An Open Letter to Christian Education Europe

I am desperately curious to get inside the minds of the supporters of Accelerated Christian Education. How do they justify the lies they teach to children? What would they say when confronted? This is an open letter to Arthur Roderick, the founder of Christian Education Europe (CEE), European distributor for Accelerated Christian Education. I await their response.

Dear Mr. Roderick,

My name is Jonathan Scaramanga – possibly my name is familiar to you since we were featured on the same segment of the Radio 4 Sunday programme in 2010. I was educated with Accelerated Christian Education at Victory School from 1996 to 1999.

I am writing to request an apology, because my PACEs consistently taught falsehoods as facts. I believed these falsehoods, and they disadvantaged me educationally and socially for many years. I believe the same thing must be happening to many other students in Accelerated Christian Education. As a Christian organisation which places the highest value on truth and integrity, I believe Christian Education Europe should share my concerns.

A great many of the evidences for Creation taught as fact in the PACEs are simply untrue, and they were known to be untrue long before the PACEs went into print. I know that you believe the truth of God’s Word is immutable, so surely there is no need to distort the facts in order to make children believe. Yet untruths are taught in the PACEs repeatedly.

The Answers in Genesis website has a list of arguments for Creationism that should never be used, or which should be avoided, because they are inaccurate ( The following arguments from that list still appear in the PACEs:

Additionally, Science 1099 includes the claim that the Loch Ness Monster has been photographed and captured on sonar. All photographs have been shown to be frauds and no sonar pictures have been produced that aren’t better explained by large shoals of fish.

In order to maintain these unscientific views, a great violence must be done to the scientific method. The scientific method matters a great deal more than any individual scientific facts. The most important factors are that any hypothesis is falsifiable, testable, and open to revision. Even our most confidently held ideas may be rejected in light of adequate evidence. Yet the PACEs tell us repeatedly that their interpretation of the Bible is fixed, and if evidence seems to contradict it, then the evidence must be discarded (eg Science 1109).

This is simply not science. Of course it is a legitimate theological position, as a matter of faith, to say that the Bible is inerrant, and you may be confident, even certain, that the Bible is correct. But science cannot proceed on this basis. The scientific method cannot tell us anything while there are certain principles it is not allowed to question. Children must be taught how to weigh evidence, and how to form hypotheses.

Many Christians accept scientific evidence while maintaining their faith in the inerrancy of Scripture. Doesn’t it make more sense to interpret the Bible in light of what scientists have used their God-given abilities to discover, rather than to lie to children in order to get them to believe?

Christianity is a faith. Jesus called on us to believe in Him as a matter of faith, not evidence (John 20:19-31). Accelerated Christian Education attempts to claim that there is incontrovertible evidence for Creation (Science 1096), and use this as a basis for belief in God. This is a house of cards. If a child’s belief is based on faith, then it is not threatened by science, for the truth has nothing to fear from inquiry. But if it is based on evidence, what is left when this evidence turns out to be false? And how about when the child discovers that this evidence was known to be false long before the textbooks were written, and the writers didn’t appear to care?

And so I repeat my request: I would like an apology. I was taught falsehoods as facts, and these disadvantaged me. I have here only discussed the ones I have identified in science; there are further pieces of misinformation (and occasional racism) I found in my politics and history education as well. These would not be so bad if the PACEs allowed the discussion and debate of different points of view, but they do not. I was wronged by the education you provided, and I want an explanation. You did not write the PACEs, but you distributed and endorsed them, and therefore you are responsible for the education you provided to British ACE students.

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Scaramanga

About jonnyscaramanga

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 June 8, 2012, in Accelerated Christian Education, Christianity, Creationism, Education, Faith Schools, Fundamentalism, School of Tomorrow and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 23 Comments.

  1. Susanna Downes

    Hi Jonny:

    I’ve just read this with interest; and feel I’d like to leave a reply, so here goes….

    I was educated on the Accelerated Christian Education system from age 5 to 17, so I’ve been thoroughly immersed in it…here’s what I have to say from my experience.

