Apologeet.nlDr. Hovind’s Seminar Transcripts
Seminar 4a: Lies in the Textbooks(previous 1999 version of this seminar)
Indoctrination or Education?
Well, thank you for joining us today. My name is Kent Hovind; I live in Pensacola, Florida. I was a high school science teacher 15 years. And now I travel around and speak on creation, evolution and dinosaurs. In the first sessions we talked about the age of the Earth and how dinosaurs fit into the Bible; but in this session I want to talk about things in the textbooks that you kids have to face when you go to school in a secular school or a secular university. Things that simply are not true.
The DilemmaAnd it’s always amazed me in my 15 years of teaching science how two people can look at the same thing and come to opposite conclusions of what they are looking at. Two people can look at Grand Canyon. They are both looking at the same canyon. One guy believes in evolution, so he looks at the canyon and he says, “Wow, look what the Colorado River did for millions and millions of years.” The Bible believing Christian stands there, looks at the same canyon and says, “Wow, look what the flood did in about 30 minutes.” How was that canyon formed? Was it a little bit of water and a whole lot of time. or could it be a whole lot of water and a little bit of time? Sometimes there are two different ways to look at things. And if a teacher is only showing you one way to look at things, they’re not educating you, they’re indoctrinating you. Which may be good-the Bible is good for doctrine. However, in the humanist school system, I’m afraid kids get indoctrinated with evolution only and they’re never shown the other way to look at things.
The Calf PullerI’ll give you another example. Anybody in the crowd know what this thing is? Yes sir, what is it? That is a calf puller. A what? A calf puller? Yes. You see, once in a while a cow has a hard time having that baby calf and so they get the calf puller out there, put the cable around the calf’s legs and jack the calf out of the cow. You get a few tons of pressure on there and the calf will come right out-no problem. Well this farmer was out pulling a calf one day. It was a breach birth-the back feet were coming out first. Not good. And so the farmer had the calf puller out there and he’s trying to pull the calf out. And a city fellow stopped his car to see what on earth is going on. And the farmer said, “Wait, come here and give me a hand will you?” And the city fellow said, “Me? I don’t know anything about cows.” He said, “Just give me some help, would ya?” He said, “Okay, okay.” So the city fellow helped him pull the calf and about ten minutes later they are walking up to the barn, going to get washed up. And the farmer said,”Have you ever seen anything like this before?” And the city fellow said, “No sir, I’ve never seen anything like this.” The farmer said, “You got any questions?” He said, “Yes sir, I’ve got one question, it’s been bugging me for ten minutes.” The farmer said, “What’s your question?” The city fellow said, “Sir, how fast do you figure that calf was going when it ran into that cow?” No, no, no, no you are looking at this all wrong fella. We are not separating a wreck here. Sometimes two people look at the same thing and one of them is getting the wrong idea.
ScoffersYou know, the Bible warned us that was going to happen. In II Peter chapter 3 it says, “Knowing this first, there shall come in the last days scoffers.” Did you know there are people that scoff at the Bible? I deal with them on a regular basis. I attract them like a magnet! Scoffers.
Why They Scoff
And it says they are going to walk after their own lusts. See, the reason they scoff at this Book is because of their sin, not because of their science. There is no scientific reason to reject the Bible. But they don’t like this Bible because it chaps their hide. Well, get some Vaseline, man, you are going to need it! Because we’re going to be judged according to this book-whether you like it or not.
What They Scoff
But the scoffers walk after their own lusts and they’re going to say, “Where’s the promise of His coming, for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” [2 Peter 3:4] That’s an extremely important phrase. The scoffers are going to teach something in the last days that means ‘the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening-long, slow, gradual processes called Uniformitarianism.’ The Bible warned us in 2 Peter that the scoffers are going to teach the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening. The problem with that is, the scoffers are willingly ignorant. It says in the next verse, they are “Willingly ignorant.” In the Greek, that means ‘dumb on purpose.’
The scoffers are willingly ignorant of how God made the heavens (and heaven is plural. There is more than one heaven; we talk about that in videotape number one. There is more than one heaven.) They’re ignorant of how God made the heavens and the earth and how it was standing out of the water and in the water. The earth when God first made it was a lot different than it is today. It used to have water above the atmosphere and more water under the crust of the earth and we talk about all that on videotape number one and on videotape number six. But the scoffers are ignorant about the creation and they’re also ignorant of the flood.
The next verse tells us, “Whereby the world then was, being overflowed with water perished.” The world was destroyed by a flood. You see, the scoffers don’t want to admit God created the world because that means God owns it. And that means there might be some rules. You know, like “Thou shalt not…” And they don’t want those rules so they scoff at the Bible. Rather than change their lifestyle and get right with God, they try to eliminate the thing that’s bothering them, which is God’s word. They’re also ignorant of the flood. They don’t want to admit that there was a flood because if there was a worldwide flood, that means God has a right to judge His creation. And He does by the way; this is His world. He can wreck it if He wants.
Now, one of the scoffers in the last days was a guy named James Hutton. James Hutton lived in the late 1700’s. He was a scoffer. James Hutton did not like the Bible for some reason. And James Hutton especially did not like the idea that the earth was only about 6,000 years old and God created it. So in 1795, James Hutton wrote a book and said, “I think the earth is much older than most people think.” I think they started off with about 80,000 years. He said that the earth was about 80,000 years old. By 1900 they were teaching the earth is 2 billion years old. Now they’re up to 4.6 billion years old. So I figure the earth is getting older at the rate of about 65 million years per year. It’s aging rapidly folks! But you have got to understand, in the late 1700’s most people believed the Bible and most people thought the earth was about 6,000 years old.
But that was also the time of many revolutions. Many countries were trying to get rid of the king or monarchy as a form of government and they were trying to establish a democracy where the people rule. Revelation 3 talks about that-the Laodicean age, the rule of the people. I think that started about this time when they tried to eliminate the king. There were many revolutions: the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the German Revolution, the Polish Revolution, the Spanish Revolution. All these countries were throwing off the king. It was an age of anti-monarchy-which may or may not be good, I don’t know-but that’s not the point. The point is they were looking for a way to get rid of the king but the Bible says to honor the king. And so some of these folks thought the Bible stood in their way for their political objectives. And so they wanted to discredit the Bible for political reasons, which goes back to what Jesus said: “The love of money is the root of all evil.” They wanted financial control and ultimately a one-world government (which we get into later in the seminar about how this evolution theory is responsible [as] the foundation for the philosophy that leads to a one-world government with Satan in charge). But the Bible says honor the king and they didn’t like that so they tried to discredit the Bible.
Now, see, even the textbooks admit [that] in the late 1700’s that almost everybody thought the earth was only a few thousand years old. But James Hutton came along and developed his idea called uniformitarianism. (Oh, big word-that will be on the test.) Uniformitarianism means ‘the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening.’ Long, slow gradual processes. They’ve got a fancy phrase for that. They say, “The present is the key to the past.” Well, the problem they don’t understand is that’s just simply not correct. The Bible is the key to the past. But these guys wrote about Uniformitarianism and long, slow and gradual processes and James Hutton’s book had a very profound influence on a man named Sir Charles Lyell.
Charles Lyell was a lawyer from Scotland. He also hated the Bible. Charles Lyell, as I said was a lawyer (somebody told me recently that they figured that if all the lawyers in the world were laid end to end around the equator, we would all be better off) but Charles Lyell hated the Bible. And in 1830 Charles Lyell wrote this book, Principles of Geology, Volume one, (I’ve got all three volumes all marked up). In this book right here Principles of Geology, Charles Lyell’s hatred for the Bible kind of oozes off every page. He talked about ‘ancient doctrines’ and ‘those who rest on scriptural authority.’ He talked about how ‘religion does not mix with sound philosophy.’ In other words, if you believe the Bible you can’t really have sound philosophy. He was always looking for ways to put the Bible down. I mean, you can read through this book and see all sorts of slams against God’s Word. ‘Those whose beliefs are founded on religious prejudices’ and ‘men of superior talent ([now] he’s talking about himself) who thought for themselves.’ I mean typical scoffer type vocabulary. He just scoffed at the Bible all through this book.
The Geologic Column
And Charles Lyell in 1830, building on the work of some other guys and along with some other guys, he really developed what we call the geologic column. How many have ever heard of the geologic column before? All the textbooks teach this in the public school system and all the ones on earth science or geology or even biology. The geologic column was invented in the early 1800’s and it’s by William Smith and Cuvier and some other guys, but Lyell was the primary culprit as far as I can figure out. In that geologic column, they took the earth (which has many layers to it) and they gave each layer a name and they gave it an age and they gave it an index fossil. Like, for instance, maybe you saw the movie Jurassic Park. Well, the Jurassic was supposed to be an era that lived millions of years ago and they have an index fossil of the dinosaurs. So each layer of the earth was given a name, an age and an index fossil.
Where’s the Geologic Column?Now, you might want to know a couple of things about this geologic column-and I taught earth science for 15 years-the geologic column is the bible to the evolutionists. That’s their bible folks. Secondly, it can only be found one place in the world-in the textbook. The geologic column does not exist in reality. The textbooks admit that. “If there were a column of sediments…unfortunately no such column exists.” The whole thing is imagination.
Now, it is true, the earth has many layers. That is not the question. I’ve been to the Grand Canyon, Royal Gorge, been to 49 states and 20 countries, been to the San Andreas Fault, the Hayward Fault, the New Madrid Fault-none of them are my fault but I’ve been there, done that, seen that, have a T-shirt. There’s no question the earth has layers. The question is how did they get that way? How did the earth get all those layers?
Rock Layers and the FloodThere might be two ways to look at that. (How fast was that calf going?) Keep that thought in mind. It could be that each of these layers is a different age or it could be all of those layers were dumped off in one big flood. You know, if you had a flood lasting for 12 or 13 months, like the Bible says the flood lasted-.
See, just the earth turning under the moon-the moon causes the tides, and if the earth were totally covered by water the tides would become harmonic. You music folks understand that. People have calculated that the tides would go [through a] 200-foot tidal change. If the earth were covered with water, there would be no continents to stop them. And with a 200-foot tidal change every 6 hours and 25 minutes, you would get reshuffling of the sediments down at the bottom for thousands and thousands of feet. You would get over a mile of sediments down there in finely stratified layers.
You can get a jar [of mud] out of your yard here, put some water in it, shake it up and set it down it will settle out into layers for you. Hydrologic sorting. They say those layers are different ages, I have a hard time with that because don’t you think if each one of those layers laid there for millions of years waiting for the next one there would be a few erosion marks in-between the layers? Why are there no canyons and gullies and cricks in-between the layers? I mean, why is it all stacked up like pancakes? Those layers are not different ages and the Grand Canyon did not take millions of years to form.
Colorado River in Grand Canyon
I was in a debate a few months ago and the professor said, “Mr. Hovind, obviously the world is millions of years old. Look at Grand Canyon. It would take millions of years to form Grand Canyon.” I said, “Sir, did you know that the top of Grand Canyon is higher than the bottom?” He said, “Yes.” I said, “Well, did you know the river only runs through the bottom?” He said, “Well, yes.” I said,”Did you know the top of the canyon is higher than where the river enters the canyon? So if that river made that canyon, it had to flow uphill for millions of years to cut the groove deep enough to flow down hill.” I don’t think so. I don’t think the river made that canyon. I think the flood made Grand Canyon, probably in a couple of hours when the mud was still soft and there was lots of water running through. We cover lots more on that in video number six about the flood.
Circular ReasoningBut oftentimes there are two ways to look at things. (How fast was that calf going?) I took my family one time when I was preaching in Union Center, South Dakota. Now, Union Center, South Dakota is not quite the end of the world, but we could see it from there. We were close. I mean, it’s the middle of nowhere. There were forty people in the whole town. Thirty-eight of them came to church. (I don’t know where the other two were, out pulling a calf I reckon.) But anyway, we had a great meeting. And the preacher said,”Hey, Brother Hovind, lets get the cars and vans and lets go down to Rapid City, South Dakota, where they’ve got a museum with a bunch of dinosaur bones in it.” I said, “Alright, I like dinosaurs, lets go.”
In the Museum
So we all drove down to Rapid City, South Dakota. We walked in this museum and a guide, an older fellow met us at the door and he said, “I’m a guide here, would you like me to give you a tour?” We said, “That would be great, sir.” The first place we stopped on the tour was a great big huge chart all lit up called the ‘Geologic Time Scale.’ The geologic column. And the guy started his speech right there. He said, “Ladies and gentlemen, this layer of rock you’re looking at here, is about 70 millions of years old.” My daughter was twelve at the time. She raised her hand. She said, “Sir, how do you know how old the rock layers are?” He said, “That’s a good question honey. We tell the age of the rock layers by the types of fossils they contain. They’re called index fossils.” She said, “Thank you, sir.” We walked around the other side of the dinosaur. We’re standing over there and the guide said, “Now, ladies and gentlemen, these bones you’re looking at here are about a hundred million years old,” or something like that. And my daughter raised her hand again. She said, “Uh, sir-how do you tell the age of the fossils?” He said, “That’s a good question honey. We tell the age of the fossils by which layer they come from.” She said, “Excuse me sir, but when we were standing over there, you told me you knew the age of the layers by the fossils and now you’re telling me you know the age of the fossils by the layers.” She said, “Isn’t that circular reasoning?” I thought, “Wow, a chip off the old block!” That guide had the strangest look on his face. It was almost as if he were thinking. He looked at my daughter; he looked at me. I wasn’t about to help him. I thought, “Wow! This is going to be good!” He looked back at my daughter and he said, “You know, you are absolutely right. I never thought of that before.” He said, “That is circular reasoning.”
That poor fellow drove fifty miles one way that night to hear me preach in Union Center, South Dakota. The crowd swelled to thirty-nine. We set up a chair in the aisle. Afterwards, he talked to me for nearly an hour. He said, “Mr. Hovind, is everything I believe about geology wrong?” He said, “I teach this stuff at the college.” I said, “Oh no, no. Man, I like geology. You learn lots of good stuff. You learn all the names of the minerals.” Just that’s a good trick folks. There are 1200 minerals, some have names about that long. I said, “You learn to prospect for ore, the hardness test, the Rockwell test, the scratch test.” I said, “No, no. I like geology and there’s nothing wrong with geology. But as far as the layers being different ages,” I said, “Yes sir, that’s all bologna.”
