Top 5 Lies Taught By Accelerated Christian Education

There are “facts” in the ACE PACEs that are absolutely untrue. Now, you might be kind and say, “Perhaps they are mistakes.” But these errors have remained in the PACEs through successive reprints, and they are things which were known to be untrue long before the PACEs went into print in the first place. Therefore, we can say that the writers didn’t care about factual accuracy. If you’re running an education system, that’s gross negligence and I feel no compunction about calling these things lies.

I called ACE on May 3rd, 2012, and was told that all of these PACEs are still in print and the content has not changed. These lies are still being taught in over fifty British schools today.

5. The Loch Ness Monster Disproves Evolution

This would be at number 1, but since it’s already been substantially covered in the Times Educational Supplement and the Guardian (at my instigation, please note), I don’t want you to feel you’re getting second-hand information. If you haven’t read the stories and can’t be bothered, Science PACE 1099 contains this priceless wisdom:

Some scientists speculate that Noah took small or baby dinosaurs on the Ark…. are dinosaurs still alive today? With some recent photographs and testimonies of those who claimed to have seen one, scientists are becoming more convinced of their existence…

Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

4. Solar Fusion is a Myth

The sun, as everybody knows, works by nuclear fusion. Unfortunately, Creationists have a pet theory, outlined on pages 7-9 of Science 1096 (a PACE devoted entirely to refuting evolution, packed with misinformation and distortions of the truth). In short, Creationists want to prove that the sun is shrinking. If the sun is shrinking at a constant rate, then billions of years ago it would have swallowed up the earth. This, they say, proves that the universe must be young.

Unfortunately for them, the sun is not shrinking. That’s because, contrary to their assumptions, the sun is not a massive gas boiler gradually shrinking as it burns fuel. It’s a fusion reactor. This doesn’t fit their model, so they outright deny the truth:

The nuclear fusion theory of how the sun emits heat and light is an invention of evolution scientists… All other theories require the sun to use up all its energy sooner than the evolutionists’ invented timetable would allow.

3. A Japanese Whaling Boat Found a Dinosaur

From the same page as the Loch Ness Monster claim (man, they were just letting the crazy fly that day) comes this:

A Japanese fishing vessel brought up the decomposing body of a dinosaurlike [sic] sea creature off the coast of New Zealand. Caught at a depth of 900 feet, the creature weight 4,000 pounds, measured 32 feet in length, and was seen and photgraphed by the crew members. The animal could not be matched with any living species but certainly resembles a supposedly extinct species of dinosaur.

That quote was placed alongside this photo. Actually, not this photo; an artist’s impression of this photo.

Not a Plesiosaur

Looks like a dinosaur. Isn’t.

Looks very dinosaur-y, no? Well, yes, but it wasn’t a dinosaur. It was a decaying basking shark; that’s just what they look like when they rot a bit. There was a lot of fuss about this when it happened, in 1977, before scientists got on the case and established what was going on through tissue samples. You can read all about it here.

Here’s the thing: As I said, this happened in 1977. Scientific evidence that it was a shark had been presented in 1978. So when did ACE write a PACE strongly implying this was a dinosaur (and saying it couldn’t be matched with any living species)? Nineteen Eighty-Nine1989. And they kept it in subsequent revisions. Utter mendacity.

And anyway, even if dinosaurs were found alive today, that wouldn’t disprove evolution. As a University of Sussex lecturer wrote to the TES, it would just mean we have to rewrite some timelines.

2. Evolution Has Been Disproved

Not “there are flaws/ gaps in the theory of evolution,” or “evolution is just one theory” – those normal Creationist arguments are bad enough. No, ACE PACEs say on multiple occasions that evolution is impossible.

  • “This gradual change from fish to reptiles has no scientific basis.” (Science 1099, p. 30)
  • “No branch of true science would make these kind of impossible claims without proof. Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!” (Science 1107, p. 24)
  • “It is not possible that our planet accidentally evolved into a living blue and green planet! No, the creation of our earthly home required a miracle. That miracle was the design and work of a mighty Creator.” (Social Studies 1098, p. 3)
  • “The evolutionist does not realise that he also accepts his theories by faith; he cannot prove them by scientific demonstration, and he is dishonest when he claims they are science.” (Social Studies 1097, p. 25)

And, best of all:

  • “scientific evidence proved the Darwinian theory of evolution was false” (Science 1107, p. 23)

That’s, um, not quite true though, is it?

1. Humans and Dinosaurs Co-Existed

There is a claim that fossilised human footprints have been found alongside dinosaur tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River, Texas. Well, I’ll just let ACE pick up the story.

“Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. Fossilized human footprints and three-toed dinosaur tracks occur in the same rock stratum…. That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

ACE, Science 1099, p.  29.

Unfortunately, the human tracks aren’t real. They may have been a hoax. Even the notable loons at Answers in Genesis have admitted they can’t be used as evidence for Creationism. Talk Origins deals with it too.

But that’s OK. ACE wouldn’t lie, would they? It was probably discovered that they were a hoax after the PACEs went into print, right?

Nope. By 1986, even the Institute for Creation Research had given up on the Paluxy prints. And as I’ve already told you, this PACE went into print in 1989. And it’s also mentioned in Science 1096, first copyright 1986.

The Paluxy Tracks are the Creationist equivalent of the Piltdown Man, except that evolution has other solid evidence and Creationism… doesn’t.

So there it is. Accelerated Christian Education: written by people who don’t care about the truth.

EDIT 10th May 2012: Changed “these tracks were a hoax” to “They may have been a hoax.” Certainly, the tracks are not human, and it was known that they were not real long before ACE wrote about them. But there doesn’t seem to be a lot of evidence for a hoax. Perhaps some were hoaxes, but they are also just random foot-like impressions in the rocks, and tracks from other dinosaurs.

Related posts:

Comments are now closed for this post. Trackbacks and pingbacks are still on, and most other posts still have comments open. If you have something important to add, you can message me.

 

About these ads

About Jonny Scaramanga

I grew up as a Christian fundamentalist in the UK. Now I am writing a book and blog about what that's like, and what fundamentalists believe.

