Debunking the Lies: Evolution in School | Evolution: School’s Biggest Lie.

Learn the truth about the biggest lie taught in schools: evolution. Why the theory of evolution may not be as factual as it's made out to be in schools. This blog post will reveal the real truth about evolution.

Description: Discover the truth about evolution in education and its controversial role in modern schooling. Our blog post debunks the biggest lie taught in schools and explores the hidden agenda behind its teachings. Join us as we unravel the myth of evolution and its place in the classroom.

The theory of evolution has long been a topic of debate among scholars, with some questioning its validity. However, in many educational institutions, it is presented as an undeniable truth. But is it really? Let's take a closer look at the evidence and come to our own conclusions."



It is not uncommon to encounter claims that random mutations and natural selection are capable of explaining the complexity of life. However, we have reason to be skeptical of such assertions. In my book, I discuss ten icons of evolution, but there are more that I could have written about. Despite this, I had to stop somewhere. The concept of survival of the fittest has a poor track record and has not produced any Darwinian predictions that can be intelligently derived. The truth is, we do not even know how to define life, let alone understand how it originated. Schools have taught us that we evolved from apes, and that this theory is practically a fact. However, this is a lie. Before biology majors start flexing their PhDs and British accents in the comments, let me clarify that I am not anti-evolution. I believe that humans have evolved, but on a much smaller scale that can be measured within human populations.

One of the biggest lies about neo-Darwinism is that the evidence revolves around the theory, rather than the other way around. Darwin himself said that "analogies would lead me one step farther, and I need to believe that all animals and plants are descended from some prototype; but analogy would be a deceitful guide." Yet, schools have taught us the exact opposite, that Darwin believed we all came from one single prototype. In reality, he did not believe this. School taught us neo-Darwinism, not Darwinian Evolution, and the differences between them are vast. Darwinian Evolution was based on Darwin's observations, whereas neo-Darwinism is a modified and often politically charged version of Darwinism.

The leading theory on how life started on Earth is something called abiogenesis, which posits that a pond of amino acids got heated from hydrothermal vents in the ocean floor and eventually evolved into all different types of life. This theory draws bold conclusions from vague evidence and ignores important prerequisites, such as spontaneous generation, which has been disproven by French chemist Louis Pasteur. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that abiogenesis has ever been recreated.

Believing in the soul is a far stretch outside the bounds of reality. While there are different stages of human evolution, such as Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo sapien, the debate centers around whether we have a common ancestor to these species or if they are a subspecies. If we did not evolve from them, why did they go extinct? The latest claim is not too hard to believe, considering the nature of our species. If somebody claimed a brand new land or territory on Earth, immediate war would be waged.

The Cardiff Giant, a model of a whole body with arms, legs, bones, and everything from a pig's tooth, was made by George Hull, an atheist who lost a debate and wanted to prove how easily he could convince people of religion to believe in their biblical giants. So, he hired some guys for three thousand dollars to make their own 10-foot Biblical giant and then buried it. This fake fossil ended up selling for twenty-three thousand dollars which of today's time would equal 500,000. Unbelievable! The Cardiff Giant was believed to be real and was exhibited in multiple museums. 3,000 people actually came out to see it because they thought it was authentic. Later, we ended up realizing that it wasn't real because Hull got drunk at a party and revealed that it was fake himself.

The pecking man was supposed to be the missing link, but then somehow all of the evidence disappeared. I'm not joking. It's supposed to be like a Homo erectus human being that lived in China that had huge protrusive eye sockets, but I guess we'll never know because it's gone and disappeared out of nowhere. They never taught you this in school, but Darwin was a racist. He was also openly sexist, and if he were alive today, he would be canceled on Twitter, and his entire theory would have been rejected.

The most shocking was when he wrote in his book written in 1871 titled "The Descent of Men" where he says, "At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of men will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races." I'm sure you can use your imagination to figure out what he's talking about when he says the savage races. He published this book roughly 62 years before the event took place in Germany that I can't see the name of in this video again, but context clues they're actually deeply connected.

But Darwin believed that the white races were evolutionarily more advanced than the black races. Darwin's views of gender were not much better. He says that men were more courageous, pugnacious, and energetic than women, with a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger, the formation of her skull is said to be intermediate between the child and the man. Darwin also says and I quote, "The chief distinction of the intellectual powers of two sexes is shown by a man attaining to a higher Eminence in whatever he takes up than can a woman, whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands." He added, "Thus man has ultimately become superior to women," not me saying this, but your boy Darwin.

