- A Seat at the Table, Not Just a Chair in the Room
- The Purpose of your Life -
- Revisiting the Great Work of Medical Missionary Dr. Anne Livingston in Haiti
- "I Beat Hitler!"
- Dick Cheney Was a Great Boss
- Concise Theology in Scripture
- U.S. Tomahawk Missiles and Ukraine
- The Battle for Pokrovsk
- Get US Out! of the USMCA
- American Religion by the Issues
- Teachers’ Unions’ Backing of Radical ‘No Kings’ Rallies Speaks Volumes about America’s Education System
- Public Advocate CEO Eugene Delgaudio Asks President Trump to Punish Discover - Debanking Link to Southern Poverty Law Center Cited
- Hamas Is Not the Greatest Threat to Israel—Political Unrest Is
- Can We Change The History Of Our Future?
- The Busan Trade Summit between U.S. and China
Top Problems with Abiogenesis
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
Before moving forward, we need to define our terms. The term abiogenesis specifically refers to the concept that life came naturally from nonliving chemicals. Some people will try to make the case for abiogenesis by defining it to include the creation of life by God. However, here we are going to specifically use the term abiogenesis to refer to a totally naturalistic idea for the origin of life. That is, it excludes, by definition, the involvement of any intelligent agency, whether it is God or aliens. Our use of the term is going to refer exclusively to a totally naturalistic origin of life.
Creationist Cosmology - Conclusion
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
It is interesting to notice just how many rescuing devices evolutionists have to come up with to save their theories from reality. Dark energy is definitely one of the biggest. Here is a clear case of a situation where starting with biblical assumptions leads to a cosmology that naturally explains the data without any need for their rescuing device.
Creationist cosmology - Possible Ways It Can Be Tested
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One of the important factors about this possible cosmology is the fact that it can be tested. Besides being based on Dr. Russell Humphreys' white hole cosmology, what this specific model has going for it is that it is fine-tuned to explain a specific set of observations. To get the proper results, there needs to be a gravity well created by a significant amount of matter whose only possible Visible indicator would be the cosmic background radiation.
Creationist Cosmology - Eliminates the Need for Dark Energy
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
What is dark energy?
Dark energy is essentially a filler concept invented for the sole purpose of explaining observations that, within the context of the Big Bang Cosmology, are interpreted as an accelerating expansion of the universe. The notion exists and was invented for the sole purpose of making the Big Bang cosmology fit observations.
The Big Bang cosmology naturally tended to predict one of two fates for the universe. The first was that it would continue to expand, getting slower and slower, but never actually stopping. If it were more massive than a critical point, the expansion would come to a stop, and the universe would start to collapse. The hope of this one was that it would result in a new Big Bang, eliminating the idea of a beginning.
Creationist cosmology - Proposed Structure of the Universe
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
The Earth is near the center.
One of the requirements of this creationist cosmology is that the Earth is near the center of the universe. Now this is not geocentrism because the universe is not revolving around the Earth; it is merely talking about our physical position. Such an idea, however, is consistent with observation.
It is, however, philosophically repugnant to an atheistic perspective simply because the probability would be way too small. As a result, one of the things that the Big Bang cosmology does is eliminate the idea of a center through what is erroneously called the Copernican Principle. The idea is that the universe is either infinite or that space curves back on itself in such a manner as to prevent there from being a real center. However, it puts any observer as appearing to be in the center.
Creationist Cosmology - Distant Starlight
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One of the biggest issues raised about young-earth creation has been seeing distant Starlight. After all, even the nearest stars are light-years distant, and the furthest edges of the universe are 10s of billions of light-years away. Consequently, from a naturalistic perspective in a young universe, light should not have had sufficient time to reach the Earth from anything more than about 6,200 light-years away.
The nature of the distant Starlight problem.
Creationist Cosmology - Clues from the Bible
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
The Big Bang cosmology, despite being popular within the general scientific community, and the fact that a catholic priest developed it, is still unbiblical. It is ultimately based on the presumption of absolute naturalism, which at its core is a fundamentally atheistic philosophical position. The one positive thing it did was get the idea of a beginning part of the official cosmology. Even today, atheists in the scientific community seek to find ways around the idea of a beginning, despite the clear evidence of one that has always existed based on the second law of thermodynamics. So, what clues can we actually get from the Bible about cosmology?
Similarities and Differences Between Creationists, Evolutionists, and Flat-Earthers
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
Evolutionists often compare creationists to flat-earthers, as a way of being insulting. Now, admittedly, if there is a modern group that deserves to be used as an insult, it would be flat-earthers. The goal of this article is to do a three-way comparison in 10 different areas of creationists (young-earth creationists), evolutionists, and flat-earthers. The goal is to see how they really compare.
Disagrees with the scientific establishment's position on their topic.
