1.) “Life arose from nonlife.”

Stated as fact as though proven. However, no replications have ever been achieved despite easy access to zillions of tons of chemicals, every force known, and every conceivable environment.

“We think that the processes leading to life began nearly 4 billion years ago.”

Note the phrase, “We think.” So, is #1 above a fact or not? Here is how normal science would respond: If it is not a fact then don’t state it as one.

Fig. 1. Life: The Science of Biology (2001-2010). Every edition loaded with false statements of fact.

2.) “The appearance of eukaryotic cells ... marks a milestone in evolution. But where did these cells come from?”

Logical fallacy. If you don’t know where cells came from then how can you say they evolved? Paraphrase exposes the fallacy: “We know that eukaryotic cells evolved even though we have no evidence.”

Fig. 2. Historical Geology (2008-2012), a required textbook, makes unapologetic use of rhetorical tricks and so many false statements in every edition that it could be used as a teaching guide for propaganda technique. The book is beautifully-presented with many truthful facts; but that is part of how propaganda works.

3.) The origin of the eukaryotic cell was one of the pivotal events in evolutionary history… How did it originate? ... We think we can make some reasonable guesses…the steps we suggest are just that: guesses.”

Say what? This is evolution buffoonery at its best: First, present an imagined story as though it were fact. Then, admit that there is no consensus for the tenet even though it is regarded as “pivotal.” Note also the improper use of the term, “history.” In normal thinking, speculations are “fiction.” Fiction parading as scientific history should raise everyone’s eyebrows.

4.) “Body plans are basic structural designs” [heading]. “Most animals have either radial or bilateral symmetry. … “The evolution of bilaterally symmetrical animals” [heading]. “The common ancestors of bilateral animals were probably simple, bilaterally symmetrical animals composed of flattened masses of cells.”

The first heading is a cunning trick of understatement diminishing the accomplishment by inserting “basic.”  Without the diversion it reads: “Body plans are structural designs.” The next heading, presented as fact then followed by “probably,” is standard evolutionary doublespeak.

5.) “Which of the features of protostomes [animals with bilateral symmetry] do you think are major evolutionary novelties?”

In propaganda technique, this is known as a “leading question,” one that no matter how it is answered, will incriminate the one who answers—in legal terms known as “Leading the witness.” Captive students should not be forced to profess a challenged theory as though its status as fact is secure.

6.) “Collectively, arthropods (which include the terrestrial insects and the marine crustaceans) are the dominant animals on Earth, both in number of species (some 1.5 million) and number of individuals (estimated at some 10¹⁸ individuals, or a billion billion).”

With this many species and individuals for easy study one would expect scientists to be pretty confident on how insects originated. Here’s their conclusion:

“Insects may have originated from a centipede-like ancestor as far back as the Devonian period.”

As always, not too impressive, employing the typical trick of appealing to some unknown creature. For all the unknown creatures needed, everyone should see that evolution depends more on faith than science. Up to this point in the timeline, we have no confidence whatsoever in any stage of evolution; if not for insects, how can they later explain “more complex” developments?

-Life: The Science of Biology, 6th Ed. Vol. II: Evolution, Diversity, and Ecology; Purves et al., 2001: 564 & 571.

Fig. 3. Life: The Science of Biology (Vol. II). Every edition loaded with false statements of fact.

Learning the skills of clear thinking can help everyone recognize propaganda and thus not fall prey to it.

-D.F. Halpern