But it doesn't stop there because Darwin would tell the Reverend Charles Kingsley in a letter dated February 6, 1862, "It is very true what you say about the higher races of men, when high enough, replacing and clearing off lower races in 500 years. How the Anglo-Saxon race would have spread and exterminated whole Nations, and in consequence, how much the human race viewed as a unit would have risen in rank. Remember what risks the nation of Europe ran not so many centuries ago being overrun by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea was! The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turks hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world."

Not only did he predict this, but he created this ideology and gave room to prove it scientifically, which made a lot of negative and nasty things happen throughout history

Undoubtedly, naturalism is the notion that every event in the universe solely occurs as a result of natural phenomena and forces that exist within the measurable universe. It may seem coherent to you if you don't believe in anything outside the universe or don't have room for Divinity. However, there are a few flaws in this school of thought. To say the least, the worst of them is that you cannot believe in Free Will and naturalism at the same time because they are contradictory to each other. If you believe that every event in the universe only happens as a result of natural phenomena, even the thoughts you have, all the physical and empirical measurable processes happening inside your brain, and all the decisions you make, may result from neurons firing a certain way and chemicals being affected by the natural forces in the world, which does not allow room for Free Will. Therefore, if you are a naturalist, Free Will contradicts your belief. If someone decides to do harm to somebody, it cannot be their fault because it is a result of natural force and phenomena. So, you cannot blame that person for doing the worst thing in the world; it's not their fault, but the natural forces' fault, right? Who are they? How can you blame them? All they are is a clump of cells and neurons firing inside their brain. To be a naturalist, you have to believe that there is no "you," no soul, and nothing that makes you "you" except the physical flesh, brain, and the sack of Flesh that you're living in currently. This is all you are; basically, just this physical thing that I'm looking at right now. But if you believe in this, then if somebody steals something from you, it's not their fault because it's a result of their environment; it's a result of their poverty that caused them to steal. Therefore, they cannot be punished for it. You have to completely neglect the fact that this person is actually guilty. If every single decision your brain makes is just the result of the natural and physical forces acting on it, then there is no self to hold accountable for any actions. This is pure delusion. Without separation of the mind and the body, there can be no such thing as free will. Instead of punishing somebody for doing something terrible, we can't hold anybody accountable. Instead of punishment, we should just tell them to just don't do it next time, or just give them some rehab instead. Another reason that you're not only a sack of Flesh with no soul or no self is that if we tear down a house and then rebuild it with every single part of this house being replaced, then we'd consider this house as being an entirely new house, right? Every single part changed. Similarly, the cells in our body do the same exact thing, except the retina cells that we have in our eyes. Nearly every single cell in our whole body replaces itself. So, with that same logic, if you commit the biggest Act of sin in the book, and all that person really is just their physical body, then you should release them from prison and drop the charges after the cells that committed the Act have been renewed or destroyed. Because from a naturalistic point of view, that wasn't the same person that committed the act that caught them in prison for life. That was their old arm that was their old body that has now been renewed and changed. So, to be consistent with your argument, you would be delusional, but you are the big bang and evolution, not being a choice of men or God, but it's natural selection, natural phenomena, random DNA mutations. If you believe in this, then you can't blame a Divine deity for creation or being the force behind the Big Bang


ATP is a universal energy source for living cells, referred to as the "fuel of life," as all living organisms rely on it to meet their energy needs. However, the creation of ATP requires two ATP molecules to already exist, raising the question of how the very first ATP molecule was created. Glycolysis is a process that initiates ATP production by converting glucose into a formula that the body can use to start the Krebs cycle. This process requires two enzymes, hexokinase and fructokinase, which require ATP to break down the substrate. The fact that humans share a significant amount of DNA with other species, such as apes, bananas, pigs, cats, dogs, cows, and mice, may lead some to believe that we evolved from them. However, this is a very basic understanding of DNA and its role in the human body.

The Human Genome Project mapped around 98% of the genome and found that less than 2% of human DNA is active and carries any significance. A study from Pennsylvania State University concluded that only 20% of proteins are identical between humans and chimpanzees, while 80% are different. The difference between humans and apes goes all the way down to DNA splicing differences, which change the way genes are expressed at a molecular level. Humans and various mammals share deviated forms of the pentadactyl limb, which is evidence that we must have come from a common ancestor. However, the pentadactyl limb disappears and reappears throughout history, suggesting that it does not necessarily mean that we evolved from a common ancestor. Darwin claimed that we have residual body parts and muscles left over from our previous evolutionary selves that we do not use anymore, which actually proves evolution. However, the ear muscles are not useless, as they provide strength and support to the ear and support and guide cartilage growth during development. The appendix is not useless, as it is part of the immune response and contains lymphoid cells believed to be part of the lymph, and it acts as a backup for the digestive bacteria held in the human body.