The Discovery Channel is persistently airing programs which spread propaganda on the theory of evolution, presenting this theory to the public cloaked as if it were scientific fact, even though in truth it is utterly lacking in validity.

Nearly 150 years ago, Charles Darwin, living in a scientifically backward age, first presented his theory of evolution, but by our day its façade of validity has disintegrated like so much dust. Since his time, research and experiments based on scientific and technological advances have definitively shown that there is no scientific evidence to back up the theory. The dogged attachment of certain groups to this theory show that they are worried about their crumbling philosophies. For in the case of the materialists, recognizing the failure of this theory would mean having to give up their entire worldview, and so they continue to blindly support evolution despite all its demonstrable failures.

The continued airings of programs on the theory of evolution on the Discovery Channel prove nothing but the senseless refusal of some quarters to accept that this theory has come apart at the seams. The real reason for these cranked-out programs pushing evolution is the great anxiety caused by the theory's collapse. The Discovery Channel and similar evolutionist TV channels - like the National Geographic or PBS - strongly resist recognizing the shortcomings and contradictions of the theory. By continuing to air such programs, they think that they can also hoodwink the public into ignoring the truth.

However, they should know that the public can sense their fear. Ordinary people are becoming more and more interested in the scientific evidence against the theory of evolution. They understand that efforts to continue spreading evolutionist propaganda in order to bring this floundering theory back to life are mere exercises in futility.

Today People Know More About the Theory of Evolution

People know very well the essence of the theory of evolution, which is based entirely upon wishful thinking and unwarranted assumptions. The propaganda methods employed ever since the era in which Darwin produced this theory seem old and outdated today, much like the theory itself. Mass communication technology has made refutations of evolution accessible to everyone, sounding the death knell of a dogmatic secular priesthood that before had taken advantage of people's ignorance of such matters. A couple of decades ago, many people believed adages such as "only scientists are qualified to pass judgment on these things," "whatever scientists say is true," and "it's useless for ordinary people to think about these subjects, they wouldn't understand anyway."

In the past, evolutionists easily spread their mass indoctrination by successfully deterring people from research and independent thinking. But today, people can easily find the facts they need through the Internet and various other means. The facts about the fallacies of evolutionary theory have become more accessible, thus stripping evolutionist propaganda of its veneer of validity.

As an example of this, a recent documentary about Africa has the narrator saying, "This place is where our ancestors lived," yet fails to produce any evidence to back up this assertion, and then shows a magnificent design found in nature but immediately misrepresents it as "a wonderful product of evolution." The forcible working in of such just-so stories is a good example of evolutionary propaganda. In such programs, even technological advances are absurdly presented as "the product of evolution." These programs on biology, space exploration, the human body, geology, sociology and other fields all come around to promoting evolution through assertions utterly lacking in scientific value. Still, all these efforts cannot save the evolutionists from the dilemma they've put themselves in. By making such groundless assertions, evolutionists may manage to keep deceiving themselves, but they cannot escape the fact that their theory is both unscientific and irrational.

People are quite aware that evolutionists have a limited store of bogus evidence up their sleeves with which to defend themselves. And they also know that this meager hoard of fake evidence has long since been proved invalid by scientific research and study.

Difficult Questions

Even as they persist with their efforts to spread propaganda, evolutionists should realize that people know about evolution and what they are up to. People's awareness of this subject is growing all over the world. The efforts of evolutionists have been rendered impotent by a number of valuable projects pursued in recent years. At one point or another, most people have been exposed to various books or other media discussing creation and exposing the theory of evolution as nothing more than a hoax. These books, magazines, documentaries and audiotapes laying out the case for creation have reached far and wide, to cities and towns throughout the world. A huge cross-section of the population - including middle and high school students, university graduates and working people who attended gatherings on the subject - have had the chance to see for themselves that the theory of evolution is nothing but a fraud. Those who imagine that people could be deceived by such hollow lies are gravely mistaken.
Those who work to spread the Darwinist propaganda must face countless embarrassing questions that cry out for answers. For the general public has become well informed, and so has begun questioning and doubting this unscientific theory for themselves. Below are just a few of the pressing questions which need answering:

- Just how did thousands of different proteins come into existence when even the random formation of a single solitary protein is clearly mathematically impossible?

