| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | [[File:Images.jpg|thumbnail|375px|right|The [[Creation Research Society]] is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons committed to the scientific study of special creation as given in the book of [[Genesis]]. They publish a quarterly peer-reviewed [[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal|creation science journal]].<ref>[http://www.creationresearch.org/index.html The Creation Research Society]</ref> ]] | | [[File:Images.jpg|thumbnail|375px|right|The [[Creation Research Society]] is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons committed to the scientific study of special creation as given in the book of [[Genesis]]. They publish a quarterly peer-reviewed [[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal|creation science journal]].<ref>[http://www.creationresearch.org/index.html The Creation Research Society]</ref> ]] |
| − | '''Creation science''' is branch of [[science]] which sets out to show that [[supernatural]] [[creation]] of the material [[universe]] by [[God]] is consistent and compatible with the available scientific evidence. Being in the realm of [[origins science]], creation science is a historical science.<ref>[http://creation.com/its-not-science It's not science] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref><ref>[http://creationrevolution.com/2011/05/naturalism-doesn%E2%80%99t-work/ Naturalism Doesn’t Work]</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/what-is-science What is science?]</ref> Most advocates of creation science believe the [[young earth creationism|earth is about 6,000 years old]], and they publish scientific evidence supporting this view (See, for example, [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]). The ongoing discovery of hundreds of [[living fossils]] correlates well with creation science but finds no answer in Darwinian theory.<ref>Thomas, B. 2015. 'Living Fossils' Point to Recent Creation. Acts & Facts. [http://www.icr.org/article/8974/268]</ref> In addition, scientists in the discipline of creation science state that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe. They also claim that these laws point to the universe being created by [[God]].<ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref> Creation scientists also assert that naturalistic processes alone cannot account for the [[origin of life]] and that the [[Evolution|theory of evolution]] cannot account for the various kinds of animals and plants. Both evolutionary scientists and [[Young earth creationism|young earth creation]] scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs; however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionists believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref> | + | '''Creation science''' is branch of [[science]] which sets out to show that [[supernatural]] [[creation]] of the material [[universe]] by [[God]] is consistent and compatible with the available scientific evidence. Being in the realm of [[origins science]], creation science is a historical science.<ref>[https://creation.com/its-not-science It's not science] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref><ref>[http://creationrevolution.com/2011/05/naturalism-doesn%E2%80%99t-work/ Naturalism Doesn’t Work]</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/what-is-science What is science?]</ref> Most advocates of creation science believe the [[young earth creationism|earth is about 6,000 years old]], and they publish scientific evidence supporting this view (See, for example, [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]). The ongoing discovery of hundreds of [[living fossils]] correlates well with creation science but finds no answer in Darwinian theory.<ref>Thomas, B. 2015. 'Living Fossils' Point to Recent Creation. Acts & Facts. [https://www.icr.org/article/8974/268]</ref> In addition, scientists in the discipline of creation science state that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe. They also claim that these laws point to the universe being created by [[God]].<ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref> Creation scientists also assert that naturalistic processes alone cannot account for the [[origin of life]] and that the [[Evolution|theory of evolution]] cannot account for the various kinds of animals and plants. Both evolutionary scientists and [[Young earth creationism|young earth creation]] scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs; however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionists believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref> |
| | [[Creation Ministries International]], a leading [[Bible|biblical]] [[creation]] science organization, declared: | | [[Creation Ministries International]], a leading [[Bible|biblical]] [[creation]] science organization, declared: |
| | {{cquote|Creationist research is having a global effect that is worrying the [[atheism|atheists]] and secularists of this world. They have had it all their own way for over a century but things are slowly changing. For almost twenty five years now, ''Journal of Creation'' has been publishing cutting-edge creationist research that has been fueling the war against [[evolution]], creating little fires all around the world, including [[Great Britain]]. | | {{cquote|Creationist research is having a global effect that is worrying the [[atheism|atheists]] and secularists of this world. They have had it all their own way for over a century but things are slowly changing. For almost twenty five years now, ''Journal of Creation'' has been publishing cutting-edge creationist research that has been fueling the war against [[evolution]], creating little fires all around the world, including [[Great Britain]]. |
| Line 6: |
Line 6: |
| | Atheist evangelist, Prof [[Richard Dawkins]], speaking at the 20th anniversary of the Edinburgh International Science Festival in April 2008, said the rise of creationism in British schools raised a serious problem for science teachers. | | Atheist evangelist, Prof [[Richard Dawkins]], speaking at the 20th anniversary of the Edinburgh International Science Festival in April 2008, said the rise of creationism in British schools raised a serious problem for science teachers. |
| | | | |
| − | It is a very worrying trend,’ he said, ‘and I think a lot of it has come over from [[United States|America]] and [[Australia]].’<ref>http://creation.com/growth-of-creation-science-in-uk-worries-prof-dawkins</ref>}} | + | It is a very worrying trend,’ he said, ‘and I think a lot of it has come over from [[United States|America]] and [[Australia]].’<ref>https://creation.com/growth-of-creation-science-in-uk-worries-prof-dawkins</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| | == Creation Science and Genetic Programs and Biological Information == | | == Creation Science and Genetic Programs and Biological Information == |
