Go to the ant and she will teach you

If we take a look at the lowly ant we can learn much about how the world works.

On a creationist website I see an article that tells me the ant provides evidence that Evolution is false. It mentions that;
''Charles Darwin recognized that ants challenged his theory of natural selection. He even mentioned it in his Origin of Species. He even asked how the situation with the lowly ant could ever be reconciled with his theory. He never did come up with an answer, and neither have modern evolutionists.'' [2.]

It then goes on to explain why;

"Darwin's problem was with the worker ants. Even though they are products of sexual reproduction, they differ greatly from their parents. They are each specialized with features their parents don't have so they can carry out their designated tasks in the nest. The problem is that these workers are sterile females, so they cannot pass on the traits that are unique from their parents. Modern evolutionists theorize that perhaps there were some lucky mutations that took place in queen ants through their evolutionary history. However, this explanation is not very credible since the oldest fossilized ants are identical to today's ants."

- Then I go to Wikipedia, (the home of PC) where everything seems to have been written by evolutionists. There I read the article on ants, and there's not a word about Darwin and his difficulties with the ant, or with any problems for evolutionary theory. Instead I read about the marvellous evolution of the ant; and all as if there were no problem at all. And not only is there no problem, there's never been a problem.

What we get seem to be verbatim reports of lessons remembered from school. (Perhaps these entries are written by school teachers during their summer months of leisure.) I see in this evidence of how science has been institutionalized, with textbooks written by bureaucrats. All is known, nothing is uncertain, and sceptics are idiots and crackpots.

- It seems the Wiki writers are so wracked with anxiety and doubt that they can't bring themselves to mention these problems. They can't seem to bear to speak honestly and openly; but instead fill the pages with politically correct transcriptions of old lecture notes. You wonder what they're afraid of. Is the truth really that frightening to them, that they have to ban it? (The stories of people trying unsuccessfully, to correct falsehoods on the site are legion.) We see that the great horror story for most people is reality. (No one is exempt from this; it's our greatest fear.) We all fear that the things we believe to be true, will one day be proven to have been false.

- If you're familiar with comments made by evolutionists about creation on the Internet you know how vulgar, rude and abusive they often are. This strikes me as revealing a great anxiety about the veracity of the theory. Anyone defending creation is accused of being stupid and ignorant at the very least. These people claim you cannot possibly disagree with them and have any intelligence or education. (Most of these apologists for Evolution know virtually nothing of the critique against evolution by the way.) This is blatantly untrue, but so great is their anxiety that they feel forced to pretend that it is.

- We see this institutionalizing of ideas in other cases as well; e.g. the idealism of the early communists becomes party doctrine, and saying the wrong word will get you a ticket to slave labor camp. We see it in science. Once the home of hobbyists and the lone investigator, science has become institutionalized, and people who once talked of the need to defend the likes of Galileo, are now brutally attacking anyone who disagrees with them. W see it in Christianity, where early idealism was replaced by institutionalization, and the rigid imposition of official creeds, state churches, and the like. (Many more cases could be sited). Now we see that Wikipedia has fallen prey to the same kind of thing. It's been taken over by ideologues who won't allow anyone to stray from the party line.

- Whatever you think of Charles Darwin, he at least was willing to talk about problems with evolutionary theory. Evolutionists in our day seem unwilling to do this. This says to me that they have a lot of doubt about the theory, and feel it must be protected at all cost. Even the lowly ant must have a shroud cast over it.

Notes;
1. " Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise." - Pro 6:6
2. Ants challenge Natural Selection
- Creation Moments website
3. Wikipedia/Ants
- I don't like the fact that articles aren't signed. I think this leads to all kinds of abuse.