Review: Jonathan Park: Ep. 19 – Cry from Cyberspace

For more Jonathan Park reviews, click here.

Plot Summary

After a diabetic episode, eight-year-old Ashley awakes to find herself locked inside a strange room with only a computer. The Eagle’s Nest Gang receives her stray e-mail, and now it’s up to them to find her before her blood-sugar drops too low again! (Taken from here.) Topics in this episode:

  • Evolution is a Religion
  • What Is a Scientific Theory?
  • Checking the Evidence
  • Creationists Behaving Badly
  • The Four Questions
  • Random Chance
  • Truth vs. Assumptions

The Study Guide for episode 19 can be found here: jp_vol2_study_guide_epi19

Background Information

The Jonathan Park CDs are produced by Vision Forum Ministries.  Through these CDs, VF hope to ‘provide children and adults with scientific evidence that is in harmony with the Word of God’.  [Which raises the questions, ‘What does “in harmony” mean?’ and ‘What do they do with scientific evidence that is not in harmony with the Word of God?’]

Tagline: This is our Father’s world, God created it; we can explore it, so live the adventure!

Topics in this episode

Evolution is a Religion

The Story: Angela Park and Martha Brenan decide to take a class on Evolutionary Biology at the local college.  Since the two women will be running the Children’s Centre at the Museum, they decide to brush up on the latest evolutionary claims.  Dr Park gives them some final advice by telling them to remember that ‘evolutionists believe the theory of evolution to be a fact of science and that Creation is “some religious story”.’  Nick Williams says that ‘it’s really kind of funny that there really isn’t any fact that proves evolution.’ Dr Park says that the Random House dictionary defines religion as “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe.”  This definition fits in perfectly with the theory of evolution. (2:10-2:51)

The Facts: Dr Park speaks in a way that sounds convincing to the casual listener.  One needs to listen very carefully to capture the full meaning of what he is saying. Evolution is both a fact and a theory.

Evolution – (biology) change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift. Evolution as defined above is a fact.

Theory of Evolution – the mechanisms by which evolution occurs.

The Theory of Evolution does not look at the cause of the universe.  That is cosmogony.

The Theory of Evolution does not look at the nature of the universe.  That is cosmology.

The Theory of Evolution does not look at the purpose of the universe.  That is teleology.

So, the Theory of Evolution fails on all three counts to qualify as a ‘religion’. Dr Park is not talking about evolution; he is talking about evolutionism. Here is an answer to the claim that evolution is a religion.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

What Is a Scientific Theory?

The Story: For something to be Scientific Theory it has to meet three rules:

  1. It has to be observable
  2. It has to be repeatable
  3. It has to have an idea that can be shown to be true or false.

1. It has to be observable

Evolution fails this rule.  Some evolutionists claim that evolution is happening too slowly for it to be observed.  Others say that it is happening too quickly to leave a record.

2. It has to be repeatable

Evolution is not repeatable.  We cannot cause another Big Bang and then watch a single-cell organism form in the earth’s oceans and then evolve over millions of years into humans.

3. It has to have an idea that can be shown to be true or false

Evolution cannot be disproved because they assume it to be true no matter what the evidence says.  Evolution cannot be shown to be false even it really isn’t true. (2:51-3:37)

The Facts: Who writes this stuff?? Dr Park has confused the “Scientific Method for testing a Scientific Hypothesis” with a “Scientific Theory“. Evolution does NOT say that the universe started with a Big Bang.  The origins of the universe falls under cosmogony.

Here is an answer to the claim that evolution is not repeatable.