Posted on May 7, 2012, in Accelerated Christian Education, Christianity, Creationism, Education, Faith Schools, Fundamentalism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 157 Comments.

  1. Another great post Jonny, I must admit that I seriously doubt if I would have been able to think my way out of this kind fo upbringing. Well done to you!

    • Thanks. I got lucky, really. I was removed from the school just before I turned 15. I went on to get a decent schooling. I was still a creationist after three or four years of proper education, but being exposed to challenging ideas and critical thought eventually got through to me. I had some great teachers.

      • Love the school of thought here Johnny. New convert to rationalization myself. Raised in a Christian home….. Will graduate with a dual major – anthropology & art in a week. I can’t believe how much I have learned. Keep the posts coming. I’m learning more every day.

      • Amazing – nice one for making it out in one piece Mary. It’s good to have you here.

      • How is it beneficial to learn, learn, learn if what truly matters doesn’t matter anymore?

        If I gain the world, but lose my soul…

    • “Unfortunately, the human tracks aren’t real. They may have been a hoax. Even the notable loons at Answers in Genesis have admitted they can’t be used as evidence for Creationism. Talk Origins deals with it too.”

      The link for “They may have been a hoax” cites Wikipedia. Sounds legit.

      • Ha, yeah. It is cited, but to a single newspaper article which is no longer online.
        I agree; it’s dodgy. Maybe I should just remove that reference. It’s not necessary to make the case. There was a TV documentary decades ago where Richard Dawkins showed random patterns of erosion in that riverbed which looked a bit like footprints, and he thought that was the origin of the myth.

      • How are the human tracks along-side the dino tracks fake? FYI the top layer of silt was removed(as they were buried under a layer of silt on a riverbed) to see if they were fake. To the surprise of everyone, more human tracks were found along-side dino tracks. They removed six more layers only to find the same thing. Now you explain to me how one can make fake tracks on six layers of silt and setiment if each layer is supposed to take millions of years to form.

  2. Donald Miller

    Curses to those “Like” buttons. I hope you stop by and leave a comment about what you liked it didn’t like about the post, “The Atheist’s Confession.” I try to keep the like buttons off but people still manage to find one somewhere. “Like” doesn’t let me know much friend. I promise to never “like” anything on your site. The next time I come by, I’ll make a comment. Fair enough, I hope.

  3. I love the way it’s presented. Like “Cracked” except it isn’t 20,000 fucking words long!

    • Hurrah! Thank you for commenting Jake. Today my blog has had more hits than every day since I started blogging combined, but fewer comments than any other day.

      • that’s because the hits come from reddit. Typically, the bounce rate on it is insanely high. i usually avoid posting shit there since the return traffic is complete garbage. I believe in a slow but steady approach to my website / podcast.

  4. Donald Miller

    Hey Jonny,

    I’m thinking about start an online church. Are you interested. I’m just thinking that . . . well, stop by and we can discuss it.

    • An online church? I’d be highly sceptical, but open to persuasion. What do you have in mind?

      • Oh. My God. I remember this cookie idea about the online church. Probably wouldn’t have lasted as long as The Weekly.

        About the article: Dawkins went to where the “Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas,” and showed it for what it is–nonsense.

        If you get a chance, you might want to read my read my review of “Darwin’s Darkest Hour.” When you compare the honorable way he went about presenting his ideas compared to ACE’s dishonorable deceptions, the contrast in character is stunning.They’re trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole, by any means possible–and impossible.

  5. Donald Miller

    Below is a comment that I just left on Lorena’s site. I admit the idea of starting an online “church” might be a dumb one. But I’m not completely convinced that it is. I come across blogs all the time where people are poking fun at the believers–most of it deserved. But still, it’s not really contributing a great deal. On the other hand, starting something like what I mentioned is like showing them how to do it. Because what they’re doing right now, sucks.

    It just annoys the heck out of me when I come across “Believers” who have nothing going for them except a couple of bible verses. They know little to nothing about philosophy, religion, the bible, the history of Christianity, the western tradition, literature, . . . well you get the idea. But that doesn’t prevent them from being ever so arrogant and condescending.

    I had the idea when I was trying to get them interested in my two bible study sites that they were really shaking in their boots with considerable fear and trepidation that they might come across something that didn’t match up with what they were taught at church. I really mean that—they are fearful.

    What you have here with this post is everything they do—only way better. There’s a bible story. You write about it and give your take on it. Then you do something they DON’T do, you ask what other people think about it. It’s like what my friend did on your previous post. He mentioned something about: You have insulted the one that I love.

    So what. They say it’s “All about Jesus.” But they all-too-often make it all about “them.”

    Besides, Jesus is tough, he can take it. After all, he took the savage beating and the crucifixion. I don’t think he needs anyone “defending” him. I would never even think about telling someone, “You insulted Christopher Hitchens.” Hitchens sure as heck didn’t need me standing up for him. He was tough. He could take it. And he could dish it out.

  6. We would love to have you on the Fundamentally Flawed Podcast to talk about this. We were talking about this blog on the latest show and found it most informative. [Email removed to prevent spam]

  7. I’m not familiar with ACE curriculum, but I do come from the Southern Baptist tradition. And I’ve been taught pretty much all of this in discipleship training classes, Sunday School and from the pulpit. This is one of the things that drove me out of the Southern Baptist church, essentially. When I found one little piece of evidence that contradicted this I started digging deeper. Putting all the pieces together I was able to sort out that all of this was a pack of lies.

    The thing that really bothers me is that fundamentalist Christians are supposed so prideful about being an honest lot and the holders of truth. The end does not justify the means and, in fact, does infinitely more harm than good to the cause and/or case of Christianity.

    • Thanks for stopping by D’Ma. I’d love to know what the rationalisations were the writers had to use. They obviously think of themselves as honest people doing the work of God, yet they write this stuff which is so obviously untrue. That’s some impressive doublethink.

      • Though I cannot speak for everyone, I can tell you my rationale. As I eluded to in my last post I believed the Bible to be the literal, inerrant, infallible word of Almighty God. For a long time I didn’t question any of it. No matter how bizarre, or illogical, or wrong it seemed. I chose to close my eyes, stick my fingers in my ears, and hum until the evil(whatever thought or teaching went contrary to the Bible) passed. Even when presented with evidence of ,say, evolution, I dismissed it because no scientist could possibly know more than God.