Blinded by Money
Now, he doesn’t dare quit teaching it because he’ll lose his job. And kids you might as well learn this today: to some people in this world, money is more important than truth. And if they have to lie or teach a lie to keep the paycheck coming in, they will do it because money means more to them than what happens to you if you believe their lie. And there are teachers all over the world that do not believe in evolution but continue to teach it because they’re afraid they might lose their job. We know who their god is, don’t we?
The Bible talks about those folks whose god is their belly. They are more worried about keeping that paycheck and keeping that food coming in, which is really what it boils down to. Well, you’ve just got to make a decision some time in your life if you’re going to serve God you’ve got to decide, I don’t care what anybody else thinks. I’m just going to serve God. Like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. We don’t care what Nebuchadnezzar says. We are going to serve God. If that means going to the den of lions or the fiery furnace, “Well, okay!” Boy, we need some folks with some backbone like that; who are just going to stand up and say I’m going to do what God says regardless of what anybody else thinks about it. But there are a lot of teachers, even Christian teachers in our public school system, that teach evolution for fear of losing a job. They are cowards. They should quit. They should get an honest job picking peaches or changing tires and quit destroying boys’ and girls’ lives. That’s my humble opinion on the subject. Anyway, I have a lot of humble opinions on lots of things we’ll talk about.
Rocks by Fossils or Fossils by Rocks?
So, let’s see what the evolutionists say about this circular reasoning in the textbooks. Do they really use the fossils to date the rocks and the rocks to date the fossils? Well, here’s Glenco Biology. On page 306 they date the rocks by the fossils. On the very next page, page 307 they are dating the fossils by the rocks. Circular reasoning right in the text book. “The intelligent layman has long suspected the use of circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling the explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results.” (J.E. O’Rourke) “Ever since William Smith at the beginning of the nineteenth century, fossils have been and still are the best and most accurate method of dating and correlating the rocks in which they occur. Apart from very modern examples, which really are archeology, I can think of no cases of radioactive decay being used to date fossils.” (Derek Ager) Don’t tell me they date those layers by carbon dating or potassium argon dating, or rubidium strontium, or lead 208, or lead 206, or U235 or U238; that’s not how they date them! They date the rock layers by the fossils in every case. “Paleontologists cannot operate this way. There is no way simply to look at a fossil and say how old it is unless you know the age of the rocks it comes from.” Quote goes on. “And this poses something of a problem. If we date the rocks by their fossils how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record.” That’s Niles Eldredge, one of the biggest evolutionists there is. American Museum of Natural History in New York. He knows it’s circular reasoning.
How about this: “The rocks do date the fossils but the fossils date the rocks more accurately.” (Figure that one out) “Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.” (J.E. O’Rourke) They have to use circular reasoning. “The charge of circular reasoning in stratigraphy can be handled in several ways. It can be ignored, as not the concern of the public (In other words, it is none of your business) or.it can be denied, by calling down the Law of Evolution. It can be admitted, as a common practice.. Or it can be avoided, by pragmatic reasoning.” (J.E. O’Rourke) Don’t tell me that you know the age of those rocks or those fossils because they are both based upon each other. It’s all based on circular reasoning.”.evolution is documented by geology, and. geology is documented by evolution.” (Larry Azar) Figure that one out, would you please. It’s all based on circular reasoning. It cannot be denied.”.from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists here are arguing in a circle.” (R.H. Rastall) They date the rocks by the organisms they contain and the organisms by the rocks they are found in. Folks, it’s all based on circular reasoning.
I like to show evolutionists the geologic column, and I ask them this question: “Now, fellows,” I’ll say, “You’ve got limestone scattered all throughout this geologic column. I mean there is limestone and shale and sandstone and conglomerate and limestone and sandstone and limestone and shale. And I say,”How do you tell the difference? If I hand you a piece of limestone, how would you tell the difference between 100 million-year-old Jurassic limestone and 600 million-year-old Cambrian limestone? I mean, how would you know how old it is?” There is only one way they can tell the difference: that is by the index fossils. It’s all based on that. “Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first.” (J.E. O’Rourke) They don’t date them by carbon dating folks; it’s all based on fossils.
Trilobites and GraptolitesThis is from a textbook. It shows a trilobite. It says, “Trilobite fossils make good index fossils. If a trilobite such as this one is found in a rock layer, the rock layer probably formed 500 million years ago.” You think the rock with the trilobite is 500 million years old? Well, I have a question. How come somebody found a human shoe print where somebody with a shoe on had stepped on a trilobite? They asked geologists all over, how could a human step on a trilobite? I mean trilobites lived 500 million years ago, man didn’t get here until three million years ago and he didn’t start wearing shoes until five thousand years ago. How can this be? One geologist said, “Well, maybe aliens visited the planet 500 million years ago.” Yes, that will do it every time. Another guy said, “Maybe there was a larger trilobite shaped like a shoe that fell on a small one.” Oh there are some big ones, but they are not shaped like a shoe.
Anyway, if you took this fossil and showed it to any University professor who believes in evolution, and said, “Sir, how old is this rock?” He’d say, “Ah, this is an easy one. This contains an index fossil. That index fossil is in graptolite, and the graptolites lived 410 million years ago. It’s the New York State fossil.” That’s what they said until 1993 when they found that graptolites are still alive in the South Pacific. Oops. Well, now, think about it. If they are still alive, maybe they lived between 400 million years ago and today. Maybe they could be found in any rock layer. Maybe all of the dating we’ve done by geologic positioning is bologna, and it is by the way. By the way, there is good indication that some trilobites are still alive in the Deep Peruvian Trench. In the Pacific Ocean. All that geologic dating is crazy. However, it has a profound influence on folks. As we’ll see in a minute.
Other Evidences“Dinosaur blood found in bone. Medical pathologists examined dinosaur bone under a microscope and found dinosaur blood inside the bone.” (Earth June 1997) How could the blood survive seventy million years? Well, it couldn’t but they don’t want to admit that. Eighteen million-year-old Magnolia leaves from Idaho shale were still green when the rock was cracked open. Kind of interesting don’t you think? Folks, those layers are not different ages and if you’ve been taught that the earth is millions or billions of years old, you have been either lied to or deceived. Hopefully, the teacher doesn’t know they are lying to you. But they are regardless. It’s a lie. The earth is not millions of years old. Those layers are not different ages.
Petrified TreesHere is a petrified tree standing straight up running through many layers of rock strata. Now, think about it for a minute. If those layers are different ages, you’ve only got two choices: the tree stood there for millions and millions of years and didn’t rot or fall down, or it grew through seventy-five feet of solid rock looking for sunlight. Which do you prefer? Petrified trees standing straight up are found all over the world, folks. They are called Polystrate fossils. Evolutionists have no explanation for this. I’ve seen lots of them. Petrified trees standing up. How can this be? Well, according to evolution, this is a real problem. They call it a geologic enigma. Because it doesn’t fit the theory. Sometimes the petrified trees are upside down running through many rock layers. Explain that one, would you please? The tree grew upside down for millions and millions of years? “That sun is up there somewhere, we’ve just got to find it, boys-keep growing!” I don’t think so.
No, this geologic column does not exist anywhere in the world. But in spite of that it has had a profound influence. It has changed people’s worldview. The geologic column was accepted in the early 1830’s-long before there ever was any carbon dating. That was done in 1950. But it turned people away from a Biblical worldview. Up until that time people accepted the Bible as God’s word and the earth is about 6,000 years old and the world was destroyed by a flood. It was just a common, accepted worldview. This geologic column is one of the primary things that changed people’s minds about the authority of God’s Word. And it is still taught in your textbooks today, by the way, in earth science and geology classes.
The Geologic Column and Charles DarwinEspecially this had a very profound influence on Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin graduated from Bible College to be a preacher. The only degree he ever got, by the way. Charlie Darwin, at age 22, fresh out of Bible College, couldn’t get a job. So his dad pulled a few strings and got him on board HMS Beagle. He was going to sail around on this ship for five years collecting bugs and birds for somebody back in England.
Where Darwin Went Wrong
While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read. He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever. Later in life he said, “Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life.” As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old. That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it. It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.
Later in life Darwin said,”Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress.” By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today. But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.
Leap of Faith
As Charlie sailed around the world, he came to the islands off the coast of Ecuador, South America, called the Galapagos Islands. There on those islands Charlie noticed there were fourteen different varieties of finches. He studied the finches carefully and he said, “You know what? I think all of these birds came from a common ancestor.” I bet you are right Charlie-it was a bird. Which is all correct; they probably had a common ancestor. But then Charlie made a giant leap of faith and logic in his book, which I have right here. Charlie said on page 170, “It is truly a wonderful fact that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other.” Whoa, now hold on a minute Charlie. I’ll go along with all of those birds coming from a bird, but that doesn’t mean the birds are related to the bananas. But isn’t that what he’s saying? Am I reading that wrong? Birds and bananas are related? That’s exactly what he was saying. See, what happened, Charlie got all confused with the two different meanings of the word evolution.
Now, there [are] two different Charlie’s. We’ve got Charlie Lyell and Charlie Darwin. Call them Chuck one and Chuck two or Chuckles for short if you’d like. But Charlie Darwin said, “All the animals and plants are related.” Charlie actually observed what we sometimes call micro-evolution.
Micro vs. Macro EvolutionNow, I object to the use of that term. We really should just call it variation. It’s a variety. But they call it micro-evolution. Okay for the sake of argument, we will use their word but I don’t like the word. I think it is deceptive. Micro-evolution tells us that dogs produce a variety of dogs. Nobody is going to argue with that. Probably the dog, the wolf and the coyote had a common ancestor. But stand 30 feet away and look at it. It still looks like a dog. This is not a banana or a tomato, it’s a dog. Anybody can recognize that. And roses produce a variety of roses.
Now, if you are going to get into a discussion on evolution or a debate (I had one last week in Detroit, I’ve got one this week in Peoria, one two weeks next to that in Georgia)-if you are going to get into a debate on evolution, let me just tell you, you have to do this. First thing you must do is define the word. “What do you mean ‘evolution’?” Because there are two different meanings to the word and this is where all of the confusion comes in. And you will never get any place in the discussion unless you define the word. Micro-evolution is a fact of science. It is observable, it is testable, it is demonstrable it is also scriptural. The Bible says, “They bring forth after his kind.” You might get a big dog or a little dog, but it is still a dog. And it could be the wolf, the coyote, and the dog are related. I wouldn’t argue about that. They are still the same kind of animal. And a three year old could tell the difference. Okay boys and girls, here we have a dog, a wolf, a coyote and a banana. Which one is not like the others? Well, duh. A three-year-old can figure that out. The Bible says, “The animals bring forth after his kind.” Not after his species or variety. After his kind. Ten times that phrase appears in the first chapter in the book of Genesis. I think God wanted us to get the message. They bring forth after their kind.
But what happened, Charlie somehow in his mind made a giant leap of faith and logic from seeing the micro-evolution into believing in macro-evolution. See, macro-evolution says the dog and the rose are related if you go back far enough in time. And the ancestor ultimately was a rock. Now, the evolutionists really get upset when I say that but I say it anyway. I’m not trying to upset them, but I’m trying to make them realize how dumb their theory is. They believe 20 billion years ago, there was a big bang, where nothing exploded and produced everything. Figure that one out. And then 4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and developed a hard rocky crust. And it rained on the rocks for millions of years and turned them into soup. And the soup came alive about three billion years ago. And this early life form found someone to marry. (A pretty good trick!) And something to eat. And very slowly evolved into everything we see today. That is the evolutionary teaching in a nutshell.
One lady came to me after a debate one time. She taught at this university I was speaking at. She said, “Mr. Hovind, tonight you said that we believe we came from a rock! We do not believe that!” I said, “Well, ma’am, do you believe in evolution?” She said, “Yes, I do!” I said, “Well, then do you believe that 20 billion years ago there was a big bang?” She said, “Yes, I do.” I said,”Do you believe 4.6 billion years ago the earth cooled down and developed a hard rocky crust?” She said, “Yes, I do.” I said,”Do you believe it rained on the rocks for millions of years and turned them into soup, and the soup came to life about 3 billion years ago?” She said, “Yes.” I said, “Well, then you believe we came from a rock.” She said, “No, I believe we came from a macro-molecule.” I said, “Where did that come from?” She said, “Well, it rained on the rocks for millions of years….” It finally dawned on her. She does believe we came from a rock. And I don’t care if you want to believe that. You can believe that if you want. But don’t call it science. That’s not science-that’s a pagan religion. It’s a dumb one, too, by the way. Macro-evolution is the other meaning of the word. And Macro-evolution is the other meaning of the word. And what they do is give the kids millions of examples of micro-evolution and try to make them believe in macro-evolution, and that is where it gets deceptive. Macro-evolution is a fantasy. It’s based upon imagination. We’ve never seen it in nature. Can’t find any fossil evidence of it. You can’t even imagine how it could happen. It’s just a fantasy; but they will give the kids millions of examples of micro-evolution and try to make them believe in macro-evolution, which has only been assumed-it has never been observed. It’s a religious world view.
So when I say evolution, I’m talking about macro-evolution. But if you get into a discussion with some professor someplace, and you start using the word evolution, and when you say, “I do not believe in evolution,” he will be thinking of millions of examples of micro-evolution, which is true. And he doesn’t understand how you can’t see it. ‘How can you be so blind as to not see this?’ But you are thinking of macro-evolution and you don’t understand how he can see it. And there is no communication taking place. You are not talking the same language and that is why you will never get anywhere with this guy or girl. If you are talking about evolution, you have to define the word.
Variation of Corn and CowsNow, I come from Illinois, corn country. There are so many kinds of corn down there that they have to number them. You’ll see XL 1047, don’t mix it up with XL 1029-something will blow up. But I’ll tell you right now, folks. You can cross breed your corn from now until the cows come home and you’re always going to get corn. You will never get a hamster, or a tomato or a whale to grow on that cornstalk. It won’t happen. All you are going to get is a variety of corn. Sometimes pretty wild varieties, but you are just going to get a corn that’s all you are going to get.
