What is Science?

Posted by Staff on Jan 26, 2009
(0) Comments • Article Link

The title asks a fundamental question, doesn’t it? After all, many evolutionists claim there are no true scientists who are creationists.
This statement ignores such pioneering giants as Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Joseph Lister, James Maxwell, Louis Pasteur, Michael Faraday,
Samuel F.B. Morse, Johannes Kepler, John Dalton, George Washington Carver, and many others. On the Answers in Genesis website one can also find a partial list of living scientists who embrace creationism. (http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/bios/default.asp).
The claim that honest scientists embrace evolution demands an answer to our question, how should we define science?
Can true science include the supernatural?
The word ‘science’ comes from a Latin word meaning ‘knowledge.’ Dictionary.com has as its second definition for science,
“systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.”
Thus, for something to be true science, it must be observable and repeatable, for experimentation demands repetition to verify
something always acts the same way under the same conditions. This definition at once dismisses the whole subject of origins from
the field of science for the origin of life is not subject to experimentation or observation. It already happened before anyone observed it
and it certainly has not been repeated. We can, however, discuss theories of origins based on presently known, repeatable laws. 
Richard Dickerson, biochemist and member of the National Academy of Science, made the following very candid admission:
“Science, fundamentally, is a game. It is a game with one overriding and defining rule: Let us see how far and to what extent we can explain the behavior of the physical and material universe in terms of purely physical and material causes, without invoking the supernatural. Calling down special-purpose miracles as explanations constitutes a form of intellectual ‘cheating.’ A chess player is perfectly capable of moving his opponent’s king physically from the board and smashing it in the midst of the tournament. But this would not make him a chess champion, because the rules have not been followed.”
(from Darwin’s Black Box) Admitting that the supernatural is possible, they say, is cheating for it seems to admit that no other explanation exists.
Yet, dismissing God from the equation has resulted in unverifiable and sometimes bizarre explanations of the origin and apparent design of life by random undirected accidents.
In a previous article we examined the motives behind dismissing the work of God in creation. Now the individual must make a choice.
Since neither theory is a matter of true science, we must examine the scientific data and then embrace by faith one or the other theory about how this world, teaming with life, came about. Either we will dismiss the supernatural and try to explain its unity and complexity through mindless accidents, or we will see the hand of our Creator in all He did. In my view, the latter is the only reasonable conclusion an unbiased observer could make. And in accepting it as true, we have no reason to feel that we cheated.

Couch’s Spadefoot Toad

Posted by Staff on Jan 19, 2009
(0) Comments • Article Link

We lived for six years south of Tucson, Arizona, the eastern part of the Sonoran Desert. The climate was certainly different from Wisconsin where my wife and I grew up. There we could go weeks without rain, without even a cloud in the sky. The annual rainfall in our area was 12 inches but most of that fell during the monsoons, in late July and August. The 110º days of summer baked the soil so hard it had a special name- Caliche. When we needed a new gas line run through our yard, it took two men, a gas powered ditch digger, and several hours to make the two feet deep grave for the pipe.
A Mattocks would hardly dent that soil! So you can imagine how surprised I was when, the first summer in our home, I found a six inch toad enjoying a refreshing dip in our swimming pool! I rescued that one but others drowned or got caught in the filter system. Where would a frog that size survive in such a dry climate, I wondered? I later learned that this area was the home of Couch’s spadefoot toad.
In spite of the hard soil, the toad digs into the soil with its hard, sickle-shaped tubercles (or spades) located on the undersides of their back feet. They dig their burrows by backing into them as they dig with their back feet. There they will remain for 10 or 11 months of the year, hibernating not from cold but from heat and drought. When rain comes, the male toad will emerge from the hole and find a female by means of a call resembling the sound of a baby lamb. The female will lay her eggs in puddles and soon the whole family of toads will dig into the soil once again to lie dormant for most of the year. The spade foot; the moisture detector on the skin; the reproductive system ready as soon as moisture comes; and the knowledge to protect itself from the sun, to dig, to immerge when moisture comes, and to mate are all abilities that were required from the beginning. They could not have evolved over millions of years for if all parts of this survival technique were not in place at once, we wouldn’t know of this frog today. Neither were these skills needed when the first severe summer arrived following Noah’s flood. We can only explain the unique ability of the spadefoot toad to survive in a desert to a wise Designer who gave the toad this skill before it would need it. Now doesn’t that sound just like something God would do?