Here is an answer to the claim that evolution cannot be proved. As for the claim that ‘evolutionists’ assume evolution to be true no matter what the evidence says, I am assuming they must have misspoken.  Young-Earth Creationists assume Young-Earth Creation to be true no matter what the evidence says.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

Checking the Evidence

The Story: Both Creation and Evolution are about past events; that’s why they cannot be proven true or false in a laboratory.  Martha says that in a court case, the court looks at all the evidence and then decides which story best fits the evidence.  Dr Park agrees and says that when it comes to Evolution and Creation, we need to look at all the evidence and see which one best fits the facts. (3:37-4:10)

The Facts: Dr Park’s statement does not actually agree with Martha’s.  Martha is talking about deciding on a verdict by looking at the evidence.  Dr Park is talking about looking at the evidence and deciding which side best fits the verdict. The evidence and verdict that Dr Park and Martha are talking about is a literal interpretation of Genesis.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

Creationists Behaving Badly

The Story: While at their college lecture, Martha is disconcerted to hear the lecturer (who speaks with an ‘evil’ English accent) go on and on about evolution as if it were true.  The lecturer had just said that the biological evidence for the evolution of man is quite impressive.  The women wonder whether they should say something – someone needs to say something to show where he is wrong. A student asks the professor if the study of biology would be meaningless without evolution.  The professor agrees that it would be a fair statement.  One of the women scoffs. (5:10-5:43)

The Facts: I thought Martha and Angela were there to learn! Instead they are there to show the professor he is wrong. The evidence for human evolution is impressive. More bad behavior to come….

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

The Four Questions

The Story: Angela and Martha call Dr Park for help with dealing with their biology professor.  Angela says that it is a little intimidating talking to someone who is such a committed evolutionist.  (Martha, in the background, says, “That’s for sure!”)   Dr Park says that they need to ask The Four Questions.  He says that you don’t need to know more than someone to challenge their beliefs.  Just by asking them questions, you can sometimes get them to see there’s a problem with what they are saying. If anything, it will help the other students realise that their teacher is making huge assumptions. To fully appreciate the Four Questions, here is what the Study Guide says (emphasis mine).

1. What do you mean by that? (Clarifying question) This question is asked to help clarify what the person is saying. By getting them to clarify, you may actually give everyone a chance to see how silly it really sounds. For example, if your teacher says that dinosaurs evolved from birds, you could ask, “What do you mean by what you are saying? Do you mean that there was an animal that was half dinosaur and half bird? Could it fly? Could it fight with half-evolved wings? Were there lots of half and half’s that died trying to fly before their wings were fully developed?
2. How do you know what you are saying is true? (Asking for evidence) This question will usually show that evolutionary beliefs are based on assumptions. If they say that rocks are billions of years old, you can ask, “How do you know that to be true?” Usually the answer to that question will be based on a belief instead of evidence, something like, “We believe that the earth is billions of years old.” Again, you can ask how they know that to be true. After a while, it will become obvious that their answers are built on religious ideas, not facts.
3. If you are right, what does it mean? (Importance of their belief) If your teacher makes the statement that mankind evolved from apes, you can simply ask, “If you are right, what does it mean?” This type of question will give the person a chance to tell why this belief is so important to them. It will help you see their bias.
4. What if you’re wrong about what you are saying? (Question of implications) This question will allow the person to think through the consequences of being wrong. If they say that evolution is a proven fact, just ask, “What if you are wrong about what you are saying?” If they’re honest, there are some major implications if evolution is not true and there really is a God who will hold them accountable for their actions! As a matter of fact, a great follow-up statement after asking this question may be something like, “It sounds like you’re really risking some major consequences based on your assumptions!” Hopefully this will help the teacher or fellow students see how dangerous it is to place so much faith in something that is not trustworthy!
Remember, when you ask these questions, be respectful with the motivation of love!

(9:00-10:34)

From 13:21-15:18, Martha speaks up in the biology class and the professor appears ‘stumped’ by her questions.  One class member says, scoffingly, “It looks like this evolutionary idea about the origin of life has some major problems.”  Martha marvels to herself, “Wow, these questions really work!” (with truimphal music in the background).

The Facts: I would not recommend anyone ask these Four Questions at all!

1. There is evidence that dinosaurs evolved into birds.  To say otherwise is either ignorant or disingenuous.  Asking clarifying questions in order to show the silliness of an idea is doing something with a hidden motive. Asking whether there were half evolved body parts or ‘half and halfs’ demonstrates a total lack of understanding of how evolution works!