    Your main point in the article addresses the problem of being taught as fact things which may not be accurate. I agree that is a problem with the system; however this is not a problem which is specific only to A.C.E. Every education system I have encountered teaches things as fact which may not be. Science is constantly developing; and I’m sure if we read some of the textbooks written 100 years ago we would laugh at the things which were being taught!

    Regarding the Creation/Evolution debate, I would echo the words of Job when he said “Were you there?” None of us were present at the beginning of time, so none of us can accurately and confidently assert to know exactly what happened. There are different arguments for different positions, but only the Creator really know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The rest of us may discover degrees of truth, but we still have our human limitations. Every education system has a bias; and I will agree that it would be better to phrase things such as “Creationists believe” or “There is evidence which points to” rather than stating something as irrefutable fact, but at the end of the day, we have to start to use our own discernment in these matters.

    I think the difficulty is that when you’re teaching young children, developing minds cannot always cope with a large degree of abstract thought, so you have to start out relatively black and white, and then introduce more advanced forms of abstract thought as they develop the ability to deal with it.

    One day you yourself may have a child who at an early age will ask you the question “Daddy, where did the world come from?” At that moment, you will have to try to encapsulate an eternal phenomena and describe it in a way which a small child will understand!

    My own view is that A.C.E is a fairly black-and-white system in it’s nature, which works better for some students and subjects than others. For subjects like Maths and English I think it does a good job of ensuring that you’ve learnt one concept before moving onto the next.

    I would say that A.C.E’s weaker points are in the more abstract subjects and creative subjects….it doesn’t really encourage enough creative thought or debate just from the PACEs alone. I personally found it annoying that you had to give answers in the exact wording they were looking for…I think that was too prescriptive.

    Having said all of that, I think that any educational material only serves as a tool to those who administer it. If you are a good teacher you will learn to balance out the weaker points of the system. For instance; you could question your students about what they are learning and get them to think around the topic. You could introduce debate and look at things from different angles. You would definitely need to supplement the material for creative subjects.

    However, why not for a moment focus on the good things which the A.C.E system taught? What about the 60 character traits which we were taught in every subject? I am very thankful for a system which valued character….things like honesty, diligence, thankfulness, patience, determination, kindness……the list could go on and on….I’m very glad that those things were drilled into me as a child!

    For me as an adult, the best thing about the system was the Scriptures that we memorized. So many times I’ll be in a situation or having to make choices when one of those Scriptures that we learnt will pop into my mind. The discipline of Scripture memory literally gave me the tools to help me live my life as an adult follower of Jesus.

    I’m not saying there haven’t been challenges; for me the constant challenge is to continue to make my faith genuine and real, and not just to copy what I’ve been taught. I still have to examine my beliefs and ask “why”…

    To A.C.E, I would say that it is really important to keep developing the system on a regular basis; now it’s been in operation for so many years the weaknesses have been identified….so why not start to address that and help make it into an even better system? Encourage more debate; give more space for creative thought etc etc….

    I have to say that reading your article, it comes across that you have felt hurt or wronged in some way which is why you’re putting all of this effort into “fighting the cause” so to speak.

    If you are genuinely concerned about the children of our nation being taught accurate facts, then I challenge you to also look into the state and private educational systems, and find out all the things which they are also teaching as truth which may not be. Challenge our government on the lack of moral teaching…

    But I don’t think this is about that really…..I think it’s a public attempt to resolve a personal hurt…which will never give you what you are looking for. You’re looking for someone else to take responsibility for something which only you can take deal with now. Whatever hurt and damage was caused you during your educational years has happened….you can’t turn the clock back…yes, there were wrongs, there were also a lot of rights.Think of those teachers who gave up their homes and their well-paid salaries just to teach you. Those teachers were not intending to hurt you….they loved you. They wanted the best for you. They did what they felt was right….and in doing that, you have experienced hurt and feel that your life has been damaged. Hasn’t that happened to all of us? What about our parents? My parents did what they felt was right when bringing me up; some of it was great, some of it had difficult implications which have taken a long time to resolve….but THAT’s LIFE!!!

