The Guardian Proves That Atheism Is Not Intuitive Or Natural (Justin Derby)

Video Transcript:

Where political incorrectness meets Christian apologetics. This is truth, the objective reality. Hello there everyone. If you're a Christian and you're a young earth creationist like me, then you're probably intimately familiar with Romans chapter 1 verses 18 through 20, which teaches that when we, the human race, observe the reality around us. We know not only that God exists, but we know what his attributes are. Evolution is an atheist, however, tell us a different story. They insist that everyone is an atheist from birth, and that if we just let our observations of the natural world and form us of what reality is, we will naturally conclude that evolution in billions of years is true. As we're about to see, however, what the evolutionist and atheist claim is the opposite of reality. Back on March 31, 2016, the Guardian posted an article titled, Evolution makes scientific sense, so why do many people reject it? And here in the subtitle we see something that is sure to rile up the evolutionists and the atheists. Child psychology studies have identified a natural human bias toward the theory of intelligent design and pose a solution. Teach evolution earlier. Wow, that is quite the subtitle. Apparently the reason why many people reject evolution, atheism, and billions of years is because there's a natural human bias towards intelligent design. IE towards God. Oh my goodness, it's a natural human bias, meaning that it's intuitive and natural from birth. But let's actually go into the article to see what exactly they're going to provide you as evidence for the assertions made in this subtitle. Evolution is poorly understood by students and disturbingly by many of their science teachers. Although it is part of the compulsory science curriculum in most schools in the UK and the USA, more than a third of the people in both countries reject the theory of evolution outright or believe that it is guided by a supreme being. It is critical that the voting public have a clear understanding of evolution. Adaptation by natural selection, the primary mechanism of evolution, underpins a raft of current social concerns such as antibiotic resistance, the impact of climate change, and the relationship between genes and environment. So why, despite formal scientific education, does intelligent design remain so intuitively plausible and evolution so intuitively opaque? And what can we do about it? Wow, there are many interesting claims made here in these two paragraphs, especially in the last one. As a side note, I first want to mention that they claim that natural selection is the primary mechanism of evolution. And if that's so, then the evolution paradigm is false, because natural selection can only select from what already exists. It cannot create new information that did not previously exist. So if you're going to make something like that, the mechanism of evolution, whose paradigm says that information that did not previously exist can come into existence out of nothing via natural selection, evolution just falls apart. But notice what the last sentence here talks about. It says that intelligent design is intuitively plausible and that evolution is intuitively opaque. Let me translate that for you. What the Guardian is saying is that when you observe the reality around you, you will naturally come to the conclusion that it is designed, and therefore there's a designer behind it. And they're also telling you that evolution is opaque, meaning that when you observe reality and let your natural intuitions and your observations inform you of what reality is, you're not going to naturally conclude the evolution in billions of years and atheism is true. The next paragraph is a real eye opener. Developmental psychologists have identified two cognitive biases and very young children that help to explain the popularity of intelligent design. The first is a belief that species are defined by an internal quality that cannot be changed, psychological essentialism. The second is that all things are designed for a purpose, promiscuous teleology. These biases interact with cultural beliefs such as religion but are just as prevalent in children raised in secular societies. Importantly, these beliefs become increasingly entrenched, making formal scientific instruction more and more difficult as children get older. So basically what these psychologists are figuring out is that people naturally and intuitively from birth believe an intelligent design, which means that if everything is designed, they're going to believe that there's a designer behind it all, because that's what their intuition tells them, and that's what their observation of reality tells them. What they also found is that if they allow these natural beliefs in intelligent design, in God, to fester and take hold while their cognitive processes are forming, then it's going to be much harder later on to convince them that atheism, evolution and billions of years is true because it goes against all of their natural intuitions and it goes against their observation of the world and reality in which they live. So how are evolutionists and atheists going to get around this little problem here? The Guardian article tells us. So how do we override such widespread and tenacious cognitive biases? Deb Killaman and colleagues at Boston University recently published a promising child-friendly intervention, illustrated story books about natural selection. It's the most how a feature changes in a species, the majority of children below ten years of age will call on a teleological explanation. The giraffe has a long neck so that it can reach the higher leaves. Having established this, Killaman presented five to eight year olds with story books about a made up animal, polosis. That's right folks. In order to overcome humanity's natural and intuitive beliefs in intelligent design and God, evolutionists and atheists are creating story books for five to eight year olds that they're going to shove all their evolutionary propaganda into it and they're going to indoctrinate these five to eight year olds into believing in evolution in billions of years and atheism before their cognitive processes have finished the vivacity of the world. So why are they targeting five year old children to shove their evolution propaganda down the throats of? The article tells us why at the end. Evolution is typically taught to students at around 14 to 15 years of age as they prepare for their GCSEs. After persistent lobbying by the British Humanist Association, evolution was included in the British National Primary Curriculum for the first time last year. From September 2015, students will be taught about evolution from year six at around 10 to 11 years of age. Might this still be too late? Killaman shows five to eight year olds to test because at this age, promiscuous teleology and psychological essentialism are still separate and fragmentary. It argues that by 10 years of age, they have coalesced into a coherent theoretical framework that then gets in the way of contradictory scientific explanations and may remain the default gut reaction even in adults. Her storybook works because it provides children with an alternative exploratory framework before these cognitive biases become entrenched. Her findings show that even very young children can understand the basic mechanisms of natural selection and can generalize that analogy to new examples. If part of the reason that intelligent design is so popular is because it seems intuitively correct, might the solution be to disrupt those intuitions very early on? Should we reconsider the National Curriculum yet again and start teaching evolution even earlier? And that's the sick twisted part of this article. Even from the Guardian's own admission, people naturally and intuitively believe in intelligent design and God from birth. And the evolution by their own admission is not intuitive, it's not natural, it's not something that you would conclude if you observe the reality around you and let your observations and your intuitions inform you of what you're seeing. So in order to get around this problem, the evolutionists and the atheists are going to start teaching evolution through storybooks to five-year-olds. And why are they doing it? Because at that age they don't have the cognitive abilities to challenge what they're being told and so they can't figure out if you're telling them the truth or not. They're just going to believe what you say. That's exactly the reason why evolutionists and atheists tell us that people like me should not be raising up our children in the ways of the Lord and the biblical worldview. And yet they turn right around and say that that's the reason why we should teach those same children about evolution in billions of years and atheism. The double standards and hypocrisy of the evolutionist community is widely apparent. If evolution in billions of years and atheism was true, do you really think the evolutionists and atheists would have to resort to indoctrinating young children, young five-year-olds into evolution billions of years and atheism? Would they even need to do that? If it hasn't become obvious to you now, I'll spell it out for you. Evolutionists claim that everyone is born an atheist and that if you just observe the world around you, you'll naturally conclude that evolution in billions of years is true. But when we look at the actual child psychology studies, we find that it's belief in God and intelligent design that is natural and intuitive and that's the conclusion you naturally come to when you observe the reality around you. And in order to overcome this problem with their religion and worldview, evolutionists and atheists are now setting out to indoctrinate five-year-olds into their worldview before their cognitive process is fully formed. Because they don't like having resistance to their worldview. They want to control what you believe about origins and what you believe about reality. Evolutionists and atheists are authoritarians at heart, even if they aren't necessarily fans of the kind of authoritarianism you see in Silicon Valley and the mainstream media. They are authoritarians at heart because their authoritarianism will become apparent when they have to face the religious nature of their worldview and all the evidence of reality that shows that the biblical worldview is true. When they're faced with those things, their true authoritarian comes out.