May’s newsletter is dedicated to recent findings in science related to creation. It reflects the author’s interests and is by no means comprehensive or exhaustive.
Jonathan Sarfati, Russ Humphreys, and John Sanford Are Coming to the Triangle This Fall
These three men are some of the finest creation scientists alive today! Plan now to take advantage of these rare opportunities.
Have you ever heard that “All scientists accept evolution as a proven fact” or “real scientists don’t believe in God?” Did you believe it?
Lawrence M. Krauss, Ph.D., is Foundation Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration and the Physics Department, Co-Director of the Cosmology Initiative, and Inaugural Director of the Origins Initiative at Arizona State University.
In their new book, The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow defend scientific determinism, which they define as follows:
The central question evolutionary science has yet to answer is by what natural processes is novel information introduced into the biological world. Until this question is answered, evolution will remain an organized system of unproven speculations and “just so” stories. There are two main events in the evolutionary tale that need this type of explanation: the origin of life and the mechanism for macroevolution.
A Roman portrait bust believed to be that of Josephus, from Plagnieux, P. 'Les sculptures Romanes' Dossiers d'Archéologie
The phrase "intelligent design" is heard a great deal lately in the media, usually in the context of secondary school science education.
Dr. Dan Reynolds attended the recent Creation Superconference held in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina July 13-17. Dr. Reynolds has provided us a summary of each of the sessions at the conference.
The TASC newsletter article Fossils examined the fossil record as evidence in support of the theory of evolution. 1 The conclusion of that article, as well as of several evolutionists themselves, was that the fossil record did not provide evidence to support the theory of evolution. We might think, "Well, that doesn't matter, since evolution is so strongly supported by the genetic evidence." However, is it really? Let's look and see. We will look primarily at the genetic evidence.
Is abiogenesis irrelevant?
The idea of life arising from non-life is known as abiogenesis. It might be argued that abiogenesis is not evolution and thus is irrelevant in a discussion of evolution. The line of reasoning is that evolution deals with how life evolves from pre-existing life via natural selection, or how more complex life arises from simpler life, which does not involve the origin of life. This is still life giving rise to more complex life, not life arising from non-life. Therefore, the argument goes, the question of how life arose from non-life is not part of evolution, and is therefore excluded from any discussion of evolution as not being relevant.