Fig. 1. The field is "anthropology."
Anthropology: the study of humanity.
You should have no doubt whatsoever that you've been intellectually compromised—including with assessment skills deleted—if you can look at the title and cover of this required college textbook and not find something wrong with the picture. Each edition of Introduction to Physical Anthropology (1-14), features a similar contradiction of text and image that would be unacceptable in any true science. Not one cover includes the face of a human being. Anthropology in all of its forms (except linguistic—the most reputable) has a long history of manipulating or outright deceiving the public. It is used as a powerful tool to manipulate both cultural and personal identity.
“Evidence of the conflation of rhetoric and propaganda, under the general notion of persuasion, has become increasingly obvious, especially in the classroom.”
-Bennett and O'Rourke, “A Prolegomenon to the Future Study of Rhetoric and Propaganda.” Readings in Propaganda and Persuasion: New and Classic Essays (Jowett and O'Donnell, Eds., 2006)
Answer: 1.) Turn science textbooks into propaganda; 2.) Intimidate students who question the propaganda; 3.) Withhold conflicting evidence.
Fig. 2. The Introduction to Physical Anthropology series—which is purportedly about humanity—has never employed a picture of an actual human being on any of its 14 covers but rather images of apes or creatures rhetorically referred to as “hominids.” The technique has the effect of causing students to associate the term “Anthropology” with apes. Manipulation at this level presented as fact is an affront to education just as a hypothetical book called, 2+2=5: The History of Mathematics, would be to anyone interested in mathematics; the difference is that mathematicians are not so easily duped.
. Faulty Cause & Effect (This technique suggests that because B follows A, A must have caused B. Remember, just because two events or two sets of data are related does not necessarily mean that one caused the other to happen. This is the #1 flaw of evolutionary thinking. My first love is 30 years of invertebrate paleontology—with no indoctrination—prior to taking on evolutionary psychology. What I know of the fossil record, therefore, is pretty “clean.” As all researchers know, the fossil record can logically be regarded a record of appearances and disappearances—but not a record of causes and effects.
. Card stacking (Evidence conflicting with the agenda is kept from the target audience, causing students, professors,
that the evidence for evolution is “overwhelming” is a modern academic
ruse directly related to propaganda. Students don’t come out of
university able to think for themselves on the matter—as one might
expect—but only with a set of instructions on what to think.|
and the public in general to naively believe that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming.)
. Association (This is one of the most common techniques of propaganda. As Figs. 1, 3, 5 & 6 show very clearly the intention is to force association between apes, etc., and the word “Anthropology.” Everyone knows that anthropology is the study of humanity—not the study of apes. But the intention is to make the two appear synonymous. Try this test of confidence in one’s own critical thinking: Look at the picture in Fig. 1 and say to one’s self the word, “humanity.” If you get a sense that something’s not quite right then you are on your way out of a propaganda-induced delusion. To force such buffoonery on students in a captive audience setting is an affront to education. It has spread throughout academia with few students or professors capable of spotting it [see also, Ardi: How to Create a Science Myth]. Teaching fantasy science as fact without presenting conflicting evidence—especially when primary tenets such as cognitive evolution have already been falsified—should have no place in the classroom.)
. Disinformation (The creation or deletion of information from public records in the purpose of making a false record of an event. The author has experienced this directly.)
. Deception or false statements of fact (Ubiquitous in evolution textbooks; Fig. 4)
. Half-truth (Deceptive statement which may include some element of truth; a ubiquitous mainstay of evolutionary rhetoric. Fig. 4)
Fig. 4. 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.
. Bandwagon (Attempt to persuade the target audience to accept an agenda because “everyone else is a believer.” Typical NCSE trick.)
. Milieu control (Controlling social environment and ideas through social pressure; a mainstay evolutionary tactic.)
. Obfuscation (Intentional vagueness, confusion; a mainstay evolutionary trick.)
. Demonizing the enemy and Name-calling
(Making those with conflicting views appear subhuman. E.g., Anyone who
“doesn’t believe” in evolution is “stupid,” “ignorant,” or “insane.”
-Richard Dawkins.) I’m champing at the bit!
Fig. 5. One of the ancient beings on this propaganda textbook cover created the 400,000-year old modern-level Bilzingsleben engravings. Anthropology students, however, could never distinguish such a person here because in anthropology ape fossils (1st two rows) are always depicted as beings more intelligent than apes, and early human fossils as beings less intelligent than modern humans. This is to force the idea of evolving intelligence even though there is absolutely no evidence for such in either the archaeological or paleontological records.
. Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt (E.g., making people believe that they will not be able to find work if they do not accept evolution ideology. Used by AAAS CEO Alan Leshner.)
. Obtain disapproaval (Adherents try to make evolution synonymous with science referring to those challenging evolution as “attacking science.”)
. Thought-terminating clichés (Blocking discussion through use of overly simplistic phrases or arguments. E.g., “attacks on science,” as typified by NCSE CEO, Eugenie C. Scott. As I’ve said before, when a science treats new evidence as an attack it is in trouble as a science.)
. Red herring (Presenting data that, while compelling, is not relevant to the argument, and then claiming it validates the argument. Used constantly in evolution textbooks.)
. Unstated assumption (A technique used when the idea the propagandist wants to plant would seem less credible if stated clearly. The concept is instead simply assumed or implied, like the Darwinian idea that intelligence evolves. This idea has been falsified. By blocking falsifications from the public the evolution community is showing its willingness to use censorship for the sake of perpetuating a deception. Evolutionary assumptions are not science but part of a belief system, so its proponents block any evidence conflicting with the belief.)
. Glittering generalities (Used by evolutionist, Dr. Kenneth Miller, telling children that accep-
attempt at employing this trick ..was..to try and get Lincoln's and
Darwin's birthdays to be celebrated in tandem as an international
tance of evolution is part of a “really good education” and that children should only be taught the “best” theories in science. Buffoonery like this and all similar attempting to force a single ideology on children shows that the propagandists have no idea whatsoever as to how critical thinking actually works.)
. Transfer (Attempt is made to transfer the prestige of a positive symbol to a person or an idea. One attempt at employing this trick by the science community was the 2009 campaign to compare Charles Darwin with Abraham Lincoln because they were each born on the same day! Contrived comparisons were made such as suggesting that each was a “defender of freedom”—Lincoln, freedom for the slaves, and Darwin, freedom for the mind. Suggestions went so far as to try and get Lincoln’s and Darwin’s birthdays to be celebrated in tandem as an international holiday. The attempt shows the complete depravity of the Darwin-absorbed hive mind. However, this is the kind of thing that one expects in a groupthink environment where adherents significantly overrate their own abilities and underrate those of their opponents. Such ideas are only devised by those approaching evolution from the perspective of fanaticism. One can’t blame them alone, as they too were programmed in school and through PBS television specials and lost critical thinking skills just as modern students are at risk for unless they take charge of their own minds early on.)
-D.F. Halpern citing the National Commission on Excellence in Education.
-D.F.Halpern citing L.A. Steen’s Mathematics Ed.
-Baron & Sternberg, Ibid.
John Feliks has specialized in the study of early human cognition for nearly twenty years, demonstrating that human cognitive abilities do not evolve. He has experienced repeated censorship of empirical geometric evidence by the evolution community because it does not support the community’s commitment to the Darwinian belief system. He wrote the article, Ardi: How to Create a Science Myth, and claims that all "pre-human" hominids are just as easy to debunk as Ardi. Before that, Feliks’ focus was on the invertebrate fossil record studying fossils in situ across the U.S. and parts of Canada as well as studying many of the classic texts such as Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Index Fossils of North America, etc., presently keeping up with current claims of speciation. Claims for purported transitional invertebrate fossils are as easy to debunk as hominids because when a paradigm is flawed it is not difficult at all to debunk every single thing it contains. Feliks encourages students going through standard education to challenge the ideology being forced upon them as fact in the captive audience science classroom—especially in anthropology, biology, and paleontology—with full confidence that suppressed evidence is there to support them in each of these fields.