2. There are many ways of dating things.  It is not based on a ‘belief’.

3.  Enough with the mankind evolved from apes already!  Evolution does NOT teach this.

4. Evolution is not atheistic.  A person can believe in a Creator God and ‘believe’ in evolution.  They are called Theistic Evolutionists.

The reminder at the bottom leaves me gobsmacked.  These questions are not designed to truly learn about the other person’s viewpoint, but rather to show how ‘silly’ his/her ideas are.  How is that being respectful?  In fact, in every episode that I’ve listened to so far, I have not come across any non-YEC character who is intelligent and knowledgeable.  They are always portrayed as the stupid, atheistic, ignorant ‘baddies’. Young listeners may hear you say that it is important to be respectful, but if they don’t have respectful behavior modeled for them, they will not know what that looks like.

The study of the origin of life is not strictly speaking a subject that falls under evolution, but rather abiogenesis. Here is a list of articles on Abiogenesis.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

Random Chance

The Story: Martha asks the professor the last two questions of The Four Questions.  The professor admits sheepishly that he had never given much thought to whether his ideas about evolution were right or not before.  He admits reluctantly that if nature didn’t create us, then there must be a Creator somewhere.  Martha latches on to this and says that, “It would mean we were created for a purpose, not by random chance.” (16:15-17:45)

The Facts: No episode would be complete without injecting the idea that evolution is a random chance process. Evolution is not a random chance process.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

Truth vs. Assumptions

The Story: Martha and Angela report back to the men about their college class.  It was tough at first but things turned around when they started the Four Questions.   By asking the professor these questions, it was evident that his belief in evolution was based on ‘blind faith’.  It made them realise how important it is to put their trust on the truth and not on assumptions. (20:53-21:25)

The Facts: The conclusions that evolutionists make are based on evidence, not assumptions.  On the other hand, Creationists base their conclusions on assumptions about how the Bible is to be read/interpreted.

[Click to return to list of Topics.]

*****************************************************************************************

Conclusion

This episode introduced the concept of evolutionism.  It also equated evolutionism with evolution and tried to show how/why evolution is a religion. This program was a good example of YEC hypocrisy. Not recommended for impressionable listeners.

Their knowledge they want to pump
The teacher they want to stump
Four Questions are asked
But the truth is masked
Another ‘pisode in the  dump
<< Previous: Ep. 18 | List of Reviews | Next: Ep. 20 >>
Advertisements

Posted on Sunday, September 12th, 2010, in Creation vs Evolution, Jonathan Park, Jonathan Park Reviews, Science, Vision Forum, Young Earth Creationism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. “I would not recommend anyone ask these Four Questions at all!”

    I *highly* recommend that anyone with these kinds of doubts ask a college biology professor these questions. However if someone thinks that the *result* of asking those questions will mirror the story above, they may want to first ask these questions in a private setting like a professor’s office hours if they are concerned at all that a college biology professor that can easily answer these questions might cause the student to look uneducated in front of his/her peers. However if a student does not have any concern about how their level of education appears to those around them I think it would be *excellent* to ask those questions in class so that other students who have the same questions/concerns but who are afraid to speak up will also have their questions addressed. If reading material on the Internet can be chewy and dry, having a professor available to provide interactive instruction from someone who has a feel for the level of learning a particular student is at (if you are so fortunate to have a basic biology class small enough for such) can be so much more effective.

    However, do not be surprised if a college biology professor requires you to do some of the research on your own, and politely directs you to others of appropriate expertise if you are challenging outside of the professor’s area of expertise (such as asking questions about geologic dating).

    Like

  2. Awesome thank

    Like

  3. Dude get a life

    Like

  4. “Dude get a life”

    Solid, logical rebuttal. We are all improved by virtue of your contribution.

    Like

Go ahead. Tell me your thoughts.

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: