We were recently treated to another of Howard Dean’s nonsensical rants in which he accused potential presidential candidate Scott Walker of being unqualified to run for the office for two reasons: (1) He does not have a college degree, and (2) since he is uneducated and uninformed, he apparently rejects the theory of evolution. His concerns were summed up as follows: "I worry about people being President of the
not knowing much
about the world and not knowing much about science. I worry about that … because
evolution is a widely accepted scientific construct and people who don't
believe in evolution either do it for hard-right religious reasons or because
they don't know anything." United States
The absolute ludicrousness of the first reason is so laughable that I will not spend very much time on it. I spent the majority of my working life as an educator, but I never did drink the Kool-Aid that says education is the answer to everything. It is not essential for everyone to get a college education. There are many people who manage to get a college degree who then spend their lives working in occupations other than that for which they prepared in college. In some cases, four years of college are wasted on a major which has little or no potential to lead to employment. There is very little demand for people with degrees in Eighteenth Century French Poetry or a hundred other such majors.
On the other hand, there are many very successful people who either never attended college or only attended for a short time. College is necessary in certain cases, but I firmly believe that there are many people enrolled in college who would be better-served to attend technical school or to go right to work out of high school. A degree from even a high-powered, well-known university does not guarantee any measure of wisdom or common sense. Just look at some of our political leaders for proof of that fact.
Dean’s first reason is absurd, but his second reason is quite troubling. We have heard many times that those who accept Biblical creation and reject the evolutionary hypothesis either “don’t believe in science,” or as Dean said, “don’t know much about science.” That is not-so-subtle code for, "doesn't believe in evolution." He then identified evolution as “a widely accepted scientific construct” and further stated that “people who don't believe in evolution either do it for hard-right religious reasons or because they don't know anything." These statements are, at best, foolishness. It is also necessary to point out that truth and reality are not decided by majority vote or by consensus of opinion.
To say that creationists “don’t believe in science” or “don’t know much about science” is ridiculous and utterly absurd. Many of the world’s best scientists accept the account God gave us of the creation of the universe and life. A large number of evolutionists have seen the truth after they opened their minds and looked at the evidence objectively. One example is found here.
Many on the evolutionist side of the argument claim that evolution is the foundational principle of biology and all science, and that science cannot be properly understood without it. That is, dare I say it, STUPID. As I pointed out in another post, many times even very smart people can be deceived into believing stupid things. In reality, one does not have to study or accept evolution as a fact or even as a theory in order to understand science. As a matter of fact, evolution is a roadblock in the way of real science, because so many believe they have to interpret all the data in view of evolution being a fact rather than actually following the evidence where it leads. The reason for this is obvious. Evolution is man's way of trying to push God out of the picture in order to avoid accountability to Him. As one evolutionist said, "...we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door" (Richard Lewontin, "Billions and Billions of Demons" in the NY Review of Books, 1/7/1997).
It is very easy to reach a totally wrong conclusion based on good evidence, especially when there is a preconceived notion involved. I once had an scientist who was an evolutionist take great offense when I said that evolutionists operate on the basis of preconceived notions. However, I stood by my position, because evolutionists must operate on the basis of two foregone conclusions: (1) everything must have a naturalistic explanation – the supernatural is not allowed, and (2) evolution is true. It is impossible to be objective when things are done this way, and this is exactly why evolution is not and cannot be science. It is merely an idea that has been advanced, without proof, as an explanation for the universe and for life.
The following story illustrates how even good observations can lead to faulty conclusions.
A scientist was interested in studying how far bullfrogs can jump. He brought a bullfrog into his laboratory, set it down, and commanded, “Jump, frog, jump!” The frog jumped.
The scientist measured the distance, then noted in his journal, “Frog with four legs jumped six feet.”
Then he cut the frog's front legs off and ordered, “Jump, frog, jump!” The frog struggled and jumped.
The scientist noted in his journal, “Frog with two legs jumped two feet.”
Next, the scientist cut off the frog's back legs. Once more, he shouted, “Jump, frog, jump!” The frog just lay there.
“Jump, frog, jump!” the scientist repeated. Nothing.
The scientist noted in his journal, “Frog with no legs is deaf.” Source here.
Need I say more? Creationists and evolutionists all have the same evidence and the same data. Nevertheless, the interpretation of that data and the resulting conclusions are impacted greatly by the worldview and belief system of those dealing with the data. Since neither creation nor evolution can be observed or experimented with, the best approach is to determine which model (creation or evolution) best explains the data.
If one actually looks at the whole evolution system of belief, it is hard not to laugh hysterically at what they are asking us to believe. Everything we see in our universe, on our earth, in every form of life – all of these things are nothing but a collection of chemicals, totally organized, yet done so in a random manner. All of the organs in our bodies with their various purposes came about through natural processes without a Designer/Creator. What? That is utter nonsense, and this is only a small part of what evolutionists expect us to swallow. They teach this stuff to children and young people and expect them to lap it up without the freedom to even question it, and sadly, many do. It is a troublesome commentary on the state of our education system that such nonsense is taught as scientific dogma.
What Dean and others are really saying is that anyone who doesn’t believe in fairy tales has no business running for high office. That is exactly what evolution is – a fairy tale.
The truth is the very opposite of what the PC police are saying. In reality, we need leaders in this country who believe in the God of Creation, the one true and living God, who sent His Son to this earth to die for our sins and to rise again from the dead to secure salvation for all who believe in Him.
...I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you ... by which also you are saved ... For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4, NKJV).