        Would I have ever knowingly presented blatant known hoaxes as fact? No. But for a long, long time I wouldn’t have researched to know that they were hoaxes. I would have taken it at face value that the writers of such literature at ACE knew what they were talking about. When presented with the idea that such things were a hoax I would have probably dismissed it thinking that was just some *gasp* atheist trying to discredit honest Christians work in the scientific field.

      • That sounds bang on, and much like I used to think. Especially assuming the writers knew what they were talking about. I always repeated “facts” from Christian elders without checking them out, because I completely trusted them to be honest and well-informed.

        But these guys writing the PACEs, that’s another level of lying.

  8. The Loch Ness Monster????? I’m guessing they had “science” lessons on Big Foot ,as well. I know, they skipped that lesson to listen to the radio documentary “War of the Worlds”…ok, I’ll stop now….but I’m flabbergasted at the “Loch Ness Monster disproves Evolution”.

    • Incredible, isn’t it? And I believed in the Loch Ness Monster, partly because of this. I had to take some serious mocking for that later on. I felt I evened the score on that one with my TES article though.

    • If someone told me “Nessie is real and disproves evolution”, I would’ve pointed out that Big Foot is the perfect “missing link”. There’s more “evidence” for Big Foot/Sasquatch/Abominable Snowman than there is for Nessie. It would be entertaining watching them try to respond.

      • These sightings of Nessie go back long before Darwin wrote his book.(The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection , Or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Aha bet you didn’t know the title was that long.)

      • Nessie is real. A motion detecting camera was put into Loch- Ness to see if there is anything in that water. The water is murky because in the summer, peat comes down the mountains and goes into the loch. Peat takes years to settle out, hence the murkiness. While this camera was in there, something swam by. The movement was detected, and it took a picture. When the camera was retrieved, they began to see if it caught anything. They found one picture. The picture revealed that something with a diamond- shaped flipper swam by the camera. Tell me what other creature that lives in that lake has diamond- shaped flippers besides Nessie. Now let us move on to sasquatch. There is a creature in Austrailia called the yowie that is a sasquatch. The sasquatch exists, as it has been sighted for hundreds , even thousands of years. But to say it is a missing link is unprovable as none of these creatures have ever been caught.

    • when you have over 1000 sightings of the loch-ness monster, your conclusion should probably be that there likely is a monster(a plesiasaurous) in there. That picture on the Japanese vessel was an actual photograph

  9. “It is not possible that our planet accidentally evolved into a living blue and green planet! No, the creation of our earthly home required a miracle.”

    Even if one believes this, how does that prove their beliefs? It is a jump to say that it had to have been created, so therefore, Adam and Eve, Eden, Apple, Moses, Jesus…. Even if you think that the earth had to be created by a miracle, how does that mean that it wasn’t Odin, Zeus….

    It’s like you can say that it doesn’t make sense that Earth could possibly be the only planet with life and there must be life on other planets. Then use that to make the jump to say “therefore I Know that they are from Jupiter, have purple skin, have a matriarchal society, and tell you their entire history and belief system and what they want, and I Know it’s all true because there must be life on other planets somewhere.

  10. Evolution’s “descent with mofification” is not randomly begun anew from square one each time natural selection operates on an organism. It is cumulative—like throwing a Yahtze…and you get unlimited turns plus you get to keep the “6s” you already threw. Get it? Evolutionary modification is culled over time…but it a very, very long time (unimaginable in human terms) and to the extent that it’s usually accumulated, it has a purpose, ie; success in adaptation to habitat pressures.

  11. I read about the “dinosaur fish” with some surprise: I was given pretty much the same information in my own (state) Primary School in Bristol in the early 1960’s, but having a measurably weird memory, I was able to recall the fish’s name, and look it up. http://australianmuseum.net.au/Coelacanth-Latimeria-chalumnae-Smith-1939. What’s bothered me more down the years is the careless way Darwinian Evolution gets co-flated with the discovery of DNA, and the two are then “glued together” with totally unjustified assumptions. Almost any educated person that you ask will tell you that “DNA is a blueprint” with complete assurance. Problem is… it clearly ISN’T. That’s why you can play games with a developing foetus – surgically remove eyes for example, and reposition them in different places – and when the nerves and vascular system arrive (late in the developmental process) they connect not to where the organ ought to be (as they would if guided by a blueprint) but instead to where it REALLY is. If DNA WAS a Blueprint, then evolution would be almost impossible. It’s DNA as ” a rough sketch on the back of a cigarette packet” that allows it to work, plus that it obviously includes some kind of “Idiots guide to foetology” that makes accidental or random changes in design WORK.

  12. Most of the evolution oriented websites deal primarily with biological evolution. Unfortunately, I’m a little dense. I haven’t gotten as far as biological evolution, the origin of life and its development over ages. I’m still stuck at the primordial speck stage.
    Cosmological evolution generally starts at that original speck of no dimensions – no width, no height, and no depth. A geometrical point, if you will. It is believed to have, on its own, with no outside influence (as there was no “outside”), expanded into the universe.
    Creation believers believe mostly the same thing, except that they believe there was an outside influence. More than a mere influence, a supernatural (“super” is “higher,” “greater,” “bigger than”), that is, outside the natural sphere, power they call the “creator.”
    As I wrote, I’m still stuck at the pre-Bang point. How, and what, caused the primordial speck to expand? Did it do so on an analog (continuous, non-stepped) or a quantum basis? And why then and not earlier or later? Are we at the “We just plain don’t know” point?

    • Biological evolution is MUCH easier than this. I think Lawrence Krauss is one of the foremost guys in this field. Google him.

      • How does something as complex as DNA evolve from random chance? just one tablespoon of DNA decides everything about you. Mutations in DNA don’t introduce a new characteristic like giving a dinosaur feathers and wings, they are just pieces of DNA mixed up or scrambled. Take the word Christmas for example. You can mix up the letters, even take out letters and get different words. You would get the words Christ, mas, Sam, smart, ham, cam, stir, and mat, but you will never get words like zebra, queen, and phone because the letters are not there. You can never get a bird from a dinosaur because the information of a bird was not in the dinosaur’s DNA. The dinosaur might get an extra leg but that will not help him. The dinosaur cannot run any faster. Mutations cause a lot of disease but nothing that would improve it.