One similarity that creationists do indeed have with flat-earthers is that both positions disagree with the scientific establishment in one or more areas. For evolutionists, this is not a problem because they hold to the establishment position. This is not in and of itself a problem, because any position on any topic that would eventually overthrow the status quo would start out disagreeing with the establishment view.
Amino Acids from Space
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
There has been recent evidence of amino acids from asteroids. This has made evolutionists excited because, to them, it shows that this important building block of life can form in space and hence makes the notion of abiogenesis a lot easier. First of all, while amino acids are major building blocks of life, they are still a long way from life. Second, at most, it shows that these asteroids had the conditions necessary to form amino acids. Finally, they are totally ignoring the Big Blue ball in the solar system that has loads of living things crawling all over it that themselves are filled with amino acids.
The Relationship Between Science and Peer-Review
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One claim that is commonly made against creation science is that it is not science unless it has been peer-reviewed by the proper journals. In other words, creationists doing their own peer review is not good enough; it has to be by the right journals. Naturally, by the right journals, they mean those that hold to philosophical naturalism and would never approve of an intelligent design or creationist paper. According to the people who make this claim, no matter how good the quality of the research, it does not qualify as science unless approved by the right people. This is a rather authoritarian view of science that is completely contrary to the entire idea of science and the scientific method.
The Philosophical Nature of Origins
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
The topic of origins is very important to understanding who we are and where we come from. The problem is that because none of us were there, assumptions need to be made about the types of processes going on. These assumptions are largely philosophical in nature, because our philosophical presuppositions are going to influence what types of processes we will accept.
Sadly, many people think that such research is totally objective and that the only reason creation and intelligent design models are excluded is because they're not supported by evidence. The problem is that this presumption of objectivity can easily be demonstrated to be erroneous, based on the reactions to both creation and intelligent design.
Do Creationist Arguments Result from Incredulity or Agency Detection Bias
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
The claim has been made that creationist arguments result from either incredulity or agency detection bias. This claim is primarily a way of dismissing any argument that would infer a designer Regardless of the nature of the argument. The insistence of this problem is never made with a reasonable explanation, the person making it simply continues to insist on the fallacy or bias.
Incredulity fallacy
An argument from incredulity Claims that an idea has to be false because it contradicts the person's personal beliefs, or that they cannot imagine that it is true. It can also take the opposite form of making the case that an idea has to be true for the same reasons. The problem with this fallacy is the fact that personal belief does not in and of itself mean that something is true or false.
Problems with the Idea of Apparent Age in Young Earth Creation
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One of the ideas claimed as a way of explaining how an Earth that is 6000 years old can be dated at billions of years old and for explaining how we can see distant starlight is the idea that God created the earth and the universe with apparent age. There are, however, multiple problems with this idea. Please note, this is not to be confused with a mature creation, where God created things with what might be called functional age. For example, God would have created Adam and Eve as fully functional adults. The same would be the case for plants and animals as well. However, what the apparent age idea proposes is that God included needless artificial age.
What if We Find Life Elsewhere in the Solar System
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
At this time the probe, known as Europa Clipper, is on its way to Jupiter. Its mission is to make repeated close-up observations of Jupiter's moon Europa. One of the reasons for this mission is the hope of finding evidence of life on the small moon. It is thought that there is probably a surface ocean underneath the ice that makes up Europa surface. This is suggested by the cracks and other features that are found across Europa’s surface.
The question before us here is what the consequences from a creationist perspective would be if life was discovered on Europa or any other object in the solar system. The response of evolutionists is obvious and in fact it has already been indicated. If we find any life within the solar system, they will immediately conclude that it is evidence that abiogenesis is very common. However, there are two possibilities that a creationist perspective offers, that would have no effect whatsoever of supporting any possibility of abiogenesis.
Top 10 Successful Young Earth Creation Predictions that Result Directly from What is in the Bible
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One common claim that evolutionists use against creationists is that we never produce any testable Predictions. This, of course, is blatantly untrue because there are a number of creationist theories that do just that, and frequently these predictions are things that surprise evolutionists when they are demonstrated to be true. However, you do not have to go to specific creationist models to get successfully made predictions. This is because there are a number of predictions that come naturally out of the Biblical account.
Creationists or Evolutionists: Who Really Ignores Evidence?
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
Evolutionists frequently accuse creationists of ignoring evidence. There are two main reasons for this. The first is that most evolutionists are convinced by their education that all the evidence support the Big Bang to man evolutionary story. Consequently, the only explanation. for not agreeing with it, is that you are ignoring the evidence. Furthermore, they frequently confuse the interpretation of evidence for the evidence itself. The result of this perspective is that they conclude that rejecting the interpretation is the same as ignoring or even denying the evidence.
Browse by the Top Tags ...
