"The Truth Filter"

HEN I was still a high school student, back in 1968 or '69, I had a disagreement with David Blakley, my Earth Science teacher, over the teaching of Evolution.   Being the good teacher that he was, Blakley slated me to give a presentation to the entire class on the topic of creation vs. evolution.

    This presentation was like a lecture or talk, with a question and answer session afterward, in which I was expected to answer any questions or objections off the cuff.   It was quite an experience, and I felt it was also a grave responsibility, that might mean the difference between apathetic indifference, enlightenment, or exposure of the oft-hidden side of so-called scientific theory for the religious belief it actually often is, in the lives of those fellow-classmates and -- it turned out -- for our instructor as well.

    It is an observable fact that each type of life on earth reproduces after its own kind, just as inspired scripture teaches us (cf. Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).   Those words, "after their kind," are apparently some of the most reviled and hated by modern science, yet they are the actual fact, and not the species-morphing wild imaginations of evolution-directed belief.

    Scientists may look at fetuses of the various kinds, and in their total ignorance imagine that they all appear to be similar, yet people do not normally give birth to plants or animals, cows to not reproduce dogs, cats or fish, and the offspring of birds can still fly through the air, while worms continue to crawl and dig through the ground without changing their various natures, from one generation to the next.

    There are those, I know, who claim that the only difference between evolution and those who hold to the concept of "intelligent design" (but not necessarily creation by a heavenly Creator) is that evolutionists supposedly make no statements as to whether or not there is some sort of intelligence guiding the largely imaginary "selection process" in so-called "natural selection."

    Nevertheless, many who hold to evolution make just such statements in relation to their belief against an intelligent guiding hand, which bias is at the very heart and core of evolutionary theory.

    In fact, there are evolutionists who also seem to hold to a the theory of intelligently guided evolution, who in reality are fence-straddlers caught between opposite religious beliefs.

    While some feel that things are too complex to have come into being otherwise, there is far more than mere philosophy or religious belief behind such feelings.   In fact, the interdependency or symbiotic relationships that exist between various life forms are a case in point of complexity that could not exist without a guiding hand and an instantaneous creation behind the scenes.

    Flowers and many trees could not pollinate without the bees, who likewise rely upon the nectar derived from the flowers to reproduce in their hives.   Greenery depends upon carbon dioxide which animals and humans exhale, while animals and people depend on oxygen, which is a byproduct of plants and plankton, phyto-plankton or algae.

    Fish feed upon the plankton, just as herbivorous land mammals feed upon grasses, and mankind depends upon the meat of such free-ranging animals for Vitamin B-12 and Omega-3 essential "fatty" acids, to maintain optimum health.

    In all these things, among many others, we see the creative hand of a super-intelligent Creator, after whom our human form and intelligence (to a limited and flawed degree, thanks to the sinful nature of choosing the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil over the Tree of Life) has been patterned, formed and created "in His own image" (Genesis 1:27).

    It is taught that the scientific method is supposedly designed specifically to isolate preconceptions and beliefs from so-called "scientific conclusions."   The taint of biased conclusions and allegedly inconsistent preconceptions is supposed kept separate from the data, in what we are encouraged to believe are pure "scientific results."

    If this were really true, why would NASA and other military government agencies in the U.S., for instance, hide the true facts of many discoveries in space from the public?

    For example, do you really believe -- with all the incredible pictures of distant galaxies produced by the Hubbell telescope in earth orbit -- that amazingly vivid close-up pictures of the various planets of our own solar system, including the moon itself, have not been taken and analyzed thoroughly?

    So what exactly do these images reveal that is so startling that NASA is concealing these truths behind a smokescreen of media disinformation and outright lies?   Exactly why did the so-called "space race" come to a grinding halt three decades ago, and has never been resumed, while the new "space program" has morphed instead into a race to build an earth-orbit satellite-based weapons system dubbed "Star Wars" by our political leaders?

    This program has been resurrected, along with carving out of cavernous, massively huge underground bases and facilities, even long after the "Cold War" came to a grinding halt with the fall of the Soviet Union.   What do those who are behind-the-scenes of these activities know that you and I presumably don't?

    Medical "science" is in no better shape, often reversing itself and conducting deliberately flawed trials and studies to continue deceiving a largely gullible public on health matters in which ineffective, dangerous or outright fatal drugs, "therapies" and diets -- that injure, maim or kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions, every single year -- are pushed continually to the fore over natural, fairly effective and tolerably safe herbs, therapies and diets.

    Despite all the flaws, fakes, and deceptions of evolutionary theory and Darwinism's "survival of the fittest" (or natural selection), which lie at the very guts of this beast, the subtle subjectivity and biased judgments and conclusions of the majority of what passes for "scientific" thinking today is as largely apocryphal as it is flawed and persistently-pushed upon credulous schoolchildren.

    Is it any wonder, then, that this skewed system -- that either derives from or is the root cause of the governmental-secrets, militarized, clandestine age in which we now live -- not only cannot be trusted to tell us what is and is not known, but can always be trusted to con, hoodwink and fool the public into accepting much fictional hogwash as "proven fact," and fanciful daydreams of science fiction as indicative of what the supposed near-future holds in store?

    Yet despite its every desperate attempt to maintain the corrupt and flawed status quo, modern science is doomed to extinction in the near future, as humanity learns to move beyond the era of "stone-age" thinking and set-in-concrete conclusions that have plagued us with the loss of so many beneficial technological breakthroughs and incredible discoveries, which have disappeared down the rabbit and gopher holes of corporate and government shysters, and their media and educational dupes or lackeys.

    When asked, after my presentation to that Earth Science class so many years ago, if my instructor thought I had done a credible job of proving my case, he admitted that I had.

    But when I pressed further, and asked Blakley if he would then start teaching the alternative to evolution, which is creationism, he balked and said he could never do this.

    "Why not?," I innocently asked, and his reply was sobering and indicative of the times in which we live: "I would lose my job if I did that."   And as one of our school's first black instructors, he was right.   Such an "outrageous" thing would simply never be tolerated in our "enlightened" institutions of "higher learning," where apparently the standards and levels of education are based more on the misplaced factor of faith in an evil, flawed and corrupt system and less on real academic honesty or objectivity.

    Knowledge, like art, is often filtered through the misconceptions and prejudices that are an inherent part of sinful human nature.   In just such ways is the truth isolated and filtered out of the realm of public discourse, and away from the conscious awareness of a mostly deceived public that apparently likes to cherish its flawed perceptions, ignorant experts, and loudmouthed politicians and news media reporters with little or nothing of real substance to say, and all the time and space in which to say it.

    There is, at the fulcrum of power in high places, an overarching concern with how people might panic and bring down the social order if they are ever told the truth in any other way than through largely fictional entertainments.

    However, that might be preferable to where this largely idolatrous society is headed without a bracing, refreshing, perhaps even shocking, confrontation with real reality, and a resultant awakening of humility and peaceful obeisance to a higher and much wiser power than any mankind -- or the other higher forms of intelligent species inhabiting this globe -- can presently muster.