  13. #3 looks more like a dragon than a shark, but I’l believe the shark dna tests.

  14. SO SOLAR FUSION IS A “LIE”?????? I bet Albert Einstein, Lisa Meitner, Hans Bethe, Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi, Edward Teller and Richard Feynmann, all physicists scientists, must be having the laugh of the centuries in their graves! RIDICULOUS! And I am no scientist.

    • Solar fusion is not a lie. A group of NASA scientists, (the American space agency, which specializes with cosmic science) measured the size of the sun over the period of a few years and found that the sun shrinks five feet per hour. If solar fusion does not happen, why are stars exploding and becoming novas and super novas?

  15. Young Earth Creationism is an embarrassment to the many ‘people of faith’, including Christian faith, who are open to the truly awesome revelations of science, particularly in relation to the age and scale of the universe. Pop-science shows like Wonders of the Universe are my favourite TV fare and the enthusiasm of the (atheist) presenter is infectious – even if we might not agree on the possibility of life beyond three spatial dimensions. What disturbs me most about Young Earth Creationism is that it is a curiosity killer… despicable thing to do to a child. Knowledge matters more than certainty.

  16. This is my favorite line,

    “No branch of true science would make these kind of impossible claims without proof. Because evolutionists do not want to believe the only alternative – that the universe was created by God – they declare evolution is a fact and believe its impossible claims without any scientific proof!” (Science 1107, p. 24)

    The hypocrisy is stunning, even if this claim is true, what it says about yourself is just as bad as the attack on science. Of course it also is false.

    • Evolutionism is not science. It is merely a religious belief. Evolutionism in the classroom is a violation of the 1969 court decision of no religion in the classroom BIG TIME.

      • Goddrick Finn

        Just because you are incapable of understanding how evolution works, doesn’t make it false. Sorry. And from your post further up I can see that you REALLY have no proper understanding of how evolution ACTUALLY works. A very weak grasp of science, and yet you have somehow come to the conclusion that with your very limited understanding you somehow know better than some of the best educated and most intelligent scientists who have been studying these things for years and the scientific community as a whole. But obviously you know better than them and the conclusions you draw disprove theirs right?

        I feel like this is a 4 year old insisting to an adult that they can fly based on their nonexistent understanding of gravity.

  17. Wow. This is amazing stuff. I went to a public school in Australia. I’m just amazed that this sort of thing goes on anywhere in the western world. Its so foreign to my own schooling.

  18. FredFlintstone

    Hoax? It was me and Barney chasing after Dino when he took off down the river. Yabba-dabba-doo!

  19. Solar Fusion is a MYTH? Why are these people even allowed to operate heavy machinery and motor vehicles and eat food with sharp utensils? Margot YEC is what I fear is the CANCER killing the entire religion. They are a small few that are making the rest look bad, I met a few that told me the entire universe is 6000 years old. Really how can we see the Andromeda Galaxy, it is 2 million MY away. It took like 2 million years to get here. If this is all just 6k old that the light should still be on its way here.

    • God created this place, that is why we can see the Andromeda Galaxy. ” And God said ,Let there be light! and there was light.” God is all powerful. He can make light be seen as far-away and as quickly as He wants.

  20. I had the same or very similar textbooks in my school. I’ve since moved past that, but I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one who’s angry about it. Very nice write-up here.

    (I totally remember the rotting dinosaur and the solar fusion thing. *shudders* I’d forgotten both.)

  21. Charles Darwin

    “If Evolution is just a theory..then religion is just an opinion!”

    • Both Creationism and Evolutionism are religious. Evolutionism teaches just as much about God as Creationism does. Evolutionism in the classroom is a BIG violation of the 1969 court decision of no religion in school.

  22. For something that enjoys such preeminence in American life, religion is responsible for more pain and suffering…more pure evil than the plague itself. The sooner all religions become marginalized into a category of lethal historical curiosity, the better for mankind.

    • Evolutionism makes man his/her own god. whatever mankind thinks or feels is ok is right

      • You clearly don’t comprehend “evolutionism” and you don’t understand me either, that’s for sure. This much I can say in all honesty: I know the mechanics & biology of evolution well enough to teach it and… first—it hasn’t resulted in delusions of being a demigod…second—it hasn’t corrupted my character with libertine hedonism.

  23. Reblogged this on Secular Wales and commented:
    Apparently Accelerated Christian Education have just had their qualification approved and rated equivalent to an A Level. Unbelievable!

  24. I actually went through this program. I hadn’t any real experience with critical thinking other than being extremely skeptical. I remember reading the solar fusion thing specifically and wondering why it contradicted every astronomy and science books I’d read (which was a lot), even those written by creationists. These five aren’t even the worst examples. Take a look at the history PACE’s. It’s utter garbage.

    • Thanks for your comment Aaron. I invite everyone who experienced ACE as a student to write a guest post, so please get in touch if you would like to write something.
      I agree, the history coverage is if anything worse than science. I just have a lot more of the science stuff to hand at the moment. History is coming.

    • Is it possible that the comparibles that you’ve looked into aren’t the lies? My question is this: Why do we try so hard to disprove the Holy Bible with other books? Which are true? We have to have a compass, and that compass should really be what we know, but don’t need to prove.

      • People try to disprove the Bible because they cannot accept God as real. They cannot accept the fact that they are sinful and depraved. That they NEED a Saviour. People want to believe they are good enough on their own. Unfortunately that is not true. Look at society. Things are not getting better they are getting worse and will continue to do so because that is the way sin works.

  25. Jayne Richardson

    Wow! You guys are a bitter bunch! I have home schooled my seven children using ACE since 1998. The three eldest are independent individuals who think for themselves. My eldest son, in particular is not afraid to read Dawkins opinions on evolution and the existence of God, yet he still has a strong faith and speaks highly of his Christian education. He also has a respect for those who he doesn’t agree with, something which is very clearly not the case with you Jonny. ACE I know isn’t a perfect curriculum, nor does it claim to be, but it has taught my children something very important – Christian character. I trust that God will grant you His grace in your life.

