe in Biblical creation, followed by a worldwide flood. Observational science supports this in many ways such as the abundance of fossil sea shells on all of the world’s highest mountain ranges. We are in harmony with observational (or operational) science which can be seen in nature and/or tested in a laboratory. Another aspect of science is “forensic science” which is like the detective at work trying to figure something out which can’t be repeated, seen, or directly measured. Forensic science includes the question of origins and understanding the universe. Many use forensic science to cast doubt on the Bible.

The outcomes of forensic science depend upon the assumptions of the interpreters which reflect their personal faith positions – which all scientists have. For example two observers can look at the Grand Canyon. One can say, “Wow – look at what the Colorado River did in 10 million years!” (Overlooking the problem that the river would have had to flow uphill for much of this time) The other observer can say, “Wow – look at what a massive flood did in two days!” The following examples can be read by the more scientifically minded to have a sense of what our senior students are taugh…

• We teach natural selection, and minor adaptations to suit an environment as observational science. But do not believe that it has ever created an increase in genetic complexity as required for evolution, contrary to the forensic interpretations in modern textbooks. Natural selection actually reduces genetic information over time.

• We teach, for example, that it is possible for a bird species to lose its ability to fly. This is observational science and has been observed with a species of egrets in the 1900s. But it is a loss of genetic information, and therefore not evidence for evolution as claimed.

• Observational science has many examples of one species splitting into two, but never a new species in the sense that one of the new species is more advanced. In all these cases we have a rearrangement and net loss of genetic information already present. This is known as speciation and helps us to explain what happened to bear, dog, and cat families, etc, after they left the ark. But without evidence of genetic information increasing, we reject the forensic science interpretation that speciation is a proof of evolution

• We teach that bacteria can obtain certain immunity to antibiotics, but do not believe in the interpretation that this is evolution at work. Scientists know that this mutation hinders the normal ingestion processes of the bacteria and represents a loss of genetic information, and not a gain as evolution requires. Natural selection will select against the mutants in a wild population in the absence of the antibiotic. (Natural selection is on our side.)

• We teach the chemical compositions of rocks as observed and measured, but deny the forensic interpretation which interprets ages in millions of years from the chemical compositions. Even a child can see that geological layers “millions of years apart in age” have no erosion between their layers and therefore must have been laid quickly under water.

• We have no problem with the fossils. Despite the impression given in the media and textbooks. The fossils are on our side. For example, all 32 orders of mammals appear suddenly in the fossil record in the Cambrian layer without any intermediate forms, and with no new orders appearing in the last 500 million years (according to evolutionary timescale). Richard Dawkins, the world’s most well known atheist, in his latest book admits the “Cambrian explosion” problem in the fossils but dismisses it relevance, believing evolution to be sufficiently proved without needing the fossils. (We know that the Cambrian layer was produced by the flood.) There are about a dozen or so claimed intermediate forms in the fossils (there ought to be millions) but our students are taught how to dismiss them scientifically, including the so-called ape-men fossils.

• We believe in the elongated light waves (red shift) which arrive from distance stars, but do not necessarily believe in the interpretation given to this light to infer distances in space.

• We believe that the universe is expanding (the Bible states in several places that God stretches out the heavens) but, of course, we don’t believe in the Big Bang. Scientists can still not demonstrate how it is possible within the laws of science and mathematics, let alone prove that it actually did happen. The world’s best known physicist since Einstein, Stephen Hawkings, now dismisses this problem as irrelevant, after 40 years of vainly trying to figure out what may happened at “time zero”.

• Similarly no scientist can demonstrate how life can conceivably begin from non life (forensic science). The laws of chemistry (observational science) go the wrong direction, and the mathematical improbabilities are insurmountable even for a single protein structure, let alone the thousands of structures needed in a living cell. And even if it could be conceivable, there is still a long way to go to prove that it actually did happen.

• We reject the modern cosmic theories of dark matter, dark energy, and many universes. There is no direct observational science to support these ideas. They are purely the products of forensic “science” in support of the big bang model.

• We reject irresponsible recent claims that scientists have used computers to create life. It is easy to deceive people and get media coverage in support for evolution. But all they have done is copy and re-arrange existing genetic information into an unnatural combination, and inserted this into a living bacteria with all its pre-existing machinery needed to decode and use this information. This is potentially very harmful if it escapes into the environment.

There are many other examples which can be given, and on our website there is a more in depth article on the subject of how the creation/evolution issue is taught at Ponatahi Christian School.

The main problem with secular textbooks is that they define evolution as gradual change from “non living molecules to simple living things to man”, but use evidence of minor changes and natural selection, which we don’t dispute, to “prove” evolution. This is dishonest. What they need to show instead is how genetic information has increased over time – which is something which can’t be done as it has never happened and can never happen. There are also examples of textbooks using “evidence “ such as embryo development and homology which has long been discredited. And if creationism is mentioned, it is dishonestly portrayed as a “pseudo science” which rejects observational science. Our students are trained to recognise these practices when they study biology. Similarly they are taught to reject events and dates in ancient history that does not agree with the Bible.

When there are two or more opposing views about how life began then somebody is wrong, as there can be only one true explanation. Similarly, when dealing with more important issues such as God’s purpose of creation, the way of salvation, and eternity, there can only be one truth. And all that opposes this truth is wrong. We must study God’s word diligently to learn this truth and be ensured that we are not the ones being deceived for eternity.

Evolution is driven by the fear of religion, and the necessary religious consequences if evolution were to be abandoned. At the cutting edge of scientific discovery, evolution is losing rapidly against strong creationists’ arguments and an increasing number of creation scientists. So strong is the creationist position now that, people like Richard Dawkins avoid public debate with leading creationists, and there would be no argument any more if it was not for the fear of religion and hatred for God’s Word. The general public is also changing slowly in the western world, but evolution still dominates education, government funding, and the media due to a misapplication of the boundary between religion and secularism. The truth of creation lies outside of naturalistic science by virtue of the narrow definition of “science”, and therefore the very truth of our origin is excluded from secular education because it fits into the definition of “religion.” And millions are deceived. Yet there is hope. The internet, especially, has brought creationist arguments, formerly banned from education and public libraries, accessible to people who used to think that there was an opposing religious view but not an opposing scientific view.