X-Nilo Files, 1(5), March 1999

Test how much you've been brainwashed!

by Ken Ham

Before peeking at the answers and explanations below, quickly read through the following questions and choose the BEST answer for each.

1. Can you marry your relation?

a. Yes
b. No
c. Probably
d. Only after counseling

2. Did kangaroos live in the Middle East?

a. Yes
b. No
c. They live only in Australia
d. We can’t know for sure

3. Which of the following best illustrates a 'prehistoric' animal?

a. Alligator
b. Mammoth
c. Brachiosaurus
d. None of the above

4. Has God told us when He made Tyrannosaurus rex?

a. Yes
b. No
c. We can’t know for sure
d. Only science has the correct answer

5. To completely and properly understand Christian doctrine, one needs to:

a. Read the book of Genesis
b. Believe the main parts of Genesis
c. Believe and understand the book of Genesis
d. Believe those parts of Genesis quoted in the New Testament

6. Where was the Garden of Eden located?

a. Australia
b. America
c. In the area around the present Tigris and Euphrates rivers
d. We can’t know

7. Creation scientists and evolutionary scientists:

a. Use the same evidence but different presuppositions (i.e., beliefs)
b. Use different presuppositions and different evidence
c. Use only evidence and no presuppositions
d. Use only presuppositions and no evidence
e. None of the above

8. The book of Genesis is:

a. The foundation of all major Christian doctrines
b. Historical narrative
c. The most quoted from or referred to book in the entire Bible
d. All of the above
e. None of the above

9. Darwinian (microbe to man) evolution is:

a. A belief
b. A religion
c. Not observable or testable
d. All of the above
e. None of the above

Answers & Explanations

The purpose of this test is to actually teach the reader to think in a particular way. From my experience, I have found that all of us, myself included, have been 'secularized' to one degree or another. You see, there are in essence only two worldviews: The Christian worldview and the secular worldview. By 'Christian worldview' I mean that all of the thinking of a person in every area starts with the Word of God (the Bible) as the foundation for their thinking. By 'secular worldview,' I mean that all of the thinking of a person starts from totally human sources.

Question 1: (a.) If a wife or husband weren’t related when they married—one of them didn’t marry a human!

You see, all humans are related because we are all descendants of one man and one woman (I Corinthians 15:45; Genesis 3:20;Genesis 5:4; Acts 26). The reason we can be saved is because Jesus became our 'relation' to die for His relations (this is why He is called the 'last Adam'— God provided another 'Adam' to pay the penalty for sin). Now we don’t marry someone closely related to us today because of the problems with our genes resulting from the Curse of Genesis 3.

Question 2: (a) This question was answered in detail in our Creation magazine (Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 16-18). When we understand the event of the Flood, and that all the kinds of land animals were carried on the Ark, and that the Ark landed in what we call the Middle East—then we can definitively answer this question!

Question 3: (d) Usually when we consider 'prehistoric' animals, we think of those that the evolutionists teach did not live beside man —like dinosaurs. This term usually means 'before recorded history.' However, the Bible records history from when it began (Genesis 1:1), so nothing is 'before history'. We are also told that all of the land animals were made on day six of Creation alongside Adam and Eve.

Question 4: (a) It’s surprising how many answer 'b' (no) to this question. Because people have been so indoctrinated by evolutionists, even many Christians believe that animals we now call dinosaurs can’t be mentioned in the Bible. However, if God made all the land animals on day six, and Tyrannosaurus rex was a land animal, then obviously God told us when he made Tyrannosaurus—Day Six!

Question 5: (c) Sadly, most Christians do not understand that ultimately, directly or indirectly, all Christian doctrine is founded in the book of Genesis. Thus, to understand the meaning of our key doctrines, one has to understand and believe the book of Genesis.

