Some prominent scientists had educators have declared that creation has failed the test of science and has to be discarded. However, ideas that have been discarded are sometimes found to be true. Creation should not be discarded, because there is no better explanation for design in nature and the origin of life. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 1.
A review of the book, The Great Evolution Mystery. Darwinism is entirely inadequate to explain evolution, so some other purely naturalistic mechanism is needed. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 1.
Species in the same family or genus may have very similar chromosomal banding patterns, but with apparent rearrangements of parts of some chromsomes. Such rearrangements may contribute to speciation in mammals by interfering with meoisis. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 2.
Reactions to the editorial, Beyond Design, and the article Genesis 5 and 11: Chronogenealogies in the Biblical History of Beginnings. Published in Origins v. 7, n. 2.
Creationists who want to use the scientific method need to develop and test theories based on creation, and not to be satisfied merely to show that some phenomenon is designed. Published in Origins v. 7, n. 1.
Review of the article, Biologists, Help! An appeal by a secular scholar for evolutionists to explain why so many fundamental suppositions of evolutionary theory are so poorly supported by the data. Published in Origins v. 5, n. 2.
A review of the book, Puncuated Equilibria: The Tempo and Mode of Evolution Reconsidered. The new theory of punctuated equilibria acknowledges the gaps in the fossil record used by creationists as evidence against evolution, and explains them as due to the nature of the speciation process. However, the new theory applies only to gaps between species, and does not help with the problem of gaps between higher taxa. Published in Origins v. 5, n. 1.
Reactions to the articles, Can the Christian Afford Scientific Research? and the article Homologies. Published in Origins v. 4, n. 2.
Reactions to the article, The Chemical Composition of the Earth's Original Atmosphere and to the article, Homologies. Published in Origins v. 4, n. 1.
Similarities in structure, or homologies, are what one would expect if all of life had been designed by a single Creator. Homologies are not evidence for evolution. Published in Origins v. 3, n. 2.
Several scientists have acknowledged that the evidence for evolution is deficient, and new approaches and information are needed. Published in Origins v. 3, n. 1.
A review of the book, Darwin Retried: An Appeal to Reason. the evidence for evolution is so weak it should not be considered a valid theory. Creation is not favored either. Published in Origins v. 1, n. 2.
