The rocks found on the surface of the Earth did not form all at the same time. Geologists schematize this different order of formation using a column, of which the lower layers represent older rocks and top layers represent younger rocks. Archean rocks are the ones at the very bottom of this geologic column, and are therefore interpreted as the oldest rocks. They are often heavily deformed and altered…
Recently I flew to London on the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Despite what media hype might lead a Dreamliner passenger to expect, there were no fires on board and the experience wasn’t particularly different from what I’ve experienced on innumerable other flights. From my perspective, the seats were too small, too close together and too hard. That is not to say that there were not some differences,…
To model the motion of Earth's plates, Baumgardner uses a Fortran program he developed called TERRA that must be run on a supercomputer. It is one of four models in the world capable of modeling Earth in a global manner.
If one accepts the evidence of the Cambrian Explosion at face value, the Darwinian theory of evolution is falsified. Unsurprisingly, evolutionists have tried to explain the Cambrian Explosion as an artifact, due to the incompleteness of the fossil record. However, there is an explanation for the Cambrian Explosion that is consistent with the data. An intelligent being could generate the genetic information needed for a diversity of body types in a short time.
Radiometric dating has its uncertainties, but often seems to work well. At this point we don’t know how to relate its resulting ages with the Bible record, for we only know in part (I Cor 13:8-12). However, God’s ways are not our ways (Isa 55:8) and with God all things are possible (Mt 19:26; Lk 18:27).
Plate tectonic theory seems to be well-founded, but the science does not fit easily with a recent one-year flood. However, as is the case in many other areas of human investigation, when we study origins issues, we must trust the details to an all-wise God, since His “foolishness” is greater than our wisdom.
It is reasonable to assert that Christianity was an essential component of the culture in which modern science developed because it provided a more encouraging worldview for the investigation of nature than did alternative belief systems.
A realistic science, not an actualistic one, is led through coherence and consistency of observation with hypothesis, even if it were an"outrageous hypothesis" such as a global planetary flood of the likes reported in ancient history.
To consider a much more rapid, catastrophic geological past challenges the naturalistic origin of life and of major categories of life forms. Do we want to know if that naturalistic interpretation is really correct or not? As scientists, are we open to consider what really happened in the past, or are we satisfied to limit our explanations to fit a pre-determined set of assumptions?
This article details examples of megabreccias of truly immense proportions, ranging from car-sized rocks to rocks a hundred kilometers in length. Such phenomena, spectacular as they seem, are not rare.
In spite of their proposed long ages of formation, the flat gaps show very little or no weathering or erosion weathering or erosion of the underlying layers. This clearly indicates a different mechanism is responsible for their formation and is what would be expected in the context of rapid deposition during the astonishing Genesis Flood described in the Bible.
There is significant scientific data consistent with the biblical record of history, EZT represents one scientific theory that seems to explain historical data from the Bible and data from paleontology thought to challenge the Biblical record.
I suggest that the level of confidence any one person has in the truth of evolutionary history directly reflects the degree of confidence they have that science is the surest way of finding truth in any topic, and/or the confidence they have in the assumption of naturalism.
There is broad agreement among Christian earth scientists who trust the biblical account that the general aspect of the fossil record is catastrophic—one of destruction and death.
For a large part of the 20th century, there was much discussion about evolution’s difficulty in explaining altruism. This was an important, unsolved problem.
If we had perfect knowledge, our science and our theology would never be in conflict because the same God who reveals Himself through Scripture has also revealed Himself through creation, and God is not in conflict with Himself. Thus, when we see conflict between our best theology and our best science, this is merely an indication of our lack of complete understanding.
Recently, the city buses in my neighborhood gained a new set of brightly-colored advertisements along their sides. In bold letters, they proclaimed that humans and chimpanzees are 98% identical: “Come and meet your relatives.”
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.