    So in closing, I would say please look into your motives for all of this….by all means fight for truth, fight for education to be accurate, but perhaps think about doing it in a more constructive way than this…

    Someone once said that in life you are dealt a set of cards…and once you have been dealt your hand it’s now up to you to play the game. We’ve all been dealt a mixed hand; some cards are difficult, some are unusual, some are helpful…but fighting about the hand you have been dealt will never help to improve your game….if you feel like you’ve been dealt a tough hand, it’s up to you now to show what you’ve got by playing a great game with that hand!

    As far as I can see from your life now, you’re a talented, fun-loving guy who has a lot to give the world around him. I can only urge you to hold onto the good things that A.C.E gave you…compassion…gentleness….forgiveness….graciousness…kindness….

    All the very best,

    Susanna Downes

    • Susanna, thank you for your very detailed response. Although I disagree with you profoundly, I am grateful for your input.

      Your main point in the article addresses the problem of being taught as fact things which may not be accurate. I agree that is a problem with the system; however this is not a problem which is specific only to A.C.E. Every education system I have encountered teaches things as fact which may not be. Science is constantly developing; and I’m sure if we read some of the textbooks written 100 years ago we would laugh at the things which were being taught!

      The main point is not things which are inaccurate. My main points are 1) the intellectual dishonesty of teaching things which were known to be untrue long before the PACEs were written (if the writers didn’t know this, they were unqualified to do the job), and 2) the distortion of the scientific method. Yes, science does sometimes discover it was wrong. But textbooks don’t generally include ludicrous falsehoods that no credible scientist has ever believed, as PACEs do, and textbooks don’t generally mislead students on how science works, as the PACEs do. The scientific method is what matters, not the facts, because the scientific method allows us to discover the truth for ourselves, and to understand why scientific theories are sometimes revised.

      Regarding the Creation/Evolution debate, I would echo the words of Job when he said “Were you there?” None of us were present at the beginning of time, so none of us can accurately and confidently assert to know exactly what happened.

      We can, however, say that adequate evidence has been found to rule out Young Earth Creationism entirely and categorically. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply misinformed. Possibly by an education system that misleads students about a) how science works, b) what scientists believe, and c) what the evidence is.

      What about the 60 character traits which we were taught in every subject? I am very thankful for a system which valued character….things like honesty, diligence, thankfulness, patience, determination, kindness……the list could go on and on….I’m very glad that those things were drilled into me as a child!

      Like submissive and deferent? I reject ACE’s moral teaching and its indoctrination of unquestioning obedience to authority.

      To A.C.E, I would say that it is really important to keep developing the system on a regular basis; now it’s been in operation for so many years the weaknesses have been identified….so why not start to address that and help make it into an even better system?

      ACE rejects the theoretical underpinnings of everything we currently believe about what makes good education. It is based on outmoded theories of behaviourism and learning. To make a good education system from ACE, you’d have to scrap the mode of instruction as well as almost all the content.

      I absolutely believe that the end of Accelerated Christian Education will be an improvement. I am also interested in curriculum improvement in the state schools, and I believe that researching the failings of ACE will help to inform recommendations for a better education.

      You may disagree with me, but please refrain from baseless speculation on my motives.

    • ashley haworth-roberts

      I agree with Susanna that science moves on and sometimes students learn things that are later found to be wrong in some way.

      However, if it is correct that ACE materials are still – today – teaching:
      •There are no beneficial mutations (Science 1096 and 1107)
      •No new species have been produced (Science 1096)
      •There was a water vapour canopy surrounding the earth before the flood (Social Studies 1097, World Geography I)
      •The Japanese trawler Zuiyo Maru caught a dead plesiosaur near New Zealand (Science 1099).
      •The speed of light has decreased over time (Social Studies 1097)
      •There are no transitional forms (Science 1099)
      •Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs coexisted (Science 1096 and 1099)
      •Noah’s Ark has been found (World Geography 12 1108; see
      and a claim that the Loch Ness Monster [plesiosaur anyone] has been photographed and captured on sonar

      then that is completely INEXCUSABLE.

      • Good to see you again Ashley.

        An important distinction (and one I really wish I’d emphasised in my letter):
        Science does move on sometimes. Until 2005, we believed that stomach ulcers were caused by stress; now we know they are caused by the bacteria helicobacter pylori.
        The nine points I raised in my article are not examples of science moving on, because they have never been respectable scientific positions. My only point is that these tropes have been so thoroughly annihilated that even AiG has given up on them.

