- Trump IS fighting for the life of our Nation
- Spinning the Catholic Killer's Bio
- Can't Sit Still Pop a Pill (Part I)
- Avenging Charlie Kirk: The Conservative Redemption of Liberal Academia
- Top 20 Nations Ranked by 2025 GDP (PPP)
- Tennessee and the Return to Common Sense: Historical Education is in Fact Safety
- The American Spectator
- Congress Takes a Holiday from Oversight
- Leibniz and Calhoun: The Christian March of Progress and Postmillennial Truth
- A Seat at the Table, Not Just a Chair in the Room
- Mainstream Media Lies about Project Ukraine
- National Debt to GDP Ratios Survey
- Venezuela Briefing 9-15-2025
- Now We Must Ask: ‘QUO VADIS” America?
- Ukraine War Update September 22, 2025
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.
Why Do Evolutionists Often See Creationists As Stupid?
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
Evolutionists tend to look down on Creationists. They will frequently accuse anyone who does not agree with them on the topic of origins of being stupid. This is particularly true of those who reject universal common ancestry of all life on earth, even if they agree that changes do occur as a part of a species adapting to changes in its environment. The simple fact of the matter is that if you disagree with them on any aspect of The Big Bang to man atheistic mythology, you are to be simply dismissed as an idiot. Anything you have to say is certainly not to be given any consideration beyond attacking it.
Is Science vs Faith Just a Myth?
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
The claim is often made that science in faith are always at odds with each other. This claim is particularly made when discussing topics like those concerning origins come into play. This is because there are models claimed by the scientific establishment as being scientific while the Bible describes God creating everything. However, it turns out that there are reasons why this is nothing but a myth resulting from atheistic influences in the mainstream scientific community.
Is Evolution Inherently Atheistic?
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
In the discussion about evolution there is definitely an atheistic tone among evolutionists. When dealing with the question of whether or not evolution itself is inherently atheistic you have to specify what you mean by evolution. Evolutionists frequently use the word evolution to refer to both adaptation and universal common descent despite the fact that they are not the same thing. Their thinking is that over the long-haul adaptation leads to universal common descent.
However, when you research the idea of universal common descent, including its history and philosophy, you learn very quickly that it is inherently atheistic. This is because when you exclude a common designer as a possibility, common descent is the only possible way of explaining genetic and chemical data. Furthermore, the reaction to ideas such as intelligent design demonstrates the atheistic connection better than anything else can.
The Heat Problem of Young Earth Creation Science
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
One of the most significant scientific challenges facing Young Earth Creation Science is the “heat problem.” This issue arises when the processes invoked to explain Earth’s geology, astronomy, and past cataclysms, such as a global flood or accelerated radioactive decay, are examined through the lens of thermal physics. The heat problem refers to the enormous, and apparently insurmountable, quantities of heat that would be generated by these processes if compressed into the brief timescales suggested by Young Earth Creation. Here we explore the facets of the heat problem, its implications, and some proposed solutions.
Defining the Heat Problem
The heat problem, sometimes called the “thermal problem” or “excess heat problem,” encompasses several scenarios in which the energy released by proposed young-Earth events would produce catastrophic levels of heat, incompatible with the continued existence of the planet, its biosphere, or even its very structure.
Understanding the Concepts of Evolutionary Biology
- Details
- By Charles Creager, Jr.
Evolutionary biology is a branch of biology that studies the origins, changes, and adaptations of living organisms over generations. It is extremely important to have a proper understanding of evolutionary biology in any discussion about biological evolution.
First of all, from a creationist perspective, evolutionary biology is not really an issue despite the label. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the points within evolutionary biology are fully acceptable within creation science and actually explain some things here in the post Flood world.
Browse by the Top Tags ...