- If in the distant past a cell was formed through chance under the most primitive conditions, why can't we manage to create a cell in today's high-tech, modern laboratories?

- How were the complex systems in cells formed?

- The fossil record shows that some species underwent no change at all for millions of years. How did these species survive down to our day without evolving?

- Where can we find the transitional fossils showing the transformation of one species into another? How did so many different classes of animals suddenly emerge in the Cambrian age without any documented ancestors in the fossil record?

- How does the mechanism of natural selection explain the irreducibly complex designs of living things?

- How can you possibly account for intentional acts of self-sacrifice seen across the animal kingdom?

- How did lifeless, unconscious atoms somehow gather together to form conscious organisms?

- How did unconscious atoms come to form humans with the ability to think, feel, experience pleasure, work, create and make discoveries?

These and many other similar questions have yet to be satisfactorily answered despite 150 years of research and experimentation into evolution and ample opportunity to do so. If the evolutionists are sincere in their beliefs, then by all means they should supply clear answers to each of these questions, one by one, without resorting to any tricks. If they feel it necessary, they should bring their most reputable scientists onto television shows to face the cameras and answer this multitude of questions. These proponents of evolution should review books that clearly challenge their theory and address the explanations contained therein, point by point, in order to disprove them. But they are doomed to failure, for evolutionist dogma can never withstand these clear refutations of evolution.

For instance, these evolutionists constantly speak of a somewhat miraculous force of "nature" that supposedly triggered the process of evolution, but they are unable to explain its main mechanisms and just how this process took place. Instead they try to mislead people through just-so stories, mainly based on scenarios of organs or traits appearing due to the needs of plants and animals. For example, an "explanation" on the origin of flight such as, "Terrestrial reptiles, while chasing flies, tended to develop proto-wings" is a totally unscientific scenario. For the "need" for a wing does not create it. Mutations do not occur to answer the needs of organisms. And when they occur, they do not add any new genetic information to the genome - so they don't result in "evolution."

Another misleading rhetorical trick used to explain the origin of species is to speak as if the animals themselves were responsible for their supposed "evolution". You might hear sentences like "birds acquired wings" or "fish developed fins." Of course, the evolutionists are aware that animals can't design or develop their bodies, but in order to avoid terms such as "design" or "creation," they prefer to invoke self-design or self-creation, which are both ridiculous concepts.

Invoking "chance" is another ridiculous idea, in face of the amazing and irreducible designs in living things which are clearly designed for a purpose. "Chance" is in fact the worst answer, because it is refuted by mathematical calculations alone.

Evolutionists keep on parroting the same tired, discredited attempts at explanation, and trying to brainwash the public into believing them, and imagining that they can transform fantastic fabrications into facts. But telling the same fairy tale over and over again ad nauseam doesn't change the fact that it's a fairy tale, with no relation to reality. A fairy tale stays a fairy tale no matter what you do. If you tell someone the same lie every day, day in and day out, it will never become the truth. If you say, "The sun doesn't rise in the morning" every day, and even if you kept on repeating this phrase for years and years and decades on end, the sun would still rise every morning, and everyone would know it.

If they are truly sincere in their mistaken convictions, the Discovery Channel and other evolutionist TV channels should respond to this message and do so using scientific methods. They must account for the inconsistencies of this theory, the ones which even secondary school students can see through, and they should publicly defend their views on a scientific platform. Otherwise they must accept the truth that the theory of evolution is losing ground with each new scientific discovery and that the inevitable paradigm shift in science will soon result in the acceptance of Intelligent Design, i.e. Creation.