  2. Joe 'Blondie' Manco

    I have some minor nitpicking – please don’t take it the wrong way, I do think the letter is excellent. The bit that jumped straight out at me though was the use of a bible quote to illustrate one of your points. Isn’t this the theists game? Surely those you are appealing to can use the same tactic to justify all their actions, as I daresay they have many times. I’m just wondering about your choice to do that. If you think I’m being petty, by all means say so.

    • I knew someone would ask me about that. Nah, I don’t think you’re being petty, but I stand by my decision to use a Bible quote. It’s the same reason I quoted from the Answers in Genesis site rather than a credible scientific one – I’m trying to frame my argument in terms Christian Education Europe will respect. I guess their response will show whether this worked.

  3. Susanna Downes

    Hi again Jonny;
    Thanks for your response….I have to say I don’t often get involved with discussions like this, but I’m very interested on following this post and seeing what other folks comment.

    I have read through most of your other posts, and forgive me if this is going off topic; but I’m really curious to know what you now believe as an adult; having come from the background you did…the posts I’ve read tell me what you don’t believe; but I have no clue as to what you do believe…where would you put yourself on the scale now? How would you describe your spiritual position? Where do you go to get your belief systems now? Who are the writers you admire? Have you found anything of value from the past that you have held onto?

    Re. the character traits of submission and deference; I think it’s worth pointing out the context of where the church was globally in that decade as well….there was a trend called “heavy shepherding”….which was stronger in some churches than others….this encouraged the “unquestioning obedience to authority” which you refer to ….and in many cases was very damaging….
    Re. A.C.E. I would say that the system was sometimes used by people who had perfectionistic and “heavy shepherding” tendencies, and therefore the bias of the system itself was often hugely amplified by those who administered it.

    I have been thinking about the word “submission”…and I believe that true submission comes as a choice…if there is no choice, then it is not submission, it is control. I believe that sometimes people can ask for “submission” which seems to be a good thing, but in reality what they want is control.
    If I agree with you, then it is not submission, it is agreement.
    I would go so far as to say that true submission comes only when you choose to submit your will to someone else, even though you don’t have to, and even if you disagree with what they are saying/doing. Sometimes this is necessary for the greater good! I think the ability to show true submission is a sign of maturity and strength, however true submission is only possible if we have the choice not to submit.

    Anyway…I digress!

    As a final note, I would say that as far as education is concerned, I learn far more from people than from curriculum; I’m really grateful for those people who input into my life in a positive way….at the end of the day I’ve forgotten a lot of what I learnt in my schooling; but what has been passed down to me from inspirational people has made an indelible imprint on my life for which I am profoundly thankful.

  4. Well written piece, as usual. I’m curious to see if they respond…

    • Me too. There are so many angles I could take in an argument with them, and I’m not sure if any of them would result in real engagement on the issue. I decided to go with just one, to avoid the risk of a TL;DR situation. I’m not sure if I chose the best one or not, but so far whenever I’ve tried to discuss anything they’ve been like a bar of soap. If I were them, I’d really care. If one of my students told me I’d failed them in any way, I’d want to hear their case through in its entirety and, if it holds water, reconsider the way I do things.

  5. How I wish you could brazenly confront the government/public schools on the curriculum that has turned our youths to violence, sex, drugs, and insolence.
    Or is that a preferable alternative to ACE and its character traits which is a character bench mark many children long after they leave school?

    • Well, I think your characterisation of government schools is somewhat paranoid, at least where I’m from.

      I don’t support violence or drugs. Sex I’m fine with, as long as no one’s being coerced and everyone knows what they’re doing. Insolence… If you mean questioning authority, I think that’s often healthy. If you mean rudeness, of course I’m against that.

      I don’t write about government schools because I haven’t done any research on them yet.

  6. ashley haworth-roberts

    You make some good arguments in the letter. Children do not normally themselves CHOOSE to be educated at school or at home with ‘Accelerated Christian Education’!

    No doubt your blog will report on the reply you receive from Mr Roderick and his colleagues (or lack of reply).

