A collection of short commentaries on scientific articles published in 1983, covering topics such as the history of Darwinism, integrity in science, evolution and thermodynamics, North American geology, Quaternary dating methods, origin of life, and the half-life of Technetium-99.
The practice of science does not depend on the beliefs a scientist has about origins. Creationists are able to conduct scientific research , and may even be aided by ideas that derive from the Bible. Conflicts may arise between science and religion, but this is an indication of the need for more study. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
A review of the book, Abusing Science: The Case Against Creationism. The book gives responses to criticisms of evolutionary theory by creationists, and presents several criticisms of creation theory. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
A collection of short commentaries on scientifc papers published in 1983-1985, covering topics such as amino acid dating, problems in evolutionary theory, God and the New Physics, Scientists Confront Creationism, transgenic mammals, philosophy of science, and In the Minds of Men. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
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.
The chronological figures in the Septuagint version of Genesis 5 and 11 are different in different manuscripts, and appear to have been altered. This indicates the superiority of the Masoretic text for these data. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 1.
Evolutionists commonly claim creation is unscientific and should be excluded from science. However, scientists study phenomena for which the mechanism is not known, science itself is not clearly defined, and evolutionists use science to try to disprove creation. These points suggest the agenda driving opposition to creation is more philosophical than scientific. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 2.
A review of the book, Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science. Many scientists, famous and otherwise, have failed to live up to the highest ideals of good science, in some cases acting fraudulently and deceitfully. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 2.
Observers may be led astray by superficial examination of apparent patterns. Two examples are given: the 20-year cycle of U.S. presidents dying in office, and N-rays. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 1.
Readers are invited to submit their reactions to the articles in our journal. Please address contributions to: Origins, Geoscience Research Institute, 11060 Campus St., Loma Linda, California 92350 USA.
It is regrettable that the inquiry into the fundamental question of origins has degenerated to such an emotional level. Attitudes must be improved, and efforts now devoted to name-calling should be redirected towards good scholarship. Published in Origins v. 10, n. 2.
Radioisotope ages are calculated from ratios of certain atoms. The isotopic ratios can be precisely measured, but the calculation of age from that ratio involves assumptions that may vary depending on the philosophical orientation of the investigator. Published in Origins v. 10, n. 2.
A review of the book, Christianity and the Age of the Earth. The book presents a biased viewpoint against recent creation, but does point out some serious challenges that confront recent creationists. Published in Origins v 10, n. 1.
Studying origins from a scientific perspective can be compared with assembling a puzzle when some of the pieces are missing and the overall picture is unknown. To produce a picture at the meaning level can be done only by patterning it after one's world view the composite of all one's acquired knowledge and experiences. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 2.
A review of the book, Science: Good, Bad and Bogus. The book vigorously attacks anyone whose beliefs are considered pseudoscience. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 2.
Axioms, or untestable assumptions, are a necessary part of science. Creationists and evolutionists differ in their axioms, and this leads to conflicts in their interpretations. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
When scientific pronouncements and religious beliefs conflict, what options are open to the Christian? The answer depends upon a host of things, but surely upon how science and religion are perceived. The present essay is confined largely to a consideration of the potential role played by various views of science, though many of the points made might be adapted readily to views of religion as well. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
Review of the journal, The Skeptical Inquirer. This journal focuses on debunking ideas considered to be unreliable, but accepts without question a naturalistic foundational basis. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
Creationism can be structured as a biblically-based religious doctrine, or as a method for exploring the world that is open to the possibility of creation. It would be inappropriate for religious creationism to be taught in public schools, but a scientific approach that considers the possibility of a creator need not be excluded. Published in Origins v. 8, n. 2.
Many scientists worry that acknowledging God's activities in nature would hinder scientific advance, but it might make science more exciting and fun if there is always the possibility that God is active in nature. Published in Origins v. 8, n. 1.
