Points Of Fact And Law For Conducting Cases
Involving The Teaching of Evolutionism In U. S. Schools
It is now known that the Big Bang "Origins Scenario" is the same as the "Origins Scenario" found in the Kabbala, the Most Holy Book of the Religion of the Pharisees. In light of that long hidden but recently documented and revealed fact, the "Establishment" and "Separation" arguments that have been used by the Courts in the USA to lawfully defeat challenges to the Evolution Monopoly in tax supported schools must now be applied with the same force to the Pharisaic Religion’s evolution-based teaching about the Origin of all that exists.
This Is Why This Is So, And Why Only One Constitutional Option Is Open To The Courts:
The 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution says: "Congress shall make no law respecting [regarding, concerning] an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."
It is clear that Congress has not knowingly made any law which establishes the Pharisee Religion’s Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm as the only Religion’s teaching about the Origin of the universe, earth, and mankind that can be taught in tax supported schools and universities.
Yet, a monopoly of that religion’s Origins teaching exists throughout tax funded education in all 50 states of the USA.
Thus, in fact, the Court’s interpretation of the "establishment clause" has upheld the very violation which the Constitution forbids. However, the Courts rulings have been based on a hitherto accepted assumption that the Evolution Paradigm is a purely secular, i.e., non-religious science-supported conclusion about the Origin of all that exists.
That assumption--as Kabbalist scientists and scholars themselves have recently revealed after two millennia of secrecy on the matter--is no longer valid. The facts as they are now known reveal that all of the essential features of the Evolution Paradigm are derived from, and are the fulfillment of, the writings of Rabbinic Kabbalists dating at least to the 1st century A.D.
Since the truth of this matter has only recently become available to the courts and to the public, the Court’s rulings in past instances where the evolution controversy has arisen are understandable.
In all of those examples it has been argued that the crux of the various challenges to the monopoly of evolution teaching in science classes has been perceived as a contest solely between the desires of Bible Fundamentalists to mandate the Biblical teaching about the Origin of all that exists over against purely secular scientific teachings about the Origin of all that exists.
Given that apparently clear breakdown wherein those on one side of the controversy had a religious agenda and those on the other side had only a secular science agenda, the Court’s ruling, again, was Constitution-based and valid.
Now, however, that it is documented and uncontested that the Evolution Paradigm is not an Origins scenario based on the conclusions of secular science alone, but is, rather, an Origins scenario that is described concept by concept in a holy book of a particular religion, the premise of all previous Court rulings is seen to no longer apply and, indeed, that premise is irrevocably invalidated.
Consequently, as it cannot now be framed otherwise, the issue must be perceived as it is, namely; an issue between one religion’s Origins Scenario and another religion’s Origins Scenario.
This situation presents the Courts with a unique conundrum, one never considered or even envisioned in previous rulings on this subject.
Having consistently ruled against allowing one perceived religious agenda to have its way in the government schools relevant to the teaching of evolutionism, the Courts must now concede that the winning side in their rulings has also had a religious agenda behind its insistence that the teaching of evolutionism in the schools remain unchallenged.
From a Constitutional standpoint, this development is a conundrum, to be sure, but, as can already be seen, there is one obvious solution.
It is a conundrum because the Courts--having ruled against allowing one perceived religious agenda to challenge the evolutionary basis of the Origins of all that exists--obviously cannot rule to allow another perceived religious agenda to have its way by denying that challenge. Both sides are seeking to vindicate their teachings about a certain "Origins Scenario" involving evolutionism. Both are religious and cannot be recognized in the USA according to numerous Constitution -based Court rulings.
The gravity of this unique conundrum is heightened by the unavoidable responsibility of the Courts to define and implement a non-religious solution. Not in dispute here is the universal recognition that man’s knowledge cannot go further back in time than the Origin of all that exists. Irrefutably, man’s knowledge must begin with a concept of the Origin of all that exists, himself included.
Equally irrefutable is the universal agreement upon the overriding purpose of education, be it government funded or not. That purpose is to acquire knowledge, i.e., that which is known to be true. The obvious importance for learners of all ages to acquire demonstrably accurate information about the most rudimentary knowledge there can be, namely, knowledge about the Origin of the universe, earth, and mankind, can hardly be overstated or argued against.
Therefore, to address this pressing need, the Court’s options in this matter rapidly and inexorably dwindle to one and one alone.
Ruling in favor of those seeking to challenge evolutionism is not an option for the same reason that this effort has been ruled against in the past; namely, its intent is to support the "Origins Scenario" of a certain religion, which intent has been ruled unconstitutional. Likewise, those seeking to stop any challenge to their pro-evolution monopoly cannot be upheld as in the past because the intent of keeping and protecting that evolutionary teaching is now known to validate the "Origins Scenario" of yet another religion, thus rendering that opposition unconstitutional on the very same grounds.
Furthermore, for obvious reasons, neither is the compromise of "theistic evolutionism" an option that is open to the Courts.