Question 6: (d) This question was also answered in detail in Creation magazine (March-May 1996, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 16-18). Because the Flood of Noah’s day so destroyed the Earth, we wouldn’t have a clue where the Garden of Eden was located. The present Tigris and Euphrates rivers are sitting on thousands of feet of sedimentary rock containing billions of dead things—fossils. The perfect Garden of Eden could not have been on top of dead and diseased animal remains— death was the penalty for sin. Obviously Noah used names with which he was familiar when he landed in this area after the Flood.

Question 7: (a) Many people have been trained wrongly to think that scientists start with evidence only to develop their theories. Actually, everyone has presuppositions (or beliefs) that determine how they look at evidence.

Creationists and evolutionists do not have different evidence—they have the same world—they have the same 'facts'—but they interpret the facts differently because they have different presuppositions.

For instance, a Christian—who starts with the Bible understanding that no death of animals or humans existed before the fall of man, and that the world was judged by a global Flood—will interpret the evidence of the Grand Canyon layers (that contain billions of dead things) differently than an evolutionist who believes that millions of years of death occurred before man evolved.

Question 8: (d) See answer to question 5.

The more Christians think foundationally, building their thinking on the Bible, the more they’ll be able to defend their faith and have a solid foundation that will not break up under the onslaughts of the evolutionary, humanistic teaching that permeates our culture.

Question 9: (d) Many people don’t understand that real science involves using your five senses in the present. This is why we could develop our technology to build aircraft, computers, space shuttles, and so on. When dealing with the past, however, scientists don’t have the past. Evolution is not science in the sense of being observable, testable, repeatable, etc. Who witnessed reptiles turning into birds, or life beginning in a primeval soup millions of years ago? No one did, of course. Because what you believe about where you came from affects your whole world view, evolution can be called a religion. For instance, the late astronomer and author Carl Sagan used evolution to justify why women can abort babies!

Club Feedback

The materials are very informative and they truly hit home!
—MR, public school club,WI

Please continue to equip us to provide evidence to our students of the full truth of the Bible to encourage them with your research and to stimulate them to seek to know why they believe!
—RT, public school club, OH

After approaching the board about the club, I was urged to make sure an emphasis was placed on origins in all science classes at least once a month. They want all students to hear so that they’ll be prepared to use God’s Word in evaluating what science says, and making all decisions.
—TS, Christian school club, SC

Your materials are excellent and so needed today. Thank you so much for helping us!
—RL, Christian school club, PA

I had one particular student who was so excited after the first class that she went home and told all her family members about dinosaurs not being millions of years old. That they were on the ark, etc. . . Thank you for all your help and all the information. It’s wonderful!
—CK, home group club, FL

Questions to stir your ‘critical thinking’ juices!

1. What do you mean by that? or How do you define that? — These questions can be used to challenge concepts such as 'The Grand Canyon was caused by the flow of the Colorado River for billions of years.' Or 'What do you mean by "caused by the flow?"'

2. What are your underlying assumptions? (Do you assume that the Earth was created about 6,000 years ago, or do you assume that the Earth originated billions of years ago?)

3. Where do you get your information?

4. How do you know that’s true? Or Is that what you believe?

5. What happens if you’re wrong (in your assumptions)?

NOTE: Science is establishing and systemizing facts, principles, and methods through experience. DATA is INTERPRETED based on ASSUMPTIONS.

It’s Really a Bird!

Q. Over the years evolutionists’ claims of transitional, or in-between, forms of creatures as evidence for evolution have been refuted – correct?

A. Definitely! One of the most famous supposed transitional forms was a creature called Archaeopteryx. It was supposed to be part reptile and part bird.

At the international meeting of dinosaur experts held in Philadelphia called Dinofest, Archaeopteryx was discussed in detail. The unanimous conclusion by these evolutionists was the same as that made nearly fifteen years ago – Archaeopteryx was a true bird and NOT an intermediate between reptiles and birds.

This is VERY significant. You see, you’ll find Archaeopteryx listed in many science textbooks, including some recent editions, as an intermediate form and thus 'proof' of evolution.