Sometimes you get a variety of cows. This is what farmers do for a living. They try to get a new variety that’s bigger and better or something. And the cows probably all had a common ancestor. A cow. That’s not evolution, that’s variation (which they like to call micro-evolution). But really it is a variation. That’s not evolution.
Variation with LimitsSee, variations do happen. That’s not the question. However, they have limits. Haven’t the farmers been trying to raise bigger and bigger pigs? Do you think they will ever get a pig as big as Texas? Probably not. I bet there is a limit in there, isn’t there. Haven’t roaches become resistant to pesticides? They will say, “See, Mr. Hovind, roaches have become resistant to pesticides, that’s evolution.” No, no it is still a cockroach. And their resistance has limits. I bet they will never become resistant to a sledgehammer. In an evolutionist’s mind, they have no limits. This variation that does happen and is observable and stays within the kind, somehow the Devil has tricked them into believing that this goes on forever and there are no limits to these evolutions. Plus they are still the same kind of animal. It’s still a pig, or still a cockroach, or still a dog-it’s not anything different.
Genetic Information Already PresentAnd another major point, the information was already present in that creature for the variation. If you had a million cockroaches and you sprayed pesticide on them and it kills all but a hundred of them, the resistance was already in the cockroaches. The pesticide didn’t add the resistance. It just allowed that section of the population to survive.
Another major factor they don’t like to admit, when you get done going through this resistance phase, you have now limited the gene pool. What you have left is roaches that are resistant to a particular pesticide, but the genetic information is very limited from the original grandpa cockroach. So it’s not going to help the species anywhere. Somehow in their mind they think it does.
Three Bad Books (Overview)
Several books had a profound influence down through history. Charlie Lyell’s book is based on James Hutton’s book. James Hutton really said the earth is millions of years old. He took away the authority of the scripture in the time factor. Along came Charlie Lyell’s Principle of Geology, published in 1830, and he took away the flood. The Bible says there was a flood that destroyed the world and made all of the sediment layers, and Charlie Lyell took that away from us. He said the present is the key to the past. Then along comes Charles Darwin’s book, published in 1859, and he said all things come from a common ancestor. He took away the Creator. These books had an incredible influence on the world. And what this book particularly did to different people is unbelievable folks. (We cover that on videotape number five, about the influence of evolution on communism, socialism, Marxism, the New World Order. Very politically incorrect. You don’t want to watch that video. I recommend that no one buy that one.) All three of these false teachings: Millions of years, uniformitarianism, slow gradual processes, and evolution saturate textbooks today.
Lies in the Textbooks
For many years I have been collecting public school science textbooks. I have lots of them. My wife says too many. I don’t think I have enough yet. I’ve got hundreds. I’ve got them from many countries, in many languages, many years, many publishers. I collect public school textbooks. There is a lot of good science in the textbook, folks. Lots of good science. But there is some poison mixed in there. I’m afraid some teachers are trying to use those books or those classrooms to teach evolution instead of teach science. I don’t mind if a book is about science. But some of these books are not about science, they are about evolution instead. They’ve mixed the two together so much, they think they go together. And they are trying to convert people to their belief. Which is normal. Everybody tries to convert people to believe like they believe. We all do that. If you think the Green Bay Packers are the best team, then you try to make other people think that way. Everybody tries to convert people to their belief. But if you are going to lie in order to do it, now there’s a problem. I don’t mind if the evolutionists want to convert people to their belief. I do mind if they want to use my tax dollars to do it. And I do mind if they are going to lie to do it.
No EvidenceThere are some lies in the textbooks. The textbooks say, “Boys and girls we’ve got evidence of evolution. We have evidence from fossils.” Not true at all. No evidence what so ever for evolution from the fossils, as we’ll see later. But they say, “Boys and girls we have evidence from structure. The design of the bones, we’ll talk about that in a minute. Evidence from molecular biology. Evidence from development-Embryology. We will talk about that in a minute. And they say natural selection is what causes all of this.
Now, just hold on a minute. Evolution is based on two faulty assumptions: number one, they assume mutations make something new and natural selection makes it survive and take over the population. Neither of those has ever been observed. But that’s what they base everything on. The textbooks say, “Mutations provide the source of variations.” That is how evolution is supposed to work. A mutation causes something new. Well, mutations do happen, that’s not a question. Here’s a five legged bull. He has an extra leg growing out of his back. Now, he can’t run any faster. Mutations do happen but they are harmful or fatal or neutral. And even if you can get one that you can claim might be good, who is it going to marry? And who are its kids going to marry? It is going to get blended back into the population. The chances of it taking over a population are zero. This is not going to happen. But they believe it did. Mutations happen. Here is a short legged sheep. Notice the textbook says, This “Mutation would not last in nature.” Well, of course not, he is the first one the wolf is going to catch! “Go boys go! Here comes the wolf! Well, Herman didn’t make it! Sorry about that.” Here’s a two-headed turtle. That’s a mutant. Not ninja but mutant. He is going to freeze first winter. Nobody makes a double necked turtle neck sweater. See, mutations are harmful or fatal or neutral.
A mutation is a scrambling up of information already present. It doesn’t add something new. It takes information already there and scrambles it up. It’s like taking the letters of the words Christmas. You can scramble them up and get all kinds of different words. But you are never going to get Xerox, zebra or queen from the letters in Christmas. It’s not available. And a mutation can only take gene pool information already present; it can’t get something new. The bull got an extra leg. He did not get a wing, a feather or a beak. He already had information to make a leg and it made one in the wrong place, that’s all. That’s not going to make something new. But somehow these evolutionists think mutations can create something new. And that simply does not happen.
Natural SelectionThen they say natural selection makes the new one survive. This textbook says, “Natural selection causes evolution.” Now, just hold on a minute. Natural selection is kind of like God’s quality control.
How many of you have worked at a factory someplace where they’ve produced something, and when they got to the end they checked it before they sent it out the door to sell it? Have you ever worked at a place like that? I worked at General Motor’s truck and coach in Pontiac, Michigan when I went to Midwestern Baptist College (I graduated back in ’74. I worked my way through school working the second shift at General Motors). We built trucks. The medium sized big truck. The dump truck size and school bus size C60 and C70 series. Those things came down the line and we did our thing. Put on the screws, nuts and bolts, fender and hoods and motors and all of that. When it got to the end of the assembly line, they checked it. If they found something wrong, it was rejected. That’s normal. Every factory does that. Quality control. Now, quality control might be good and it might be bad, but let us suppose you had some guys that were eagle eyed, I mean they caught every mistake. Nothing got past those quality control guys. How long would it take that process of quality control to change that truck to a helicopter? You say, “Well, it will never change into a helicopter.” Well, that is precisely the point. See, quality control cannot change the product. It just keeps it good. That’s all it can do.
And natural selection cannot change the animal. It just makes it good. Keeps it good. That’s all it can do. Christians have nothing against natural selection. We thought of it first. It happens folks. Natural selection can only act on properties that are already present. It cannot create anything new. So don’t let them tell you that natural selection is part of evolution. It is not! It is part of Creation. God wants a species to stay strong. And by the way, ‘survival of the fittest’ is a phrase they often use, but ‘survival of the fittest’ does not explain arrival of the fittest. It doesn’t tell you how it got there does it? And if a whale goes through a school of fish and eats 80% of them, it’s not survival of the fittest. It is called survival of the luckiest. Which is really a little more toward reality. What really happens.
Good Observation, Bad ConclusionsSee, some people are capable, I’ve learned, of making good observations. Like the strongest survive. That’s a good observation. But they still come to the wrong conclusions. Just because the strongest survive doesn’t mean they evolved to get there. It could mean that they were created.
Jump, Frog, Jump!
Example; there were some brilliant scientists one day who wanted to see how far a frog could jump. They put the frog down on the ground and said, “Jump, frog, jump!” The four legged frog jumped 80 inches. They said, “Wow!” They brought him back and cut off one of his legs. And said, “Jump, frog, jump!” The three-legged frog only jumped 70 inches. They brought him back and cut off another leg. “Jump, frog, jump!” The two-legged frog only jumped 60 inches. They brought him back and cut off another leg. “Jump frog jump!” The one-legged frog only jumped 50 inches. They brought him back and cut off his last leg. “Jump, frog, jump!” The frog didn’t jump. They expected the frog to jump 40 inches based on their observations. But he actually jumped zero. So they tried it again. “Jump, frog, jump!” Frog didn’t jump. After concluding the experiment they came to several conclusions. Number one, the frog jumped less every time the legs were removed. Good observation. Conclusion: a no legged frog goes deaf. No, no, no. It’s possible to have good observations and still get a bad conclusion folks.
Did you know the lug nuts from a Chevy would screw onto a Pontiac? That’s a good observation. So that proves that a Chevy and a Pontiac both evolved from a Honda 29 million years ago. Bad conclusion. Just because someone has a good observation doesn’t mean a thing. He may still have the wrong conclusions.
For instance, when I was in school we did the fruit fly experiment. They raised flies in the laboratory. They nuked them, they microwaved them, and they x-rayed them. They got those flies to have mutated babies. They got flies with curled wings. They fly around in circles and couldn’t go anywhere. Flies with red eyes, and white eyes and brown eyes. They got flies with no wings at all! What do you call that? A crawl? Can’t fly. After raising 80,000 generations of flies, they concluded: “Well, boys and girls, we have some conclusions to reach. All the mutations that we observed made the fly worse off than great, great, great, great grandpa fly.” Good observation. Everything they did to those flies wrecked them. Conclusion: “Flies must have evolved as far as they can go.” No, no, no. (Jump, frog, jump.) You’ve got the wrong conclusion. It could be that God made the flies right the first time. Why do they have to conclude evolution is done?
I know in England someone went around and counted the moths on the trees. (Must have been a government project.) They discovered it was 95% light colored moths only 5% black. Then they started burning coal in the factories and the trees turned black and they went around and counted the moths again and found that it was now 95% black moths and only 5% light. They said, “Wow, look at this! Evolution right in front of our eyes! The white moth evolved into a black moth!” No, no, no. See, when the tree turned black the white moth lost his camouflage. They were burning coal in the factories and made the trees turn black and he lost his camouflage. He stuck out like a sore thumb and he got eaten by a bird. And the black moth had more babies that survived. But they said, “Boys and girls we can conclude that the moth population ratio shifted from mostly white to mostly black.” That’s true. “The moth population was able to adapt to a new environment. See, boys and girls, this helps prove we all came from a rock.” No, no, no. Actually the peppered moth is proof of design.
They even had the kids do activities on this one. “Boys and girls get a large piece of black paper one meter square.” (By the way, I like to kick this dog every time I walk by. Did you know all of the new textbooks that I’m aware of are metric? Now, I understand the metric system very thoroughly. I taught physics. I’ll take a metric quiz against anyone you know. But I’m not sure I want a kid coming to help build my house that doesn’t know what a two by four is. So if you are a patriot, make your paper a 39.37 inches square instead.) “And then get 200 black circles and 200 white circles and cut them out and throw them on the paper. Okay now, boys and girls. We are going to see how many can pick up the most in one minute. Ready, set, go!” Well, of course you are going to pick up the white circles off of the black paper! You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. And then they say, “See, boys and girls, this proves evolution.” No teacher I think this proves that we have extra money to waste in our school district. We just cut up a whole bunch of good paper and threw it on the floor.
Actually the peppered moth is proof of design. God designed the animals to survive in any environment. If it is dark or light they can still survive. That’s called planning ahead. By the way, the variations in the moth, the dark and the light variety, it’s still a moth. And it has limits. They never got a pink one, or an orange one or a green one. There are limits to the variations, and it was already programmed into the code of the moth gene pool. That’s not evolution.
And see, providing two colors in the gene pool is pretty smart thinking. Did you know that Ford and General Motors put heaters and air conditioners in some of their cars? I’ve seen them. I drove one. Wait a minute. Doesn’t a heater and an air conditioner do the opposite thing? Oh yeah. Well, isn’t that dumb? No, that’s called planning ahead. They don’t know if it is going to go in a warm climate or a cold climate. So you put them both in there. The peppered moth is an example of God thinking ahead. That’s not evolution that’s an example of Creation.
Trick QuestionsAnd then they tell the kids, “Boys and girls, we want you to think critically.” Now, look at this sentence.”Do you think humans are still evolving?” What kind of question is that? That’s one of those questions like,”have you stopped beating your wife yet?” Well, now, hold on a minute. If I say yes then I’m admitting I did. If I say no then I’m still doing it. I mean that is one of those unanswerable questions. Right? Doesn’t the question in the text book here assume that evolution did happen? Do you think they are still evolving? Wait a minute. That’s not teaching the kids how to think. That’s teaching them what to think. That is brainwashing. If a kid does not believe in evolution at all, how is he supposed to answer that question? He’s got a problem doesn’t he? That’s not thinking critically. That’s brainwashing.
Comparative AnatomyThen they tell the kids, “Boys and girls, we have evidence from structure. Yes, boys and girls, did you know you have two bones in your wrist? The Radius and the Ulna. And do you know, boys and girls, that the whale has two bones in the flipper and they are called the Radius and the Ulna.” Wow. Who named them teacher? The whale? I doubt it. “Yes boys and girls all these animals have similar bone structure.” Here is what the textbook says;”Comparative anatomy provides further evidence of evolution. The commonalities suggest that these animals are all related. They probably evolved from a common ancestor.” Uh, excuse me teacher. There may be two ways to look at that. (How fast was that calf going anyway?) Maybe this proves that they have a common designer. A similar structure might prove that the same guy designed all the animals instead of a common ancestor. But they conclude many animals have similar forelimb structures. That’s true. They must have had a common ancestor. False. This helps prove it came from a rock. False. But that’s supposed to be evidence for evolution. They’ve got it in the textbooks.
EmbryologyThen they are going to say, “Boys and girls, we’ve got evidence from development.” What do you mean by that teacher? “Well, you know, when the babies develop inside the mother they go through similar stages. And evolution is broken down into four stages. We went through the fish, amphibian, reptile and mammal. Just memorize the word ‘farm’. F.A.R.M. And you got it. Fish, Amphibian, Reptile and Mammal. And, boys and girls, the embryos growing inside the mother go through similar stages.” That’s bologna, by the way! They say the human starts out with gill pouches. Gills? You mean like a fish? Gills? Oh, that’s exactly what they mean. They are going to say the human has gills. Now, just hold on a second. There are folds of skin in the embryo but those are not gills. They are little folds of skin that later develop into the Mandible, the Masseter muscle, and the Sternocleidomastoid. It has nothing to do with breathing. I’ve seen fat people with five or six chins. They can’t breath though any of them but the top one. Those are not gill pouches, folks.