    Jayne Richardson, Scotland

    • Thanks for your comment, Jayne. I think it is unfair to say that I do not respect those I do not agree with. I respect anyone who has considered opinions, even if they are not my own. I do not respect the teaching of lies in school. So far, no one has defended ACE for teaching these things. If you think teaching things which are clearly untrue is justified, I would love to hear your reasons.

      In fact, such is my respect for those I disagree with, I invite anyone who knows about ACE, and who disagrees with what I have to say, to write a guest post for this blog. I would love to have an entry from you explaining why you feel that ACE offers a good education, particularly if you responded to specific criticisms I have given on this blog.

      • Have you emailed Jayne following this exchange? I’m so sick of people saying you don’t give both sides of the story, then disappearing as soon as you invite them to write a guest post! Dear The Internet: JONNY WOULD LOVE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY.

    • “Bitter”…maybe so…more like angry and fed-up with the self-righteous pollution of incontrovertible verisimilitude within the minds of young people who are guilty of nothing other than being born to mating pairs of breeding fundamentalists.
      Hmm. On second thought…I am bitter and p*ssed-off!

  26. I dared to challenge my RE teacher with the question, Did Adam and Eve see the dinosaurs? If they were the first human life forms, surely they must have had dinos roaming around their garden? I was promptly told to shut up thus I persisted until I was threatened with disciplinary action. It was worth it just to see the teacher’s face darken with ‘controlled’ fury!

  27. What I really don’t understand about creationists is their conviction that scientists have started with the ‘belief’ in evolution and distorted the facts to fit their agenda. No: that’s what creationists do. There is literally no reason to accept evolution other than because all the evidence points that way; the whole POINT of science is that it has no agenda other than the truth.

    Any scientist that found evidence to disprove evolution and instead support creationism would become very rich indeed.

  28. This “small” pack of “Ace” haters on here do not come close to the number of Ace Users and they never will! Keep yapping back and fourth it still will not change the fact that millions use this curriculum! Go ACE!!!!

  29. sounds to me like you are just bitter against the truth. Evolutions is disproven everyday but you are so “educated” you can’t see that

    • Thanks for that comment there about Evolution being disproven everyday mike. The book of Psalms states that where it says ” The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament( the sky) showeth his handiwork.” The solar system and the universe are so orderly that there is no way that a random explosion or swirling cloud of dust could have made them. Now those of you evolutionists out there explain to me the last time you have seen an explosion create order. Explosions cause caos. They distribute random parts everywhere and never create nothing new or orderly

      • Evolution does not claim that anything was created ‘randomly’, nor does it say anything about the solar system or the universe. No one who accepts evolution has a reason to deny that explosions cause “caos” [sic], because this has no bearing on the validity of evolution. Evolution is an iterative process, and you can actually simulate it pretty easily with a computer program; engineers use genetic algorithms all the time precisely because a problem may have too large a search space and be too complicated to design.

  30. dont trash my school man! i loved my school! the teachings were amazing and made me a better person. i nvr believed in lochness and I DO NOT believe in evolution all u Athiests and science losers can go to hell or go be a tree when u die. im standing up for the ACE teachings. my kids will go and learn it all juts as i did.

    • u aint alone bro

      • I attend an ACE school. I have never seen one shread of political bias, scientific inaccuracy, or historical event taught wrong that these morons who started this sight and similar sights allege that are in those PACES.

  31. yes and all those public school textbooks are 100% accurate?

  32. Humans and dinosaurs do coexist, you know. I saw one yesterday in my backyard. It had feathers and flew off when I came too close. I’m pretty sure dinosaurs have landed on many Japanese whaling vessels too–it’s just that we call them seabirds.

    Some people (like me) are creationists through and through. We just believe that the divine miracle that caused life to diversify on Earth (and other planets, should we ever run into life somewhere else that didn’t come with us or our probes) is called . . . guess what? Evolution! ;)

    • Well said. This blog has no beef with the majority of Christians. Thanks for showing that.

      • Tiberius Clausewitz Drusus Nero Germanicus

        I’m not even a Christian–I profess the religion next door. Yes, the one that started about six centuries later and has had a history of needless bickering with its Christian cousin ever since. That being said, I have no shortage of Christian friends who wouldn’t hesitate to express similar pro-evolution views.

        I don’t know which is more frustrating–ACE and similar weird-ass Christian education systems that aggressively try to deny the merits of the scientific method, or fundamentalist Islamic education that pretends it (i.e. modern science) doesn’t even exist. In both cases, I guess the worst part is that the anti-science movement tries hard to cover up the fact that many people outside their narrow circles don’t see anything wrong with believing in both science and religion.

  33. The three comments above mine perfectly exemplify my reasons for disliking the fundamentalist attitude. No evidence, no specific points challenging yours, just “Yeah well we’re still right because we say so!” Not to mention a lovely threat of going to hell; thanks Aimee.
    Keep doing what you’re doing. The world needs more people exposing blatant lies for what they are.

  34. You are guilty of exactly the same thing you accuse Christian fundamentalists of doing. It’s called a straw man fallacy. You misstate their contention and then attack your misstatement. It’s very easy to make people sound foolish when you cherry pick the stupid statements. I don’t know this “ACE” so I can’t and won’t defend them. But I do know that there are serious scientists doing serious research that cast a great deal of doubt on the theory of natural selection. I also know that they are ridiculed by their peers rather than entering into discussion. Evolutionary Science has begun with the a-priori assumption that there is no God or if there was one, he had nothing to do with the origin of the universe. If that is your filter, you will interpret evidence in a very different way. It’s much easier to ridicule than to seriously deal with arguments, but I have found that ridicule is the weapon of a weak mind. Think this through when you resort to this.

    • There are scientists doing serious research that casts doubt on the theory of natural selection?

      Perhaps you could give some names, or better yet, links to papers they have published.

