The PBS film series "Evolution" (part 2)

These are both examples of a very successful, but deceitful, argument called equivocation.  Equivocation is the shifting of definitions; it's using words with two or more meanings to purposely mislead.  In the first example two correct statements are used to support a third incorrect one.  The first statement refers to mankind in general.  The second statement uses a second meaning of the word man.  Here, man is defined as an adult male thus, is not a woman, a female.  The third statement deceitfully uses the definition of woman as a gender to support an incorrect statement based upon the correct statement that man (mankind) is logical. 

The second example equally leads to an incorrect conclusion.  It is correct to say, "Today evolved from a cold day to a hot one."  One meaning of the word allows it to be used as simple change over time.  Obviously change is true.  However, the meaning of evolution applies the true statement “simple change over time” to a speculation that all plants and animals developed from a rudimentary state.  In other words, just because things change over time does not mean that this applies to change over time with plants and animals from one species to another.

This deception has become so well established in science today that any change seen in science is presented as proof for evolution.  This is illustrated in the film series "Evolution" seen on public broadcasting this month and last month.  From microbes to newts many examples are given illustrating how change in these organisms is proof of evolution.  Episode one describes the dilemma that physicians are faced with when confronting the HIV virus.  The program attempted to illustrate evolution by describing the virus as rapidly evolving because it mutated.  These random changes due to the mutations make the virus drug-resistant.  Thus, natural selection would favor the more drug-resistant forms.  A physician treating patients infected with the HIV virus pointed out that because of mutations and natural selection it is becoming more and more difficult to treat the virus.  Then, he makes a bold statement based on his faith in evolution: "Imagine we didn't have the concept of evolution and we started giving drugs to treat the patient that in the test tube looked great.  Then, all of the sudden, the virus starts coming back and it's not susceptible to the drugs anymore.  What a mystery!  How in the world did that happen?  There's only one way that it happened--through evolution." 

Ironically, the model of evolution does not predict this.  Evolution would predict that the organism would gain information.  This is not what is happening with the HIV virus.  The mutations that are causing resistance are due to a "loss" or transfer of information and certainly not due to a gain of information.  Thus, through natural selection, those that are mutated are the ones that survive.  (Natural selection, by the way, is a fact of nature acknowledged by creationists even before Darwin came around.  Natural selection as a process in nature is what the creation model would predict.  It is a process in nature that the Creator instituted as a conservation measure, i.e. a way to explain how organisms survive, not originate.)  Neither natural selection or mutations have been shown to cause evolution--change from molecules to man.  Mutations do not create they corrupt.  Mutations are the origin of death, deformity etc., not the origin of life.  This is exactly what we would expect with the creation model.  Corruption caused by the sin of man has caused the whole of creation to groan (Romans 8:20-22).  Thus, mutations are actually the enemy of evolution and are exactly what creation science would predict.  So scientifically the creation model is far superior.  

However, because mutations and natural selection cause change in the HIV virus the PBS program use them like a magician uses a magic wand to deceive.  Instead of "abracadabra" the magic word is "change."  The HIV virus causes change with mutations and natural selection.  Change is true.  Poof!  Evolution must be true!  This naïve, deceitful and misleading logic no doubt dazzled many viewers convincing them evolution is true.

So what?  The problem with this deception is not just that it manipulates science to promote the unscientific conclusion of evolution.  The problem is a moral one.  The reason evolution has to be true in the minds of these people is because it is the only way to explain how things got here without a Creator.  The creation model of how things got here not only leads one to a more scientifically predictable model but also a more reasonable moral conclusion about how we got here. 

These indoctrination films by PBS were some the most well funded evolution programs ever devised.  They are built upon the faulty logic of equivocation and the manipulation of science in order to deceive.  Thus, these words from the Bible seem more important now more than ever: "But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ." 2 Corinthians 11:3.

Page 85


Previous Article   Table of Contents    Next Article

Home Page

Perhaps you could get my column published in your local paper, too! Have your newspaper editor contact me. Also, feel free to email me with any of your questions, comments or disagreements.

©Tom Carpenter
Originally published in the Rockdale/Newton Citizen