A guy named Ernst Haeckel made up this whole thing back in 1869. See, Charlie Darwin’s book came out in 1859. He said, “We should find evidence for my theory.” Ten years later they had none. So Ernst Haeckel in Germany-who also hated God-Ernst Haeckel said,” I’m going to make some evidence.” He took the drawing of a human and a dog embryo at four weeks development and he changed them and made them look exactly alike. There are the drawings he made. He traveled all over Germany with his fake drawings and just about single-handedly converted Germany to being atheistic. Ernst Haeckel was the evangelist for evolution in Germany in 1869. He took his drawings, right here, made huge posters and he went around holding seminars like I’m holding today. He held seminars on evolution in Germany. He had these drawings that he made right there showing the different animals and how their embryonic stage is nearly identical.
Well, somebody a few years ago decided to check out his drawings and see how accurate they were. On top are Ernst Haeckel’s drawings; on the bottom are actual photographs. He blew it. He lied, actually. And it was proven that he lied. He was taken to court at his own university, the University of Jena. And he was convicted of fraud in 1874. One hundred and twenty-five years ago Ernst Haeckel confessed to lying about this embryology thing. He lied. And he confessed it. But guess what. That concept is still in textbooks today. Holt Biology 94 edition shows the human embryo with gill pouches. Proven wrong 125 years ago. Glenco Biology showing the human embryo with gill pouches. Simply a lie. College textbooks still have it. Proven wrong in 1874. This textbooks shows a five to six week embryo but look what it says: “By seven months the fetus looks from the outside like a tiny normal baby but it is not.” It is not a baby at seven months? Well, what is it? Kids are born at less than that and still survive. Aren’t they? Let’s see, the angel of the Lord said, “Behold, thou art with fetus.” No, “Thou art with child.” See, it’s a child the instant it is conceived. But why do they keep this lie in the textbooks anyway?
Tie to Abortion
Well, it is the only way to justify abortion. See, they want people to believe in abortion and what evidence do they have that it is not a human? It is obvious it’s a human! But they want you to think that it is not a human yet. You might have heard of Ana Rosa. She had her arm chopped off in a botched abortion. She was born anyway, missing an arm. As far as I know, she’s still alive today. Ask any abortionist: you say, “You think that’s bad what happened to Ana Rosa?” They will say, “Oh, that’s terrible!” And then ask them, “Well, what if they would have cut her head off instead?” Would have been fine then, wouldn’t it? According to their thinking. By the way, it is happening right now as we speak. 4,500 abortions taking place today. It’s murder folks! Just plain murder! The Bible says,”Cursed be he that taketh reward to slay and innocent person.” These doctors get paid under the table, tax-free $150-$250 bucks every time they do an abortion. No accounting process. The Bible says there is a curse on them.
“Choice Above All?”
Now, I live in Pensacola, Florida. You might have heard of my town. We have had two abortion clinics-two or three-blown up or burned down, and two doctors shot and killed. I didn’t shoot any doctors and I didn’t blow any clinics up. And I don’t think Jesus would do it that way either, by the way, but-. Jesus grew up under Roman control. He didn’t go around blowing up tanks and burning down bridges. But the doctors were murderers, plain and simple. I was preaching in Ft. Lauderdale the day the first doctor got shot. And the next day I was flying home to Pensacola. And there on the airplane right in front of me were two of the ladies-I’m sorry-two of the women from NOW (National Organization of Wild Women). They were going to come up to Pensacola and hold a big rally and march around town holding their signs “PRO CHOICE!” “PRO CHOICE!”
Have you noticed the news media and the textbooks call them “Pro Choice” and they call us the “Anti Abortion.” There is a reason they do that. See, nobody wants to be an “Anti.” It’s a little negative jab they get in there. “Oh, you’re a antiabortionist.” Well, how about they call us “Pro Life” and them “Pro Death.” That would be fair wouldn’t it?
Anyway, as we are getting off the plane walking down the gangway, I notice these two ladies, I’m sorry; women had on their shirts in huge block letters”CHOICE ABOVE ALL”. So, being my mild mannered self, I said, “Excuse me, ma’am, what does this mean, ‘choice above all’?” She said, “We believe a woman ought to have the right to choose.” I said,”Choose what?” She said,”choose if she wants to have an abortion. It’s her body you know!” “Well, yes ma’am if she wants to abort her body I suppose that is fine. Looks to me like she wants to abort somebody else’s body!”
I said, “Ma’am, I’m kind of curious about this. I’ve got three kids. I delivered one of my kids at home. I taught biology and anatomy. I used to raise hamsters. I’m kind of familiar with how this works.” I said, “Tell me, why does the woman’s right to choose stop at birth? I mean, if that is really what you are worried about (the right to choose), let’s let the mother choose to kill the baby after it’s born. It would be a lot safer and simpler. I’ve got a brilliant idea! Let’s extend abortion rights up until the kid is two years old.” I know a lot of mothers with a two year old that have thought about it a time or two. (I won’t make you raise your hand, but I know you are out there!) Hey, I’ve got a brilliant idea, let’s extend abortion rights up until the kid is 18. I bet they’d behave a lot better! “Look son, one more time and I’m going to abort you.” “Teacher, where’s Johnny today?” “Well, Johnny didn’t do his homework last night so his mommy aborted him.” Hey, grades would sky rocket wouldn’t they?
Well, the ladies-I mean the women did not want to talk about it anymore. So they went down and got their luggage and I got my luggage and I’m waiting for a taxicab to take me home, you know. And I got talking to a cameraman. He showed up from Chicago, I believe, to film this rally. And I thought, “Wait a minute. Six people are going to march around town and it’s going to make worldwide news? You could have a hundred thousand people line your street against abortion and it wouldn’t make the news!”
Have you noticed that? That’s why I don’t take the paper. We get a call once a month around our house. “Mr. Hovind, would you like to take the paper?” I say, “No, I don’t have a parakeet.” Lady called about a month ago, “Mr. Hovind, would you like to take the Pensacola News Journal?” I said, “No, ma’am, we don’t have a parakeet.” She said, “What?” I said, “We don’t have a parakeet. I don’t need the paper.” She said, “I don’t understand.” I said, “Well, look ma’am, when we had the parakeet we needed the paper but now we don’t have the parakeet so we don’t need the paper.” She said, “Sir, what are you talking about?” I said, “Ma’am, I know you are just on the phone trying to sell me a paper, you don’t work for them. But I don’t want to take that liberal rag. I don’t want my money to support that propaganda. Sorry about that.” The only thing I could think that it is good for is wrapping mullet or under the parakeet’s cage.
Anyway, the cameraman and I were talking and I said, “You know, I live right here in Pensacola, and I think there are two things wrong with what happened to this doctor.” He said, “Oh, yeah? What’s wrong with this?” I said, “Well, there should have been a trial first. Nobody should be shot without a fair trial.” I said, “Secondly, the state of Florida should have shot him, Griffith shouldn’t have shot him.” If you don’t understand my position on abortion, see me later. I’ll try to clarify it for you.
But you know the logic they use to try to justify abortion is absolutely crazy. They are going to say, “It is not a human.” Well, I’m sorry. That was proven wrong in 1874. You need to get up to date on your science. It is human the instant it is conceived.
They are going to say, “Well, it is not viable. It can’t live on its own.” Well, neither are you viable stark naked on the North Pole. I mean, is the baby viable after it is born? Lay it on the sidewalk for a couple of months and let’s see how it does. Now, think about that logic. Just because it can’t live on its own, we have the right to kill it. I know kids that are 25 that still go borrow money from dad.”Hey, uh, dad, can I borrow some money?” [Gun shot noise] “You ought to be able to live on your own by now, son.” Justifiable homicide.
How about this: the child might be unwanted. There are a lot of kids that are unwanted. That doesn’t mean we should kill them. My parents moved four times when I was growing up, but I found them every time. How about this: the child may be a financial burden. Well, show me a kid that is not! Every kid is a financial burden. Come on.
They’re going to say, “Well, it may be from rape or incest.” Well, then you kill the rapist, not the baby. Execute the rapist and adopt out the baby. See, in case you don’t know how it works, there are three people involved here: the mother, the father and the baby. If we have to murder one of them, why is it always the baby? Why don’t we abort the mother once in awhile? I’ve got a brilliant idea. Pass a law in your state that says, “If a woman goes in for an abortion, the doctor will have a bag with four marbles in it. One marble is labeled “Baby.” One marble is labeled “Mother.” One is labeled “Father.” And one is labeled”doctor.” You reach in the bag and pick out and decide who dies. Give it a lottery. Give the baby a sporting chance. Don’t you think that would be reasonable? I bet that would stop abortions in a hurry wouldn’t it?
They say, “Well, what if a woman is raped?” Okay now, think about that. Suppose a woman is raped and gets pregnant and has the baby. Five years later, she’s holding her five-year-old and it reminds her of the horrible experience. So she kills the five-year-old. Is it murder? Obviously! Of course it is murder. Now, what is the difference if she kills it afterward? It is still bothering her. It’s still the same folks. There is no difference. It’s still murder.
They are going to say, “Well, abortion is legal!” Just because it is legal doesn’t mean it is right. Did you know that in 1936 the German Supreme Court declared that Jews were not persons? If you are Jewish and you live in Germany you are not a person. So when Hitler’s guards killed the Jews it was perfectly legal. They had no rights what so ever. They slaughtered them by the millions, folks. It was murder. I have been there before. I’ve stood next to the ovens. Watched the place where thousands and thousands of them died and were cooked to ashes. They’ve got a giant mountain there where the people are buried. I was there a few weeks ago in Nürnburg in the courtroom where they had the trial. The Germans stood up and said, “We were just following orders and it was perfectly legal.” Did their logic hold up at the trials? No. And you abortionists, your logic is not going to hold up at God’s trial either. It is murder plain and simple. You know, during the Revolutionary War 25,000 Americans died. During World War to 400,000 Americans died. So far in the war on the unborn we have had 38,000,000 babies murdered by abortion. And we pray “Oh God bless America.” God says, “Forget it. I’m fixing to judge you folks.” We deserve God’s judgement.
In 1916 this lady-this woman I mean, Margaret Sanger founded a group called Planned Parenthood. Now, Margaret Sanger was a racist. She hated Blacks, Hispanics, Jews anyone who wasn’t Aryan. They wanted to eliminate those inferior races and let the white race thrive and survive. But clear up until 1952 when planned parenthood published this document about how to plan your children, (you know, birth control stuff-they answered questions in this document. What is birth control? Is it an abortion?), back in 1952 they said, “Oh definitely not. An abortion requires an operation. It kills the life of a baby after it has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health and it may make you sterile.” Boy, they have changed their tune haven’t they? Now 300 million tax dollars a year goes to support planned parenthood, killing babies all over America. There is probably a clinic in this town. Funded by your tax dollars.
Why Satan Loves Evolution
I think Satan is using this evolution theory because he hates humanity. You see, Satan lied to Eve in the Garden of Eden and said, “You can be like God.” And he’s been using that lie to get some people to think that they have evolved farther than other people and it is really better if they eliminate these inferiors.
See, Satan’s ultimate plan here is to get humanity to destroy each other. He hates humanity. And this evolution theory is a lie. He’s been using this theory for 6,000 years to get humans to fight against each other. Through ‘racial ethnic cleansing’-through genocide. World War I and World War II were direct results of the philosophy of evolution. The reason we have communism in the world. How many folks have died because of communism? It is directly because of evolution thinking. See, communism and Christianity are polar opposites. They can’t go together folks. I’ve got a lot more on that on videotape number five about how evolution ties in. Satan is using this evolution theory to destroy humanity. Here we are killing the babies; next it will be infanticide (killing them if they are deformed, after they are born), genocide, the elderly (euthanasia-Jack Kevorkian (Jack the dipper) up in Michigan killing the people if they are old and out of service for humanity or whatever his thinking is). In the next session, we are going to show you some more lies in the textbooks and tell you what you can do about it. Some practical steps. Don’t miss that one, coming up next. Thank you so much.
Seminar 4b: More Lies in the Textbooks
Converting to Atheism
In the last session, we talked about some things that the textbooks show the students that simply are not true. Anyone who believes something wants everyone else to believe like they believe. That’s normal to try to convert people to your belief. There are some that believe in the theory of evolution and I think there are probably four reasons why they believe in that theory and we’ll cover that some other time. But some people like this evolution theory and they want other people to believe in it. And so they are trying to push their belief in our school system.
The typical atheist knows he cannot get a crowd together. If you ran an ad in your paper saying, “Atheist meeting tomorrow night,” you know: three people would show up. But if you run an ad about a Creation seminar, you’d get hundreds or thousands of people to show up. So the atheist knows he cannot get people to come together for a meeting and preach his “Gospel” (or whatever he calls it) the normal way. The only way they can get other people to believe in their theory is to let all the taxpayers pay for it to be taught in our school system. So a few dedicated atheists or agnostics or skeptics or evolutionists can get evolution into the textbooks and that way all of us pay for their religion to be spread in the school system. So in this session we want to continue what we covered last time about some lies in the textbooks and what you can do about it.
The AppendixTextbooks often say that there are vestigial organs. This textbook says that the appendix is a vestigial organ. Now, wait a minute, vestigial is supposed to mean you don’t need it anymore. Excuse me but you do need your appendix, okay? It’s part of the immune system. If your appendix is taken out, you can still live; but just because you can live without it doesn’t mean you don’t need it. You could live without both of your legs and both of your arms too. That doesn’t mean you don’t need them. And by the way, the whole idea of a vestigial structure is the opposite of evolution.
The appendix is not vestigial first of all, and so it is a lie to teach that to the kids that it is vestigial. And even if there was a vestigial structure, that’s the opposite of what they need. So they say, “You know, man has a smaller appendix than a horse.” Well, that may be true. It definitely is true. But that doesn’t prove we are slowly losing our appendix. We’ve just got a smaller appendix than a horse that’s all. See, what they do is look at any evidence and it becomes evidence for evolution in their minds. And that simply is not fair to teach the kids only one way to look at it.