| Line 31: |
Line 31: |
| | | | |
| | == Creation Scientist Successfully Predicts Planetary Magnetic Fields == | | == Creation Scientist Successfully Predicts Planetary Magnetic Fields == |
| − | Using a young earth creation model, physicist Russ Humphreys successfully predicted the strength of planetary magnetic fields while Darwinists failed.<ref>The Creation of Planetary Magnetic Fields, by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D., December 1984, CRSQ Vol. 21, No. 3 [http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/21/21_3/21_3.html]</ref> Since Humphreys' first success with the Voyager II results on Uranus and Neptune,<ref>D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. 1990. Beyond Neptune: Voyager II Supports Creation. Acts & Facts. 19 (5).[http://www.icr.org/article/beyond-neptune-voyager-ii-supports-creation]</ref> subsequent explorations yielded additional successes for Mercury.<ref>Thomas, B. 2011. Mercury's Fading Magnetic Field Fits Creation Model. Acts & Facts.[http://www.icr.org/article/mercurys-fading-magnetic-field-fits]</ref> | + | Using a young earth creation model, physicist Russ Humphreys successfully predicted the strength of planetary magnetic fields while Darwinists failed.<ref>The Creation of Planetary Magnetic Fields, by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D., December 1984, CRSQ Vol. 21, No. 3 [http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/21/21_3/21_3.html]</ref> Since Humphreys' first success with the Voyager II results on Uranus and Neptune,<ref>D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. 1990. Beyond Neptune: Voyager II Supports Creation. Acts & Facts. 19 (5).[https://www.icr.org/article/beyond-neptune-voyager-ii-supports-creation]</ref> subsequent explorations yielded additional successes for Mercury.<ref>Thomas, B. 2011. Mercury's Fading Magnetic Field Fits Creation Model. Acts & Facts.[https://www.icr.org/article/mercurys-fading-magnetic-field-fits]</ref> |
| | Dr. Donn Chapman invited Dr. Humphreys on the Origins TV series presenting his theory.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7manZ1WF-Lc&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=26 Magnetic Fields, part 1 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amDk5rgoThA&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=47 Magnetic Fields, part 2 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref> | | Dr. Donn Chapman invited Dr. Humphreys on the Origins TV series presenting his theory.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7manZ1WF-Lc&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=26 Magnetic Fields, part 1 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amDk5rgoThA&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=47 Magnetic Fields, part 2 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref> |
| | | | |
| Line 55: |
Line 55: |
| | | | |
| | ==Creation Science and the Evolutionary Science Community== | | ==Creation Science and the Evolutionary Science Community== |
| − | Creation science is considered as pseudoscience by the majority of the scientific community. It is also commonly rejected by [[Atheism|atheists]] as they generally hold the [[worldview]] of [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]]. Liberals reject Creation Science with the spurious pretext that it cannot be disproved ([[falsifiable|falsifiability]]) and therefore cannot be considered "[[science]]".<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/19991013122341/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/evolutionviews990816.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> | + | Creation science is considered as pseudoscience by the majority of the scientific community. It is also commonly rejected by [[Atheism|atheists]] as they generally hold the [[worldview]] of [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]]. Liberals reject Creation Science with the spurious pretext that it cannot be disproved ([[falsifiable|falsifiability]]) and therefore cannot be considered "[[science]]".<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/19991013122341/https://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/evolutionviews990816.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> |
| | | | |
| | However, Dr. [[Walt Brown]] argues that the field of creation science is scientific<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> and the evolutionists' objections to creation science are due to their worldviews and preconceptions, rather than on the basis of scientific evidence or the scientific validity of the idea.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref> | | However, Dr. [[Walt Brown]] argues that the field of creation science is scientific<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> and the evolutionists' objections to creation science are due to their worldviews and preconceptions, rather than on the basis of scientific evidence or the scientific validity of the idea.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref> |
| Line 80: |
Line 80: |
| | *[http://creationnetwork.org/ The Creation Network] | | *[http://creationnetwork.org/ The Creation Network] |
| | *[http://visitcreation.org/ The Big Map of Creation] | | *[http://visitcreation.org/ The Big Map of Creation] |
| − | *[http://creation.com/ Creation Ministries International] | + | *[https://creation.com/ Creation Ministries International] |
| | *[http://www.creationscience.com/ In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood] the website of Dr. [[Walt Brown]] | | *[http://www.creationscience.com/ In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood] the website of Dr. [[Walt Brown]] |
| | *[http://www.creationresearch.org/ Creation Research Society] | | *[http://www.creationresearch.org/ Creation Research Society] |
| | *[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq.html Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal] | | *[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq.html Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal] |
| | *[http://www.answersingenesis.org/ Answers in Genesis] | | *[http://www.answersingenesis.org/ Answers in Genesis] |
| − | *[http://www.icr.org/ Institute for Creation Research] | + | *[https://www.icr.org/ Institute for Creation Research] |
| | *[http://www.nwcreation.net/ NorthWest Creation Network] | | *[http://www.nwcreation.net/ NorthWest Creation Network] |
| | | | |