Evolution Radio Broadcast 16 Oct 2005

CW – During our radio broadcast on the need for revival in our land you said that one of the big blocks to revival was the existence of evolutionary thought.

Ford – Yes. Creation vs Evolution issues have been much in the news in recent times. Individuals in numerous states are attempting to initiate some aspect of fairness into school classrooms long dominated by anti-Christians materialism. Even President Bush has weighed in on the side of those who would reform the curriculum. This has set off a media frenzy. Christians and people who believe in a Creator are often termed in the so-called news “the other side.”

          I have made a study of the use of words to influence the perceptions of people. When the subject of Creation comes up, you find the pundits really get busy slanting their words to prejudice people’s minds against creation and for evolution.

CW – I remember you pointed out what goes on in classrooms is a hindrance to America’s return to sanity.

Ford – That is right. The school systems have children for roughly eight hours a day, five days a week, for at least nine months out of each year between ages 6 and 18. The church has only those children brought to church in those formative years for maybe 4 to 5 hours per week at the most. And many church teachers waste much of the time they have. Who do you think is going to win out?

CW – So you say children are brainwashed in the school system to believe in evolution?

Ford – Yes. I have long noted that the school textbooks represent the worst of evolutionary education, rehearsing long disproved evidences such as the peppered moth, vestigial organs, and mutant fruit flies.

          Only a small percentage of Americans hold an “evolution only” view, and many biology teachers, who have been propagandized into believing in evolution, suspect there is more to the story. Unfortunately in a recent poll a high percentage of the same people who believed in creation also believed evolution should be taught. This is the kind of doublethink that has taken over in the world due to generations of brainwashing. In fairness to them however over half of the people polled also thought Intelligent Design should also be taught.

CW – You are saying that there is evidence contrary to evolution then?

Ford – Yes, but that evidence has been censored. Decades of “evolution only” teaching has produced generation of teachers that know only the propaganda of evolution. They are passing on what was taught them and they do not think for themselves. On one of my teaching/preaching trips back in the seventies we had a night that was advertised for teenagers. One of the local science teachers came to hear my presentation. He had the honesty to come up to me after the program and tell me that he had listened to what I had to say and he recognized that what I was saying was correct. Many will not admit to that but rather they will get mad. It is hard to admit when faced with the truth that you have been misled, lied to, while getting your education.

CW – And this has affected other areas of life.

Ford – The brainwashed mentality has spilled over into legal education, producing evolution supporting lawmakers and judiciary, and it has gotten into journalism yielding prejudiced reporters.  Many people sincerely believe that evolution is a fact and creation is irrelevant to science.  Opposition to creation is quite strong and well entrenched.

          Reporters will put on the façade of being “fair and balanced” to their mostly creationist clientele, but they are most concerned with distribution, ratings, and awards. They are going to work on the basis of how they think they can accomplish these agendas. Also, reporters often view belief in creation as religion only. It is next to impossible to get media people to understand that creation is more scientific than evolution, and that evolution is at least as religious as creationism. That is because they have been brainwashed. Thankfully the flurry of interest caused by the actions of some enlightened school boards has provided a platform for trying to reach some individuals.

CW - But many people will not even listen when creationists speak.

Ford – That is a problem, and many will not alter their views when confronted with the truth this is what Dr. Kent Hovind calls “dumb on purposes.”

The word of God says:

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

CW – That is 2 Peter chapter 3. Explain what you mean.

Ford – The Bible predicted the appearing of people like evolutionists who will say that the rest of the Bible is a lie because creation is a lie. They claim that all things continue but cannot explain if that is so why there is no evidence for evolution happening now. These willfully ignorant people, dumb on purpose, who deny things like the worldwide flood, which created the fossils, and layers of sediment around the earth, literally made the world as we know it.

CW – One of the things you learn in seminary is that God is always presenting Himself as the Creator.

Ford – That’s right. The fact that He is the Creator is the basis of His first claims upon men. It leads into the presentation that He is the Redeemer of men from their fallen status.

          The fact God is the Creator lies at the basis of why He has the absolute right to tell men how they should live their lives. This is why men do not want to acknowledge God as Creator. Then they must agree that He has a claim upon them.

CW – But there has been some interesting broadcasts recently on PBS, the History Channel, and others that have had creationist scientists on them.

Ford – Often they have exhibited a condescending anti-creation tone, but they have given an opportunity for the creationists to get the message and sound reasoning out to the public. You can expect the media to do less live broadcasts in the future though, because when they have allowed that to happen the creationists have had their best opportunity to offset the bias and get out the truth.

CW – Some Christian organizations which are on the radio all the time are weak on the creation issue.

