I want to respond to comments put forth in the article about Senator Crandall and SB1213.
It was stated that creationism is not a scientific theory subject to evidence like legitimate scientific theories. The truth is that evidence is neutral and it is interpreted when any theory is attempting to explain the past, as evolution and creationism do. Both have the same evidence, but it is interpreted differently. When the two theories have the same evidence they must both be accepted at equal value.
The article explained adaptation in one paragraph and in the next paragraph explains that scientists argue over the slow or quick formation of new forms of life. Adaptation has never been observed to produce a new form of life. Evolutionists simply presume that this must have happened! The vast majority of creationists know that adaptation happens since it can be observed in the present. They don’t know that new forms of life arise because this has never been observed, it has only been inferred. The mechanism for the addition of the astronomical amount of coded information that must be produced for a microbe to become a man, and all other living things, has never been found! It appears that the microbe to man theory of evolution is also based on faith in the unseen.
The biblical concept of kinds allows for the variety seen in a kind such as dogs. However, we have never observed dogs, bacteria, or any other organism becoming a new kind (form) of organism. The biblical concept of kinds of organisms is verified repeatedly and without exception by observation and should be taught.
Editor’s note: Almost all researchers in the biological sciences accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution — although lively debate continues about the pace and mechanisms. Cross breeding and genetic manipulation has repeatedly confirmed the theory, not to mention the fossil and DNA evidence. Creationists have raised many interesting challenges to elements of evolution, but have not successfully challenged its basic tenants in the eyes of the vast majority of scientists. Moreover, the creationist belief that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old based on passages in the Bible conflicts with a mass scientific evidence collected by geologists, cosmologists, physicists, astronomers and researchers in many other disciplines. Creationism isn’t a scientific theory, it’s a religious belief and therefore not a relevant topic for a science class.