Prepared Testimony for the Texas State Board of Education—November 20, 2013

Stand Up for Science; Adopt These Books!

In September, I urged you to adopt these books because their adoption will strike a major blow to the teaching of evolution; I am here to repeat that plea. Even though these books are full of unsubstantiated dogma proclaiming evolution, the evidence they present clearly demonstrates evolution’s inability to explain the development of life from a common ancestor. This is the great claim of evolution—that all life has descended from a common ancestor due to unguided natural processes—without God. In contrast, I believe the Bible—that all life was created by God.

Let me illustrate: The first picture, of a Detroit dilapidated house, demonstrates what evolution—unguided natural processes—can actually do for what was at one time a pretty nice house. The other picture, of a cute little baby panda bear, demonstrates something entirely different; it shows what a creator—an intelligent designer—can do. Our children know the difference! You know the difference!

In my heart, I believe the evolutionists also know the difference. But, they have been so blinded by ideology and swept away by group-think that they have lost the ability to see what is staring them right in the face. Despite all the gloating and celebrating of the evolutionists here today, they do not seem to realize that there is NO evidence for evolution in these books; there is only dogma.

Therefore, I urge you to adopt these books. Not to please the evolutionists, but because when our students read these books, they will clearly see, like the little boy in Hans Christian Anderson’s The Emperor’s New Clothes, that evolution has no clothes.

Thank you.

Don McLeroy

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Prepared Testimony for the Texas State Board of Education—November 20, 2013

  1. Luke says:

    Wow, what a ridiculous analogy. Just goes to show you that the science deniers will grasp at any straw possible in order to further their Christi-centric, intolerant ideology.

  2. Craig Dävis says:

    What was this supposed to illustrate again? The stupidity is hard to reconcile for those of us with an ounce of intellect.

  3. Matt says:

    This is just silly. Even if there is some kind of supernatural power that created the universe/multiverse with some form of intelligent design, the idea that it can be explained by any religion (much less a Bronze Age scientifically ignorant religion) is absurd. Just the facts ma’am. Save the fairy tales and idolatry for Sunday School.

  4. Colby says:

    It breaks my heart to read this, knowing that the writer actually thinks he is making any sort of valid point. This should be ‘Exhibit A’ when proving why the scientific illiterate should have no say in classroom. If you don’t understand a subject what makes you think you should have any input on the matter?

  5. Charlie says:

    This is a joke, right? Using a house to make a non sequitr about evolution? Don, you do understand that evolution has to do with explaining the diversity of life on Earth, and has nothing to say about the upkeep of residential structures, right?

    No one cares what you believe in your heart. We care what you can demonstrate and substantiate with evidence. Until such time that you can leave the blind religious assertions at home and become scientifically literate, you should save yourself the embarrassment and keep your preaching in the church.

  6. David Wilson says:

    Freakishly Orwellian… “Stand up for science…” and “…so blinded by ideology and swept away by group-think that they have lost the ability to see what is staring them right in the face…” It would be funnier if the problem weren’t so serious.

  7. Everett McGillory says:

    The derelict house shows a principle known as entropy. Look it up in the dictionary – you know, that amazing book that gives humanity all the knowledge it needs to know about words. Entropy is also a scientific term, although, I am not sure you understand what science really is as evidenced by your blathering above.

    The baby panda is a product of nature. Nature, oddly enough, is a scientific term, too. It describes the gamut of all that is created naturally throughout the universe. A factory is not nature, because it is not natural. Factories don’t spring up out of the ground on their own, mankind has to build them. The same is true of houses. Houses are built by mankind, and if not attended to, fall apart. That is the term I mentioned above – entropy. Houses cannot get together and make new houses. Left on their own, houses do not become bigger, stronger, more intelligent, or better – they fall apart. Entropy.

    Baby pandas, if left on their own, will eventually find food to eat (hopefully) and then grow bigger, stronger, better – and if two of them get together, provided they have the right parts, they can make another panda. This is nature.

    Now who made nature I don’t know. I could theorize all sorts of ideas, from a mystical sky wizard to alien explorers, from the four armed blue creator of the universe to the child of the titan Chronos, or perhaps from the word spoken by Zoroaster to the great Dragon who breathed the universe into creation. But since science can’t prove any of those, I will keep searching, and in the meantime, believe what science has shown in observable, documentable, and explainable common language, without the need to blindly accept a truth that has nothing more than someone’s say-so as proof.

    Thanks, have a nice day, and don’t forget to wash behind your ears, because the devil might just be hiding there . . .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s