In regard to the Kansas school board decision and resulting massive disinformation campaign waged against those who question the dogma of macroevolution, it might be well to simply look at some of the clearly unscientific statements made by taxpayerpaid public school biology textbooks (some of which are used in Kansas).
When compared with the caecum of a horse, the caecum and appendix of humans is thought to be vestigial. (Oram, Biology, 1994, p. 311.)
The caecum is a blind pouch found as the first portion of the large intestine in most mammals. The trouble for neo-Darwinian theory is that some mammals have a caecum, but then, some don’t (e.g., some primates don’t). Why does the author compare the caecum of a horse to the appendix in people? Why not a chimpanzee and people? It is now known, according to evolutionists themselves, that the appendix in people is not a vestigial organ, but is in fact fully functional as part of our immune system.
The first nucleotides, amino acids, and sugars could have been formed during this period. There have been experimental results that support this hypothesis. (Schraer & Stoltz, Biology, 1995, p. 590.)
Amino acids, strung together in a precise sequence form nucleotides which are the “building blocks” of the molecule of life, DNA (genes are segments of DNA, which are composed of a series of nucleotides). While amino acids can be synthesized, nucleotides have never been made in origin of life experiments. Thus, there are no “experimental results that support this hypothesis”! Clearly, the textbook includes badscience.
If today’s species have come from more ancient forms, then we should be able to find remains of those species that no longer exist. Scientists have found such evidence in the form of fossils. (Towle, A., Modern Biology, 1993, p. 219.)
We certainly find remains of many species that no longer exist, but did basic categories arise through the alteration of previously existing ones? Scientists should hesitate to be so dogmatic. There might be a better explanation for the fossils, i.e., sudden creation of each basic category. Indeed, it was editor Montgomery Slatkin of American Scientist who said in 1994, “The fossil record has always been a problem.” Evolutionist A. G. Fisher said in 1998 in specific regard to fossils, “Both the origin of life and the origin of the major groups of animals remain unknown.”
We of ICR do not question science, but we do reject the strange idea of neo-Darwinism that is presented as fact in virtually all secular biology textbooks found in American public schools. Such unscientific indoctrination must change. The new freedom now allowed in Kansas provides for refreshing alternatives.
Cite this article: Frank Sherwin, M.A. 1999. Bad Science in Kansas Science Textbooks. Acts & Facts. 28 (11).