Biology Texts, Lies & Peer Review

Under totalitarian regimes scientists play the tunes of the politicians.  But this is true down through history and to varying degrees in all countries.  Many American universities will exclude any professor who questions evolution.  They will drum him or her out of the university.  Evolution is too weak of a theory to survive honest inquiry.

Macro-evolution presumes that all life descended from early single-celled creatures.  But in order to prop up macro-evolution the biology texts must use several examples of micro-evolution (i.e. genetic remnant variation), which is not evolution at all.  Built-in genetic variation evidences a wise Designer, not that evolution is some automatic process that came into being all by itself.

We've read the biology texts. Creationists are strong enough to hear both sides and then discern the truth. Most evolutionists are stuck back in consensus opinion.  "The scientists said it, I believe it, that settles it."  They never hear of all the errors and fabrications built into evolutionary beliefs.

Dr. Kent Hovind has an entire seminar (#4) which discusses:  "Lies in the Textbooks."

Remember when the consensus of scientists was that the rest of the universe revolved around the Earth? They believed that for over 1,000 years.  The scientists were wrong and they had errantly taught the theologians and other educated colleagues of this belief.  Their books later had to be revised after Copernicus and Galileo showed that all the scientists had been wrong on this for over a millenia.  Later in France the other scientists mocked Louis Pasteur too; again scientists wrong.  They stood together against Einstein's relativity also, right?

Does the highly vaunted peer review process help or hinder science?  When peer review is like peer pressure - then it holds us back.  Remember that our universities won't allow dissent from the belief in evolution, even though science shows that it cannot possibly be true.  And the only way they can teach their theory to students is by propping up false data that has been disproven long ago.  On the one hand the evolutionists charge the creationists with not publishing in their peer reviewed journals, but they have forgotten to tell their students that any research submissions that question evolution automatically gets rejected from publication in the first place.  Convenient.

In ClimateGate many people learned that scientists are first human.  They lied.  Humans are sinners.  They fudged on the data and hid some things in order to preserve their supposed consensus.  "All the real scientists believe in Global Warming"; and only "flat earthers" disagree, they contended.  Self-deception and pride played integral roles in their belief system.  Peer pressure (peer review) and exclusion prevented honest scientific inquiry.  Someday EvolutionGate will be an even larger debacle.  Scientists are firstly human and when in sin humans want to hide from God, and that means that they cannot even consider creation theory (which necessitates a Creator), no matter what the evidence shows.  They have to cling to either evolution or to alien implantation, otherwise it would be logical for them to submit to God.  So they hide.

Open a few biology texts and logically question the consensus.  Here is a small organization that rates science (and other)school textbooks for accuracy, noting their errors: "Educational Research Analysts"

"Biology Texts, Lies & Peer Review"

Main:  EN_Articles