Whale PelvisThis textbook says, “The whale has a vestigial pelvis.” Look what it says here: “Many organisms retain traces of their evolutionary history. For example a whale retains pelvic and leg bones as useless vestiges.” It is in many, many textbooks. They talk about the whale having a vestigial pelvis. Now, excuse me, that is not a vestigial pelvis! Those bones are necessary because muscles attach to those bones. And without those bones and those muscles the whales cannot reproduce. It has nothing to do with walking on land. It has to do with getting more baby whales. So the author that wrote this is either ignorant of his whale anatomy and should not be writing a book about it, or he’s a liar trying to promote his theory. I guess we can give him the benefit of the doubt and call him dumb. I hope he’s not lying to the kids deliberately. But that is not a vestigial pelvis. And those pages ought to be cut out of the textbook.
But here we have a children’s book.
Whales & Dolphins
The first sentence in the book says, “Just imagine whales walking around. It’s true.” That is pure propaganda. There is not one shred of evidence for that. Now, if someone wants to believe that, I suppose that’s fine. They can believe In the Tooth fairy, the Easter bunny, and Santa Claus, and evolution. I don’t care what they believe in. But I sure resent my tax dollars going to pay for that junk to go into the school system.
Human TailboneThis textbook says,”Humans have a tailbone that is of no apparent use.” I couldn’t believe it when I read that. I was doing a debate in Huntsville, AL. I was debating the president of the ‘North Alabama Atheist Association’ or something like that. And he got up in front of God and everybody and said, “Folks, we’ve got proof for evolution. The humans have a tailbone they no longer need.” When it was my turn I got up and I said, “Mr. Patterson, I taught Biology and Anatomy. I happen to know there are nine little muscles that attach to the tail bone without which you cannot perform some very valuable functions.” I will not tell you what they all are, but trust me, you need those muscles. I said,”However Mr. Patterson, if you think the tail bone is vestigial, I, Kent Hovind will pay to have yours removed. Bend over.” Anyone who says that the tailbone is vestigial is either ignorant or a liar. Tell them I said so. But folks, that is propaganda. That should not be in a textbook. Textbooks ought to be accurate. That’s not accurate, that’s pure propaganda.
No Vestigial OrgansThere actually are no vestigial organs. In the early days they said there were over 200 vestigial organs. That’s because they didn’t know the function of them, that’s all. They thought the pituitary gland was vestigial. I mean they had whole lists of vestigial organs. There are no vestigial organs and even if there were that’s the opposite of evolution. That’s a lousy way to have your theory work. Show kids things that they are losing and that is supposed to explain how we got it all? I don’t think that is good evidence.
Adaptation or Design?
In the textbook it says, “Plants have adapted to their environment. The pitcher plant has adaptations to help it get nitrogen.” What? Why do they say the plants have adapted to their environment? Now, you’ve got to watch out. That’s a code word. They are going to use that word a lot in textbooks because they don’t want to use the word designed. This textbooks says, “Gills are an adaptation to living in water.” Well, how did the fish live before he adapted the gills? Why don’t they say that it’s a design feature? Obviously gills are designed for breathing under water. Well, they don’t want to say that because then some kid is going to say, “Who is the designer?” So they very carefully avoid use of the word”design” because it might bring up, you know, embarrassing questions like, “Who’s the designer?”
The WatchmakerBy the way, you don’t have to see the designer to believe He exists. You believe a lot of people exist that you’ve never seen. For instance, I have a Casio Databank stop watch-$50 at Wal-Mart. This thing holds a hundred and fifty phone numbers. It’s a calculator, a stopwatch, and an alarm clock. It does not tell time-you have to look at it. But this is an amazing machine. Now, I don’t have to go to Japan and see the guy who made this to believe he exists. See, when you see a complex structure like a watch it is common sense to say, “There must be a designer.” I don’t have to see Him to believe He exists. There just must be one, that’s all. When you see a complex machine, you should come to two logical conclusions: there is a designer and he’s pretty smart. And when you look at science-whether it is through the telescope or microscope-when you look at anything in nature you should come to two conclusions: there is a designer and He’s pretty smart.
Science ought to bring students to the Lord. But Satan is using it to bring students away from the Lord. And I resent that. I like science. I taught it for 15 years. I’ve got nothing against science. But I sure resent this evolution propaganda being stirred in with our science. That’s not fair.
Mt. RushmoreI like to ask evolutionists this question when they say there is no designer. (By the way, as far as I know, this is the world’s largest rock group. I’ve never seen a bigger one.) I’ll say, “Fellas,-.” (some of you are going to get that by Monday.) I’ll say, “Fellas, do you believe that there is any way these faces could have appeared on this rock by chance? Do you think the wind did that? Do you think erosion did it? How about exfoliation? What about thermal expansion of rock? I mean what caused this anyway? They are going to say, “Well, obviously it was designed.” Oh well, very good. Now, I have another question,”Do you believe the men represented here happened by chance?” If they believe in evolution, they have to say “Yes.” And I’ll say, “Now, wait a minute. You don’t think that their face could come on a rock by chance but you do think their whole complex anatomy with 50 trillion cells could happen by chance. I just have one question if you believe that. “Are you dumb in any other area? Or is that the only one?” It had to be designed folks. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Evolution?This textbook says, “Boys and girls, we are going to talk about the origin of life. Swirling in the waters of the oceans is a bubbling broth of complex chemicals. Progress from a complex chemical soup to a living organism is very slow.” I guess it is-totally stopped. Doesn’t happen at all. And they tell the students in school that life evolved from non-living material. I mean, is that scientific? This textbook says, “Most important events occurred during the Archean era, the most important of which was the evolution of life.” And again it says, “Progress from complex molecules to even simplest living organisms was a very long process.” Didn’t happen at all. They just tell the kids it happened. Look at this textbook. “The first self replicating systems must have emerged in this organic soup.” Must have happened-after all, kids, we’re here. I mean, that is their thinking process. How about this one: “The first living cells emerged (there’s that word again) between four billion and 3.8 billion years ago. There is no record of the event.” That’s pretty handy! “Now, look kids, you’re going to be tested on this but there is no proof.” You call that science? They just believe it happened. They take that totally on faith.
Producing Life in the Laboratory?
Miller’s ExperimentThey tell about Miller and Urey trying to make life in the laboratory back in the fifties. They made this glass tubing where they circulated four gases through there. They very carefully excluded oxygen, I’ll tell you why in a minute. But they had these gases going through this tube system. An electric spark was supposed to simulate lightning strikes in the pre-biotic soup. And then they had a trap at the bottom to trap out anything that was produced. Well, did they make life in the laboratory? Absolutely not! Never came close.
Back in the 1950’s, Urey and Stanley Miller wanted to know how the earth and solar system had come to be. I could have told them. It is right in the Bible. “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” That’s what it says. It’s real simple, folks-not that complicated.
And then it says he [Miller] never proved how life originated. But the students are taught that he made life in the laboratory. Or that life can come from non-living material. That’s what the textbooks teach. Now, is that true?
Engineered EnvironmentWell, Miller and Urey, in their experiment, both excluded oxygen. There is a reason they did that. They had what’s called a reducing atmosphere. The problem is if you have oxygen, that creates what’s called ozone. And ozone is essential to filter out UV light. You have to have oxygen to make ozone. And ozone has to be there or else the Ultra Violet light comes down and destroys anything here on earth. So they have to have oxygen or you cannot get life to evolve because it would be destroyed.
Another problem: oxygen is found in the lowest rock layers. I don’t believe the geologic column exists anywhere in the world. But even by their thinking, the oldest rock layers have oxygen in them.
Also, one of the gases he used was ammonia and UV light will destroy ammonia. So he has to have oxygen to make this work. Life couldn’t possibly evolve without oxygen. The problem is if you have oxygen, it will oxidize whatever you make.
See, in the experiment he had, he very carefully trapped out the product that he made. He filtered it out so it wouldn’t circulate through again because the lightning strike would be millions of times more likely to destroy what he made then it would be to create what he made. That’s not realistic for real life. You don’t get to trap out what you make when you are in the ocean.
What he made was 85 % tar, 13 % carboxylic acid, and only 2 % amino acid. And out of that only 2 amino acids were created. And those amino acids quickly bond with the tar or the carboxylic acid. He came nowhere close to making life. And the amino acids he made, [there were] basically only two and there are twenty different ones required for life. No, don’t let them tell you that they made life in the laboratory.
Amino Acid ScrabbleSee, amino acids are sort of like letters of the alphabet. There are 26 letters in the English alphabet and from those 26 letters you can make millions of words. And you can arrange those words and make an infinite number of sentences. So, what he made was like making a few letters of the alphabet. Problem, half of those were right handed and half were left-handed. If you dropped letters on the floor, half of them would land upside down and backwards. Well, that’s not any good for making a common sense word. And half of the letters he made were backwards. There was a real problem with that. The smallest proteins have 70 to 100 amino acids in precise order and they are all left-handed. DNA and RNA are all right handed and there are millions of those in order. Now, what are the chances of dropping letters of the alphabet on the floor and ending up with 70 to 100 of them in an exact order, all of them right handed? The chances are zero! That will never happen! But the evolutionist has to believe that it happened. They take that totally on faith. They have not made life in the laboratory.
Brownian MotionBy the way, proteins (which they wanted to create from those amino acids-[amino acids] bond to make proteins) they un-bond in water much faster than they bond, and the oceans are completely full of water to the top. And Brownian motion is going to drive them away from each other. It is not going to bring them together. This experiment was a total failure.
Evidence of The CreatorThey tell the kids, “Boys and girls, we are going to think critically.” Here we go again with their thinking critically. It says, “There are twenty kinds of amino acids” that’s true. Kind of like 26 letters of the alphabet. “Explain how this fact supports the idea that all life shares a common ancestor.” No, teacher, this fact supports the idea that all life comes from a common designer. And it’s a good thing all life forms have those 20 amino acids, otherwise you would not be able to eat anything except other humans. You wouldn’t be able to digest them. They are all made out of the same amino acids so we can eat other things, folks.
If all you need to do is put all of the molecules together in one place to create life-and somehow that is what they think in their mind: “If we get all of the molecules together in one place it will automatically create life.” Well, if you really believe that, put a frog in a blender and turn it on. You will have all of the molecules to make a frog in one place. Let it run for millions and millions and millions and millions of years. How long would it take to create a frog? It won’t do it will it? Never going to work!
Evolutionary Family Tree Hoax
The textbook says,”Humans probably evolved from bacteria that lived more than four billion years ago.” We started off like bacteria? Yes. They make these family trees and they put them in the textbooks. They tell boys and girls,”Hey boys and girls, we started off like a bacteria and slowly over billions of years evolved to a human.”
The Lie ExposedThese family trees that they put in the textbooks are pure propaganda. There is not one shred of scientific evidence for any of them. Even Mary Leaky, who believes in evolution, says, “All of those trees of life with the branches of our ancestors-that’s a lot of nonsense!” Even Stephen Gould from Harvard University (where they ‘pahk the cah in the yahd’ [Boston accent]). Stephen Gould said, “The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks are not the evidence of fossils.” They make it up folks! It’s pure imagination.
The Damage DoneNow, let me see if I’m reading this tree right. Is this thing trying to tell the kids that the humans on the left over here and the birds and the crocodiles and the snakes all have a common ancestor? Wouldn’t you say the average student is going to look at that chart and believe that they all have a common ancestor?
A Serious WarningNow, you don’t need to be a genius to figure out that is going to ruin some kid’s faith in the Bible. And anyone that ruins a child’s faith in the Bible should see what Jesus said about it in Matthew chapter 18. “Whoso shall offend one of these little ones that believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck. And he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Anyone that goes around teaching evolution is in serious trouble when they face God. Don’t do that! You are going to ruin some child’s faith in the Bible.
No Simple Life Forms
This textbook-from Glenco Biology, 94 edition-it says, “All the many forms of life on earth today are descended from a common ancestor.” Excuse me, isn’t that telling the kids the birds and the bananas are related? I’m not making this up am I? That’s what it is teaching! And it says, “This is found in a population of primitive unicellular organisms.” What on earth is a primitive unicellular organism? There is no such thing as we will see in a minute. And then they say, “Boys and girls, no traces of those events remain.” That’s real handy! “Now, look kids, you are going to be tested on this but there is no proof.” That’s not education, that’s indoctrination.
ParameciumAnd they talk about a simple life form. Primitive life form. Now, just hold on a minute! A single celled organism like a paramecium is not simple. You can fit thousands of those into one drop of water and yet every paramecium is more complex than the space shuttle. The most complex machine ever built by man is the space shuttle. And one paramecium has got them beat millions to one. Smaller is not simpler. Somehow in their brains they got it stuck that if it’s smaller it must be simpler. No, no, no. Microchips that fit inside a paperclip are not simple. They are small, but they are not simple.
Honeybees vs. Cray ComputersLet’s compare the brain of a honeybee, which is pretty small, to NASA’s Cray computer. The Y-MPC90. The Cray computer is huge. NASA has seven of those things. Let’s compare that to the honeybee’s brain. The honeybee’s brain is tiny. Nobody is going to argue with that. What about the speed? Well, the Cray computer can process six billion calculations per second. That’s pretty fast. The brain of a honeybee can do about a thousand billion per second. So the honeybee’s brain is about 166 times faster than a Cray computer. Pretty amazing huh? What about the energy consumption? Oh, the Cray uses many kilowatts. A honeybee only uses 10 microwatts. Did you know honeybees not only make honey, they fly on honey. That’s their energy source. And a honeybee can fly a million miles on one gallon of honey. Let me see you invent a machine that gets a million miles per gallon. My Heavenly Father did! He’s pretty smart, isn’t He? What about the cost? Well, the Cray costs 48 million. The honeybee’s brain is pretty cheap. You splat them on your windshield all [of] the time. What about the maintenance personnel? Many people have to scramble when the Cray breaks down. The honeybee’s brain? Nobody fixes that. He heals himself. Hey! Let me see you invent a computer that fixes its own problems and replaces its own hard drive when it needs it. Pretty amazing isn’t it? What about the weight? Well, the honeybee doesn’t weigh much. His brain weighs even less. The Cray computer weighs 2300 pounds.