You know, I used to be a biology teacher in the public schools. Something I noticed was that the textbooks and many of the teachers would still teach some of the classic evidences used for evolution – when in fact these had been refuted years before.

To be honest, I believe evolutionists cling to these refuted evidences because they have nothing else to put in their place – except, of course, the answers in Genesis that tell us the truth about origins.

— excerpt from Answers . . . with Ken Ham radio program, October 9, 1998.

Science in the News

So-called feathered dinosaurs are in the news again. Headlined on the front page of the October 9, 1998 Current Science
and rehashed in a recent article on the ABC website, the same argument for feathered dinosaurs raises its malformed head. Once again, we remind you that 'new evidence' should be accepted only with extreme scepticism:

Feathered Dinosaur?

Here’s what some newspapers and scientific web sites have been stating:

• The fossil find of the century! The first dinosaur with feathers, a possible fore-runner to flying birds, has been discovered in China.
• This fossil, found in Liaoning province, China, has been radiometrically dated to the early Cretaceous, allegedly 135 million years ago.

Here are some key points to ponder:

• How many other fossils have been sensationally called 'fossils of the century?' Remember Piltdown Man (a hoax), Nebraska Man (a pig’s tooth), etc.?
• Dr Alex Ritchie, a paleontologist at the Australian Museum and a fanatical anti-creationist, claims that 'dinosaurs developed feathers for insulation and later evolved and refined them for flight purposes.' This is a vacuous statement; the 'facts' that feathers are good for insulation and flight are asserted to 'confirm' the 'hypothesis' that they evolved to get that way!
• Dr Ritchie fails to explain 'how' they could have evolved—scales are folds in the skin; feathers are complex structures with a barb, barbules, and hooks. They also originate in a totally different way: from follicles inside the skin. Their embryonic development is different, as well. Furthermore, there has been no report yet of a fossil showing scales turning into feathers or a leg turning into a wing!
• This fossil 'cannot' be an ancestor of birds, since Archaeopteryx, a true bird with fully formed flight feathers and a wishbone, is dated by evolutionists at 15 million years 'before' this fossil!
• There are many dating methods that give an age for the Earth that is far too young for evolutionary scenarios. (See Dr John Morris, The Young Earth).

The Chinese fossil seems closely related to the coelurosaur Compsagnathus, one of the smallest dinosaurs. The liaoning animal cannot be considered a direct bird ancestor because it came well after the time of Archaeopteryx, which lived 150 million years ago. If the bird-dinosaur theory is correct, true birds must have split off the theropod line before Archaeopteryx.

For now, critics of the theory remain undaunted by the new find. Larry D. Martin of the University of Kansas in Lawrence says that the structures on the back of the Chinese dinosaur may be the frayed remnants of dermal scales, similar to the frill running down the back of an iguana. In that case, the find would say little about the origin of birds.

Like most palentologists, however, Martin awaits a detailed report on the new find. 'The possibility for having egg on the face is tremendous at this point,' he says. 'We generally get more hard evidence with alien abductions than we have here.'

Twisted Thinking!

First published in:
Creation 15(2):3,
March-May 1993

In September 1992, a Scientific American article called 'Mind and Brain' said that the human brain is . . . 'the most complex structure in the known universe, complex enough to coordinate the fingers of a concert pianist or to create a three-dimensional landscape from light that falls on a two-dimensional retina.' A few lines further on, the author said that 'the current version [of the brain] is the result of millions of years of evolution. It is difficult to understand the brain because, unlike a computer, it was not built with specific purposes or principles of design in mind. Natural selection, the engine of evolution, is responsible.'

This is the stark reality of what evolutionary 'science' is teaching our generation—even the most complex structure in the universe is said to have no plan, no purpose, in defiance of all ordinary logic. Trying to explain design without a designer—in other words, justifying atheism—is what evolution has always been all about, despite the attempts by compromising 'theistic evolutionists' to disguise the obvious.

Source: Gerald D. Fischbach, 'Mind and Brain,' Scientific American, (Vol. 267. No. 3) September 1992, p.24.