Ford - Yes, James Dobson has people on his staff who do not believe in the first twelve chapters of Genesis where the foundations of much biblical truth is laid. Robert Schuller, who many mistakenly believe to be Christian, has also done harm to the creationist cause. He put on a million dollar presentation titled Creation, which included numerous anti-Biblical themes. Anti-biblical and extra biblical beliefs is Schuller’s stock in trade.

CW – You mentioned scientists who believe in Creation. Are there many of these?

Ford – Yes. There are probably a great many who believe in creation and keep silent because being vocal about their ideas can cost them funding, government grants and positions in research universities. But there are a tremendous number who have come out and proclaimed their confidence in Creation. As a matter of fact several societies of scientists who believe in creation exist and they have produced some tremendous work in various fields of science. One professor I knew had been a working geologist before he came to the seminary to teach. He said that in order to function as a geologist he had to set aside everything he had been taught in the first four years of college because what he found in the real world was not like the evolutionary models he had been taught as an undergraduate.

CW – I heard there are now several Creation museums now open in the United States.

Ford. – It has been an amazing struggle to get them into operation too.

The Answers in Genesis museum in northern Kentucky was fought tooth and nail for several years, once local authorities realized the museum would be about Creation instead of evolution. It was as if the local government wanted to test the evolutionary theory of the survival of the fittest in the courts.

          The Creation Truth Foundation opened a dinosaur-based museum in Arkansas in April of 2004. Dr. Hovind has been putting together a museum in Florida. Local officials tried to interfere with him down there and he resisted them every step of the way, including their attempts to set standards or do inspections on his buildings. He withstood them, and though they arrested him he eventually won.

CW – You said there were scientists who believe in Creation that have banded together to do research. Tell me something about what they have found.

Ford – There is so much I hardly know where to begin.

One of my favorite projects in recent times has been a research project called RATE. For decades evolutionists have argued for “deep time.” That is, that everything has evolved over billions of years. At first evolutionists argued for millions of years but they were overwhelmed by evidence that this was not a long enough time, so they went to billions.

The Bible, however, pictures a young planet created just a few thousand years ago. I was interested when the RATE project came along because I had followed the work on the steadily decreasing magnetic attraction of the earth some years before. It you follow the decline of the earth’s gravitational pull backwards it argues for a world with life that could not possibly be over ten thousand years old.

Evolutionary scientists had come up with methods of measuring age that argued for millions even billions of years. But initial work with things like carbon dating proved how flawed their ideas were. The eight year project called “Radio Isotopes and the Age of the Earth fascinated me and they found evidence that crushed the evolutionary foundation of long ages.

Trying to explain this physical evidence to the average person who is not involved in scientific disciplines poses a problem however. But it is one of the things I have tried to do as I have spoken in churches on the subject. The new report from the RATE research project discovered evidence that radioactive decay, the means that has been promoted by many scientists as the most accurate, has not in fact proceeded at a uniformitarian rate. That is, the rate at which elements in rock decay was faster in the past than it is today.

CW – That is interesting and what does that mean in plain English?

Ford – That means that rocks that were previously said to be billions of years old only appear to be ancient or old because accelerated decay has been overlooked.

Diamonds, once said to have been formed under millions of tons of pressure for millions of years are turning out to be the creatonists’ best  friend. But then people are now making diamonds in laboratories. If men can do that, don’t you think God can do it too.

CW – When you do seminars I am told you sometimes bring along your evolving dog. Tell people about that.

Ford – My evolving dog is actually a rock. I changed dogs some months back. My original evolving dog was shale and he was a flake. Bits of him kept breaking off. I have a granite one now and most people do not notice him wearing away. I introduce him and tell people he is a dog that is evolving. If you wait long enough he will develop hair and a tail and all the things a dog has. All you have to do is wait.,, billions of years you wait, and when that time is over according to the evolutionists bingo he will be a dog.

          Evolutionists tell us that they can prove evolution if you give them enough time. Just like they say evolution occurs given enough time, guess what? I think my rock will turn into a dog long before evolutionists ever prove they are right. They have not done it in a hundred years. All they have done is change evolutionary models over and over again to see their latest evolutionary theories fall to facts.

CW – You are making fun of evolutionists.

Ford – I never make fun of the mentally deficient, but making fun of people who are dumb on purpose seems to me perfectly acceptable.

After all, the Three Stooges were dumb on purpose and they got wealthy at it. Evolutionists are either deceived or dumb on purpose. If they are deceived, they have been made a stooge of by the devil. If they are dumb on purpose they are being profited some way, so they must want to be laughed at.

CW - What did you think about the President’s support for teaching Intelligent Design in the classroom?

