Challenge To Evolutionists And Creationists
I think its true to say that many evolutionists and creationists read books and other writings authored by people who hold to their particular view. I'd like to to issue a challenge to individuals from both camps to read at least one book (cover to cover) written by someone writing for the other side (if you haven't already).
I am a person who is not convinced by the assertions of evolutionists that life evolved spontaneously into all the different forms we see today. I don't like it when people use the "well everybody accepts it as fact" or "virtually all scientists accept it as fact" as an intellectual strongarm tactic into making those who disagree look stupid; such intellectual bullying is hardly an honourable way of persuading people to accept the truth as a certain person or group sees it. I would very much like to read a book on evolution by an evolutionist, but get the impression that I would be subjected to that sort of strategy, rather than an unemotional walk through what evolutionist claim they have as tangible proof. What I am looking for in particular is a book that provides detailed information about human/human-like/ape/ape-like fossils, with honesty in presenting what actually has been found - i.e. I want to know what part of, say, a skull for display is real bone, and which is fabricated to fill in any gaps. I don't want to be bogged down by endless theories about how man evolved, I want to be free to come to my own conclusions based on what we actually know to be fact.
I personally would be willing to take up the challenge set here. I would therefore be interested in hearing anyone's recommendations. For any evolutionist (or indeed anyone else) I would recommend the book "Darwin On Trial" by Phillip E. Johnson (second edition). I found "Bones Of Contention" by Marvin L. Lubenow very interesting in its discussion of the fossil record as it relates to primates, but felt somewhat irritated by its occasional excursions into preachiness, and the last few chapters in particular are given over to trying to convince its readers of a literal seven-day creation. "Forbidden Archaeology" by Michael A. Cremo is one book I plan to read sometime which claims that there are fossils which contradict the common evolutionary claims with regard to man's appearance on this earth, such as the skeleton that was found in rock that, according to modern geological reports, is 500 million years old.
Personally, I have read online articles from evolutionist sources, resulting in a better understanding of how evolutionists think and how taxonomy and micro/macro evolution fits into the scheme of things. We all owe it to ourselves to free our minds so that we can think for ourselves, and not allow someone else to do the thinking for us, no matter how expert that person may appear to be, whether they wear the robe of a "priest" or the white coat of a scientist. Shutting ourselves off from considering the other person's argument may mean we pay a very high price, intellectually, emotionally, or physically. We could lose Please consider the following extract from John Taylor Gatto's book "The Underground History Of American Education" (page 210), where the then eight-year-old author was in a class being taught by a Jesuit priest: After a brief lecture on each combatant and its cultural and historical characteristics, an outline of incitements to conflict was chalked on the board.
"Who will volunteer to face the back of the room and tell us the causes of World War One?"
"I will, Brother Michael", I said. And I did.
"Why did you say what you did?"
"Because that's what you wrote."
"Do you accept my explanation as correct?"
"Yes, sir." I expected a compliment would soon follow, as it did with our regular teacher.
"Then you must be a fool, Mr Gatto. I lied to you. Those are not the causes at all." It was like being flattened by a steamroller. I had the sensation of being struck and losing the power of speech. Nothing remotely similar had ever happened to me.
"Listen carefully, Mr Gatto, and I shall show you the true causes of the war which men of bad character try to hide," and so saying he rapidly erased the board and in swift fashion another list of reasons appeared. As each was written, a short, clear explanation followed in a scholarly tone of voice.
"Now do you see, Mr Gatto, why you must be careful when you accept the explanation of another? Don't these new reasons make much more sense?"
"Yes, sir."
"And could you now face the back of the room and repeat what you just learned?"
"I could, sir." And I knew I could because I had a strong memory, but he never gave me that chance.
"Why are you so gullible? Why do you believe my lies? Is it because I wear clothing you associate with men of God? I despair you are so easy to fool. What will happen to you if you let others do your thinking for you?"
You see, like a great magician he had shifted that commonplace school lesson we would have forgotten by the next morning into a formidable challenge to the entire contents of our private minds, raising the important question, "Who can we believe?" At eight, while public school children were reading stories about talking animals, we had been escorted to the eggshell-thin foundation upon which authoritarian vanity rests and asked to inspect it.
There are many reasons to lie to children, the Jesuit said, and these seem good reasons to older men. Some truth you will know by divine intuition, he told us, but for the rest you must learn what tests to apply. Even then you should be cautious because it is not hard to fool even these.
Comments please!
Alex.