Like an ultimate acid, evolutionism destroys everything it touches.

Evolutionism has caused America's entertainment industry, mainstream media, academics and political class to betray the self-evident empirical understanding of the natural world.

Evolutionism and Self-Governance

But as The Declaration of Independence suggests, losing the physical understanding of self-evidence causes us to lose the metaphysical understanding of self-evidence. If it is no longer self-evident that all men are created, then it cannot be "self-evident... that all men are created equal." After over 50 years of evolutionary dogmatism in the government schools, it is not a coincidence that every omnibus federal legislation during this time has been unconstitutional. Get rid of evolutionism dogmatically taught and protected in our government schools, and we have a fighting chance of regaining the ability to manage that beast which we, the people created--the federal government.

So entrenched is evolutionism in our political culture that it might be easier to get rid of government schools (euphemistically called "public education") than to purge the government schools of evolutionism. As a scientist with a Ph.D. in experimental physics, I am tired of Creationists saying, "Evolution is merely a theory." The truth is that evolution is not even a scientific theory.

The Folly of the Definition of Evolution

In order for a candidate theory to be a viable scientific theory, this candidate theory must have a theoretical development that goes beyond "things happen."

We also seem to know that were a sixth grader to have as his science project metric, "things happen," that he should fail.

But evolutionary biologists seem to have the toughest time understanding that the definition of evolution as "a change in allele frequency over time" has the same discriminatory powers as "things happen."

So here is a mock conversation you can have with an evolutionary biologist that even a politician, Hollywood metrosexual, or evolutionary biologist professor should be able to understand:

You: "Every genetic change is evolutionary, right?"

EB: "Right."

You: "There is no such thing as devolution, right?"

EB: "Right!"

You: "So when genetic things happen it is evolution, right?"

EB: "Yup!"

You: "So if when genetic things happen it is evolution, how is that different than my claim that the hypothesis for evolution is 'things happen'?"

EB: "Shut up you #$#@#! You just don't understand evolution!"

If one claims that everything is evidence for one's theory, then one can have no scientific vindication of one's theory. Thus the definition of evolution has insured that there has not been a single instance of scientific validation of evolution. Applying the scientific method to this definition of evolution is epistemologically like applying the scientific method to the hypothesis that "things happen."

The Cost of Devolutionary Denial

Allele frequencies can change in either an evolutionary or a devolutionary way. If evolutionists deny devolution, then they also deny any scientific vindication for evolutionism. The beauty of the scientific method is that it is not affected by polls. It just cares about discriminating hypothesis and discriminating results.

Information theory was discovered in 1929 by the physicist Leo Szilard. This work matured to the definitive work by the mathematician Claude Shannon. The discovery that information was physical and therefore required energy for its production is one of the major scientific discoveries of the 20th century. Yet this scientific discovery has not affected the lore of evolutionism.

Evolutionary biologist are more discriminating about their automobiles than they are about the work of their career. Imagine that an evolution biologist takes his car to the shop to get it tuned up. The mechanic opens the hood and delivers several sledge hammer blows to engine and charges the evolutionist $150. One imagines the evolutionist is discriminating enough not to do repeat business with this shop. While when it comes to his automobile, the evolutionist is rather discriminating about qualifying the nature of the change, yet this same evolutionist preaches in his classroom that evolution is merely a change in gene or allele frequency.

How about distinguishing between those changes in the alleles which increase information and those changes in the alleles which destroy information? Kinda like day and night, evolution and devolution, no?

The Hijacking of Natural Selection

This meaningless definition/metric of evolution is probably the reason why evolutionists are duped into believing that natural selection is a mechanism of evolution. While many evolutionists believe that natural selection produces adaptations, natural selection merely kills off less suited phenotypes. This killing off of the phenotype suppresses the associated genotypic information of that phenotype in the gene pool.

Indeed this error traces back to Darwin. The title of Darwin's book associates "natural selection" with evolutionism. Apparently evolutionists just haven't yet thought much about evolutionism.

Evolutionism's Elusive Evidence

What is the evidence that causes evolutionists to believe in evolutionism? Do their cars perform better over time? Does their plumbing repair itself? Do sandcastles spontaneously form from piles of sand in their backyards?

Empowered with time lapse photography of a sandcastle, I gave a TEDx talk on the scientific bankruptcy of evolutionism. I also discussed the implications of losing this self-evidence on the American experiment in self-government. Enjoy this video and share it with your friends. What is at stake is not merely an academic science discussion, but the future of our republic.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.