Let’s see, what conclusions can we come to here boys and girls? The super computer is huge, it’s slow, it’s inefficient, it costs a lot of money, and you have to baby sit the dumb thing. It had to be designed. There isn’t anybody with half a brain that would say, “The Cray computer came from an explosion in an electronics factory.” Would they? And yet we have the honeybee’s brain which is faster, more efficient, energy efficient, cheap, and they say it evolved. Well, I’ve just got my same question if you believe that. Are you dumb in any other area or is that the only one? It had to be designed. You don’t need to be a genius to figure that out.
The Human BrainAnd the human brain is millions of times more complex than a honeybee’s. You know, you can walk into a room and look around the room and in one second your brain picks up enough information to keep the Cray Computer busy for 1000 years. It’s amazing!
Let’s see: if the human brain is nothing but three pounds of chemicals that got together by chance over billions of years (which is what some people think) and I tell this to atheists all of the time. They’ll say, “I believe in evolution.” I say, “Well, then you think that your brain is nothing but three pounds of chemicals that got together by chance over billions of years. If that’s true, how can you trust your thinking process? Wow, a brand new thought rattles around in there for a while and gets lost. Folks, it had to be designed. If evolution is true, you could not know that it’s true because your brain is nothing but chemicals. Think about that.
The DNA molecule in your body (the Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is the most complex molecule in the universe. The average person in this room has 50 trillion cells in their body. Each of those cells contains 46 chromosomes-except for the gammates, they’ve got 23. If you took all of the chromosomes out of your body, you would end up with about two tablespoons of chromosomes. That’s it. Extracting all of them from every cell in your body would give you about two tablespoons. But if you stretch them out, each one six or seven feet long (they are wound up like a tight little spring) if you stretched them out and tied them all together, one persons chromosomes would reach from the earth to the moon and back five million round trips. Coming out of one person’s chromosomes. Pretty amazing don’t you think?!
How Complex is DNA?And if you typed out this computer code you would find you’ve got enough code in your DNA, and it is more complex and contains more information than all of the computer programs ever written by man combined! Pretty amazing! And this unbelievably complex DNA code if you typed it all out, when you got done typing you would have enough books to fill Grand Canyon forty times.
Anybody work with computers at all? Who works with computers around here? Anybody? Alright. I want to see you get forty Grand Canyons full of books. More than ever has been written or printed or copied in the history of the world and I want you to condense it to software. You can use CD ROM, PK Zip, or SyQuest. I don’t care what you use, but when you are done it must fit into two tablespoons. My Heavenly Father did it! And it reproduces itself! Did you know you are a copy off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy, off a copy of Adam? That’s pretty amazing don’t you think? I mean that is really amazing! King David said in Psalm 139, “I will praise Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” He didn’t even have a microscope and he could figure it out! Today we ought to really be praising God. See, science should cause us to praise God. And the devil knows that, so he’s working awful hard to infiltrate science where it turns students away from God. The probability of just one DNA happening by chance. That’s a complex molecule. The chances of just one coming together in random order has been calculated to be one times 10 to the 119,000th power. That’s a big number! That would have 119,000 zero’s behind it!
Chance DNAOne professor told me in a debate-he said, “Now, Mr. Hovind, if we can just get one DNA by chance, evolution can take it from there.” Well, there are your odds against getting your first one. But I’ll give you one. I’ll give you two! I’m going to be nice. I’m going to let him start with two DNA.
I did some research on this, folks. I decided the more chromosomes you have, the more complex you must be because it is the most complex molecule in the universe; and so I arranged a bunch of animals and plants in order based upon the number of chromosomes they had. I discovered that penicillin has two chromosomes. Fruit flies have eight. There are a few missing links in there three, four, five, six, seven. I don’t know where they went, but I do believe from this research that I could prove that penicillin slowly evolved into fruit flies. And then over billions of years, they got more chromosomes someplace and turned into either a housefly or a tomato. (They are twins, you know! Pretty tough to tell the difference.) They both have 12 chromosomes. And then very slowly over billions of years we got more chromosomes and became a pea. And then over billions of years they got two more chromosomes and turned into a bee. Pretty close, now: bee-pea, see the similarities? And then very slowly became lettuce. And then a carrot. And when we got to 22 chromosomes a miracle took place. Did you know the possum, the redwood tree and the kidney bean all have 22 chromosomes? Identical triplets. See, that’s a possum; that’s the tree and kidney bean. Hey! Got them right! Look at that! The average scientist can’t tell the difference. They’ve got 22 chromosomes-all three of them. “Let’s see: we’ve got tree, possum, kidney bean and huh, which one is which? I don’t know.” Very slowly over millions of years we got enough chromosomes to become a human. Here we are folks: we have forty-six. And if we can just get two more we are going to be a tobacco plant! I know some that already smell like it! Sometimes I’ll get on the elevator and I’ll say,”(sniff) Man, you’re evolving! You are way ahead of me! How did you do that?” And then some day in the far distant future, we may have enough chromosomes to be a turkey-eighty-two. And some day in the way far distant future (now, this won’t happen in my lifetime but maybe star date 349572), we might have enough chromosomes to be a fern! I was in a church a few years ago and a lady came to me after church, stuck out her hand and said, “Mr. Hovind, I’m Fern!” I shook hands with that hand right there. I’ll never wash it again!
Why don’t they teach the kids about the chromosome number as proof for evolution? I’ll tell you why: because it goes totally against the theory. You won’t find that mentioned anyplace! Those are facts, folks! Chromosome number does not prove evolution. That’s all a farce, of course. And evolution itself is a farce.
Textbooks, though, say, “Boys and girls, we have evidence of evolution from molecular biology.” Oh wow, big word! What do you mean by that teacher? Well, the DNA in your body (the Deoxyribonucleic Acid-the chromosome) we’ve compared the chromosomes, or the DNA, of animals and found some similarities. This textbook says, “The percentage of DNA sequence that they have in common is how you tell evolution.” It says,”Darwin speculated that all forms of life are related.”
Duck, Monkey, or Sunflower?Then look what it says: “This speculation has been verified.” Oh now, come on teacher, you know better than that! They arrange all the animals in order based upon the similarities of their DNA. They discovered that man is only 11% different from a duck. You only missed being a duck by 11%! You might have been flying south for the winter! How many would like that about now? I saw a bunch yesterday flying south for the winter.
Look, this percentage of DNA sequencing is pure propaganda. It’s bologna! It doesn’t mean a thing! And the evolutionists understand that. We have no direct access to the process of evolution. It’s only by creative imagination that you can come up with this. They had just imagined it. They tell the kids in school that the human and the orangutans are 96% similar in their DNA structure. “And this, boys and girls, proves they had a common ancestor 15 million years ago.” Now, just hold on a minute. That does not prove any such thing! It might prove that they have a common Designer. Similar DNA codes prove the same Engineer wrote the codes. I bet I could point out that most of the stuff coming out of Microsoft has some similarities. Most of their programs are similar. That doesn’t prove they all evolved from Morse code! The same guys are writing the programs. That’s what’s going on! And there are thousands and thousands of differences between chimpanzees or apes and humans. Yet they point out the one similarity, the 99% similarity of DNA, and think that is somehow proof. But they overlook millions of other things. Monkeys cannot touch all of their fingers to their thumb. Monkeys are missing a whole section of the brain called Broca’s Convolution. Monkeys can hang upside down with their feet on a tree branch-their big toe on one side and their other toe on the other side. Try that some time! Pick a low tree branch, I would recommend. I mean there are thousands and thousands of differences. The body covering is different-the hair, of course, and its distribution across the body. There are thousands of differences. But they think there are similarities with the DNA code and so that’s the one they point to the students and say, “See, this proves evolution!”
Well, now, hold it. If you want to just pick one item and that’s supposed to prove relationship, did you know that human Cytochrome c is closest to a sunflower? So really the sunflowers are our closest relative folks. It depends what you want to compare. If you want to compare the eyes, we are closest to an octopus. Not a chimpanzee. Pick something. What do you want to compare? Human blood specific gravity is closest to a rabbit or a pig. Human milk is closest to a donkey. It depends on what you want to compare. Pick something. If there were not some similarities between us and other animals we could only eat each other. So God designed all animals from the code so we could eat other plants and animals and digest them. Not proof for evolution. It’s proof of a common Designer!
The Relationship ScamHowever, if you think similarity proves a relationship, let me show you some research I’ve been doing. I’ve been doing a lot of research on things based upon their similarity. I discovered in my research that clouds are 100% water. Watermelons are 97% water-only 3% difference. That proves watermelons evolved from clouds. Not only that, I found a missing link! Jellyfish are 98% are water and so are snow cones. So that prove watermelons evolved into either snow cones or jellyfish, I’m not sure how it happened. I’ll have to work on that some more. But it’s obvious that’s a relationship, you know.
They tell the kid, “We’ve got evidence from fossils.” Now, just hold on a minute. What fossil evidence do they have for evolution? Darwin said in his book (which I have right here)-Charlie Darwin said, “If my theory be true,” (big “If” Charlie) “Numberless intermediate varieties must assuredly have existed.” That’s correct Charlie. They must have existed-billions and billions of missing links should be there if the theory is true. But the evolutionists know it is not true. David Raup knows and he’s an evolutionist. He says, “In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions in general. These have not been found. Yet optimism dies hard and some pure fantasy has crept into the textbooks.” Crept in? David, it was thrown in purposely! They want kids to believe this theory.
Horse EvolutionFor instance, they tell the kids that the horse evolved from a four-toed ancestor. How many have ever heard of that before-about the horse used to have four toes? That’s pure bologna! That didn’t creep into the textbooks. That was thrown in! It’s in nearly every textbook, though, about the horse evolving from a four-toed ancestor. What they don’t tell the kids is that the so-called Eohippus, the ancient horse, had 18 pairs of ribs, the next one had 15 pairs of ribs, the next one after that had 19 pairs, the next one after that had 18 pairs. The rib number changes back and forth. Well, that’s kind of interesting! How is that critter going to survive? And the experts are saying, “The evolution of the horse has not held up under close examination.”
Here are some problems with the horse evolution theory. The whole thing was made up by Othniel C. Marsh in 1874. He picked animals from all over the world. He did not find them in one place and he did not find them in that order. He made up the entire thing! It’s propaganda! It was invented. Modern horses are found in layers with and lower than the so-called ancient horse. And the ancient horse is not a horse at all. It’s called a hyrax and it is still alive today in South America. It’s about the size of a fox and it’s a meat-eating animal with sharp teeth. That is just propaganda. The ribs are different, the toes are different the teeth are different. And experts are saying, “Look, that’s not a missing link. Not at all.” Tulsa Zoo finally removed their horse evolution display because 2000 people signed a petition and said, “Get that thing out of the zoo!” Why does a zoo have to teach evolution? Why doesn’t the zoo teach about animals!
Evolution is unrelated to science. Why do they feel like they have to get evolution into the zoos [and] into the textbooks? Well, folks, otherwise there is no way they can get people to listen to their religion. They have to push it off at your tax payers expense. A friend of mine wrote to the Tulsa Zoo and said, “Why do you have the horse evolution on display? It’s been proven wrong years ago.” The director wrote back and said, “We haven’t had the funding to remove it.” I’ve got all of the letters over there on the table. Man, I thought,”haven’t had the funding to remove it!?”
Yale University still has the horse evolution on display right now. I was there a couple of years ago. There while I was standing at Yale University Peabody Museum, hundreds of kids came through the museum and went past the horse evolution display and were never told it was wrong. Now, what we need is somebody at Yale who has got some intelligence and some courage to do the right thing and get the horse evolution out of the Peabody Museum. Now, are you trying to educate the kids? Or are you trying to indoctrinate the kids in your religion? And if somebody from Yale gets this tape, get that thing out of your display. That’s not science-that’s propaganda. Don’t lie to the kids. Be honest, take it down. They arrange these animals in order. And say that’s somehow proof.
Strata orderNow, look, just because you find animals buried in a certain order that doesn’t mean anything. And they do not find the animals buried in the order they would like to find them in to prove evolution. See, if I get buried on top of a hamster, does that prove he’s my grandpa? Well, no. Arranging things in order doesn’t prove anything. But let’s pretend that it does. Evolution of Silverware Okay. If you believe arranging things in order proves something, let me show you the research I’ve been doing. I’m a research scientist you know? I’ve been doing extensive research for many years on the evolution of silverware. I believe after intensive research that knives evolved first. This was billions of years ago boys and girls. And then slowly, very slowly over billions of years pressure, great geological pressure squished it. Widened it out, shortened it up, and made a spoon. And then slowly erosion cut grooves into the end and it became a short tine fork. And then very slowly (that’s the secret: slowly) over billions of years the grooves got longer and wider and it became a long tine fork. I knew I had the right order, but I feel like I had a missing link. Particularly between the spoon and the fork. You see, spoons are rounded and have no grooves. Forks are squared and have grooves. That’s two jumps in one. Even punctuated equilibrium couldn’t do that. So I knew that there must be a missing link in here. But I couldn’t find it. Until one day I was flying up to Connecticut on US Air. 30,000 feet off the ground, the stewardess walked down the aisle and handed me the missing link. I don’t think she knew what she had. But my trained scientific eye picked it up right away. “Wow! This is it!” I put it in my pocket. Later that day, I went to Kentucky Fried Chicken. Found another one! There they are folks! The missing links! So the evolution of silverware is becoming very complete. Which means I’m ready to apply for a government grant. I need about 30 million dollars to finish this research, don’t I?
Look, arranging things in order doesn’t prove anything. You can arrange words in order and prove anything you want. You can turn a cat to a cot to a dot to a dog. As a matter of fact you can play around for awhile and turn yourself into a fool. Spend all of your time arranging stuff in order. No, there is no evidence for evolution at all.
Did Birds Evolve from Dinosaurs?
Now, the textbooks are going to tell the kids, “Boys and girls, birds are the descendants of dinosaurs.” How many have ever heard of that before? Wasn’t that the whole purpose behind the Jurassic Park movie? Now, just hold on a minute, in case you don’t know, there are a few differences between a dinosaur and a bird. You don’t just put a few feathers on him and say, “Let’s go man come on you can do it!” It’s not quite that easy folks. You see, reptiles have four perfectly good legs, birds have two legs and two wings. So if his front legs are going to change into wings (besides lots of other things having to change, like the muscular system, the nervous system to control this and the brain to control flight) besides all of that, somewhere along the line, his front legs are going to be half-leg half-wing. Which means now he can’t run and he can’t fly. This guy is going to have a problem evolving through that stage don’t you think? As a matter of fact, through all the stages he’s going to have a problem evolving.
