Creation Presentation at a Public School

I am a freshman in a Public Highschool, and my Biology class is studying evolution. I am thinking to ask my Biology teacher if I could do a 5-10 minute presentation on Creationism, and why Christians don't believe in evolution.


I am thinking to mention that science is built up on theories on things in our world, and how the difference between the science in the Bible and the science in science in an atheist view is different because of faith. I will also mention that there are many things that evolutionists and creationists agree on, such as the order in which the world was created, and then also mention how Christians are open to scientific research about the world, but are against evolution because it is against what the Bible teaches (in terms that there is no God, or supernatural events that formed the world).


I will also talk about how the elements of life (DNA) are too complex to have been created by a process that is only by random, which supports creation, because there is a God.

And Second, the  large number of links ("missing links") needed according to the Theory, in which small changes that lead to a big change have not been found. 

My book teaches that the "missing links" have been found; thousands of transitional fossils. So what should I say against that? Is that accurate? What is the ratio, how statistically there would be many more missing links than that have been found based on non-transitional links that have been found?

Here is what the book says:

"In Darwin's time, paleontology was still a new science. Darwin worried about the lack of transitional fossils between groups of organisms. Since Darwin's time, however, many transitional forms have been discovered between species. Many of the large gaps in the fossil record have been filled in. The fossil record today includes many thousands of species that show the change in forms over time that Darwin outlined in his theory. These "missing links" demonstrate the evolution of traits within groups as well as the common ancestors between groups."

That seems very bias in my opinion, because many creationists today are still arguing about the  "missing links" and this book says they have been found! (No wonder everyone in my class believe in evolution)




I also want to mention that in a 2001 poll, 79% of the parent population wanted creation taught in public schools, and 21% did not. Is there a more recent poll than this?


Then I think I will read Genesis 1. 


I'd also like to mention some geological proofs of creation, or some other proof. Are there any specific proofs that are good to use? Please send me some links. (I might talk about how since our galaxy spins, if the earth were old, it would have "torn apart". 


Then I want to mention how there are many things that scientists do not know about evolution, and how the reason many people believe in evolution is because they are only taught what scientists do know about evolution, so then it seems more reasonable to them. But if they were taught the weaknesses, maybe they would have a second thought about it. 



Is there a better way I could present this? Are there any things that I should remove or add to this? Please comment.

Views: 35


You need to be a member of Creation Conversations to add comments!

Join Creation Conversations

Comment by Adam J. Benton on March 17, 2011 at 5:28am
Have you done it? How did it go?
Comment by Adam J. Benton on March 7, 2011 at 10:21pm
"Creationism" is a broad term covering many beliefs, so I can't really say what it supports as there's always one who believes something else. However, the great majority of creationists have accepted that variation occurs and these do accumulate, over time leading to change. Although, as I mentioned, they place a limit on the amount of variation which can accumulate - dinosaurs might change into other dinosaurs, but not into birds as evolution would suggest.
Comment by James Church on March 7, 2011 at 8:36pm

Thank you for this information. 

But creationists, they believe that there is a God, but don't they also believe that over time, species change a little bit? Like Ken Ham (who you probably know), when talking about the Ark, he explained that in the Arc, since there are many types of wild dogs, numerous in fact, Noah only took one sort, and over time, they changed a little, and there were different types of wild dogs 'again' (there were 'sects' of wild dogs before the flood).

Does creationism support this? 




Comment by Adam J. Benton on March 7, 2011 at 8:29pm

In essence, yes. Evolutionists argue that change accumulates until eventually two organisms are sufficiently different to be considered different species. Creationists posit that there is something which prevents this accumulation, meaning there is only variation within species.

Comment by James Church on March 7, 2011 at 8:04pm

Thanks again; and yes, rehearsing is always good!


So you're saying that since species give offspring to young that are slightly different than themselves; sometimes they end up being very different, and evolutionists try to argue that they are evolving and becoming different, and creationists say that it's only a slight variation that the species produce that may sometimes look like a transitional link? Is that it?




Comment by Adam J. Benton on March 7, 2011 at 7:15pm

The notion is that all the various things which lead to change - genetic drift, mutation etc. - occur every time a creature reproduces because they don't require special conditions, they're just a natural effect of reproduction. As such, every child is going to have slight differences in them, meaning every child is a "transitional form" between their slightly different parents and slightly different children.


Also, if you aren't going to pick out too many similarities I'd recommend dropping that section - if only one passage in ten lines up with science, arguing that the Bible lines up with science won't work.


Further, rehearse. I failed to do that for a recent presentation and would up bumbling around for 5 minutes just reading my notes. Know what you have to say in advance so you can talk to the audience rather than just reading things at them.

Comment by James Church on March 7, 2011 at 6:14pm


Thank you for your advice; could you explain a little more about the evolutionist's view on transitional links? I did not really understand.

Also by the way, I meant with the order the world was created, that humans came last, which both creationists and evolutionists agree on, when talking about the order the world was created.




Comment by Adam J. Benton on March 7, 2011 at 5:53pm

When doing something like this, you want to be careful you've got everything in order. The slightest discrepancy is all some people need to throw everything you say out the window. It doesn't matter if you make a thousand valid points, a single error and you will be ignored. Note, for example, that science and the Bible do not chart similar paths through history - plants did not arise before the sun, nor birds come before land animals (allegedly). Further, the evolutionist would like to tell you that every fossil is a transitional form since everything is always constantly evolving.


Other than that, get some sources for the stuff towards the end and group various sections together (for example, talk about how 79% of people want creationism taught is schools, then mention the last bit about how teaching things contrary to evolution would benefit) and you're ready to go.

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms

Homeschool Curriculum


Creation Conversations 2018

What's new @ CC for 2018? 

Creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2019   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service