I used to question all I had been taught about the subject of creation, persecuting all who supported it, and denying all the evidence that could give it credence, even though it would secretly stick me in the ribs. I could not admit openly my growing contempt with the idea that it could be true . Creationism was beginning to make more sense to me than what was initially reported to me. Therefore, I had to hide my conflicting thoughts, so as not to weaken my position in my stated beliefs by failing to refute creationism.
Like Saul of Tarsus on his mission to destroy the early Christian church, I was convinced I was doing a noble work by stamping out this belief supported by the sect initially called “The Way.” Again, like Saul, I eventually grew weary of “kicking against the pricks,” and had to admit my futility of trying to deny the common sense of creation that sang a chorus of truth all around me. God through the beauty of his wondrous universe showed me a better way.
After two years of going it on my own as a man of science, I could not deny the contradictions that were being taught in schools any longer. A double standard existed, where the first function of my university Anthropology teacher on the first day of my first freshman class was to identify all of the creationists, and kick them in the teeth, by declaring in a loud voice,
“Evolution is not a science theory, but a science fact!”
He went on a withering diatribe to prove his point that was defined by his initial edict and did not stop until all but the most intrepid and well versed faith was crushed and totally demoralized. To disagree and present honesty in one’s school work would be to receive a failing grade for not learning the curriculum. The only alternative would be to lie or misrepresent your interpretation of the class work, ignoring your personal objections, and like any good robot quote the party line without being allowed to think honestly for one’s self and present it as truth. Scientific, political, moral, religious and philosophic thought was held hostage during the greater part of the written history of man by just such close-minded totalitarianism in society.
This intellectual despotism was typically enforced by the elitist aristocracy of the day, and served to delay mankind's cerebral and social growth, and Renaissance from the dark ages of history. Sadly, as I have illustrated it is still in practice today, where entrenched authorities and purveyors of knowledge hold court over the lesser supposedly naive mortals who are entrusted to their tutelage and care.
If creationist teachers were to stand up like that and publicly put on such a show, they would be considered scientific heretics who would be happily escorted from the classroom and promptly terminated. This would ensure the Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state would remain the status quo by killing the messengers of enlightenment, though the initial idea was to protect the church from interference by the state, not the opposite.
The idea that random DNA mutations would result in a more ordered genetic state than a disordered genetic state on a grand scale is a ludicrous concept. Probability is very much against a random ordering of events to accumulate consistently toward anything meaningful, unless the instructions to do so were pre-programmed within the species. No proved analogy exists in the natural world to support this macro-evolutionary position outside of the one purported to support evolution by using its own alleged occurrences to support its own theory. Use of this circular logic is simply bad science and should not be tolerated and allowed to stand. Moreover, no one has ever seen a fish become a bird, or even found a complete fossil that represented this change, but only by quantum leaps of imagination can this be seen to be true . If you apply this logic to the larger universe, then anything with similar characteristics whether it is something animate or not, could be considered to be a transformative process in the making, yet no one need witness it for it to be considered a scientific fact!
The same criteria are not allowed to be applied to creationism, where hard evidence is demanded, even though like religion science also employs leaps of faith to support its tenets. It is good to remember that many of our Ivy League schools started out as faith-based institutions at their birth. Perhaps the founders of some of America's greatest universities realized that all truth comes down to faith, whether you choose to accept the declarations of Darwin and his disciples, which are constantly being refined, or that of God whose word has remained a constant de facto standard of truth, despite the many attempts to refute it or change it to fit the “idea de jour.”