Page 158 - A Definitive Reply to Evolutionist Propagand‪a

A DEFINITIVE REPLY
TO EVOLUTIONIST
PROPAGANDA

So, since the fact is that no intermediary forms have ever been
found, and that this represents a serious problem for the theory of
evolution, how is it that BBC and other like-minded evolutionist
media are able to continue propagating the myth that "fish became
reptiles and reptiles became birds?" The answer to this question is
given in an article in the journal Science:
A large number of well-trained scientists outside of evolutionary
biology and palaeontology have unfortunately gotten the idea that
the fossil record is far more Darwinian than it is. This probably
comes from the oversimplification inevitable in secondary sources:
low-level textbooks, semipopular articles, and so on. Also, there is
probably some wishful thinking involved. In the years after
Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In
general these have not been found yet the optimism has died hard,
and some pure fantasy has crept into textbooks. 11
As revealed in Science, behind BBC's unscientific claim lie such
factors as "not being unbiased and imagining." BBC presented evo-
lutionary fantasies to the viewer like a fairy tale, talking about "bac-
teria turning into human beings," and "reptiles that were birds and
fish that walked on land," as if it were talking about "the prince who
turned into a frog."

Why Does BBC Still Portray Haeckel's

Deceptions as if they were Science?

Human and fish embryos are compared in the BBC documen-
tary The Human Body, and the theory of "recapitulation," which
ceased to be part of scientific literature years ago, is still portrayed
as a scientific fact. The term "recapitulation" is a condensation of the
dictum "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny," put forward by the
evolutionary biologist Ernst Haeckel at the end of the nineteenth
century.
This theory of Haeckel's postulates that living embryos re-expe-
rience the evolutionary process that their pseudo-ancestors under-

156