This would-be solution argues that it is acceptable to attribute the creation of everything to some g’d of one’s choice, but that it must be understood that whatever g’d is chosen has used the prescribed evolutionary process over billions of years to do the creating. Both components of this compromise are religious and are therefore not a constitutional option for the Courts. It must be noted also that the only God and the only "Origins Scenario" that is ruled out by this alleged compromise is the God and the scenario taught in the Bible. In point of fact, the g’d of the Pharisee Religion’s "Origins Scenario" which provides the billions of years required by the Evolution Paradigm, fits this "compromise" perfectly in the eyes of many Kabbalist Rabbis and Rebbes and is, therefore, just another extension of that religion.
Beyond those facts--and setting aside whatever frivolous options there may be--there is only one constitutionally legal option open to the Courts. In light of the religious agenda of both the anti and pro evolution parties, that single legal solution is one that neither of these religions can convincingly reject in good faith nor refuse to embrace without exposing their fear of ignominious and irreversible defeat.
That one option that is open to the Courts is one that is consistent with their early rulings in one major respect, namely; those rulings were based on an accepted and judicious conclusion that a secular science solution accommodated both the "Establishment Clause" of the 1st Amendment and the "Separation Clause" of Jefferson’s writings, and that conclusion was, therefore, Constitutional.
Thus, the Courts have already determined what option is open to them to adjudicate this hugely important but heretofore interminable controversy. That option has been--and now is--to rule that only science which is strictly secular meets the Constitutional requirement and that it alone may be taught with public monies.
Since this was and is the only unclouded judicial option open to the Courts, the guidelines for enforcing this ruling must be equally unclouded. It will therefore be incumbent upon the Courts to issue the following guidelines for curriculums in the physical and biological sciences:
1)Henceforth, in a period to be no longer than ninety days after the Court Order is handed down, only the known, factual, non- theoretical Laws of Science which apply to all levels of knowledge about the Origin of the universe, the earth, all plant and animal life, and human life itself, shall be counted as true secular science in tax- supported centers of learning throughout the United States.
2)All theoretical science which would tend to weigh in favor of either the Bible-based religion’s "Origins Scenario" or the Kabbala-based religion’s "Origins Scenario" shall be superseded by factual science when the two conflict. In all such cases theoretical science shall not be regarded as secular science evidence from which final conclusions can be drawn, and said theoretical science will play no role in any testing that students may undergo.
It would be hard to conceive of a more poignant example of the danger to the rights of students to be taught true science rather than theoretical science than the example evaluated herein. Cloaking itself under the title of "theoretical science", the Pharisee Religion has succeeded in establishing in the USA and around the world, its evolution-based "Origins Scenario" built entirely upon theoretical science concepts. Those surreptitiously implanted and fraudulently propagated concepts have fulfilled a religious agenda and deceived even the Courts thereby.
Accordingly, in addition to the guidelines above, and with proper concern for the impact of evolutionary teachings in learning disciplines outside of the physical and biological sciences, every theoretical concept upholding the Pharisee religion’s evolution-based Origins Model in those disciplines will be classified as spurious and the discipline’s teachings restructured to fit only the known facts.
For example: World History Courses which begin with the acceptance of theoretical evolutionary premises about proto-human ancestors, etc., will subject those premises not only to the scientific Laws of Biogenesis and Thermodynamics, but also to the abundant falsified claims of evolutionary paleontologists, the egregiously fraudulent dating techniques that are used, etc. Factual evidence which has never failed to be certified by observation and experiment throughout all of man’s history will establish the parameters of knowledge here as in all subjects. All hypothetical and theoretical assumptions which contradict demonstrable, observable, repeatable, testable criteria for determining true knowledge will be inadmissible in the curriculums of tax-supported schools and universities.
Tax-supported education will henceforth be mindful that the root word for "science" is the Latin: "scire", which means "to know". To hypothesize and theorize is legitimate scientific endeavor when trying to uncover and establish a true scientific fact. However, to permit hypotheses and theories to contradict and override demonstrable, observable, repeatable facts and laws of science is to willfully endorse teachings which can be essential to the survival and furtherance of a particular religion, as demonstrated by the evolution teaching, and can not be Constitutionally approved in the USA.
The perfect resolution of the debate over evolutionism is now within the grasp of the Courts, high and low, viz.: Educate only with the known facts of science, and let those facts form each student’s conclusions about the Origin of the universe, the earth, and mankind.
With a fact-based foundation about the Origin of all that exists serving as a cornerstone for all other knowledge that is built upon it, students and all seekers after truth in all subjects can confidently set about living their lives and shaping their beliefs in accordance with the dictates of the facts they have learned. The Constitution has been rightly interpreted, to wit: No tax funded education can teach an Origins Scenario that is derived from a Religion's holy book. That interpretation must now be applied to the Pharisee Religion's Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm which is derived concept for concept from its holy book Zohar/Kabbala.
This "Brief" is to be read in conjunction with the documented Paper entitled: "Evolution is a Religious Doctrine that is Taught in Violation of the Establishment Clause of the U. S. Constitution"