  7. ashley haworth-roberts

    I’ve just realised this is not a new blog post (and I commented earlier)! I came across it today again HERE:

    So – any response to your letter yet?

  8. @ Ashley, actually, BOTH my children asked to be educated on ACE, as they were both in state schools. I have often asked, on a regular basis if they would like to return to State Ed, it is totally their choice how they are educated.
    @Jonny, every education system has flaws, none is perfect. So ACE didn’t work for you, so what??? You are an adult now, so you get to choose how or what you want to learn or indeed not to learn. So you didn’t have a parent, like me, who offered you choice of how you were educated when you were younger. I find it very, very hard to believe you are so emotionally scarred by how you were educated, that it affects your adult life. You write very eloquently and intelligently, so I would think you would be able to move on from your childhood disadvantages.
    Sounds like sour grapes to me.
    At the end of the day folks, parents should educate their children, in the best way they can, in order to develop their child to their full potential. I bleieve, I am doing just that, as I am sure Jonny’s parents believed. Maybe we get it wrong, But maybe, just maybe, we get it right!
    My kids are well adjusted, social beings, that know they can question and debate and research for themselves. Yes, I too find issues with the ACE curriculum from time to time, but dont throw the baby out with the bath water. There are aspects of it that are just priceless teaching tools. Use a variety of text from Internet, library, curriculum and then make a choice. But don’t shoot down another form of education, just because it does not fit in with your own views or experience. It works, for others.

  9. Teaching someone else your beliefs is not lying, Christians teach others what they believe, because they belive it’s true, however if they knew that what the Bible teaches is untrue then they would be lying, but it can’t be a lie if you think that your beliefs are true, the PACEs try to show that with supposed facts, because they want to prove and want you to believe in their beliefs, thats not lying, thats only teaching your opinion or belief, if you however happen to disagree with their beliefs, then thats another story, but just because you disagree, that dosen’t make their beliefs a lie, because it’s your opinion and that does not mean that your opinion is right, nor ACE’s. But thats just my opinion, God bless.

    • Indeed. But I think ACE display such a callous disregard for factual accuracy that it counts as negligence. And being negligent, as we know, carries almost the same responsibility as doing something wrong on purpose.

