Dinosaur Size
Recent research suggests dinosaurs were not as heavy as previously thought.
Recent research suggests dinosaurs were not as heavy as previously thought.
At present, there is an almost absolute exclusion of God from scientific textbooks and journals. Unfortunately, such a closed attitude prevents science from following the data of nature wherever it may lead. Science cannot evaluate evidence for God as long as He is excluded from consideration.
This paper evaluates a representative sample of the best anti-ID and pro-ID publications and presents a conclusion as to the present state of the evidence and arguments regarding these positions. Published in Origins, n. 63.
A review of the book, Explore Evolution. This is written as a supplemental Classroom textbook exploring the controversies surrounding neo-Darwinism. Published in Origins, n. 63.
A review of the book, The Tinkerer's Accomplice, How Design Emerges from Life Itself. Mutation and selection are not sufficient to explain evolution, and another factor, homeostasis, should also be considered. Published in Origins, n. 62.
A review of the book, The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Darwinian mechanisms may permit limited adjustment to living conditions, but there have not been enough events in the history of organisms for random mutations to construct complex adaptations. Changes in species are often due to broken genes rather than to new improvements, and intelligent design is necessary to explain complex adaptations. Published in Origins, n. 62.
A review of the book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design. Published in Origins, n. 61.
A review of the book, Compositional Evolution: The Impact of Sex, Symbiosis, and Modularity on the Gradualistic Framework of Evolution. Published in Origins, n. 61.
A review of the book Why Is a Fly Not a Horse? Published in Origins n. 60.
How do dinosaurs fit into a biblical worldview?
Is God real? Is the Bible true? What about all those amazing stories in the Bible? Specifically, what about the Genesis stories? Did God really create the world and all that is in it in a literal week? Did that Creation occur only some 10,000 years ago? How could all these biblical accounts be true when so many brilliant scientists advocate otherwise?
Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection was inspired not primarily by his observations of the natural world, but by Thomas Malthus's theory of scarcity.
Ever since it was discovered in 1861, Archaeopteryx lithographica has been a controversial fossil. Its remarkable finding has provided certain credibility to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Archaeopteryx has a mixture of characteristics found in birds, reptiles, and theropod dinosaurs, and for that reason, scientists are divided regarding its origin, flight capacity, and position in the alleged evolutionary sequence from reptiles to birds.
Poor design in Rubisco can now be added to the growing list of failed Darwinian arguments from ignorance.
Reaction to the editorial, Chicken Soup, and the article, Recent Developments in Near Eastern Chronology and Radiocarbon Dating, Self-organization and the Origin of Life. Even if biomolecules self-assembled into cellular organization, that would not produce life because life requires non-equilibrium chemical reactions. The editorial by Jim Gibson did not address this point. Correlation of carbon-14 dates with the biblical time scale favors the younger archaeological dates discussed in the article by Michael Hasel.
In this article, the multivariate technique of classical multidimensional scaling is introduced to baraminology. Published in Origins n. 57.
Whenever religion and science have a dispute about some question of fact, religion always loses. So goes a common belief. The implication is that religion should never make any factual claims, as it has no contact with reality. For some religions, such an assertion is irrelevant, as these religions do not make any claims about the physical universe. But for biblical Christianity, such an assertion would be fatal.
Many models have been proposed that tend to blur some of the contrasts between the biblical and naturalistic theories. A number of attempts have been made to develop intermediate models in which elements of the biblical story of creation are mixed with elements of the scientific story of origins. All of these models share the biblical idea that nature is the result of divine purpose and the “scientific” idea of long ages of time, but all suffer from serious scientific problems or are entirely ad hoc and conjectural.
Darwin’s view of God is contrary to the biblical view of God and should give Christians pause before buying into Darwin’s naturalism and attempting to wed it to the supernatural in a theistic evolutionary synthesis.
Currently evolutionary geology explains the fossil record as the result of slow processes and change occurring over long periods of time. However, an increasing number of rock formations and fossil occurrences previously interpreted within such an evolutionary framework must be reinterpreted as the result of rapid, or even catastrophic, processes operating on a different time scale.