Ford – What he said was that he thought Intelligent Design should be taught alongside secular evolution in the public schools, thus allowing students to think and decide for themselves. Why are people opposed to that? The reason is that they do not really want students to have the opportunity to think for themselves.

When the detractors are trying to sound thoughtful in their resistance to creation they say it should be consigned to discussions of philosophy or religion but not to science. They say that with all seriousness as if such a statement is irrefutable, but they have simply not done their homework. If they allow the student to have an objective look at the two ideas, to do their homework, they know the evolutionary ideas that they are so attached to will crumble like the house of cards they are.

One of the great lies of the people who fight against students being taught Intelligent Design is that there is no credentialed people in the scientific community that embraces such ideas. But that is a lie. It is either one of willful    ignorance or a lie told blatantly in spite of knowledge, but it is still false. There are many credentialed biologists and other research scientists in the Creation Research Society, alone not to mention others.

President Bush’s statement that the two should be taught together represents a compromise, but it is a compromise that I would be willing to make provided that the people who put the material together would be honest.

CW – You are saying people putting the material together will not be honest?

Ford – Some will be dishonest on purpose and some will be dishonest because they have been brainwashed. Right now in Pennsylvania there is a case in federal court that proves my point.

The media says it has “echoes of the famed Scopes Monkey trial of 1925 when lawyers squared off in a Tennessee courthouse over the teaching of Darwin's work.” They like to bring that one up because that was the trial where the famed lawyer Clarence Darrow, who was supposed to defend creation, was caught in a trap that revealed he had been influenced by evolutionary teaching.

Science professor Brian Alters who teaches at Harvard and McGill Universities has been recruited to try to defeat the Dover, Pennsylvania school district. Eleven parents have gotten together to try to keep their children from even having a glimmer of an idea that evolution could be wrong.

CW – So, what is the issue? We had a lawsuit here in Georgia over a sticker in a textbook.

Ford – Four paragraphs that suggest that Intelligent Design might be considered as an alternative to evolution, and recommending a book where they might learn more is what the court case is all about. They are attacking creation and bringing a federal lawsuit saying the policy of giving students the 4 paragraph statement is religiously based and illegal because it violates the U.S. Constitution's separation of church and state. A separation, which is an invention, a fiction itself.

Professor Alters lied when he said "Evolution does not deny the existence of God, … It's not about God. You can play the game of science and still have your religious beliefs." That is a lie. You cannot have the creator God of the Bible and believe in evolution.

          The truth is these people are so fearful of having people acknowledge God created that they cannot allow four paragraphs into an entire year of curriculum.

          I have to give Professor Alters credit. He is bringing out the same tired old arguments for evolution. The arguments that they no longer dare to use in direct confrontations, debates, with creationists because they get tore up. There used to be several people going around debating professors in college forums. That has diminished because these professor types have gotten to where they are afraid to debate. So now they testify in court where their only questioner is a lawyer, not a scientist who believes in Creation.

CW - In at least 30 U.S. states, pro Intelligent Design groups are trying to introduce the teaching into classrooms through school boards, state education standards or state legislation.

Ford – Yes, and I wish them well, but they are fighting an uphill battle with judiciary, media, and educators arrayed against them along with unbelieving scientists. One of the things that amazes me is there are some scientists who would rather believe that planet earth had life seeded upon it by some ancient alien civilization from outer space than that the world was created by God.

CW – I remember when that kind of an idea was in a Star Trek movie.

Why is it that otherwise rational people would want to believe that?

Ford – One thing that occurs to me is that if you believe space aliens put life on earth you have no accountability, but if you accept the truth, that God created, then you have to consider what His will for you is.

CW – We have been using the words Creationism and Intelligent Design interchangeably during this broadcast. But they are not really the same are they?

Ford – No, they’re not. You have caught me. I use them interchangeably because I know the designer.

Creationism is an a priori argument drawn from the Genesis account of creation. In the context of a public classroom, that means the God of the Bible is the starting point and assumed ground of life's origin and the origin of the cosmos. Drawing from a literal reading of Genesis, creationists postulate a "young earth" and six 24-hour days of creation. All empirical data are subject to and analyzed within this interpretive grid.

          Intelligent design, however, is an a posteriori argument; it is the inference drawn from examination of complex structures in living organisms and the universe. Instead of attributing the design evident in these structures to God, or undirected processes and natural selection, the intelligent design theorist merely posits an intelligent cause behind life and the cosmos. The inference is not held as the only possible explanation, merely the most plausible.

CW – Well I believe that God created the earth and its creatures, just like the Bible says. And I think real science supports that.

Ford – I agree absolutely. We are getting down to the end of our time together and there is so much about this subject we haven’t even touched on. We need to do another program on this subject. We have not even talked about the debate that goes on in liberal churches.

CW – Concluding remarks.