Scales and FeathersThey tell the kids though, that birds are covered with feathers, (which is true) and they are going to say, “Boys and girls, bird feathers evolved from the same scales that protected the dinosaurs so well.” Hold on a second. Feathers are extremely complex. The only similarity they have between feathers and scales is they are both made from the same protein. It is called Keratin. Your finger nails and your hair are made from the same stuff. That doesn’t prove that they are related. It proves they’ve got a common Designer. Did you know battleships and forks are both made out of the same metal? Iron. That proves that they both evolved from a tin can 27 million years ago. (Jump frog jump!) Man, you’re getting the wrong conclu-sions here folks! Similarity proves a common Designer.
Other DifferencesThere are real problems with the bird evolution from reptiles. The lungs are totally different. Reptiles have a sac type lung. Birds have a tubular type lung. Very different lung system. Modern birds are found in layers with and lower than the so-called dinosaurs. How can they be the ancestors? How can the dinosaurs change to birds? The birds were already there, even by their thinking, with their faulty geologic scale. Scales and feathers attach to the body differently and they come from different genes on the chromosome. Birds have a four chambered heart. Reptiles have a three chambered heart. Major change there, folks! How is that going to survive? In addition to just the heart changing, you have to get the nerve supply changing. And the DNA code changing so the next generation has this heart change. It doesn’t work.
Reptiles lay a leathery egg. Birds have a hard-shelled egg. There are thousands of differences between reptiles and birds. There is no evidence. And the experts know that.
Even W.E. Swinton from the British Museum of Natural History, the largest fossil collection in the world. He said, “There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved.” Now, he believes that happened, but he knows that there is no fossil evidence. But the textbooks tell the kids that there is.
ArchaeopteryxThey show the picture of Archaeopteryx and say, “Boys and girls, this is Archaeopteryx.” (Wow-big word, write that down. It will be on the test!) Archaeopteryx. It means “Ancient wing.” They are going to say, “Boys and girls, this used to be a dinosaur. This is the missing link.” It’s a bird, teacher. It’s twelve inches long. Come on! It’s the size of a pigeon. Only six have been found. Some people think they are all fakes. I don’t know. Even if they are legitimate though it’s just a bird. It’s 100% bird! The size of a crow.
Claws and Teeth
They are going to say, “Well, now, he’s got claws on his wings. Do you see those claws right there? Don’t you see? That proves he used to be a dinosaur.” Come on now, teacher. Twelve birds today have claws on their wings. The ostrich, the hoatzin, the touraco, the ibis. I can’t name them all but there are twelve birds that have claws on the wings right now! By the way, going from claws to no claws would be an example of losing something, not gaining something. Is that how evolution works? You lose everything until you have it all? I don’t get it.
Well, they are going to say, “Well, he’s got teeth in his beak! See those teeth right there? That proves he used to be a dinosaur!” Well, now, hold on just a minute, some birds have teeth, most don’t. Some reptiles have teeth some don’t. Some fish have teeth, some don’t. Some of you have teeth. Some don’t. That doesn’t prove you used to be a dinosaur. And again, going from teeth to no teeth is losing, not gaining! That’s the opposite of what we need!
Evolving a Loss?
They told me when I went to school, “Man used to have a tail but he lost it because he didn’t need it.” I thought, didn’t need it?! Have you ever thought how handy a tail would be? Have you ever come to the door with two sacks of groceries? That would be nice man. Grab that door, open it right up, and swing it around, walk right in there! Have you ever been driving down the highway and wished you had something to hold that can of Coke or tune that radio knob? It would be tougher to put your britches on, I understand all that. Somebody could figure that out, you know, put another zipper or something. I don’t know, they’d figure it out. But what do you mean lost it because we didn’t need it? That’s propaganda! These experts know that there is no evidence for any changing! They say there is fossil evidence and there isn’t!
Famous Evolutionists Admit
There is No Proof!
These experts know that there is no evidence for any changing! They say there is fossil evidence and there isn’t! Luther Sunderland wrote this book Darwin’s Enigma. He wrote to all of the major universities [and] to the museums (or visited them) and he said, “Would you please show me the evidence you have for evolution?” They said, “Well, we don’t have it here, it must be somewhere else.”
Have you ever seen that shell game where they have the three shells and they put a pea under it and they move them around and try to fool you? This evolution is a giant shell game, only there is no pea under any of them! They all think somebody else has it. Nobody has the evidence!
Luther wrote to the British Museum of Natural History. The largest fossil collection in the world and asked Colin Paterson. He said, “Mr. Paterson, I read your book about evolution but I noticed that you didn’t show us any missing links. Why not? Where are the missing links? Colin Paterson wrote back and said, “I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living (now, that’s interesting, why would you include a living one as a missing link?) He said, “If I knew of any I certainly would have included them. I will lay it on the line, there is not one such fossil.” There is no evidence for changing from one kind to another. It’s not a missing link they need folks. The whole chain is missing! And folks like Stephen Gould understand that. He said, “The absence of fossil evidence has been a nagging problem for evolution.” I guess it has Steve. You can’t find any! But he still believes in evolution.
Stephen Gould and Niles Eldredge have resurrected Gouldschmidt’s theory and come up with this idea called Punctuated Equilibrium. That’s supposed to explain why we don’t find the missing links. “Yes boys and girls, maybe a reptile laid an egg and a bird hatched out! So you see, we won’t find the missing links because they never existed!” So what you’re trying to say is, because we don’t have any proof that proves it? Hmmm, I don’t get it. It’s pretty obvious the conclusions from all these fossils that have been dug up. They’ve dug up millions and millions of fossils. Fossils are not the problem. It’s not that they are rare. It’s that the intermediates are extinct. They don’t exist. But they will say, “Well, you know, fossilization is a rare process.” Well, take a look in the dirt, man. There are billions of fossils out there. Don’t tell me it’s a rare process. The flood formed most of the fossils. That’s what they don’t want to admit. Fossils cry out real loud,”Hey! Quick, rapid burial!” All fossils seem similar to living forms. With no undisputed missing links discovered so far. That’s the conclusions of science.
But they do believe in evolution so they’ll say, “Well, since we know evolution is a fact, even though there is no evidence, this proves it happened rapidly.” Now, among many scientists who are evolutionists, here’s the argument that’s going on. They are going to say,”Darwin said evolution happened slowly. Gradualistic.” They should find billions of fossils of evidence for that. But they don’t find any. And so this new group of folks have come along called the Saltationists and they say, “Well, maybe evolution happened quickly. It happened in leaps or jumps or saltations.” See, in their little brain there is only two choices. Evolution happened slowly like Charlie said. Or evolution happened rapidly like Stephen Gould said. They don’t seem to stop to consider that there might be another choice: it didn’t happen at all.
What Evolution has Cost Mankind
Many evolutionists have admitted, though, there is only two choices, Creation and evolution. And Creation is clearly unthinkable. They won’t even consider that. But folks, I’m telling you, this evolution is a fairy tale for grownups. That’s all it is. The theory is useless. You can’t name me one scientific advancement we have because of the evolution theory. That’s not why we have lights, it’s not why we have electricity, it’s not why we have computers, it’s not why we have cars. I defy you to name me one scientific advancement because of the evolution theory. Even if it is true (and it’s not) but even if it were true, it’s a useless theory. It is of no value whatsoever. You’re wasting classroom space, classroom time, textbooks space. Get that stuff out of the classroom! Malcolm Muggeridge said, “I’m convinced the theory of evolution will be one of the great jokes of the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious a hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.” Why do people believe that dumb theory? Well, I’ll tell you why! It’s the only way to get rid of God. They have to have an explanation for how we got here and they don’t like the Bible explanation because that involves accountability. So they try to get rid of God. And they will grasp at any straw that floats by rather than the lifeboat of Jesus Christ.
Total Lack of Evolutionary Evidence
Experts are saying, “The scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men. The story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever.” “In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact. There’s no evidence for this.”
Darwin’s EyesEven Charles Darwin said in his book right here on page 217, Charlie said, “To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd.” Charlie very much was confused about the human eyeball because it is so complex. He said,”How could this thing have evolved by chance?” Good question Charlie! How can blind chance make a seeing eye? Explain that to me please! Well, the textbook says, “The complex structure of the human eye may be the product of millions of years of evolution.” Why do we have to give evolution the credit for everything when nobody knows of anything that it’s done?
God’s EyesThis textbook shows the kids a couple of different eyes and it says, “Boys and girls, you might better understand how the eye might have evolved if you can picture a series of changes.” See, you have to imagine it. Evolution doesn’t take place in the world we see today. It doesn’t take place in the fossil record so you have to imagine that it happened. Don’t you see, the devil is blinding you? The devil is laughing at you for believing that dumb theory! And he’s pushing it all over the world, but he’s laughing at folks that believe it! He doesn’t believe it! He knows it’s not true! The devil is just using it to blind people away from the obvious. The Bible says God formed the eye. In Psalm chapter 94,”He that formed the eye, shall He not see?” God ought to get the credit for what He made!
Human Eyes and Octopus EyesHere is a section of the back of your eyeball. The back of your eye is about one square inch but it contains 137 million light sensitive cells. Now, how would you like to be the electrician responsible for wiring that thing up? Would anybody like to make 137 million connections in one square inch? Anybody want to try that? I got a call a couple of years ago. This guy called up. (You never know what you’re going to get when you answer the phone in my place.) I picked up the phone and said,”Hello, Creation Science, this is Brother Hovind.” The voice on the other end said,”How can you be so dumb as to believe in Creation?” I said, “Excuse me?” He said,”How can you be so dumb as to believe in Creation?!” I said, “Well, what’s my other choice?” He said, “Evolution!” I said, “Why would I believe a theory like that?” He said, “Well, don’t you know things in this world are very poorly designed!” I said, “Like what?” He said, “Like the eyeball for instance. The human eye is a poor design.” I said, “Sir, I can see fine out of mine.” (Well, I’ve got to have a little help now with glasses when I’m reading but don’t tell anybody.) He said, “The eye is poorly designed. Mr. Hovind, don’t you know the blood vessels are in front of the retina?” I said, “Oh, yes sir I knew about that.” He said,”Don’t you know that means the light has to go through the blood vessels to get to the retina so that kind of blurs your vision a little bit. I said, “Well, I don’t think it blurs the vision any but yes it is true that the light has to go through the blood vessels. You’re right about that.” He said, “See, that’s a poor design!” He said, “The octopus has a much better eye because their blood vessels are behind the retina.” I said, “Sir, I don’t know who you are or where you are calling from, but let me explain something to you. We live in the air. UV light from the sun comes down right through the air, it doesn’t get slowed down hardly at all coming through the air and UV light will burn your retina. And so we have blood vessels in front of the retina to protect us from UV light. Now, octopuses live in the water. Water stops UV light so they don’t need the blood vessels in front. Now, if you want to swap eyes with an octopus have at it, but you’d be blind in a few days. We need the blood vessels in front. It’s incredibly designed! Do you have any other dumb questions?” He said, “No, that was it.” Click. Anybody that says the eyeball is a poor design is ignorant or a liar! It’s incredibly designed!
The Lie Summed Up
Look, nothing man has made comes close to the eyeball but lets just take a car as an example. I’ve had 99 cars since I started driving. Never had a new one. I always get someone else’s problems and have to fix it. I’ve done just about everything you can do to a car. Started off when we were little bitty. My daddy’s idea was, “Boys, I don’t care what you do for a living but when you get out of my house you are going to know how to do everything.” We built houses together. We designed them. Plumbed them. Heated them. We did it all you know. Daddy taught us everything whether we wanted to learn it or not. I had a great daddy. One thing, we al-ways spent time working on cars. I’ve rebuilt motors, rebuilt transmissions, differentials, wobbelator shafts, muf-fler bearings, cannutin valves. I’ve done about everything you can do to a car folks. I understand how cars work.
Car EvolutionNow, understanding how it works does not prove how it originated. And this is where the problem comes in. These evolutionists somehow got it in their brain, “Well, if we understand how it works that proves there is no designer.” Oh come on now, fellas. Think about that would you? Understanding how it operates doesn’t prove there is no designer! A car is a complex machine folks! Lets suppose your son turns sixteen. All three of my kids did in the last couple of years. Your son comes up one day and says,”Hey dad I’m sixteen!” “Yep son, you made it. We didn’t think you would but you did.” He says,”Hey dad, I got my drivers license!” “Son, let me see that thing. Come on, let me see. Wow son that is a lousy picture! It is a good likeness though!” He says,”Hey dad? Can I borrow the car? Give me the keys dad, I want to borrow the car.” “Well, son listen, a car is a complex machine. Your mom and I have been praying about this. We don’t think you fully understand how complex the car is son. Did you know there are 3000 bolts required to hold a car together and one nut can scatter it all over the highway? We decided we are going to let you slowly evolve into the car son. This year we are going to give you 10% of the car. Next year maybe a little bit more.” Just hold on a minute. What good is 10% of a car? That’s what you put in a junk yard isn’t it?
Life is too Complex for EvolutionNow, what good is 10% of an eyeball, or a wing, or a feather, or a beak, or any complex structure? You ought to get Michael Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box. Now, he’s an evolutionist but he says, “Look folks, things are too complex. They had to be designed. I mean, it just had to be.” An excellent book by the way from an evolutionary perspective.
But then the textbooks teach the kids “We’ve got evidence for evolution.” And they have none! There is zero evidence! But they want the kids to believe that theory anyway. So they are lying to our students at our expense!
Ways to Fight The Lie
Now, what should we do about it? Let me give you some practical steps. The Bible says, “Ye are the salt of the earth.” Salt is an amazing product. Salt does lots of things besides flavor. Salt preserves. Salt also irritates. If you are not irritating somebody, you are probably not a good Christian. You don’t have to try to irritate folks, you just try to be salty and that will automatically irritate them. Our job is to preserve the world. And folks there is corruption in our system.
