The "information highway" was a phrase popularized in the 1990's because of the advent of computerized access to all unclassified media information. Children and adults alike spend their work and leisure hours at a computer terminal. On the side of productive learning is the fact that thorough research on any subject that has been put on this "highway" can be accomplished quickly with a minimum of cost. On the down side, however, is the fact that the learner can only accumulate what has been placed in circulation on this technological superhighway.

If there is a failing of a computerized method of education, it is the same failing that has faced public education. The information available is necessarily subjective, as is any information found in a textbook, in the school library, or classroom. Subjective means the information presented as reality is that which is perceived as such after it has filtered through the mindset of the writer. History, science, math, social studies, and, in fact, all educational material is written by a person with a worldview. The worldview of that writer will show forth in what has been written. If the writer views history, geography, geology, biology, sociology or any learning discipline through an evolutionary framework, then the writing will reflect this view. If an evolutionary framework architects the structure on which all learning proceeds, that framework will be that the world and all that is in it (people, plants, animals, rocks, continents, sea life, etc.) are the accidental product of random chance.

It is difficult to illustrate random chance. That is why the evolutionary foundation and outgrowths of much of the learning of today are difficult to pinpoint. However, no one would expect an engineer to build a bridge without planning and design. To say that everything that is to be studied proceeded from nothing plus random chance is to ask a physicist to make conclusions based on a blackboard empty of calculations. Random chance as the basis for studying all that man sees around him crushes the foundation of any concrete conclusion.

A science education does not begin in a physics laboratory, however. It begins at the simplest level, perhaps with a child looking at a flower and making observations.

Alexander Bell said, "The period of childhood is the great observing period in human life. The child is an explorer in a new land in which marvelous discoveries may be made each day."

The child has no thorough knowledge of the intricate workings of photosynthesis, pollination, etc. but he does share an instinct that is common to all humankind. Most children around the age of three begin to ask the question "Why?" They have found this word to be an instant conversation promoter and enjoy the attention the word provokes. It is interesting that children from all cultures ask this question in their own language. It may be more than just a silly question asked by children. One educator has said, "'Why?' gets back to a purpose, and purpose gets back to a person." If a child asks why, and the answer is, "Because of nothing, and from nothing," the educational process has begun in a vacuum. Many fine scientists may be lost in our generation because they are not equipped with the most fundamental of truths. The Bible teaches, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" (Proverbs 9:10). One can fill the mind of a child full of information, but if that information is incorrect, then it is not education. Education is, first of all, a body of truth and the wise exercise of it. The core of that truth is the knowledge of the Creator who gives meaning to all other facts in the universe. And education's goal is the exercise of that truth in the execution of the God-given role mankind has as the supreme caretaker of all creation.

My high school children and I were invited to be one of the "visual aids" in a class of fifteen PhD candidates (mainly secondary school principals and administrators). These "students" were conducting panel discussions and giving presentations about things that were impacting the modern public school system. Because I was a homeschooling parent, I and my children were invited. After an hour of discussing the strengths and weaknesses of public education versus home schooling, I was asked THE QUESTION by one of the PhD candidates (a high school chemistry teacher). It was, "Why are you home schooling?"

A home schooling family makes a definite statement about the present state of much of education. Many public school science teachers and, in fact, most teachers in the public sector have received their credentials in universities that teach man is a product of billions of years of an upward spiral of random chance and mutations. This theory of origins envelopes a child's educational process from the biology textbook to the literature class. My answer was not popular that day, but at least it was truthful.

Dr. George Lindsey is an educator who has done over two decades of research in the field of evolution's "contribution" to the advancement of learning. He maintains that evolution not only makes no contribution to learning, it can actually be harmful to that learning process. I recently interviewed Dr. Linsdey on this subject. He made some telling points about how evolution is going to affect education and research for years to come.

Dr. Lindsey talked about the contributions of creation scientists in the past: "Louis Pasteur, a creation scientist, did more than anyone had done in the field of inoculations and immunology, and his work was based upon the biblical perspective that only life can beget life. He reasoned that if humans have a pathogen (disease causing organism) in their bodies, that it should be possible to find its origin by tracking it back generation to generation. Once the source is discovered, a method to block the pathway can be developed preventing the infection. If medical science had assumed the evolutionary perspective, that pathogens could spontaneously generate, then Pasteur's solution would not have been discovered, perpetuating devastating worldwide suffering."

What many researchers in scientific laboratories fail to understand is they have brought a faulty premise into the laboratory with them. Many scientists in these research facilities have been taught from their earliest education that ultimate truth cannot be discovered and the wonders they see in the microscope are all a product of random chance. Truth is approached as a moving target and all that is in the world has no ultimate purpose beyond what the person at the microscope can muster.