  35. I know the ACE curriculum very well. great post!

  36. ACE is Christian education. It goes by the Bible & most of these “lies” that y’all stated have to do with evolution. In public school they teach on evolution; in ACE they teach Biblical principles. That GOD created the heavens & the earth. So yeah they are going to not believe evolutionist. ACE has changed my life & I won’t let the lies of the Internet stop me from going.

    • the public schools don’t just “teach” Evolutionism, they endoctrinate you to believe it. That is, they only show Evolutionism and do not present the case for Creationism at all in their books. Thanks for your comment there Alex. You made my day, encouraged me to keep pluggin’ away

  37. It’s a shame when a Christian science textbook stoops into the ridiculous to try to prove its position. I want you to know that both of my children used Christian textbooks, mainly A-Beka books and Bob Jones University Press, and while both teach against evolution, they do not base that teaching on the Loch Ness Monster! I had never heard of ACE before reading your posts, and I would certainly never use them based on the information you have presented. Your followers should know, however, that most Christians who believe in the biblical account of Creation do so on the testimony and authority of the scriptures and not on fanciful sightings of the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot! That’s just ridiculous and not the belief of rational Christians.

  38. I voted for the so-called dinosaur found by the japanese, because it is so simple since the whole skeleton is available, to check that it actually is a species of mammal (my guess because of the size of the animal)…!

  39. I believe whether these facts are true or untrue is irrelevant, to know or not know about it is absolutely inconsequential for the carreer and future life of most of the children. On the other hand you are pointing out some of these mistakes while completely ignoring all of the benefits of these education, all of the ACE system is based on teaching youngsters to be better humans, to help others, to not hate, and to guide their lives in a healthy way, capabilities which science has failed to teach. I am an investigator in education and have personally investigated the advantages on the development of creativity of the ACE system and found that it is in clear advantage compared with traditional educational models, so, in my professional opinion if these mistakes are made it is a pretty irrelevant critique.

  40. I have one question for the guy who said that the footprints in the riverbed were caused by erosion. Be sensible! Since when does erosion, which randomly washes away dirt and what not, make footprint shapes, and a lot of them in the shapes of human and dino tracks on multiple layers?

  41. 1. Before sin, there was no death. This is why the lion could live with the lamb and no one got eaten. Every living creature was a herbavore, before sin entered. Then came the meat eating, and the t-rexes, etc. But before this, dinosaurs could have been as harmless as puppies..
    2. Even Darwin himself admitted that his theory was incorrect. Why can’t everyone else?

    • Exactly. several scientist who sided with evolution in the beginning only did so because, and I quote “to believe in God is unacceptable.” The fact of the matter is evolution nor creation can be proved. But how can you look at all that makes up this world, how it works, how the human body works and many more things, and not think there was a Divine Creator. To think it was accident to me just seems irrational.

  42. There’s a lot of comments on here. A lot of people here thinking the same darn thing.

  43. As a christian myself , I don’t find it a contradiction to believe the earth may be around 14 billion yeras old. If God/ Jesus has no beginning or end them 14 billion years would be like 14 days to Him! The problem is whether you are an atheist or a Christian we both can’t prove with absolutes about how it all began. It takes faith on both our parts to believe what we believe.

  44. I still love A.C.E. :)

  45. Those 5 things were very interesting, and shook me up a bit.
    A lot for a 20 year old boy from Texas to take in …..especially in one sitting,
    but I give everything a lot of thought before I believe it.
    It’s a wonderful curse.
    A horrible blessing.
    If only I existed for an eternity before time so that I could know about the beginning of time.
    If only I couldn’t die, so I could see all of earthly life die.

  46. I talked to the youth pastor that I was under during my internship a few years back about how there might not be a God and the big bang etc. was true or could be, and he said something about the sun not being able to withstand over billions of years, and I didn’t know how to respond, I wish I understood the sun a little better back then, but whatever.

  47. I attended public school through 9th grade, then attended an ACE school. Yep, there are things that I QUESTION, and/or disagree with. There are things that I hated~at the time~HOURS of memorization, requirements of respect, honor, communication, study, promptness, faithfulness, and preparation. I learned Piano, Art, Foreign Language, Music, Dance, Math, English, Science, History, Chemistry…on and on…I was pushed by amazing teachers to go on and search for truth, explore the world, and never stop questioning. These are things I never received from my local public school. Yes, in ACE I was taught the Creationist view as the most rational, heart felt view, taught with conviction, and that other views are wrong~ RESPECTFULLY!!
    Your quotes~since I have the pace in my hand~ are misleading in one case, (for instance), P.7 of Science 1096, you didn’t mention the fact that it is a story of two boys..and one is quoting what he heard someone say and they are discussing it. No, with your self admitted anger and bitterness, you will not promote ACE, however other than your disagreement with the Creationist view, you are just bashing something you disagree with. That, does not make it wrong~ just not what you choose to believe. Don’t throw the words “truth” and “lies” around so flippantly if you are not going to hold to any standard yourself.
    I will support ACE education on the basis of the great things they teach and I will continue to push and encourage continued education on the things I wonder about. Setting up a blog and webpage to bash an opposing view seems like a gigantuous (and no, that word did not come from my ACE education! Chalk that up to world travel and foreign teenagers!!) waste of energy and just a way to vent your bitterness. Use your awesome ability for good maybe?!

    • Hi Deborah,

      I’m glad your teachers encouraged you to question, and also gave you a broader education than ACE. But if they taught you the Creationist view was the more rational one, I’m afraid you were simply misled. I am, in principle, happy for students to consider the evidence for evolution and Creation and make a choice. The problem is that almost everyone who advocates this wants to use bogus evidence for Creation. That’s because, so far, no one has found any evidence which isn’t better explained by the theory of evolution. If you have evidence to the contrary, you could probably become an extremely famous and respected scientist.

      I am also sorry if you weren’t encouraged to question and search for truth in your public school (When did you attend public school, and when ACE?). I was encouraged to question much more outside of ACE, and most of the other ex-ACE students here found the same.

      Your point about Science 1096 may be true (I am currently moving, so my copy is boxed up and I don’t have it available), but irrelevant. In Science 1085-1096, everything is taught as conversations between two or more people. That’s just the way the information is imparted.

      What are the great things that ACE teaches? In particular, great things you can’t get from other schools.

