Comment on Perspectives from alleged LSU students by Shane Hilde.
Continuation…
With that said, here are the points of contention I have with the biology department at LSU.
1. The evidence for a recent creation is not taught or promoted in any known biology course.
2. The theory of evolution is the ONLY scientific worldview being promoted in the biology department that we know of.
3. The professors themselves reject the church’s position, thus making them inadequate to to give due diligence to the evidence for a recent creation.
4. Extreme cases of derision have occurred toward students who believe in creation on campus. For example, at the conclusion of a Breakout session at LSU (Feb. 2009) a group of about four students (creationists) asked the professor, who had just finished a talk negating a recent, six-day creation, on what basis then do we observe the Sabbath. This angered another biology professor in the front row. Things escalated into yelling. Yes, the professor was yelling at these students. He soon lost control and said, “Your kind of thinking drives planes into buildings!” Other words such as stupid and ignorant were directed toward them. Chris Olmo, one of the four, said, “I felt betrayed because I couldn’t even ask a question. If I ask a question they call me ignorant. We do believe in science we just don’t believe in evolution. How are you supposed to learn in that kind of environment.” This was an extreme, but there have been other incidents which could be labelled minor in comparison. Seventh-day Adventist students should feel free to express their beliefs without this kind of treatment.
5. There is good experiential evidence that strongly suggests that the promotion of theistic evolution potentially leads to an agnostic or atheistic worldview.
I’d prefer that no one is fired or compelled to resign, but if LSU administration doesn’t start providing support for these students by giving them the classes they’re paying for and creating an environment supportive of their beliefs without derision and professors who know and understand the evidence for creation then these professors should be fired for their non-complience in the above areas.
Table of Contents
Recent Comments by Shane Hilde
Why Vaccinate Kids Against COVID-19?
[…] Based on similar misinformation to that already described, RFK Jr. has removed access to mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 from women and children, claiming that healthy children don’t need to get vaccinated since it is very unlikely for children to die of COVID-19. In response, a lawsuit has been issued, as of July 7, 2025, by six leading medical organizations, including the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American College of Physicians, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance, along with an anonymous pregnant physician, against Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as the current Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) (Link, Link). This lawsuit alleges that Kennedy unlawfully removed COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant women and dismissed expert advisors from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), replacing them with individuals who espouse anti-vaccine viewpoints. . The fact is that RFK Jr. has no scientific basis for his actions here. The mRNA vaccines have not been shown to harm pregnant women, unborn children, or born children, while at this same time, have shown strong benefits, to include a significant reduction in hospitalizations, long-term injuries (to include Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) and Long COVID). (Link) […]
Dr. Peter McCullough’s COVID-19 and Anti-Vaccine Theories
[…] The “Largest Autopsy Study” was written by Peter McCullough and others who are also well-known for spreading false and misleading information on vaccines, claimed that: . “There is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases.” . This pre-print was withdrawn from The Lancet and later from the journal Forensic Science International in August of 2024. Why? Because of concerns about the paper, including “inappropriate” citations and design methodology; “errors, misrepresentation, and lack of factual support for the conclusions”; along with “failure to recognize and cite disconfirming evidence.” Also note that this paper was based on 44 studies comprising 325 autopsies. What is most interesting is that the authors of the studies themselves came to the opposed conclusion. 105 of the autopsies cited in the McCullough paper came from a single paper from Colombia. The authors of this paper found “no relation between the cause of death and vaccination.” Similarly, the McCullough and his co-authors counted 24 of 28 autopsies from a study from Singapore as vaccine-related, even though the original authors identified “no definite causative relationship” to mRNA vaccines. The authors of a German study also attributed 13 of 18 autopsy deaths to preexisting diseases, but McCullough et al., decided 16 of these cases were vaccine-related. (Link, Link) McCullough and the other authors of his paper didn’t perform the autopsies themselves. They reinterpreted the autopsy cases of others based only on the reports of others and in opposition to how the authors of these reports interpreted their own cases. This isn’t how good science is done. This is an example of simply making stuff up out of this air in an effort to support one’s own preconceived notions of reality. . In short, the autopsy reports come from 14 countries that collectively administered some 2.2 billion vaccine doses. If the COVID-19 vaccines truly were as dangerous as the review authors contend, this would be evident in other data sources — but it’s just not there. Vaccine safety surveillance systems and other studies from across the globe have found that serious side effects can occur, but they are relatively rare. . The Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines, for example, can, in very rare cases, cause a dangerous and sometimes fatal blood clotting condition combined with low blood platelets. Rarely, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech have caused inflammation of the heart muscle or surrounding tissue, known as myocarditis or pericarditis in young men after the second dose. In comparison, the COVID-19 infection itself was much more commonly associated with myopericarditis and with much greater severity and risk of death. It’s just that the benefits outweighed the risks. There are risks, as there are for everything, but what conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers do is falsely enhance the risks while minimizing the benefits. (Link) […]
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
[…] O pastor Conrad Vine, então presidente da Adventist Frontier Missions (AFM), emergiu como figura central na polêmica sobre vacinação obrigatória durante a pandemia. Conhecido por sua defesa ferrenha da liberdade individual, ele se posicionou publicamente contra as políticas institucionais da Igreja, que apoiaram exigências de imunização youtube.com+3educatetruth.com+3educatetruth.com+3. […]
The Arguments of Adventists Opposed to Vaccines
[…] Smallpox was also a scourge in her day, so much so that she did not oppose the use of vaccines as an aid to help the human immune system better fight against smallpox infections. Even though she did have a bad experience when vaccinating her children when they were young, she did not oppose her adult son, William, when he and his associates were vaccinated for smallpox – and was likely vaccinated against smallpox herself (Link). […]
Pastor James Rafferty on Religious Liberty and Vaccines
[…] the VAERS database was able to detect rare adverse effects, such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, and myocarditis in young men following the second dose of the mRNA vaccines (Link). However, contrary to Dr. […]
