Why should Creationism be taught beside Evolution in public schools? I have done some research on this and quite frankly, I have to say that any evidence for Evolution is either dubious or completely faked. In fact, if you look at one of the major illustrations used in science textbooks today, you will find that it is completely inaccurate. This illustration is the well-known picture of the ape-to-man timeline which begins with a picture of an unassuming ape and continues with more human-like primates until we finally see a hairy cave-man. The artist’s perception is probably very unlike the actual organism looked. Why? Because the skeletons are hopelessly incomplete. Look at Lucy (Australopithecus)- she has very few bones about her and only six shards make up her skull! Another one of the “link” skeletons is but a broken skull, which could be placed together in a plethora of ways to make it appear either more human-like or more ape-like. The rest follow this pattern. And yet we are teaching our children that these are without a doubt our ancestors. Very sad.
It is not just this way with homo sapiens. It is this way with every genus. Why are all the missing links still missing? How come the fossil record isn’t showing any evidence for evolution? And why don’t we teach Evolution as a hypothesis, which is what it is?
Much to the chagrin of Evolutionists, the geological record follows the Creation theory much more closely. In addition, a worldwide flood is the only explanation for many inexplicable findings. The Cambrian Explosion shows many fossils together which shouldn’t belong together, according to Evolution. So why don’t we teach Creationism? Why don’t we encourage school kids to think for themselves and choose what makes the most sense to them? Cramming only one idea down their throats (not just in science, but also in History classes) makes for TV watchers and passive bystanders, not critical thinkers, avid readers and enthusiastic, active citizens.
Mike Snavely (http://www.natureofcreation.org/)
I recently had the privilege to hear Mike Snavely speak at a seminar for three or four sessions. One of his sessions was called “Aunt Lucy?” and part of what he spoke about is featured in this article. If you ever have the chance to hear Mike Snavely speak, I encourage you to do so. His sessions and the Aunt Lucy one in particular are extremely infomative, well-researched, and interesting.