      I’m not angry or bitter. I do think education is important, and for reasons I illuminate elsewhere on this blog, I don’t think ACE provides it.

  48. And for the record: My 9th grader scored Post High School in 4 subjects on the standard SAT test
    and my 11th grader scored Post High School in EVERY SUBJECT…that is a PUBLIC school testing…ACE can’t be all bad eh?!! :)

    • Well, I think there’s more to education than performance on standardised tests, and I also think standardised tests are a flawed way to measure ability. But it’s clear you’re a bright person, so congratulations on having successful kids.

  49. I am so, so very glad that the only PACE books I used in school were for math, painting, and music. Granted, A Beka isn’t much better, but at least they know better than to stoop this low.

  50. James Griffin

    There are WAY more holes in evolution than in Creation. The bottom line, and I held this belief long before I became affiliated with ACE, is that evolution simply is an alternative belief system that writes responsibility to a creator out of the picture. In so doing, Humanism becomes the dominant belief system, and is ridden with putting men on the pedestal of so called “holiness” that God should be on, and has only one purpose:brainwashing the people of the world into believing we came from monkeys.
    Man is morally depraved. Our degenerating bodies prove this. If we were perfect beings, or even evolving toward a state of improvement and eventual perfection, we wouldn’t have cancer, we wouldn’t have AIDS, Sodomy wouldn’t be accepted as a genetically programmed behavior, and nations would look to GOD for revival, instead of Humanism for an alternative conscience.

  51. Evolution can be proofed by reading the Bible – who where the people Adam and Eve’s children married??? The Bible does not say HOW God created everything – only that He did.

  52. May God grant his mercy on all your ignorance, clearly you are all still mere “children of ignorance” and shallow thinkers to boot. Im going to take a stab in the dark and say all of you who follow “Jonny” Jonny included dont think an unborn baby is a baby either right?? tisk tisk, lucky for you His Grace is enough….but shame on you just the same.

  53. Well, Johnny, I agree that A.C.E. sometimes is too quick to conclude some things and state them as fact. However, if you compare their claims with the other side such as the falsified embryo drawings and claims that moths changing color show evolution, I don’t think that A.C.E.’s errors cause serious problems. I believed the claim of the plesiosaur on the fishing boat, then studied the evidence and found that it was a basking shark. My professor of geology at a secular university also thought it was a plesiosaur for a while. The A.C.E. people are kind of busy. Give them a break. The photo of the flipper is impressive, and I still believe there is a family of plesiosaurs in Loch Ness. I also have seen some impressive photos of the human tracks and I do not think it is far fetched for human tracks to exist with dinosaur tracks, especially since blood cells and soft tissue have been found in unfossilized dinosaur bones.

  54. This is my first visit to your website, and I’m impressed. Your whole project is really fascinating. I teach a course at a US university on evolution, religion, and politics; students come from assorted educational backgrounds, secular and religious, though not many home-schooled. One of the key concepts we need to cover is the difference between deductive (start from an agreed-upon truth) and inductive reasoning (come to a tentative conclusion based on as much evidence as possible), the former being the essential mode of law and some religious thought and the latter being part of the nature of science. Because these reasoning systems are so different, it’s nearly impossible for a hard-liner of one reasoning type to be persuaded by the other type of reasoning. With inductive reasoning, one never expects to have all the evidence–it’s simply not possible. This means that someone who adheres to deductive reasoning will never, ever have enough evidence to accept an inductive argument, because the only sufficient quantity would be *all* the evidence, which is an impossibility. For example, most creatures never became fossils, so we’ll never have a record of all of them, and we’ll never even hope to find all the fossils that do exist. Scientific crews who search for Nessie will never be able to see every nook and cranny of the loch at the same time, so the lack of positive evidence disproves nothing to a person who already believes she’s out there–the argument that Nessie exists is unfalsifiable (much like that argument that a person can catch AIDS from a drinking fountain). From the perspective of deductive reasoning, if someone starts with the belief that AIDS can be caught from a drinking fountain, or that dinosaurs and humans co-existed, or that Big Foot is lurking in the wilderness, the fact that there is no positive evidence of any of this is irrelevant. (The reverse is also true: someone could point to 60 Biblical passages clearly making the same point about the creation of the earth and yet never persuade someone who uses inductive reasoning.) Some of the comments to your posts illustrate this pretty clearly.

    • Thank you for commenting, profschell. That’s a really helpful contribution to the discussion.

      This article is very old and I keep thinking about closing the comments because most commenters now are just creationists who are angry at me, but I’m glad I left comments open now.

  55. Some one sounds like a bitter, old woman

  56. All Hail Thor!

  57. I will say, I’m sorry for all the angry and terrible messages you’ve gotten.

  58. I don’t know what you believe, but science has a reputation for accuracy, altough its principles are always changing, seems to me a little paradox, turns out gravity doesn’t always work the way Newton thought, and that there are so many things that science can’t explain, even more that those it can. And of those things we take a scientific rules half of them will be proven ridiculous in 50 years. For all I know tomorrow they can invent a new technique to measure the age of fossiles and disproof evolution, and create a new DNA test that proves that some dinosaurs still exists. And here’s one of my favourite from real life, did you know that some psychologist in the early 20th century believed that part of the processing of language was located on the face muscles because they activated (recieved electrical signals) when people where thinkng? I believe now it is ridiculous to think there is language processing outside the brain but science accepted that theory back then, oh oh, and a better one, some scientists of the conductism movement even denied the existence of the mind because the couldn’t measure it, and psychologists accepted that, they even discard better theories at the time because their paradigm just couldn’t fit to them. To me that’s hilarious now a days, but it is how science works it is NOT absolute, and that’s ok, science has it’s field and religion has another. Each can help us understand different phenomena, but please for crying out loud do not make science your religion or religion your science, it just won’t happen. Finally, let me tell something, evolution may pass and change to a different theory, but LOVE YOUR ENEMIES won’t. I’m just asking you to think about it.

