Page 826 - Atlas of Creation Volume 4

If living matter is not, then, caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has it come
into being? . . I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable expla-
nation is Creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a
theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it. 130

As Lipson says, many scientists, academics and teachers frequently face the threat of Darwinist ex-
communication. When the principal of a high school in Detroit wished to place various books critical of

Darwinism in the library in 1999, the NCSE fiercely opposed the move, using all kinds of intimida-
tion. 131
Jonathan Wells describes this policy of intimidation thus:

The NCSE tells school boards that “evolution isn’t scientifically controversial,” so “arguments against evo-

lution” are “code words for attempt to bring non-scientific, religious views into the science curriculum.”
Since U.S. courts have declared it unconstitutional to teach religion in public schools, this amounts to a warn-
ing that the school board is contemplating something illegal. If the warning doesn’t work, the NCSE calls on
the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for backup, and the ACLU sends a letter to the school board
threatening an expensive lawsuit. Since every school district in the country is already struggling to make

ends meet, this bullying by the NCSE and ACLU has been quite successful in blocking overt criticism of
Darwinian evolution in public school classrooms. 132

Following moves aimed at putting an end to the teaching of evolutionary biology in the state of
Kansas, where there has been a huge campaign for Creation to be taught in schools, the education sys-
tem in the state came in for widespread intimidation and pressure. In a piece sent to Science magazine,

Herbert Lin, president of the National Research Council, announced that American colleges and uni-
versities should not regard the biology classes taught in Kansas schools as academic. The following
month, Scientific American magazine editor John Rennie asked university admission committees to tell
the Kansas schools administration that they would “examine the qualifications of students applying to

them from the state of Kansas with the greatest care " and asked them to issue “an open letter to fami-
lies in Kansas declaring that this bad decision would have severe consequences for their children’s fu-
tures.” 133 The meaning of the threat was clear. It is a crime to oppose the theory of evolution, and those
committing such an offense must be annihilated at once.

In one recent case, a researcher from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute by the name of
Nathaniel Abraham announced that he had lost his job for denying the theory of evolution. A letter writ-
ten to Abraham in 2004 by a Woods Hole scientist said he had been removed from his post because
Abraham said he did not accept the "evolutionary aspects" of the National Institutes of Health grant,

824 Atlas of Creation Vol. 4