Vestige Organs

Posted by Staff on Jan 12, 2009
(0) Comments • Article Link

If it were not for the assumption of evolution, I would probably still have my tonsils. I lived at a time when tonsils were considered vestige organs and virtually all the kids my age routinely had them removed. So at age seven, I was promised ice cream when I awoke, was given ether gas, and went to sleep. They didn’t tell me my throat would feel like it was on fire!
Today, tonsils, like the other 179 organs that were at one time on the list, has been removed from the vestigial organ list for, as Wiki puts it,
“they are believed to be involved in helping fight off pharyngeal and upper respiratory tract infections.” Other organs removed from the vestigial list (in some cases no doubt fatally too late) include the thyroid, the thymus, the coccyx, the pineal gland, ear muscles, and the appendix. Darwin argued that vestigial organs proved evolution because they demonstrated that organs have evolved out of usefulness over time. However, S. R. Scadding, in an article entitled “Do ‘Vestigial Organs’ Provide Evidence for Evolution?”, (Evolutionary Theory, vol. 5, May 1981, p. 173),
stated, “Since it is not possible to unambiguously identify useless structures, and since the structure of the argument used is not scientifically valid, I conclude that ‘vestigial organs’ provide no special evidence for the theory of evolution.” Not all agree. We have yet another example of evolutionary circular reasoning here.
Vestigial organs have proved evolution and therefore, since evolution is proven, the organs are not needed.
One who believes in design would have handled these enigmatic organs very differently. Instead of assuming we no longer need them until we find we still do, a creationist would reason,
“Since we know God designed the body, we know each part has a function, even if we as yet don’t know what that function is.”
That difference in approach would, no doubt, have saved many lives through the years.
We are not ignoring the fact that some body parts were needed only for a brief time, and others become useful in maturity. For example, the 20 deciduous teeth of childhood have only a temporary purpose. The belly button is the remains of connection to mother during development. On the other hand, children are born without a kneecap but it develops when it is needed.
Reproductive organs are present but immature in childhood. Neither are we claiming the removal of any organ is life threatening. I have functioned without tonsils for a good long time.
But perhaps I would have been healthier if I had retrained them. Is this not true: evolutionary thinking has brought no good to the world but much harm? God, on the other hand, makes all things good.

More Symbiosis

Posted by Staff on Jan 05, 2009
(0) Comments • Article Link

Review: symbiosis is the relationship between two living creatures so that each benefits from the other.
An example of mutual symbiosis is the relationship between Ocellaris clownfish that dwell among the tentacles of Ritteri sea anemones. The clownfish is a type of fish that lives in salt water habitats north of Australia and east of China. It is also called an Anemonefish. Clownfish became famous through the movie Finding Nemo. They are typically very bright, orange fish that have three white stripes, one at the head, middle and tail. The clownfish can grow to be from 2 to 5 inches long and with that coloring and size, it would become easy prey for many other sea creatures.
Anemones, on the other hand, are a plant looking animal surrounded by many tentacles that are able to sting its prey and then eat it. The clownfish live in these tentacles, free from the danger of predators who would be food for the anemone. But how can the clownfish live in these tentacles without getting stung? Clownfish have a slimy mucus covering their bodies that protects them from the sea anemone. If this covering is wiped off of a clownfish, it will get stung and possibly be killed when it returns home to the anemone.
How do these two creatures benefit each other? We already saw that the anemone protects the clownfish from predators. In turn, the clownfish will do three things for the anemone.
First, the clownfish is very active. It got this name from its coloring and from what appears to be ‘clowning around.’ This activity stirs up the waters and brings by more fish and algae for the anemone. Second, the clownfish defends the anemone against its predators. Third, the clownfish will clear away the remains of fish or algae eaten by the anemone.
This of course, provides a free meal for the anemone. Such a relationship is hard to explain by evolution.
Without this mucus (it is the only fish with such a protection), the clownfish would be killed by the anemone and without the anemone, it would be easy prey for larger fish.
On the other hand, without the clownfish, the anemone would be attacked by larger fish immune to its sting and would become clogged with debris.
It is a relationship that had to be complete from the beginning for gradual evolution would result in extinction first.
This can only be explained by the design of an intelligent Creator. The Bible says this was Jesus Christ. (John 1:3)

The Desperate Search for Life

Posted by Staff on Jan 04, 2009
(0) Comments • Article Link

What would you do with $3.4 billion? A more important question might be, Why would you spend that kind of money as you would plan?
Recently PBS aired a special documenting the failures and successes of the space program dealing with exploration of Titan, the brightest of Saturn’s 56 moons.
That much money, and years of planning and brain power went into the successful landing at the end of 2004. The program told of directing the probe through a space in Saturn’s rings.
If it missed, the probe would be destroyed by the fast moving ice chunks and all would be for naught. It was certainly another triumph of human ingenuity to be able to accomplish this,
for it took nine months just for the probe to travel the 745 million miles from earth. That said, what was the purpose of this expensive undertaking?
Titan isn’t even a planet; it’s just a moon of a planet, measuring 40% of the earth’s diameter. The answer is found in the composition of its atmosphere.
Titan is the only moon in the solar system with a thick atmosphere. The most abundant gas is nitrogen but in second place is methane gas.
This is the required ingredient of earth’s early atmosphere if life evolved by accident. During this Titan work, vehicles failed and succeeded in landing on Mars, taking pictures, and examining the soil with spectrometers. They were scouring the planet for signs of water or water formed compounds. Without water, simple chemicals could not have floated together to form life.
Since Mars is our most earth-like neighbor, any evidence of life’s building blocks are greatly desired, for many have concluded that we are not going to get life to evolve on earth.
Titan has evidence of both of water and of methane gas (containing carbon and hydrogen) so hopes rise that proof for life evolving by accident rest in these far away spheres.
It is almost comical if it were not so expensively tragic. Pictures from Mars and Titan show a very bleak terrain. If life were there, it surely isn’t obvious!
Further, Titan’s surface temperature is -288ºF and Mars averages -81ºF but reaches -200ºF, a bit too cold for life as we know it.
Are they saying at those temperatures life might have floated together accidently? Now imagine a space probe landing on earth to find signs of life. There is virtually no way to hide its presence!
Digging, searching, probing, analyzing, spending, all in the name of finding even a speck of evidence that supports the notion that life could come about by accident. To put it bluntly, over $3 billion of our tax dollars were spent to verify the theory of evolution. What is the justification for such effort? I suspect evolutionist Aldous Huxley hit it on the head in an article entitled, “Confession of a Professed Atheist.” “I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption . . .
For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was . . . liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.”
In contrast, Jesus said, ”If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” (John 8:36)