  10. I’ll start off by saying that God does not exist, amen. As for Jesus, he seems to have existed but the more you read the first four books of the New Testament the more Jesus appears to have been a schizophrenic itinerant preacher who had the delusion of being the son of god (common in the ancient Mediterranean, e.g. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar) and whose semi-illiterate apostles couldn’t keep their propaganda about him straight from book to book. Almost every direct quote from Jesus sounds like something from a schizophrenic who skipped his meds. As for him walking on water, the equations of hydrodynamics rule that out. But of course, hydrodynamics is liberal propaganda and junk science funded by the same people who fund the global warming hoax.
    So there are people stupid enough to believe that a single, isolated site where creationists found some scratches that look like humanoid footprints beside dinosaur tracks disproves evolution. My friends, it’ll take a lot more than that to disprove evolution. Your digestive system and dental formula and skeleton alone and what you do with your wife at night and a lot of your thoughts and behavior are all proof of evolution. Nothing in biology makes sense without evolution. As for Nessie and the rotting shark carcass, the non-extinction of the dinosaurs does not disprove evolution. Whether the dinosaurs are extinct or not is irrelevant to the validity of evolutionary theory or even the age of the Earth. If we group birds in the clade dinosauria along with the extinct dinosaurs then technically the dinosaurs are not extinct. The creationists reject the birds being dinosaurs, however, maybe because they can’t accept the fact that that would have meant the birds evolved from dinosaurs.
    My dear, lost, befuddled Creationists, we might note that scientific evidence is also cumulative, and the evidence for evolution has been steadily accumulating since 1859, thanks to the assiduous efforts of Satan the Devil and his archangels Darwin, Hunt Morgan, Beadle, Watson, Crick, Khorana (Get it?), Dawkins, Mullins, Venter and others, and the Communists and the Liberals and the public schools and the Obama socialist, universal health care seeking junta and the United Nations, with its black helicopters. God will slaughter all them evil creationists and seekers of universal health coverage at Armageddon, you betcha. All those people are going to hell. Didn’t they know that denying the existence of Noah’s ark and seeking universal health care are sins? The Bible says so. Hell, the Bible is the infallible book with answers to everything, from evolution to foreign policy. If god could make the sun stand still when Joshua ordered it to, destroying the public schools shouldn’t be all that difficult on the day of Armageddon. After Jesus’ daddy makes the Young Earth Creationists still in the public schools disappear on the day of Rapture he will rain fire and brimstone on those teachers of Darwin’s monkey theory.
    So these vandals of human intellectual achievement feel free to call whatever they don’t like in modern science a myth. Well, I call their god (note the lowercase) and their Jesus myths. The platform of the Republican Party they overwhelmingly vote for is a myth too. We actually have more proof of evolution than we have of the existence of Jesus. Aside from references in the Bible, we know nothing more about Jesus Christ. Evolution on the other hand is documented, and can be verified through comparative anatomy, the fossil record, biogeography, comparative genomics, drug resistance, ethology and so on. Compare that to the gospels, our best documentation about Jesus Christ. The gospel books contradict each other and some were clearly written well after the events depicted in them. We have to note a subtle but important difference here. To a scientist evidence is a component of a theoretical system, technically an operational statement in an axiomatic system used to evaluate the system’s validity. To a creationist evidence is whatever supports their preconceived notions and their pathetic bible stories. If it wasn’t for their habit of interfering with public education and going to whine at the courts these people would best be ignored You start to come down to their level when you debate them. You demean yourself arguing with a fool who believes the existence of the Loch Ness monster disproves evolution. I mean, the argument is so stupid you don’t know where to start. It’s like arguing with a fool who says the existence of the Bermuda Triangle disproves Newtonian gravity.
    So 500 hundred years after the Catholic Church imprisoned Galileo we’re back to arguing with another bunch of theocrats. I’m sure their population breaks down into the following groups. Some are doing it because this gives them a controllable, reliable bloc of voters who will automatically vote Republican and they get funding for these websites and courses from right wing interests. Where would the Republican Party be without these idiots? Another bunch is in it for the money. Ken Ham likely has no other means of support than selling this garbage. Another group however literally believes this nonsense. They literally believe the solar system is less than 10,000 years old and that anyone who argues otherwise is a pawn of Satan or is politically motivated. Well, nature doesn’t care if a scientist is Republican or Democrat. Unfortunately, a lot of politicians don’t know that. Ideology to them is everything.
    The British biologist JBS Haldane, when asked what single piece of evidence would invalidate evolution mentioned finding fossil rabbits in the Cambrian would do that. Well, fossil rabbits, or even fossil tetrapod vertebrates, have never been found in the Cambrian, and fossil human remains have never been found in the Jurassic either. Dinosaur fossils exist and human fossils exist but they have NEVER been found together. If you want to see dinosaurs and humans coexisting, go to the Smithsonian on a Saturday afternoon and snap pictures of the people around the dinosaur skeletons.
    So you have your pathetic Texas tracks. Who gives a f***k. (The state of origin of the tracks alone makes them suspect.) Well, what about the thousands of finds around the world of dinosaur remains where nothing remotely resembling human fossils or human artifacts, or even fossils of anthropoid apes or advanced primates, have shown up? What about the complete absence of dinosaur remains in the numerous sites in Africa and Eurasia where the fossils of apes, hominids and early humans have been found? More importantly, what about the complete absence of any dinosaur fossils in the strata intervening between that of the Cretaceous extinction event that took out the dinosaurs and the Pleistocene, when modern hominid remains start to show up? Of course, Satan and the godless Obama-United Nations conspiracy churned up the dirt to make it look like there aren’t any intermediary fossils, with funding from the godless European Union. They want to be able to tell them liberal lies about the “religion” of evolution in the public schools and turn good children away from Jesus. Hell, Obama won’t put the Koran down.
    Around the world, dinosaur fossils stop abruptly at the Cretaceous boundary and don’t show up after that. Of course, that’s just my “liberal”, communist, atheistic, godless brainwashing talking, right? I didn’t benefit from a godly ACE or A Beka education. What am I saying? I’m arguing with people, who, in attacking radiometric dating, challenge modern atomic theory itself. If there’s a foundational concept of all of modern science, the atom comes closest to that. And you idiots throw that out too. But then, atomic theory is not from the Bible, so it’s not worth anything, right? Moses didn’t put any periodic table in the Bible, so the periodic table must be a myth, or it must be the work of Satan, trying to keep our childrens from learning about Jesus. God didn’t create the atom. Liberals and Communists and the United Nations did. If we could just get enough vouchers we could teach more kids that the rate of atomic decay is uneven and that solar fusion is a myth from the New York Times and the rest of the lamestream media.
    You want to balance a single weird site against thousands, not to mention the layering of the sites, and the dramatic nature of the K-T stratum? In recent years the access Western paleontologists have gained to China has revolutionized dinosaur studies. Not a single human remain has been found in any of the dramatic sites in Liaoning Province in China. But maybe the Chinese were so godless during the Great Flood that they refused to give Noah some of them baby dinosaurs to take onboard the Ark. Hell, they still are godless commies, aren’t they? We’ve got to turn them from Confucius to Jesus.
    The religion of evolution had fossils from every continent of the world, including Antarctica. The fossils are of creatures of the size of a chicken to that of the giants that have captured the world’s imagination. Fossils of dinosaurs with modes of life people could not imagine without the fossil record for guidance are being found. Meanwhile, all you Neanderthals have to show is a rotting shark and the Loch Ness monster. The Loch Ness Monster. Give me a break. I do not have time to read of the Loch Ness Monster. Maybe ACE kids headed for a brilliant future of scientific illiteracy and right wing stupidity do. Hell, maybe you idiots should be out setting up nets for unicorns, so that when you catch one you could use it as proof of how even creatures scientists say don’t exist are out there. I mean, since your schools use the mentions of dragons in the world’s myths and fairy tales as a disproof of evolution, surely unicorns and mermaids and Big Foot are out there waiting to disprove Darwin too. But how do we know the Communists didn’t corral all the unicorns together and are hiding them on a ranch in Area 51. Hell, maybe some of Noah’s dinosaurs are in Area 51 too, with the embalmed corpses of the aliens who could fly across interstellar space but were too stupid to pull out their landing gear over New Mexico. I mean, I have no proof that they’re not. Maybe I’ll cherry pick some sentences from widely scattered sections of the Bible that prove it. I mean, that’s how you prove things from the infallible word of God, right? You pick a sentence in the Old Testament, and then jump to another one on the New Testament, and so on. I mean, it’s infallible, inerrant, dictated by God’s to his Bronze Age Israeli secretaries.
    Yeah, I’m going to hell, but you savages are in it already. If you idiots could stay out of American courts we could afford to leave you to raise your children according to a Neanderthal epistemology. I mean, it’s an epistemology a literal Neanderthal could have related to. It’s your problem. The Neanderthals were too dumb to cross any body of water they could not see across of, and they had spears but they were too dumb to use them as throwing weapons. Inventing the bow and arrow apparently might as well have been on the level of nuclear physics for them. An ACE or A Beka education is on the same level when it comes to teaching modern science. I mean, what’s the difference? I mean, why even bother to teach any science. Have the kids chanting from and memorizing the Bible every day like they do in the Taliban’s madrasas, and nothing else. It’ll definitely save the energies of your teachers for more effective indoctrination. After all, the Bible is superior to all other books and what it has to say is superior to anything science ever could have to say. Let them read only the Bible. They’re not missing any scientific education they would be getting from the ACE course.
    After all, according to you guys, since the Bible is the word of god and god made both nature and the Bible, if a scientific discovery about the workings of nature goes contrary to scripture it should be rejected or discarded, right?

  11. Working scientists should take a stand against ACE, A Beka and so on. We need more books by Richard Dawkins, Steve Jones, Lisa Randall and so on. We cannot allow this denigration of science in the name of a Bronze-Age belief system to continue unchallenged.

  1. Pingback: Creation Curriculum - Christian Chat Rooms & Forums

  2. Pingback: Creationists lying repeatedly « Leaving Fundamentalism

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: