How does one account for bird migrations? Why do they migrate at all? How do they know when it’s time to begin the long journey? What guides their flight path and direction? How do they know their destination, and how do they prepare for the trip?
This article reviews the theoretical basis for expecting the presence of carbon-14 in Pliocene to Cambrian carbon from certain creationist viewpoints, and for expecting its absence from a viewpoint proposing a long age of life on Earth. Published in Origins n. 51.
Zoology and genetics are required courses for biology majors. Both subjects are usually structured around the theme of the theory of evolution. A careful examination of the scientific basis of these disciplines shows that the evolutionary framework doesn't fit with a lot of their fundamental aspects, however. Some of these topics even constitute strong evidence in favor of intelligent design.
The integration of Bible and science is an uphill work that requires careful reading of both the Bible and of scientific data. Because no other natural science has traveled so great a distance down an anti-biblical road, no other science requires this corrective procedure more than biology.
Science and Scripture are built, according to Boyle, on the same epistemological features of revelation, reason, and experience but with different relative contributions from each.
Science/religion issues are important because they have to do with ultimate realities, with whether to "worship" the Creator or the creature (creation), with whether a supreme being is above the creation and can supernaturally intervene.
During the last decade, several provocative accounts of "morally significant" behavior in animals have been documented on film and in the print media for the general public.
This brief monograph was written to champion the views of a minority in the scientific community. This minority holds that it is possible to accept this ancient report of Earth's creation at face value — and still be a true scientist. But the main purpose is to go a step further. It will be argued that a close examination of life can lead observers to the logical conclusion that life itself is an actual evidence for creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
As a scientist, I frequently find myself taking a polemic stance in defense of creationism. In doing this, I easily lose sight nature as a revealer of its Creator. It is a pleasant change to contemplate my field of scientific interest, looking for insight about the Creator.
Eight categories of models for converting carbon-14 dates into real time are discussed. Six of these models are based on a creation as described in Genesis and a short age of life on earth. Published in Origins v. 24. n. 2.
Any of the proposed resolutions to the conflict between radiometric dating and biblical chronology has problems. The pros and cons of each need to be considered.
Radiometric dating is an interpretive science. The complex chemical and physical processes taking place within Earth's mantle and crust are neither completely known nor understood. This is especially true when the radioactive isotope parameters are considered.
It must be emphasized that Chemistry, like any other area of scientific knowledge, is neither good nor bad, but like everything else that was marred by the entrance of sin, man's ability to manipulate his environment has led to misuse. Instead of giving in to technicism, where technology sets the agenda for life on planet Earth, the ethics of the Bible should be the basis on which we make decisions on the value of life and on the conduct of life.
Various examples adequately establish that a radioisotope age does not necessarily have a real-time significance. A relationship of a radioisotope age with real-time must be based on an interpretation.
Horses gave way to automobiles. Rubber to plastics. Cotton to polyester. What about intelligence? Are computers about to replace human intelligence? Is artificial intelligence a threat to our humanness?
Ancient fossil reefs are considered to be a challenge to the biblical concept of creation. But do these fossil reefs really negate the biblical account of beginnings? Published in Origins v. 21, n. 2.
This paper suggests that from its beginning, science has been one of those factors informing the Christian understanding of human and Divine causality. We conclude that the new physics suggests a wide-open universe in which the interaction of a Creator-Sustainer god can be postulated with far less confrontation with rational and scientific views of the natural order than was the case with the older Newtonian worldview.
The philosophical context in which biology is presented can make an important difference in its meaning for the student. The philosophical worldview of the biblical Christian is quite different from that of the non-Christian; thus, the biology teacher may have a profound influence on the development of worldview by the student.
The basic question of the relationship between the mind and brain has intrigued scientists and psychologists for many years. Beyond these considerations are philosophical questions revolving around the mind-brain relationship which challenge the Christian to consider the human brain from the standpoint of the human person, and the person from the standpoint of God's purposes.
The current scientific picture of the origin of the Universe seems at odds with the Genesis account. Is this a serious problem for those who believe the latter to be reliable? Are there ways to harmonize the two? Or should we be looking for alternatives to the so-called Standard Model for the origin of the Universe? Published in Origins v. 19, n. 1.
