Why be Afraid of the Scientific Evidence?

I continue to be amazed that many people assume that “science” pertains to facts, while “faith” relates to myth, or fables, or unsubstantiated beliefs.  They seem to imagine that facts of science support evolution, over billions of years, from a supposed “big bang” explosion at the beginning of time (and where these elements came from, they simply don’t know).  Then they further suppose that Biblical or Christian beliefs rest on unscientific ideas, fanciful dogmas, that even contradict the basics of science.

Harold Jacobs’ letter (Dec. 1) is filled with this sort of erroneous thinking.  First, he says that Genesis was written in 300 BC, whereas Biblical scholars know that it was written about 1400 BC.  If Jacobs is incorrect in this, are we sure he is correct in his other assumptions?  Further, Jacobs says that some believe that the six days of creation may be millions or billions of years.  This cannot be, since evolutionists say that the heavenly bodies were formed in the beginning and vegetation came ages later.  But in the Bible, vegetation was created on the third day and the sun and stars were not created until the fourth day.  If the day was a billion years long, the vegetation could not have existed or grown without sunlight for that length of time.

The basic fallacy in Jacobs’ reasoning, however, is that he assumes that science supports vast ages of time, that every living thing came from non-living chemicals, and that matter is either eternal or was self-created (since he doesn’t believe God created).  Those who believe in intelligent design rightly point out the utter impossibility of explaining the creation without reference to an intelligent designer—a Creator.  Creationists would go beyond this, offering several dozen scientific evidences for creation in the relatively recent past, and would strongly affirm that all life-forms arose from earlier life-forms, not from non-life.  All living things—animals, birds, fish, insects—were created according to certain “kinds” and there has been evolution from “primitive” forms to more “advanced” forms of life.

The blasphemy of Greg McKinney in the same issue is not worth refuting.  His referring to “the Flying Spaghetti Monster” as Creator is an offense against all believers in God.  In addition, Lynne Jacobs says that she is utterly opposed to Texas students learning of the “strengths and weaknesses” of Darwin’s evolutionary theory.  She insists that they only learn of the “strengths” of evolution (though there are none), and refuses them the opportunity to learn of the “weaknesses” of this false theory. 

Why do McKinney and the two Jacobs refuse to allow all of the students to see the evidence of science?  Is this really true science?  Why are they afraid of the evidences of creation?  Do they fear that acknowledging creation will mean that they must acknowledge the Creator?

Richard Hollerman