Eliminate Evolution from TextbooksSome practical things you can do. You can demand that your school cut out the pages with false information. Get the textbooks down; show them where the information is false, the horse evolution, the gill slits, and all this kind of stuff. See? Look, just cut the pages out. How many of you would help cut the pages out so it wouldn’t cost the school a thing. You would do it for free. Go to your school and help cut the pages out. Would you do that? Come on, put your hand up. Let me see if you are willing to volunteer. Doesn’t cost the school a thing. Right? Now, textbooks are expensive. They don’t need to buy a whole new textbook. Just cut those pages out. Very simple! Won’t cost them a thing. Or you can do like a principal in Georgia did: glue the pages together. He got all of the pages where they teach evolution and glued them together. One summer he did that. He didn’t ask any questions, he just did it. That fall the NEA hit the ceiling!
By the way, you should get teachers and encourage them to get out of the NEA. Don’t let your union dollars support the NEA and their liberal causes. In my seminar notebook there is a list of several other Christian or Bible believing unions that teachers can belong to, to get their insurance. Get out of the NEA. If you love God, if you are a Christian and you are a public school teacher (like my brother [is] and my mom was before she retired from there) get out of that folks! Don’t give them a penny of your money. Just quit. The only language they speak is withhold your money.
But this principal in Georgia got all of the pages and glued them together if they taught evolution. The NEA was so angry! They said, “You can’t do that!!” He said, “I did.” They said, “But you can’t!” He said, “I did, done, over with, the glue is dry!”
Warning StickersOr put a warning sticker in the front cover. Put a warning sticker in the front of the book that warns the kids, “The information on the following pages is not correct.” Don’t you think the kids ought to be warned if they are about to be lied to or taught something false? I mean, come on!
Brainwashed BookletOr give the student my little Brainwashed booklet. We’ve written a little booklet called Are you being Brainwashed by your public school science textbook?
They are two bucks apiece. If you get five or more they are a dollar apiece. That’s our printing cost. So if you want to get some of these, pass them out. One guy came over and bought 3000 of them. And gave them to every kid in his county. Most teachers are going to have a hard time teaching evolution for the next few years. Yay, they ought to have a hard time teaching evolution! How come teachers are scared to teach Creation for fear of a lawsuit? Why aren’t they scared to teach evolution for fear of a lawsuit? They sure should not be teaching false information in the textbooks, that is for sure.
Educate Students about their Legal RightsStudents ought to be made aware of the fact that they have some legal rights. This book on page 53 explains the courts have always ruled if a parent goes down and says, “Look we don’t want my kid taught evolution.” The school must provide alternative information. Alternative studies. You can not force a student to learn something contrary to their religion.
Opt In or Opt Out?
Now, you’ve got to watch this, because here is what happens a lot of time in schools: if you have something you want out of, like sex education or whatever, you have to opt out. The humanist and atheist and agnostics have learned, “You know, we can make this where we get our way most of the time. If we have a bad program like we want in there, we are going to have some queer come in and teach on queer lifestyle, you know, for all of the students.” You have to opt out of that assembly. But if it’s a good thing coming in, you have to opt in. See, to opt out you have to go home and have your mom sign a paper or dad sign a paper saying, “I don’t want my student there.” That’s called opt out. But how many kids forget to take those papers home? How many of you forgot to take a paper home from school and forgot to get it signed or something like that? Everybody does that. Right? And they know that. So what they do with the good programs is you have to opt in so some kids will forget to bring the paper. But if it’s a bad program you have to opt out. Watch for that and demand that it be equal here. Let’s make everything opt in or everything opt out. None of this stacking the deck type of stuff.
But students have the right to be exempt from anything that is contrary to their religion. They ought to be told about that. See, not knowing your rights is just the same as not having them. Might as well not have them if you don’t know them.
Textbook SelectionTeachers ought to be aware of the fact that there is some help. If they want to help select good textbooks, they can get a hold of Mel Gabler in Longview, Texas. For 38 years now the Gablers have been researching every new public school textbook that comes off the press. They read it, they write a critique on it, and they help folks select good books.
Now, you may not be able to find a good one. Let us suppose there are 12 biology books available one year to buy. They go from a little bit of evolution like 3 % to 16 % evolution. Pick the least poisonous one for your school. You’ve got to buy a book, okay, buy a book for your school. Pick the least poisonous for your district that year and then be sure to do two more things (and this is where most Christians fall down). Write letters to ones you did not pick and tell them why. Write a letter to Holt or H.B.J. or Prentice Hall or whoever and say, “Look we did not pick your book because of all of the evolution in it.” Let them know why you didn’t pick it. Don’t you know if you were the C.E.O. at Holt Rinehart, Winston or H.B.J. or any of these publishers, if you got 5000 letters from across the country from different individuals that said, “We did not buy your book because….” Well, they’re going to look at the bottom line which is money and say, “Man we better take that stuff out of the books!” And then secondly write a letter to the one you did pick. And say,”Dear CEO at whatever, Merrill or Holt or whatever, we picked your book because it has the least amount of false information in it. However, be warned that if we find another book next time that has less, we will pick their book instead.” Let them know you still don’t approve of the little bit of evolution that is there but you had to buy it anyway. I mean that ought to be done folks, let them know.
Now, most public school teachers that I know are sincere and dedicated professionals. My brother led me to the Lord. He’s been teaching public school for 28 years. My mom retired from teaching public school. Look, most teachers are good, Godly, honest, intelligent people. They are sincere. They are not trying to lie to the kids. Many of them simply teach the evolution because that’s what’s in the book so they think it must be true. They’ve never heard the other side. They don’t know any better. There are some who may have other reasons, but I think most would fit into that category. Many of them don’t know that they can teach Creation Science in the public school. It’s perfectly fine. It’s okay to teach Creation Science.
Pass Legislation Against False InformationIn Florida, we have a law that says, “Instructional materials shall be accurate.” Anybody disagree with that law? Do you think that is reasonable to require the books to be accurate? Yes, very reasonable. In Texas they’ve got a law that says, “Instructional materials (like textbooks) shall be factual and theories shall be clearly distinguished from facts.” Go Texas! That’s a good law! Now, they don’t enforce it, but they should. And if they are not clearly distinguishing between theories of evolution and facts of science they should be sued. It’s against the law to do that. In Wisconsin you’ve got an administrative code here that says, “Textbooks must have factual accuracy.” Yay, I think that’s fair! Alabama passed a law that says, “If a textbook discusses evolution it must have a warning sticker in the front cover warning the kids that there is a difference between micro-evolution (which is a fact) and macro-evolution, which is a theory and has never been observed.” Go Alabama!! That’s fair! The kids ought to be warned there’s a difference between these two. Because, like we covered in the last session, that’s where the whole problem comes in. They are confusing micro and macro evolution.
Teaching Creation Science is Legal!Adolf Hitler said, “Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state.” Here most teachers don’t realize they can teach Creation Science in a public school. It’s perfectly fine. Hey, not only can you teach Creation Science in public schools, you can teach it right out of the Bible! And teach or devote a class to religion and have the textbook be the Bible if you want! We know what happened in 1963 when the Bible was taken out and evolution was put in the schools, but we’ve been deceived by the ACLU folks. 1963 the Supreme Court banned the use of the Bible to try to get kids saved; which is not good, obviously, but that’s a lot better than what the ACLU (the American Communist Lawyers Union) has led us to believe. They did not throw the Bible out, we threw the Bible out! We allowed ourselves to be deceived. It is not against the law to teach the Bible in a public school. It is perfectly fine to teach Creation Science.
Use the Bible in ClassYou might want to get a hold of Elizabeth Ridnour, they’ve got a program where they help people start Bible classes in their public school. They’re in North Carolina. The phone number is (336) 272-3799 and say, “Give me the packet on starting a Bible curriculum in our Public school.” Some college student could do that. A Bible college student. You could go volunteer your time to teach a Bible class in the public school here in your town. Yeah, anybody can do that!
States can legally require teachers to discuss evolution. They cannot require them to teach it as a fact but the state can pass a law that says, “We require you to discuss evolution.” They can do that. They cannot require them to discuss Creation. And many people have tried to get laws passed that require the teachers to discuss Creation. I’m telling you, you are wasting your time. That law is not going to go anywhere. Teachers may already discuss Creation if they wish, but the state cannot require them to do that. Get ahold of the Gablers, they’ve got all sorts of stuff on that. Courts allow states to require discussing weaknesses of the evolution theory. The courts have never said, “We will demand that the schools be required to teach Creation.” That just doesn’t work.
In 1963 the Supreme Court said, “It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion (when presented objectively) as part of a secular program of education may be affected consistently with the first amendment.” The Supreme Court never took the Bibles out of the schools, the publishers took the Bibles out of schools. Didn’t have to, but they did. The Supreme Court said, “The Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion or the like.” It’s okay to use the Bible in schools, folks. Permitting public school observances which include religious elements promotes, and the courts said, “The secular purpose of advancing the students’ knowledge and appreciation of the role that our religious heritage as played in its social, cultural, historical development of civilization.” Eighth circuit court. It’s okay to teach the Bible. If you want to keep up with what’s happening in education, get on the web and get a hold of Fred and say, “Fred, add me to the loop.” FredB001@Spectra.net and say, “Put me on the loop.” And you will get all sorts of stuff.
If You are a Student…Handling Teachers
Now, practical steps. Listen, if you have a teacher who believes in evolution, here is what I would recommend you do. Number one, don’t confront them publicly. Try to talk to them privately after class. No teacher responds well to a public challenge in front of the students. They are going to jump all over you. Don’t confront them publicly. Number two, if you are late to class frequently, if you are a class troublemaker or a goof off, if you never do your homework, if you don’t pay attention in class, don’t tell them you are a Christian! You’re not helping. Okay?
Answering Test Questions
You want to help make a change. Okay. If a test question comes up and you know the answer is demanding something from evolution like”How old is the earth?” You can write down, “The textbook says… blah, blah, blah.” You know, spit it back up to them.”However, this is not correct.” Let them know,”Hey teacher, I learned it but I didn’t believe it.” You can learn the material but don’t swallow it.
Or you can ask to be exempt. The law requires that they make sure you are exempt from anything contrary to your religion. You can demand that be done. Or, of course, you can get your kids out and put them in private school or home school which is probably the best option of all – get them out of there totally if you can.
Now, if you want to convert your teachers, give them my video to watch at home. We get teachers converted by the hundreds. They call us up and say, “Man, I watched your videotape. Now I’m teaching Creation.” One guy called me up, “Mr. Hovind, my second grade daughter has watched your tapes about 50 times.” Why do kids do that? Watch the same tape over and over and over again? He said, “My second grade daughter’s teacher just called me and said you know your daughter stops me every time I teach evolution. The teacher said, ‘I’ve decided I’m not going to teach evolution anymore this year.” I thought, “Yay!” Then I thought, “Why do we send second graders off to war? Why didn’t some parents make sure there wasn’t evolution in the curriculum to begin with?”
Pray for Teachers
You can pray for your teachers. Folks, public school teaching is a hard job. They get pressure from the students, they get pressure from the parents, they get pressure from the school board. Pressure from the community. I mean-my brother said,”Hey Kent, it’s just not fun anymore. It’s just not fun. It used to be fun to teach. Now there is just too much pressure.” Pray for them, they have a hard job. Honestly pray for them.
Use This MaterialInvite them to a Creation Seminar. Have them call me with any questions. I’d be glad to help them. Ask them to have a creation speaker come to their class. I speak in public schools all of the time. Have them show my videos or some Creation videos in class. Many teachers have learned the lesson that your kids have learned early in life, it’s easier to get forgiveness than permission. Don’t ask if you can show the video in class. Just show it! We get calls, probably once a week, somebody getting saved watching a video that mom or dad saw because the kid checked it out of their public school library. Somebody donated some tapes to the library. Interesting.
Educate OthersYou could run for school board or make an influence on your school board. You could get on the textbook selection committee. Somebody in your county picks the books the kids are using. Get on that committee. You could pass or else enforce laws that require textbooks to be accurate. That’s only fair. They ought to be accurate. Try to convert the teachers and the students and then it doesn’t matter what’s in the books. If the kids don’t believe it anyway, then it doesn’t matter.
Letters to the EditorWrite letters to the editor. I’ve got a bunch in my seminar notebook you’re welcome to copy it and change the name at the bottom of it. None of my stuff is copyrighted.
Etc.You can donate Creation books or videos to your library or school library or public library. Educate others. Acts chapter 17, Paul when he went to Mars Hill did not use any scriptures, he used creation as a means of evangelism.
Why Evolution Should be Feared
Satan is using lots of evolutionary lies to send boys and girls and men and women to hell. He keeps them thinking,”Hey evidence is right over there. Come on, keep coming! A little more evidence!” Everything gets disproven folks! He’s a liar! The Creation shows us there is a Creator. These people are without excuse.
Here’s what it boils down to and we’ll quit:
- If Creation is true, there is a Creator.
- If evolution is true, there is no Creator.
- If Creation is true, there are rules. Like thou shalt not…
- If evolution is true there are no rules.
- If Creation is true there is a purpose to life.
- You know, if evolution is true there is absolutely no purpose to life.
Which is why folks who believe evolution like Pol Pot and Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler.
Life is meaningless to them. If you need to kill a few million people to accomplish your
goals, so what! It goes along with evolution thinking.
- If Creation is true, man is a fallen creature and he needs a Savior.
- If evolution is true, man is an evolving creature and does not need a Savior.
You’re getting better all by yourself. You’re going to be God someday yourself.
In Genesis 3, Satan told that lie to Eve in the Garden of Eden. Satan’s a liar.
- If Creation is true, man brought death into the world.
- If evolution is true, death brought man into the world. Totally opposite!
- If Creation is true, there’s an afterlife. You’re going to Heaven or Hell.
- If evolution is true, there is no afterlife.
- If Creation is true there is comfort in knowing the future.
- Boy, if evolution is true, we can’t know a thing about the future.
It’s just all chance. The evolution philosophy or mindset is a dangerous mindset.
It takes away the existence of God.
Nothing to worry about. Eat drink and be merry, tomorrow you will die.
Made available on the Internet
by Michel Snoeck (2003).
Creation Science Evangelism
c/o 29 Cummings Rd.
Pensacola, Florida