  59. “As long as there are people who believe in the unreal…?” Nessie is real. There is another dinosaur in the Congo River called Mokele – Mbembe. The Natives in the area consider it sacred. An Evolutionist went over to see if this thing was real. He went to the natives to know more about it. They told him what it ate and where to find the plant it eats. He showed them some pictures of animals that live in the area like hippos and crocodiles. He asked them if they ever see any of those animals. The natives confirmed that they see them a lot. Thinking they were just saying “yes” to please him, he then showed them pictures of animals that only live in North America like the grizzly bear. The natives said that they had never seen those at all. The evolutionist then got in a boat and went down- stream a little bit. A little later, to his suprise, he saw Mokele- Mbembe. Relaying this to his science class later that week, he said that he was surprised that the dinosaurs had survived this long. This is a true story that took place in the late 1800″s. A group of Dutch settlers in the 1830″s went to the same area. Only one returned home. He reported to the Dutch government that there are dinosaurs in the Congo.

  60. The fact that science is sometimes wrong is an excellent point. Science has no claims of infallibility; the go-to example you did not mention is that we once thought the Earth was flat. It also has no agenda other than finding an objective truth, and judgement about this objective truth is made solely on available evidence. Evolution is a hypothesis so vastly supported by ever-increasing evidence that it has become scientific fact, which means the probability of it not being true in spite of all this evidence is so minuscule that we can basically round up and call it a certainty. Just like we can be certain that paracetamol has pain-killing effects, or that the Earth is, in fact, round.

    You are absolutely right that someone could, technically, come up with some new fossil-dating technique to disprove evolution. If that happened, there would be literally no reason for the scientific community to cover it up, and the person who made the discover would become very rich indeed.

    The position of science is ‘this is what we currently know based on the available information’, not ‘we know everything’. The difference with these claims by ACE is that they are known – and were known at the time of print – to be false, and yet were taught anyway. This is why it is important to teach the scientific method, not just facts – especially incorrect ones. Religion and science are not just ‘two different versions of the truth’, and it is not valid to equate or compare them as such.

  1. Pingback: As long as there are people who believe the unreal, we will have a hard time progressing into the future… « Under The LobsterScope

  2. Pingback: Fundamentally Flawed » Ep #53: Christian Accelerated Learning in the UK, with Leaving Fundamentalism’s Jonny Scaramanga

  3. Pingback: Christian Accelerated Learning pass Ofsted inspection despite Michael Gove’s opposition to teaching creationism in UK classrooms | How good is that?

  4. Pingback: Loch Ness Monster Debunks Evolution ? Louisiana To Fund Schools Using Odd Curriculum « SpeakEasy

  5. Pingback: Jindal and the Dumbing of Louisiana: Tax Payer-funded christofascist “madrasas” « Sky Dancing

  6. Pingback: Nessie a Plesiosaur? Louisiana To Fund Schools Using Odd, Bigoted Fundamentalist Textbooks by Bruce Wilson « carapace – Not your father's america

  7. Pingback: The Loch Ness Monster Is Real; The KKK Is Good: The Shocking Content of Publicly Paid for Christian School Textbooks « Freethought

  8. Pingback: The first ever Pharyngula podcast! | Pharyngula

  9. Pingback: Accelerated Christian Education Validated by UK Government Agency « Leaving Fundamentalism

  10. Pingback: Here Be Monsters! | DaveD's Blog

  11. Pingback: Nessie existuje a vyvrací evoluci, říká křesťanská učebnice | Občanské sdružení ateistů České republiky

  12. Pingback: US religious Right teaches children Loch Ness monster is real | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  13. Pingback: Yet another use for Nessie, the Loch Ness monster | Dating Jesus

  14. Pingback: This Louisiana School Want Students To Believe The Loch Ness Monster Is Real – Finding Out About

  15. Pingback: Why fight it? Let’s embrace textbooks Loch, stock and barrel | TheLensNola.org : Investigative Journalism New Orleans

  16. Pingback: God's iPod - Uncommon Descent - Intelligent Design

  17. Pingback: Radio Freethinker Episode 173 – Dis-Education Edition « Radio Freethinker

  18. Pingback: Radio Freethinker Episode 174 – Burning Fat Edition « Radio Freethinker

  19. Pingback: Louisiana schools « Petunias

  20. Pingback: Bridgend Christian School – ACE or CRAP? « Bridgend Green Party

  21. Pingback: Roger Ebert Pans Jindal’s Education Drama | NOLA DEFENDER

  22. Pingback: Aliens in the Aurora Borealis: Sometimes You Just Gotta Believe « Misanthropology 101

  23. Pingback: UK Government agency finds creationist qualifications are equivalent to A-Levels | British Humanist AssociationBritish Humanist Association

  24. Pingback: Looking Back at my Fundamentalist Home Schooling Past | Reason Being

  25. Pingback: but then something saves you. « potential is a muscle

  26. Pingback: Why fight it? Let’s embrace textbooks Loch, stock and barrel | The Lens

  27. Pingback: Life During and After Fundamentalism: Sheldon’s Story | Wide Open Ground

  28. Pingback: Majority of identifiable Free School proposals from 2011-13 were religious » British Humanist Association

  29. Pingback: Easter Church Attendance and a Story of the Loss of Faith | The Wartburg Watch 2013

  30. Pingback: Majority of identifiable Free School proposals from 2011-13 were religious | Secular News Daily

  31. Pingback: Looking Back at my Fundamentalist Home Schooling Past: Sheldon’s Story | H • A

  32. Pingback: Public funds being spent to send children to creationist, Charedi and Steiner nurseries | SecularNews.Org

  33. Pingback: Creationism in UK education – the fight must go on | Richy Thompson | Everyday Worldwide

  34. Pingback: Men and Dinosaurs Coexisted (LOL!!!!) | The Meenister's Log

  35. Pingback: This Louisiana School Want Students To Believe The Loch Ness Monster Is Real | Finding Out About

  36. Pingback: What England’s creationist schools are teaching » Godlessness in Theory

  37. Pingback: ACE Infantile creationist burblings rated equivalent to UK A-level (school leaving; University entrance) exams | Eat Your Brains Out

  38. Pingback: Best of RFT – Education « Radio Freethinker

  39. Pingback: Reasons I Questioned and Ultimately Left Christianity | Lana Hobbs the Brave

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,002 other followers

%d bloggers like this: