Disclaimer:

The author of this guide is not a research scientist. This information has been compiled from an abundance of easily accessible and confirmed scientific authorities. The majority of the information is common knowledge in the scientific realm, while less known facts are cited. Do not quote the author as a scientific authority. This guide is intended to systematically build the case for Biblical Creation through the logical alignment and application of the abundance of established scientific facts.

True Blue

All undisputed facts in this guide are in bright blue.

The Challenge

This would be a good time to get that list out. At the beginning of the book, the challenge was posed to name simply one, undeniable, incorruptible fact of science that can only support the theory of evolution, and that completely excludes the Special Creation/Flood model, as accounted in the Bible. Check that list, the one that exposes the foolishness of the Bible and of a God that created the universe, and see how it has fared.

Up until this point, such scientific facts have been discussed, but they unerringly confirm the Creation/Flood model instead. These facts are not in dispute within the scientific community, though their implications are not always regarded. There is much, much more evidence in the world that points to this same conclusion, but the human heart is the real arbitrator in its willingness to receive common sense. Nevertheless, the facts are undeniable.

The following outline summarizes many of the facts discussed, in conjunction with the claims of the Biblical Creation/Flood model. These facts are compelling evidence in support of the Biblical assertions.

A) God created the heavens and the earth:

1) First law of thermodynamics (the law of conservation) dictates that the matter and energy that now exists is not being created or destroyed within this system. The logical conclusion therefore is that something outside the system created it. Something cannot come from nothing.

2) Second law of thermodynamics, the law of entropy, dictates that everything is winding down, decaying, and wearing down. Accordingly, usable energy will eventually become even and unusable. This law dictates the diminishment of order, vitality, and information; therefore the universe and all the systems in it cannot now, nor ever have been capable of self-elaborating. This law contradicts that the universe could grow from nothing, through chaos, to increased order, to simple life, and to complex life--all the while it was also breaking down and obeying the destructive effects of time. Time does not increase order, but is the irrefutable destroyer.

3) Matter cannot be eternal. The Big Bang could have only come from the interaction of atoms, and any such interaction would have always been possible prior to the Big Bang. All of eternity would have used up the energy of the Atoms before the Big Bang could have occurred.

4) Einstein’s Theory and formula for Relativity (E=MC2) dictates two things: 1. that Energy comes from Mass or matter. Because energy and matter are interchangeable and relative, the massive explosion of the Big Bang could only come from a massive collection of pre-existing matter relative to the energy output. If it happened, it blew up what was already here. 2. That the formula itself dictates that time is required in order to cause the reaction, and yet the evolutionary clock does not begin until the Big Bang occurs.

5) Matter only comes from matter, so whatever supposedly emerged from the Big Bang could not be more than the original material

6) Gravity is a weak interactive force. Big Bang theorists rely on the center of the massive, outward explosion of the Big Bang, to also be the source of a mysteriously powerful gravity that is able to effect and slow atomic particles as far away as the furthest star is today. This is physically impossible, and counter intuitive. If, however this mysterious gravity does not slow the particles, then matter can never clump together and form. It would all still be hurtling through oblivion.

7) Quantum mechanics, the fundamental forces, the laws of motion, and the Law of Angular Momentum prohibit all scenarios concerning the formation of matter, stars, planets, satellites, the motion of solar systems, and galaxies as the result of the outward explosion of the Big Bang. Straight line projectiles from a single point of explosion could not result in the thousands of circular, swirling motions that are required to bring matter together, and cannot explain all the differing planetary and satellite motions—all this complexity developed while the universe was still expanding.

8) The earth has the perfect physical conditions for life (distance from sun, moon, stars, tilt and speed of earth’s rotation, atmosphere, water, oxygen. . .

9) Evolutionists cannot explain how so much water came to exist on our planet in an environment supposedly void of oxygen.

10)There is no accurate way to measure the earth’s age, and no evidence that it must be millions of years old. All methods that attempt to measure the earth’s age range from a few hundred years old, to 800 billion years old. Reliable evidence indicates that the earth is just thousands of years old. Some examples that show how young the earth is are: studies of changes and heat loss in space, biological studies of desserts, reefs, and other living time clocks, and geological studies of erosion and ocean/salt levels.

B) God created all the plants and animals, and people, and made them to reproduce after their own kind.

1) Life begets life. Life only comes from life. The innumerable complexities of life dictate the impossibility of its self-origination. Scientists must imagine what the first “simple life” is because the life that now exists is too complex. Their projections, however, are unfounded and illogical. If the first life came from miraculous amino acid production, then where did nucleic acids (RNA and DNA) come from—they are not made by the amino acid proteins. If RNA came first, then amino acid experiments are futile, and there is no explanation for this miraculous formation of a set of instructions, and nothing to build.

2) Scientists are unable to generate life from non-organic material. It has never been witnessed, it cannot be done in a lab.

3) Single-celled organisms always begin and end their lives as single-celled organisms. They do no combine into multi-celled organisms.

4) Single cells reproduce by mitosis, multi-celled organisms reproduce using meiosis, and each cell carries the blueprint for the entire organism.

5) Cell differentiation is still a complete mystery, and unfeasible in the transition phase from single cell, to multi- cellular organism.

6) DNA always dictates the species and physical traits of all off-spring. DNA is provided by the parents, prohibiting the spontaneous development of new features that the parents did not carry.

7) Mutations are only destruction or loss of genetic information, not a gain or addition of complex instructions. Mutations are not the addition of a new feature, but an error in the transmission of an existing feature.

8) Variations are pre-coded into the DNA of each species, and are brought out through natural genetic processes and isolation. Variation in a species is a narrowing of pre-existing genes, not a broadening or addition of genes.

9) DNA instructions promote stasis in a species. Successful species result in steady, dominant genes, preventing anomalies from taking over the species, inhibiting evolution. Each tiny new genetic trend would have to dominate in isolation from the rest of the species in order to adapt that trend, making evolution through mutation completely unfeasible.

10)Mutations in species today make them vulnerable, not more successful, and there are no upward changes in existence to demonstrate any mutation that has been retained by a species as a successful trait.

11)There are no examples to demonstrate that evolution is operating in any form today. Instead of adapting, species simply die. They do not seem to know millions of years in advance what adjustments they will need to make to ensure their future survival. They do not seem to be able to enact these changes even if they knew what they ought to be.

12)All the incredible biological processes observed today (genetic stability, complex physiological processes, perfect ecological balance of life forms, and self-awareness and thought), completely suit the expectations of design for the Creation model, while they are contrary evidence for the accidental nature of the evolutionary model.

13)DNA is a symbolic language. This fact alone proves the existence of an intelligent designer, and there is no evidence or scientific explanation that it could have developed otherwise.

14)Inexplicable explosions in species preserved in the fossil record have no feasible or historical roots in evolutionary fact. Among them are the Cambrian explosion, the explosion of angiosperms (flowering plants), the explosion of insects, the explosion of mammals. New trends in body types just suddenly appear without transition, from the complex multi-celled organisms, to vertebrates, to amphibians, insects, mammals, and even flowering plants. This evidence instead testifies to the incredible diversity since Creation.

15)Hundreds of individual species anomalies that live today, and are recorded in the fossil record, have absolutely no conceivable history or predecessor that can be explained by the evolutionary scheme. Some of these are butterflies, bats, whales, turtles, all marsupials, birds, flying reptiles, the platypus, primates, and humans. No paleontologist can point to a true intermediate species that demonstrates how any of these and innumerable other anomalies evolved.

16)Complex structures, such as wings and eyes appear in the fossil record complete without any evidence of evolutionary experimentation or predecessor. The eye, as complex as a human’s, appears in the Cambrian explosion with the first level of evolution in the nautiloid squid—not after millions of years of evolution. The wing pops onto the seen fully formed, lacking any experimentation. The same applies to, each dramatic new feature in a species from spine, to lungs, to legs, to any number of unique traits in each family of plants and animals to the silk in a spider’s web.

17)Shared traits among unrelated species are inexplicable and untraceable through the evolutionary process. Some examples are: Eyes among nearly all complex animal forms (regardless of any possible evolutionary connection); Wings among insects, birds, reptiles (pterodactyl), mammals (bats), and flying fish. Certain qualities like warm-bloodedness, follicle skin, four-chambered heart are shared by mammals and birds, though they would not share a common ancestry from the reptiles. Echolocation is shared by bats and whales. Fins are shared by aquatic mammals and fish without common ancestor. Marsupial rats, moles, mice, wolves, cats, and lions closely resemble their placental counterparts, although scientists say they developed separately. These and many more invalidate the evolutionary process, making it completely unfeasible, but validate the diversity of created life.

18)There are abundant examples of inexplicable fossil anomalies that refute the progress from lower forms. Species are often found out of order in the strata with no evidence of turmoil. Misplaced specimens are common, but rationalized. Pollen has been located as early as the Cambrian system, hundreds of millions of years before gymnosperms and angiosperms evolved. Leaves, stems and wood have also been found at these early levels, which is impossible if the strata reflects the evolutionary progress. If it doesn’t then there is no use for fossils in the theory. It should take only one unexplainable “misplaced” fossil to discredit the theory, and there are hundreds. This demonstrates the model for Creation when all life was formed at the same time.

19)According to evolution, humans had to give up their natural animal survival tools in order to become human. They don’t have tough, long hands, or the feet, legs and arms for climbing, body hair to keep them warm, or powerful teeth and jaws for grinding and cutting food, or the body structure to live comfortably on the ground or in trees. Evolution stripped humans of their actual tools, in favor of potential tools, in the mind and hands. Could evolution be so wise to foresee this significance, and conveniently so overshoot the brain capacity necessary for survival in order to make use of tools? Man’s uniqueness corroborates that humans were made in God’s image.

20)The link is still missing. There is not one “hominid” to stand firmly in the gap between the 3 ½ foot ape (made famous by “Lucy”) of the australopithecines, and man. The junk pile of discarded links, under the heading of “Homo Erectus” is a hodgepodge of hoaxes, fragments, and bad science that not even all evolutionary anthropologists accept as links. Beneath the whitewash of speculation, there are no facts to bridge the gulf between apes and man.

21)If we accepted what the fossil record presented (gaps or not) as the true story of evolution, the story would be that life started out very complex with an immense variety in species, and then got narrower through extinctions, not the other way around. Scientists do not dispute that the fossil record presents the species in this a manner—they just don’t believe that it is what it appears to be.

22)The fossil record absolutely, and without exception, reflects the stability of the species, in plants, arthropods, animals, and humans. There is absolutely no evidence to support the “fact” of evolution—not even one transitional species—in the one place it ought to be most evident. The fossil record completely verifies the Creation model to the exclusion of the evolutionary model.

C) Man sinned and allowed death and destruction into the world.

1) Law of entropy throughout the universe reflects that there was once a point of perfect order, energy, information, and operation of systems, but that as time passes, these things degrade losing energy and order causing death and destruction in all systems.

2) The destructive behavior of mutations demonstrates that there must have been a time of perfection, or life would have self destructed long ago. Today mutations inhibit the success of life. Mutations cannot be a scientifically sound mechanism for upward change in light of all the actual evidence, but instead they demonstrate entropy.

3) The fossil record indicates that there was once a great many more species than today, and that even in our time we have witnessed losses of species, demonstrating obedience to entropy.

4) Even the “ancient” rocks record a degradation through their isotope levels, demonstrating an entropy that reaches back to the formation of the earth.

D) The world became rampantly evil before the eyes of God, and he judged them with a flood, only sparing righteous Noah and his family, and representatives of every terrestrial species in the world on the ark.

1) Population growth rates indicate that humanity is about 4,000 years old, dating back to the time of the flood.

2) There are massive, waterborne sedimentary deposits up to several miles deep all over the earth’s surface. The one mile layer of sediment in the Grand canyon alone demonstrates that the water once had to be over 5,000 feet high, putting the entire world at that time under 5,000 feet of water, even prior to any uplift.

3) Even the tops of the highest mountains are covered with fossils of sea life, proving that prior to tectonic uplift, every part of the world was once under water. Scientists concede to the presence of, at the very least, bountiful ancient seas all over the world as indicated by geological formations and this presence of abundant fossil sea life.

4) There are dramatic water-formed geological formations and erosion zones in every part of the world. Almost every one of hundreds of thousands of canyons, sea cliffs, valleys, and dramatic erosional features is carved from sediments that have been laid in massive deposits, and then eroded from massive amounts of water not now available in these areas. The height of the deposits themselves bear witness to the height of the water that deposited them.

5) The sedimentary deposits of conglomerate and breccia, (which are large rocks, boulders, or jagged rocks) are commonly found throughout the world mixed in with the soft sedimentary muds. This fact unquestionably documents the rapid, torrential environment these deposits were laid in.

6) The worldwide Iridium spike at the K-T boundary is consistent with the massive volcanic activity indicated as part of the global flood catastrophe.

7) There are vast fossil deposits and mass graves all over the world demonstrating the immensity of sudden death worldwide.

8) The unique requirements for fossilization dictate a catastrophic burial. The need for massive sediments, borne by water, and a quick burial have compelled evolutionists to invent thousands of unique burial scenarios to account for fossils, when only the Flood is necessary to explain them all.

9) Inexplicable fossil preservations taunt the evolutionists. In addition to the massive sediments required to preserve giant dinosaurs, some of the most delicate creatures in the world were preserved, such as the soft tissued, jellyfish, crinoids, leaves, insects, and even feathers, testifying to utter, rapid burial. Trees and other polystratic fossils, which are embedded across numerous geological time periods, are ridiculous within the evolutionary explanation of slow sedimentary deposition.

10)The abundant and massive fossil fuel deposits that exist globally, are only formed by trapping vast deposits of organic material under heavy loads of water borne sediments—the recipe of a flood

11)The proposed evolutionary “geologic column” is perfectly consistent with the burial of natural ecological zones in a massive flood.

12)The mass fossilization and extinction of the dinosaurs is best explained by the Flood (likely not to have adapted well to the resulting post-flood cold climate). This dramatic preservation and extinction is a tremendous difficulty for evolutionary scenarios.

13)Fossils show mountains uplifted after deposition. The earth’s surface water ratio is 70%. If it were not for the mountains, and the deep sea valleys that align with them, the earth would be covered by 1.7 miles of water. This fact perfectly verifies the Biblical flood account that much of the Flood water came from underground, and then drained into the sea when the mountains arose, and the valleys deepened.

14)The Ice Age is perfectly explained by the effects of the catastrophism of a global flood. Evolutionists offer no explanation.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

What are the Facts?

While these facts passionately testify to the Biblical Creation/Flood model, the evolution/ uniformitarian model lacks both the factual evidence, and the scientific integrity necessary to justify any of its hypotheses. If one were to ask an expert in any of these scientific fields about the validity of the facts listed here (though not necessarily the interpretations thereof), evolutionist or not, they would have to agree with their validity. It is easy to construct untestable theories to manipulate the evidence, but the true science is taking what is fact, and applying the natural, testable conclusions to it.

This book has covered many scientific facts that focus a great deal on discrediting the theory of evolution. Though so many of them confirm Creation and the Flood explicitly, in some ways this information almost demeans the evidence that God created everything. This very short and meager list is limited for time’s sake. These facts are merely examples of where evolution and Creation can be divided by the evidence, proving Creation to be the only scientific model. However, the true facts of Creation are innumerable and never ending.

The true facts are revealed in the absolute intricacy in design of every last detail of the operation of the universe. The perfection of design is the least controversial evidence for God our Creator because it is irrefutable. The reliable and nearly indestructible atom, the stars and planets, graciously keeping time, the sun and moon all reveal wisdom. Biological systems flaunt the limitless precision of life’s design.

Unimaginable ingenuity speaks in every detail from the production of proteins in bacteria, to the baffling intricacy of life-giving plants with their complex photosynthetic processes, to the miraculous human body with its system of lungs, and heart and blood pumping out and back, the immune system, the muscles, the balance, the function, and a brain full of thoughts and a heart full of soul. Every need is provided for, every system is in perfect balance, and every process has an ingenious purpose.

The Facts of Creation is Creation itself.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Further Evidence and the Bible

The entire theory of evolution contradicts all scientific observations. It is completely unfalsifiable, untestable and unvarafiable. This is anti-science. The actual facts of the natural world are in complete harmony with the scientific expectations of the Creation/Flood model, while the evolution model continues to offer only theories why and how the evidence does not meet expectations. All evolutionary theories are continually being revised and adjusted because of their conflict with the actual facts, but no irrefutable evidence is offered to support them.

Alternately, while the Bible is continually touted as a book of fairy tales, no assertion of the Bible has ever been scientifically disproved. The Bible itself is a powerful witness for the reliability of its contents. There are many scientifically sound principles related in the Bible, written often thousands of years before our understanding of them. A study of a few of these principles can help substantiate the soundness of Biblical statements, and their reliability. Here is a short list of some remarkable scientific insights in the Bible:

1) The earth hangs on nothing in space

*Job 26:7

2) Light is in motion

*Job 38:19,20

3) Time, space and matter have a beginning

*Genesis chapter 1, 2 Tim 1:9, Titus 1:2, I Cor 2:7.

4) First law of thermodynamics (creation of energy & matter complete)

*Gen 2:2,3, Hebrews 4:3,4, Psalms 148:6, Isaiah 40:26

5) Second law of thermodynamics (everything, even the universe, will wear out)

*Psalm 102:25,26, Isaiah 51:6, Matt 24:35, Rom 8:22

6) Genetic code defined

*Genesis 1:21-31, Genesis 7:1-16

7) Atoms and molecules (that things are made up of things unseen)

*Heb 11:3

8) Perfect dimensions of Noah’s arc

*Genesis 6:16. Though there would be no way to test these dimensions or the structure when it was written, scientists now know that the design was perfectly detailed for stability, water proofing and utility in the high seas.

9) Blood is the source of life in a body

*Leviticus 17:11. Until recent centuries bloodletting caused harm and death by misunderstanding its properties.

10) Circumcision the 8^th day (When blood coagulates best)

*Genesis 17:12

11) The principles of quarantine, sanitation, sterilization and handling the dead (which would have stopped many plagues and diseases around the world had they been followed)

*Leviticus 13, Deut 23:12-14, Num 19, Lev 12-15

12) Global wind patterns

*Ecclesiasties 1:6

13) The earth is a sphere (long before science confirmed it)

*Isaiah 4o:22

14) The center of the earth is hot

*Job 28:5 (under[the earth] is turned up as it were fire)

15) There are hydrothermal vents in the ocean

*Job 38:16

16) The agricultural principles of leaving ground fallow every seventh year to rest it. (Not practiced outside Israel until 200 B.C.)

*Leviticus 25:4

The scriptures listed here demonstrate the wisdom of the Bible. Many of these concepts were not understood outside of the Bible for up to thousands of years after they were written. For this reason, the Bible, exhibits scientifically sound principles in a time when these principles were not known.

One marvelous example is a description of the hydraulic cycle in Job 26:8, Job 36:27,28, and Ecclesiasties 1:7. “He binds the waters in His thick clouds, and the cloud is not rent under them.” “For He makes droplets of water, they pour down rain according to the vapor within, which clouds do drop and distil upon man abundantly.” “All the rivers run to the sea, but the sea is not full: unto the place from where the rivers come, there do they return.” These statements are remarkably accurate, and scientifically insightful. Such descriptions throughout the Bible reveal it to be a reliable and realistic depiction of scientific principles long before their time.

Another example, as mentioned, is the Biblical portrayal of the deluge and recession of the flood waters, which is not only scientifically sound, but insightful to even today’s scientist. How did the author of Genesis (Moses) know thousands of years ago, that so much water could be contained under ground? Why didn’t the account simply rely on rain to produce the Flood, as most people would think? It was also completely correct to correlate the raising of the mountains and the creation of valleys as a means for the waters to run into the seas.

The Bible says in Job 26:10 and Ps 104:9 that the Lord “. . .has set a bounds, that [the water] return not again to cover the earth.” In Job 28:9, the massive geological forces that affect such changes, are evident, “He puts forth His hand upon the rock; He overturns the mountains by the roots.” This is not something that can be witnessed within a lifetime—certainly not within the uniformitarian model.

Additionally, it tells us in Jonah 2:6 that the bottom of the mountains is in the sea. It is remarkable, then to find that something as ordinary as mountains, in reality holds a key to our view of the earth’s geological history. Certainly the writers of the Bible could not witness how mountains were formed, and would not know that the entire world would be covered by water if the mountains and valleys of the world did not hold them back. Most people today don’t even know this.

The accounts of the Bible are often criticized as fanciful tales. Despite these accusations, there are very few fanciful depictions in contrast to the realistic accounts. In addition to some of the sound scientific principles listed here, other accounts in the Bible, though remarkable, are composed of feasible elements in comparison to many other religions. In other words, many ancient faiths that attempt to explain the world use unrealistic depictions such as those that use a multitude of gods. Many of these beliefs, like Greek myths, or Native American traditions, or Hinduism, make no attempt to link their explanations to our evidence of reality.

The Biblical accounts stay within realistic bounds when ever the text is not intended to be a vision. There are numerous examples of this. The account of the creation of Adam and Eve is frequently questioned, and yet scientifically sound. Not only was Adam designed (which fits the evidence) but Eve was formed using Adam’s rib. We know that valuable cell material can be obtained from bone marrow. Even the plagues of Egypt used natural elements in supernatural excess, not purely supernatural, or fantastic events. There are many opportunities for the literal accounts in the Bible to go outside the bounds of reality, but instead even the remarkable accounts remain within the bounds of scientific feasibility.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Dinosaurs in the Bible?

There are two remarkable descriptions in the Bible that initially appear to be out of the realm of fantasy. Since the text does not indicate that they are visions, they should be interpreted literally. Both from the book of Job (considered the most ancient text), these accounts depict two creatures in detail that do not fit any living animal. These creatures do, however, resemble types of dinosaurs known to paleontologists. The first one, in Job 40:15-24, resembles a Brachiosaurus, one of the largest dinosaurs. In this passage is God speaking, and reads “Now behold Behemoth, which I made with you; he eats grass like an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the muscles of his belly. He moves his tail like a cedar; the sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are like tubes of bronze; his limbs are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God. . .”

The particularly telling detail in this passage is that the tail is the size of a cedar. No creature alive has this feature. This account accurately describes a Dinosaur in a time when they were supposed to be extinct. Either this is a rare mythical description of a fictitious creature that by coincidence hit the mark, or it is an actual description of a creature living at that time.

Another creature is also described that has very dinosaur/reptilian features. Some translations call it a whale, but it is not very whale-like at all, and sounds more like a dragon, which is a creature who has persisted in tales through ancient cultures for centuries. A paleontologist might see the 55 ft Kronosaurus, or the 82 ft Liopleurodon in the description. The passage, also in Job beginning at 41:1, is extensive, describing the fierce power of this creature, which apparently spends some time on land, and some in the water.

Can you catch leviathan with a hook, or his tongue with a cord you let down?. . . Can you penetrate his skin with barbed irons, or fill his head with fish spears?. . . Now, none is so fierce that dare stir him up. . . Who can open the doors of his face? His teeth are terrible all the way around. His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a tight seal. One is so near to another that no air can come between them. They are joined to each other, they stick together that they cannot be torn apart. When he snorts, a light shines, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. Out of his mouth goes burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his nostrils goes smoke, as out of a boiling pot or caldron. His breath kindles coals, and a flame goes out of his mouth. . . When he raises himself up, the mighty are afraid. . . He treats iron as straw, and brass as rotted wood. The arrow cannot make him flee. . . He makes the water boil like a pot of ointment. He makes a path shine after him. One would think the water is glowing white. On the earth there is no one like him who has no fear.

This remarkable description is not presented as being mythical or visionary, but actual. The noted features such as the scales, size, strength, and even habitat suggest a dinosaur like reptile. The fact is that such creatures did actually live, and we have the evidence of them in our fossil record. If it were not for the paleontological assumptions about their time of extinction, this would be a perfectly accurate description of a dinosaur-like reptile. The only questionable detail is the remarkable feature of fire-breathing.

Though fire-breathing seems improbable, it not only fits numerous other accounts of “Dragons” over the centuries, but has also been demonstrated as scientifically possible through the little bombardier beetle. His chemical concoction is potentially flammable, and serves as a chemical basis, when mixed with oxygen, for a fiery blaze. We know that several dinosaurs and Pteridactles had mysterious chambers in their skull, of which scientists can only guess at their purpose. The fantastic becomes feasible in the light of tangible science. Just like the question of bio-luminescence associated with this creature is consistent with living examples such as algae, fish and even fireflies, which utilize luciferases enzymes to emit light.

In addition to these accounts, the Bible also refers twice to flying serpents, and sea monsters—both likely to refer to known types of extinct reptiles. There is also an allusion to giants in Genesis, possibly referring to the dinosaurs specifically, or the common phenomenon of giganticism of species well depicted in the fossil record. These descriptions only seem fanciful when we ignore that these creatures really existed. Scientists used to think that descriptions of giant squids were mythical until recently. Ideas of a squid the size of a humpback whale were unbelievable until several were found, and now they are redeemed from the realm of fables to fact.

Centuries of accounts of sea monsters and mysterious marine creatures mirror fossil finds, and demonstrate that we have always discounted these historical experiences as fanciful until we found evidence that these creatures did exist. If the Biblical descriptions were instead of flying horses, or three-headed monsters, or two headed dogs, or a giant one-eyed green man, we could reject them because they have no basis in the fossil record. However, not only is there a basis in the fossil record for these creatures described in the Bible, but we have given them names, and are fascinated that these strange creatures once walked the earth. They are a fact of history. The Bible presents a strong case that they are also a fact of human history.

Now if you believe evolution took millions of years, and all the dinosaurs became extinct long before humans could ever see them, then this account would seem to discredit the Bible. But the Bible is not the only place where such a creature is described. Legends and stories from all over the world describe similar creatures, commonly called dragons. The Chinese zodiac is composed of entirely real and ordinary animals, except for the dragon, which is the only creature assumed to be mythical. As recently as 750 AD, dragons were described in the story of Beowolf, where the rest of the story seems to authentically depict the time period.

Numerous accounts from around the world detail encounters with these creatures. While often they are viewed as fictional, some are presented as factual, and the commonality of features among the creatures described presents an element of truth. Even a European science book from the 1500’s, Historia Animalium, listed several creatures we would call dinosaurs as still alive, including an account of a peasant’s encounter with what seems to be a Tanystropheus on May 13, 1572. He killed the creature, which would have provided proof to reporting witnesses.

Sightings of the Mokele-mbembe, a sauropod-like creature persist today by native people living in the Congo. They describe it and draw it and have named this creature, which is no fiction to them, that makes them quite nervous, as it is reportedly aggressive, and grows to over 18 feet high. Many expeditions have been able to find footprints and other evidence, as well as some sightings, worth investigating further. Since the native people have maintained these descriptions since westerners first encountered them, the likelihood that they have conspired to create new sightings is an unscientific presumption.

Even today stories persist in the Amazon and other remote locations reported and described by natives as common sightings. More convincingly, in 1977 Japanese fisherman off the coast of New Zealand pulled up a 32 ft carcass in their nets that fits the description of a Plesiosaur. It had a large skull and long neck, as well as large fin-like fore and hind limbs.

A few pictures were taken before it was returned to the sea because of the concern over contaminating the catch. The Article “What Was the New Zealand Monster?” by John Koster at www.gennet.org/facts/nessie presents the original 1977 article and photos published in Ocean‘s Magazine with an interview of a crew member. The mystery carcass could not have been as much as a month old, yet it has defied rational explanation beyond a Plesiosaur-like creature such as that reported in Loch Ness, Scotland for centuries.

Figure 1 mysterious carcass

Further evidence of dinosaurs’ co-existence with humans is found in a few pictograph drawings of sauropods in White River Canyon, Utah, and plesiosaurs in Aboriginal caves in northern Australia and other numerous locations. Additionally, footprints have been revealed preserved in mud/ash along streams in the Paluxy River beds near Dallas-Fortworth, Texas, that strongly resemble the footprints of a man parallel to those unmistakably made by a dinosaur. It is not possible that they were made millions of years apart in the same strata and soft ground.

Moreover, the remarkable discovery, mentioned earlier, of red blood cells within “68 million” year old T.Rex bone disproves an ancient dinosaur extinction. Clearly the bone had not even been fossilized yet, and contains intact hemoglobin which should have been destroyed after just several thousand years, let alone millions. Moreover, very few bones of this type have even been examined like this. How many more could there be? This evidence powerfully supports the assertion that these fossilized Dinosaurs were killed recently, in the Flood, not millions of years ago. But the whole story isn’t recorded in the sediments.

Although the fossil evidence indicates that there was a massive annihilation of the dinosaurs, the only evidence that they did not survive extinction is that they do not now appear to be among us. Paleontologists claim that dinosaurs were all eradicated about the same time worldwide because of the catastrophic testimony of the fossil record. According to their interpretation of the fossils and “later” strata, there is no evidence of dinosaurs living past that extinction. They believe that they could not have survived past that time, or there would be a record of them.

Evolutionists rely so much on fossils for evidence of when something lived, but it has been proven unreliable for that information. Although it is this remarkable preservation of species in massive sediment deposits that evolutionists use to support their theories of what lived and when it lived, these very fossils simply do not form without disasters. The same evidence that tells them that dinosaurs ever lived, is the same evidence that tells the story of destruction.

This fossil record, however, also indicates a mass destruction of all terrestrial life. All kinds of life were preserved in the fossil record, not just dinosaurs, so the only scientific conclusion we can draw is that all kinds of life was quickly buried by sediments. The fossil record is not a history of life, it is a history of death. The only thing that it demonstrates is not what evolved, but what was extinguished because by its nature the fossil record only reveals what was killed and suddenly buried. It has no authority over how life came about because the record exclusively preserves only what has died. If we were to take the fossil record at face value, all life, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, not just dinosaurs, appeared to go extinct.

Remarkably, in light of this incredible testimony of death, the abundance of life today is our only evidence there was not a total end to all life. If, then, nearly all species are found in the fossil record, but all species are not extinct today, then there is no evidence that all dinosaurs went extinct millions of years ago other than that they do not exist today. We cannot prove that the dinosaur became extinct millions of years ago, but eyewitness testimony is good evidence that dinosaurs did survive for some time—better evidence then theories. We have witnessed the extinction of species in our short lifetime, if we didn’t have pictures of them, how would we prove that they ever existed to future generations hundreds of years from now?

If we accept the Flood model based on the convincing fossil evidence, then all the terrestrial life that survives today had been preserved on the ark, including dinosaurs (likely in juvenile form). Therefore, the species that remain today would be what managed to persevere in the vast climate changes after the Flood. It should be no surprise that as gigantic (likely cold-blooded) animals, these dinosaurs could not adjust to the new, post -Flood climate, and never dominated the earth again. This scenario is certainly a more feasible explanation of their demise, and would put them in the same time period as humans. The dinosaur is not the only creature missing from our past, but one of thousands of extinctions that point to a diminishment of kind and variety, not an increase. Is evolution getting narrow-minded, or was there truly a greater abundance at the beginning of Creation, before the intrusion of sin? The record of the fossils irrefutably supports the latter, regardless of the spiritual implications.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

The Post-Flood World

If the evidence supports the fact of a worldwide flood, how can we understand the world we see now within that perspective? It is good to evaluate how a worldwide flood could result in the biological conditions we observe on the earth today. Let’s consider what we know:

In the Flood, a lot of fish were killed, and so were a lot of insects, but we still have fish and insects

A worldwide flood would destroy every terrestrial animal, and cover all the terrestrial land with sediments. But, we have terrestrial animals all over the world, and we have terrestrial vegetation today

A lot of the animals around the world are very similar, and some are very different

Humans have been scattered throughout the world

If we imagine a worldwide flood, we know by the evidence that everything was buried—plants, animals, insects, even fish, because we find all these things in the fossil record. We know that all life was affected by this global catastrophe, not just land animals. How do the Flood and post-Flood conditions result in the way life is now? How did life spring back so well, and the world become full again after the catastrophe?

Although these are good questions, the same problem needs to be addressed by evolutionists as well. Remember, whatever catastrophe killed all the dinosaurs also would have had such far-reaching effects, that the rest of world would have to recover from it as well. They would actually need the equivalent of a natural ark, rather than Noah’s ark in order to preserve the mammals and the birds. One thing that is undeniable on both sides—at least one worldwide catastrophe actually happened, which resulted in massive extinctions. The Flood is able to account for all the evidence, and for the continuation of life, which again makes it a better model.

The Fish Tale

First, let’s examine the Flood’s impact on fish. Clearly a lot of fish, and other animals that lived in the water, perished in the catastrophe. We know this, again, because there are a lot of dead fish and other animals that have been buried in the sediments and preserved as fossils. Despite the evidence of catastrophic marine death, there are still a lot of fish and other animals living in the oceans and lakes.

From the evolutionist prospective, these massive marine fossil sites pose many problems. Again, how on earth did so many fish happen to get buried while still completely intact? These only occur under unnatural circumstances. Since paleontologists use the fossil record more as a document of life, not of death, they have to recognize such phenomenon as periodic and unexplainable extinctions. One such example is the Permian Extinction, which is marked with an abundance of Cambrian and later marine species found in massive grave sites. Since many of these species are not now living, evolutionists assumed that the evidence of this massive death was the last of them, but how and why is inexplicable within a non-catastrophic paradigm.

Within the Flood perspective, however, this evidence of extinction, and the life that survived, can both be understood. Evidently, the Flood did not kill all marine life, although a great deal of pre-Flood species apparently did not survive. Much of the marine life that evolutionists call the Cambrian is so well represented in the fossil record because this “system” is mostly composed of sedentary or heavily shelled invertebrates such as crinoids and bivalves, along with crustations like trilobites, as well as animals like the giant shelled nautiloid, and armored placaderm fish. In a great flood, it would be difficult for these animals to escape the overwhelming sediments.

Since all of our fossil access to these fossil layers is on land, it is easy to see how the marine animals buried in these sediments were washed over the land during the Flood. Being trapped on land during an overwhelming deluge is easy to fathom since we have seen what a small tsunami of can wash on shore at only a few feet high. With each continent covered for several months, different stages of the Flood could easily result in the burial of these animals in the torrent of terrestrial sediments. Some could be borne up in the turbulence, and survive, but much of the off-shore animals still in the ocean would have the opportunity to escape altogether.

The turbulence and sedimentation would have killed many other levels of marine life from squid to fish, to marine mammals and even large marine reptiles. This same story is told in the fossils worldwide. The ability to survive would depend on many variables, but in a vast ocean, the opportunities would certainly be there. Sea lions, whales, dolphins and other marine mammals live higher in the water, and though many may have drown, many also were evidently able to avoid the sediments. Even though hundreds of marine species appeared to face extinction based on the fossil record, clearly they live on today. Once again, any marine mammal that was washed over land was more likely to become trapped in the torrent of sediments, and become buried than out in the open ocean.

The fossil record makes perfect sense within the Flood model, but under the uniformitarian model it seems to contradict everything we know. Evolutionists cannot rely on their interpretation of the record for what once lived because again it only recorded what died. Though the Flood killed a lot of marine life, clearly enough survived to replenish the sea.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Lakes

The fish that survived the Flood are presently divided into salt water and fresh water species. However, this distinction may not have been a factor after the Flood. As discussed earlier, salt water is caused when water evaporates and leaves behind the salt dissolved in the water that had run off the land. The pre-Flood conditions may not have had very salty oceans, but as the tremendous Flood waters drained and brought salt into the sea, the salinity may have gradually increased as the hydraulic cycle left deposits. Any surviving fish would have necessarily adjusted to it, or died. As a part of their genetic variation, they were likely created with this ability to adjust, and even now, many fish can survive in both environments (salmons, eels, sturgeons, trout). There is a strong relationship between many fresh water forms and many saltwater forms of fish, (basses, whitefish, and others that share resemblance) demonstrating the feasibility of gradual post-Flood adjustments within these species.

The recession of the Flood waters also explains how fish can be found throughout the world in the most amazing places. Lakes and rivers in the world have an abundance of local fish, even though there may be no feasible access to the sea. Many of these cases would be difficult for evolutionists to explain, as fish would be continually evolving all over again around the world in these isolated situations.

Uniformitarians attribute the formation of many of the lakes in the northern hemisphere to glaciers. While in many cases this is likely true, there are also numerous lakes that do not fit this assumption. For these lakes, which are not connected to larger bodies of water, a good question is where the fish that live in them came from? They would certainly not come stocked with fish, and even those that have an outlet stream do not provide enough passage for ocean fish to determinedly brute their way up there. At least salmon have a purpose, and a sufficient passage.

If one accepts the Flood, though, it is easy to see how receding waters would trap fish in these lakes and ponds, where those that were able, would adjust to their environment through variation and natural selection. If evolutionists would like their receding ancient seas to have populated many of these lakes, then they are still utilizing evidence that also confirms the Flood.

Surviving Plants

Now let’s consider the next post-Flood condition. After all the land was covered by sediments from the flood, so how did terrestrial vegetation come back to life? This, actually, is a relatively simple question to answer, because of the nature of plants. While a great deal of the vegetation would have been buried under sediments, a great deal of it would also have been uprooted, or torn up in the torrent. Many plants and seeds are capable of floating (especially fruit), and masses of vegetation would have offered a relatively safe haven in floating mats, keeping the seeds from rotting. The vegetation that had stayed afloat would be scattered all over the world, and as the waters receded, it would be deposited in the fresh ash and mineral rich landscape.

In the changing post-Flood climate, only the vegetation that suited the new environment would take hold, and thrive. In the same manner, insects could have been preserved on floating vegetation, though many would naturally have been on the ark. Additionally, the Bible specifically decrees that birds will “keep seed alive upon all the earth,” recognizing this important vehicle for the spread of plants. This model, therefore, effectively explains the world ecology today.

Two by Two

The next thing to consider is that all terrestrial life would have been eradicated. This means that all the land animals we see today would have come from the ark. While Noah was told to put two or more of each kind on the ark, it was not necessary to put two of each species. Though he may have, it would not be necessary to preserve every type. For instance, today we have many varieties of mice all over the world. There are little differences that distinguish them, but overall, they are essentially the same. A shrew, on the other hand, or a rat, are different species from mice altogether. The majority of the great variety of mice throughout the world today could easily have come from just a pair of mice, and variations occurred through genetic isolation and natural selection.

The same process can account for bears, or felines, which are found throughout most parts of the world. Some distinct species (like Pandas, perhaps) were likely original kinds, but many of the species that are very similar to each other are likely the result of isolation and natural selection. For instance, Polar bears and Brown bears share a lot in common. The Woolly Mammoth and the African elephant may or may not have come from the same parents, but their new environments would have forced genetic selection of the best variations. Because of the great amount of room on the ark, though, it is not necessary to insist that every species in a family came from one set of representatives.

Our experience with dog breeding, again, demonstrates that there is actually a lot of genetic flexibility built into each species—the barrier is between species like lions and bears. Since there are so many closely related species throughout the world today, though, it was not necessary for Noah to take more than about 8,000 kinds (including currently extinct types) of animals on board the ark in order to account for all the present terrestrial animal species. This also explains the lack of diversity today in comparison to the original created kinds found in the fossil record. Amazingly, since Noah’s ark was nearly 2 football fields long, and three decks high, at about 1.5 million cubit feet, it was quite capable of carrying all that was dictated by the Bible, and have plenty of room for living quarters and storing provisions. There was likely even room for any new additions during the year on the ark.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Disembark and Disburse

When the ark came to rest on Mt. Ararat, Noah released the animals from the ark, except for those used domestically, like sheep and oxen. Ararat is quite a high mountain at this time, and likely was at that time, though there may have continued to be some uplift. From the top of Ararat the animals would have likely begun to spread in different directions. Some species would begin down one side of the mountain and never go to the other side, limiting the range of that species. For instance, post- Flood apes are only found in the south and to the south east of Ararat, (Africa and Asia) but not in Europe or the Americas. There are only four living types of ape, likely not related, but since the great apes, like chimps and gorillas tend to travel in groups, in addition to the cold factor, it is not surprising that they all spread in the same southerly direction.

On the other hand, monkeys are found in both South America and Asia and Africa, but divided into Old World and New World species, indicating a definite separation of original kinds. Hoofed animals, like deer, oxen, goats, and other grazers, predictably, are common throughout the world. As grazers, they would constantly be seeking new territory as their numbers increased, but as they disbursed, the natural barriers from the mountains, would have kept the herds in genetic isolation, opening them to the environmental influence of natural selection.

There are many influential factors that we may never know. For instance, as mentioned earlier, marsupials may have ventured off in all directions, but competition and environmental natural selection may have led to their virtual demise throughout the world. Perhaps they were only preserved by their ability to stay ahead of their placental competition, and reaching Australia relatively early. Then the melting polar caps caused the sea level to rise, which may have cut them off from the slower placental mammals and carnivores.

We also do not know the exact effect of the Ice Age on migration and genetic variation. We know that the Wooly Mammoth, and Saber toothed tiger seemed to do well in post-Flood North America, but they have been found in other parts of the world as well. Though they seem naturally suited for the cold environment, we may never know the influence that the Ice Age may have had on bringing out the most appropriate variations.

Some environments clearly select certain characteristics, like the white fur of a polar bear or snow leopard, or snowshoe rabbit. Other differences seem to be simple genetic isolation, like the variety of mice or squirrels. Some other differences between animals are clearly too large to come from variation, and they are likely separately created species, like orangutans and chimpanzees. But certainly, there is a wonderful array of diversity among similar species as seen in rabbits, and similar bird varieties. This reflects the incredible genetic flexibility originally built into the basic species, that allows for their diversity and environmental adjustment.

All the remarkable differences among related species are easily explainable by Creation. Clearly God pre-programmed all species with this wide genetic diversity, which would be brought out under the necessary conditions and genetic isolation. This explanation is absolutely consistent with our experimentation in genetic selection and isolation, as discussed earlier concerning the wide variety of dogs, and domestic animals. Additionally, scientists are beginning to suspect that there are genetic triggers in DNA that activate under certain conditions, or in certain combinations, which allow alternate characteristics to be manifest.

Because pre-programmed genetic information and environmental natural selection are known factors in influencing species diversification, it is not difficult to trace the basic patterns of many species as they spread throughout the world from Mt. Ararat. Since Ararat is so centrally located for most of the continental regions, (versus South Africa, or North America, which are further removed), the disbursal of animals from the ark could have been widespread in a relatively short time.

There are some factors that likely aided to the rapid spread of animals from the ark. One factor is the search for appropriate food. Unlike today, early grazers and other herbivores would not be restricted to their territory. All territory would be wide open to them, so they would be free to continually expand at the slightest competition or threat from predators.

Additionally, the openness of territory would reduce the mortality rate in that no competition or predators would have been previously established anywhere they went, and this would allow a rapid increase in population. Because of the unfettered state of herbivores, carnivores would be forced to follow. If too many carnivores were in a location, the grazing herds would simply move into new territory, forcing further expansion of the carnivores. Much of the rapid disbursal of animals from the Ararat region can be attributed to this pattern.

Spread of Human Civilization

Another factor is humans. Although the survivors on Noah’s ark were told to fill the earth, they did not. Numerous generations stayed in the same region, building cities, and growing in population. This would also drive many animals out of the region, though this is a lesser factor than natural migration. It wasn’t until after the Tower of Babel when God disbursed humanity by imposing different languages on them, that humans slowly began to spread across the world.

We see validation in this since the most ancient cultures in the world are in the immediate region of the Middle East, and the more recent cultures are in the Americas. Evidence of this is can be demonstrated by the stage of civilization that these New World people were found in when Europeans arrived. They were still busy inhabiting the fullness of the land, as nomadic people, and had not come to the point where they had developed technologies that mark civilization. Had Europeans not interrupted their progress, they may have followed a similar developmental pattern.

Prior to that, the most advanced of cultures in the Americas, the Incas and the Aztecs, still relied chiefly on superstition and power for its basis of governmental authority. The Aztecs of Mexico, and the Incas of South America, both came to their peak between the 1300’s and mid 1500’s. This indicates that they were likely at the same stage that many Middle Eastern cultures went through thousands of years before, like the ancient Babylonians and the Egyptians. The Teotihuanacan civilization was also established between 200 BC- 700 AD, and likely had nearly 100,000 people living in its city center at its peak, before it mysteriously disappeared.

Though the Mayan culture in Central America seemed to thrive for many years from about 250 AD to about 900 AD, their urban areas were sparsely populated, primarily consisting of the priests and those who ministered in the city. The majority of the people lived rurally and widely spread because of difficult agricultural conditions in the dense jungle. The city centers, with grand pyramids and elaborate temples were used primarily for ceremonies, and not as populated cities.

This civilization, as the others, exhibits the similar early Mesopotamian and Egyptian patterns of authority based on power wielding infrastructures using awe inspiring superstitious practices. All of them discovered some of their own breakthroughs in technological advancements. However, these thriving Mesopotamian cultures were established over 2,500 BC—thousands of years before the American cultures.

The time it took for civilizations to develop after leaving the Ark can be an indication of the time it took for the people to cross to the Americas, and spread, (most likely by following the coast) throughout the Americas. In fact, whether one believes in evolution, or in Noah’s flood, the expansion of people from a general area is necessary since all of humanity would have come from an initial stock of people, whether driven by lingering “animal instinct” or by God who drove people apart at the tower of Babel.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Language, the Great Divider

Strangely, there is actual evidence for this idea that God confounded the language of the people in order to disburse them. Linguistic studies have traced the relationship of almost all languages back thousands of years to an early time in our language history. Linguists have compared all the languages in the world to determine their common relationships in the past, but they were only able to narrow them down to 10 main families of language. If evolution were true, there should be a link among all of the languages, as they would have come from the same stock of people. But the differences are so divergent, that linguists cannot find a relationship between them, and these 10 families remain distinct.

What is so remarkable about these languages is the proximity of their regional origin. In other words, every language in the world falls into one of these 10 families, but these 10 families originated in the same general region. Based on the pattern of human geographic dispersal, almost all of the 10 language families can be traced back to their roots in the Mediterranean Middle-East, yet there is no discernable relationship between them.

Anthropologists and linguists realize that if humans came from the same stock of ancestors through evolution, they would have all begun with the same basic language. Even if isolation gradually altered the basic language, they should always have some things in common. However, except for the obvious relationship of basic language structure, linguists are unable to reconstruct a language that could have spawned them all. The groups of languages are actually so mysteriously different, it is exactly as if they purposely had no relationship to each other.

Imagine the ancient Mediterranean Middle-East culture, bustling and productive. Trade routes crossed the land and sea, and cultures arose through relationships and conquest. This is an impossible environment for creating new languages that have absolutely no relationship to each other. Language is used by humans to facilitate communication. Every time one people blends with another, or one power conquers another, or one nation trades with another, the first thing they have to do is communicate. The first thing they do is to learn each other’s language. In such a close proximity, different languages become a barrier, and translators are necessary to overcome it. How, in this culture of commerce and conquest, did so many entirely different basic languages arise?

When we consider these 10 basic families of language, we must realize that linguists agree that each one is too different to associate them. The familiar Indo-European family alone includes English, Greek, German, French, Latin and Russian, along with other branches such as the Balto-Slavic languages, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, and Armenian, to name a few. These vastly different languages (try learning Russian, it is not like English at all), are all considered in the same Indo-European language family, despite their differences, so clearly the 9 other language families are utterly unique in comparison.

When linguists separate languages into families, it is because there is nothing in common to justify a relationship, or to consider them as having the same root. These 10 language families are Indo-European, Austro-Asiatic, Afro-Asian, Black African, Malayo-Polynesian, Sino-Tibetan, Uralic and Altaic, Japanese and Korean, Dravidian, and American Indian. The majority of these families have languages clearly linked back to this area of the Middle East. For instance, Indo-European is largely based on Latin and Greek, which are from the Mediterranean. Reconstructions of this family’s first basic language have been traced to the Black Sea area, although what this original language was is unknown, and unimaginable because their differences are still quite vast.

Several other languages, though far-reaching geographically, also began very close to this area, as indicated by their local viability even today. The Afro-Asian languages include Hebrew and Arabic, and are fundamental to the area. Black African languages are spoken today as nearby as just West of the Sahara, and Ethiopia. The Sino-Tibetan family is not so far removed, because although China seems far away, its western border (including Tibet) is relatively close to the Middle East region. Though the Uralic-Altaic family includes Finnish from Northern Europe, other languages in that family include those spoken in nearby Turkey and even Mongolia. Dravidian is spoken in India, which is also nearby. Almost every language today still has a relationship through its family to languages in the Mediterranean Middle-East, the Biblical post-flood center of civilization, and yet they are inexplicably distinct.

Linguists cannot justify the obviously similar locale of the origin of these languages. There is no logical impetus for the creation of so many distinct languages in regions where people would continue to have contact. Nearly all the languages of the world were generated in an area no larger than the United States. It is understandable that once people had spread far from each other, their languages would have altered in unique ways. What is not understandable is that the languages not only changed while they were still close together, but that they are so distinct that they have no relationship with one another.

These 10 distinct language families were all spawned within close proximity of Iraq, the location of the Tower of Babel. The generation of so many distinct languages in one region is unfeasible within evolutionary terms. It is, however, the best evidence one could hope for to confirm the Biblical account.

Conclusion

When we examine the post-Flood world with a knowledgeable and discerning mind, it is not difficult to see how it could have transformed from barren to abundant in a short period of time. Watching forests grow back after fires, and even the remarkable comeback witnessed in a short time from the ash covered Mt. St. Helen’s, we know that nature is inherently resilient. We can imagine how so much of today’s biota could have been influenced by the Flood and post-Flood conditions. Evolutionists must acknowledge that a disaster wiped out the world of the dinosaurs, but they must also explain the continuation and disbursal of life.

The situation the world enjoys today is incomprehensible under the uniformitarian restrictions and inexplicable extinctions. Evolutionists do not have an ark to explain how so much life, from lizards to birds, survived the dinosaur disaster. They do not have flood waters to bury some of the vegetation to form fossils, or then bear up other vegetation above the sediments to preserve it until the disaster was over. They cannot explain Australian marsupials, or the pattern of language, or why it took so long for humans to get to America. Without knowing how the future evidence would support it, the authors of the Bible answered these questions, and answered them soundly. Humans are not capable of making up such scenarios with the forethought to avoid future pitfalls. The soundness of these truths reveals that God is the true Creator, who has disclosed this knowledge to us.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Common questions

Why is the universe so big if people only live on earth?

No one can speak for God, but we know that His infinite wisdom is clear in the minutest of details on earth, and His infinite greatness is evident through the vastness of space, which still cannot contain Him. Even the ancients saw the immensity of the universe through the innumerable stars, and had to feel small, and wonder at the power that made it.

Psalm 19:1-4 tells us that it is this glory that speaks to all mankind about the Lord.

Isaiah 45:18 confirms that God had made all of this for us, His children. “For this is what the Lord says, who created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; He has established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited. . .”

Genesis 1:14-18 tells us the practical purpose of the universe, and it is only for the use of humans.

“Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years:

And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule by night; he made the stars also.

And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth.

And to rule over the day and over the night, and, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw it was good.”

What is going on in Genesis chapter one?

Many scientists see God’s power and wisdom in how He chose to create the universe. He spoke all the chemical elements into existence, and then perhaps separated cold matter from energy when He said “Let there be light,” in Genesis 1:3. He then may have established light energy (for stars) and dark matter (for planets and satellites) verse 1:4, and set the rotation of the earth to establish day and night, verse 1:5. Though the stars and the sun itself were established on the fourth day, the Bible tells us in Rev 22:5 that God Himself will some day exclusively do the work of the sun for light and a source of life. By establishing the earth and plants (Gen 1:11) before establishing the sun (Gen 1:14), we see that God is not dependant on these things for giving life, but He is the source of energy and life for the stars and the sun.

Why do animals have claws and fangs for killing, and camouflage and defense mechanisms for escaping predators if the earth was created without death?

God in His wisdom provided a multitude of variations possible in plant and animal genetic code. After sin entered the world, death and the cycle of death began. If things were going to die, something had to get rid of the body, so all types of organisms likely took advantage of the pre-programmed genetic variations in their DNA through natural selection. This system likely brought out the features that each species was best armed for in filling a niche of their environment. God wisely provided an alternate role for each creature—some that would eat dead, some that would kill, some that would flee (and therefore spread quickly after the Flood). All these potential scenarios came out in order to perpetuate and maintain balance in the system of death that would continue to exist under the curse of sin until man, and thereby Creation, was redeemed and renewed.

Though God did not start this system of death, He knew what would happen, and made provision for it. It can simplistically be compared to the way we do not cause flat tires to happen, but we carry a spare because of the potential for it to happen. No one says to the driver on the side of the road “You obviously caused your own tire to go flat on purpose because otherwise you wouldn’t happen to have that spare with you.” Similarly we aught to recognize that while God allowed sin to enter the world for His ultimate purpose, He did not make us sin. It was and continues to be our choice. This is why we rely on God for the restoration of His Creation, and once He has completed this work, we will willingly decide to not make that same choice again.

Wouldn’t it take a long time for the earth to be ready for life?

Evolutionists have attempted to argue that it is scientifically impossible for God to have created the earth and filled it with life in 6 literal days. They contend that it would take millions of years for the light of the stars to reach the earth. Or that the rocks took millions of years to come to the surface from the earth’s core, or millions more to form enough soil on the planet, and for plants and animals to grow and fill the earth.

Although these arguments seem on the surface very scientific, the obvious answer is that if God is able to create anything at all out of nothing, He is able to bring it all to the appropriate maturity. Though it may actually take millions of years for the light of stars to cross the universe, God can make it instantaneous. The same applies to all aspects of creation.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

The Case Against “Old Earth” Creationism

Many of the concepts to be presented here have already been discussed, therefore some of the extensive detail already covered will be truncated and geared specifically toward Old Earth Creationists who credit God of the Bible for the source of Creation, but acquiesce to popular science for the interpretation of the earth’s history. Their argument will be presented, and then refuted with facts:

Allowing for millions of years does not contradict the Bible because the term for “day” that is used in the creation account can also mean “time period.”

While prophecies and visions in the Bible come with the shadow of mystery, historical accounts (other than a riddle) are literal. The term for “day” in Hebrew is “Yom” and can be used as an unspecified time period similar to the English term “day” Ex: “back in the day,” or “In that day.” However, just as with English, the term cannot be used as a general time period when it is used with a quantifier. Just like we would not say “Six days ago” and mean six unspecific periods of time, so with Hebrew. When we say “six days” no one is confused.

Moreover, six days is confirmed throughout the Bible as the Creation period, and always compared to the work week. “Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath. . . For in six days the Lord made the heaven and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. . .” Exodus 20:9-11. Also: Lev 23 and Hebrews 4:4. The entire 7 day week is established nowhere in history except in the Bible and it is directly related to God’s literal Creation week. Additionally, the continued reference “The evening and the morning were the ____ day” further specifies a literal interpretation of the text.

If one tries to extract the literal quantifying of days out of the text and replace it with unspecified time periods, there are immediately 2 major problems: The nonsensical interpretation of the language structure, and a conflict of when the text actually reverts back to literal days. At what point does the deliberate quantifying of days have actual meaning? When does the Bible really mean literal days, and how can we know for sure? Deferring such interpretations to the eye of the beholder makes the “Truth” of the Bible meaningless and arbitrary.

The most compelling reason to trust the literal interpretation of the Creation account is that Jews are not confused by what the Hebrew means. Their entire system of laws, writings, and their calendar is based on the very clear and unambiguous account of a 6-day Creation, with the 7^th day of rest. Moreover, the timeline account of Noah’s Flood, and all the years of genealogy are interpreted according to their literal Hebrew meaning, which is a language that has been kept alive purely through perpetual reading and learning of the Tenach, or Hebrew Old Testament, for the last 2,000 years. Evidence of this is the continued double timekeeping method of both the civil and Jewish Calendar. There is no doubt about an “Old Earth” hidden in the “original Hebrew” meaning when consulting the Jewish Calendar that is still used today, which tells us that the year of this writing is 5,769.

According to 2 Pet 3:8, a thousand years to the Lord is like a day.

Great, if it helps, I’ll give that one to you. You have 6,000 more years than the Creation account. Now where do you get the few billion more without completely disregarding the Bible?

The light of stars would take millions of years to reach the earth.

God put the stars and features in the sky “For signs and seasons, and days and years,” Gen 1:14. To say that he could evoke everything from nothing, but had to wait around while light reached the earth before He could go on is illogical. He didn’t even make the sun before he had plants growing on the earth. He can do anything, and he can certainly cause the light of stars to instantly reach the earth so they could be those signs in the sky. Just as God could have created soil without waiting for erosion, He created plants and trees with seeds in them, and chickens before eggs, and humans before babies. It’s logical, and He’s God—either believe he can do all things, or don’t bother to believe the Bible at all.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Noah’s Flood was local.

I have yet to hear what this irrefutable evidence is that has convinced these Old Earth “Creationists” to deny the clear Biblical account, yet still bother with the Bible at all. They consent that God is capable of evoking everything out of nothing, but don’t believe He can do it in Six days. This is the epitome of compromise. Perhaps it is easier to evoke everything out of nothing if you have a lot of time. But when these “Creationists” claim that the Flood was only local, they are siding with a heinously dangerous agenda. This agenda is that death existed before Adam and Eve fell.

If Noah’s Flood is only local, then fossils are explained by the slow and steady processes of evolution’s path of death. The only reason for refusing the Global Flood is to accept the interpretation of long ages of death in the fossil record. If death pre-existed Adam and Eve, then man is not responsible for death, and the wages of sin is NOT death. The Bible would be wrong, including the explanation in Romans 8:19-23 that all of creation has been subjected to death because of our sin, and awaits our redemption in order to return to the pre-fall state of “Good” and the time when God’s instructions were that everything would eat plants and fruit.

If therefore Adam and Eve did not bring death into the world through their sin, then Romans 5:12-21 (and many others) is wrong and Christ did not die to conquer the sin and the death we brought into the world. He actually would have created the world with death already in it, and we are therefore not responsible. His death was for nothing. What a joke.

Given the severe theological implications of viewing Noah’s Flood as local, there are innumerable facts that confirm the Flood:

Biblically, it is indisputable. Beginning at Gen 6:7 it is clear that the Lord sought to destroy the land animals from the entire planet:

Gen 6:7 “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man and beast, and creping thing, and the fowls of the air. . .”

Gen 6:11-13 “The earth was also corrupt before God, and filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them, and I will destroy them from the earth.”

Gen 6:17 “And behold, I do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die.”

Gen 7:19-20 “And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.”

Gen 7:23 “And every living substance was destroyed which was on the face of the ground”

Many other scriptures confirm the total destruction of the earth. Moreover, the Hebrew word “eretz” which can mean “earth” or “land” is further specified as global, rather than local by repeatedly using “Alhaeretz“ meaning “on the earth,” rather than simply “b’haeretz” meaning “in the land.” Whenever the Bible is referring to a specific region, it uses “in the land” not “on the land.” “On the” indicates surface, not location. Eretz is used throughout Genesis consistently and unambiguously as the “earth.” “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth,“ Gen 1:1 etc . . . Therefore, the versatility of the word is not a compelling argument for a local flood in light of the specifically all-inclusive references in the Flood account.

Once again, we can look to the Jews for support, as they are not in the least confused by the extent of the global Flood, as the Hebrew is interpreted as thus in all their writings.

Scientifically, the evidence is indisputable as well. As has been discussed extensively, the earth is covered in miles of water-borne sediments. The immense deposit of fossils world-wide were created by the sudden deposition of water-borne sediments. Marine fossils cover every continent, mixed in with terrestrial environment fossils, and imbedded within the rock of most mountains.

Compellingly, there are currently no environments on the earth that model the necessary circumstances that will eventually create fossil fuels. There are vast, immeasurable fossil fuel deposits all over the earth, including millions of barrels of oil, miles of coal, and millions of cubic feet of natural gas per deposit.

Each requires an immense volume of vegetation many times that of the fossil fuel deposit to be buried by vast loads of water-borne sediments in order to create the current deposits. In spite of the great forests that would have to accumulate first, there is no gradual, natural, non-catastrophic process that could bury all these vast deposits in the same environment that would allow them to accumulate undisturbed.

All Fossil fuels are buried by heavy loads of water-borne sediments--the exact circumstances one would expect to see in a Flood. The exact circumstances we have witnessed in a Flood. Here we have processes we have observed verses processes we cannot find, and yet despite the powerful confirmation of a world-wide Flood, the unknown is preferred. One must ask for what agenda?

This is a small portion of the evidence in support of the clearly Biblical “Young Earth” interpretation. The language is solid. The science is solid. What is so solid about teaming up with a community whose first step in any direction is prefaced by “God is excluded as a scientific option because He would be supernatural, and therefore unscientific?” If everything must be explained without Him, then the story of science must be carefully woven to exclude Him.

Jesus confirmed Creation, and Noah’s Flood, and told us about the end of the world. How do we decide what to believe? Let us believe Him. He was there for it all. He said he came to confirm the word of God, not destroy it. He also came to restore us to the Father by his death and resurrection, and by conquering sin and death for us.

Jesus said “He that is not with me is against me.” Luke 11:23. Really, where are you?

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

What is the Truth?

No scientific fact has ever disproved or disputed Special Creation according to the Biblical model. Scientists do not have evidence that Creation, according to the Biblical account is impossible, they simply reject it. All geological, biological, and physical evidence, including basic laws of science, are consistent with the Biblical model of Creation and they don’t need to be modified, manipulated, or reinterpreted. The Bible was written prior to our present knowledge of the world and understanding of science, yet it is still compatible with the scientific evidence today. If the Bible is some wild, primitive fairy tale, the scientific facts should have easily torn it down by now.

Evolution is not a scientific perspective based on evidence that dictates the interpretation of Evolution. The theory is completely uncorroborated and unable to conform to even the minimum scientific requirements of sound hypothesis, verifiable evidence. It doesn’t even align with proven scientific principles. Common sense, scientific facts and experimentation all reveal that the evolution model is unsound non-science, and the Creation model, though thousands of years old, remarkably remains scientifically sound. Evolution is a science model based on faith, but the Creation model is a faith soundly based in science.

Abundant additional evidence within the Bible is factually validated in the real world. The Bible is a practical reflection of reality so that our faith may be based in truth. In addition to the scientific validity of the Bible, it is completely historically sound, has hundreds of ancient manuscripts to verify its integrity, and has been confirmed by the accurate fulfilling of thousands of precise prophecies. This is not some haphazard story one man sat down and wrote to entertain himself. The writings of the Bible have not been altered over thousands of years, and they are confirmed by Old Testament comparison to the Dead Sea Scrolls, and overwhelming, indisputable New Testament manuscript support. The more than 60 books throughout the Bible all agree in History, essential nature of God, and God’s plan of salvation.

No statement or claim made by the Bible has ever been factually disputed. Additionally, the purposes and occasions for these writings range from historical, to prophetic, to poetic, and reflective, in times of war, peace, fear and joy, covering all the range of humanity’s emotions and issues. In contrast, not even two historical textbooks can completely agree on the history of just our nation, let alone on the interpretation of its ideas in the way the books of the Bible agree about ancient history. Even Jesus confirmed this history, including the Creation and the Flood, in His ministry. We can accept that He said these things the same way that we know Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address—witnesses, evidence, and accuracy. No other faith is founded on such surety. There is sufficient truth to justify faith in the Word of the Bible, if one is open to hearing it.

The reality, though, is that people either do want to have a relationship with God, or they do not. Every one of us has an emptiness inside that the things of this world cannot touch, but not everyone is willing to find the answer. There will never be enough evidence to make someone humble their heart and come to God if they simply do not want to know God. The question is not whether evolution or Creation is true. The question is, do you want to know the truth, no matter what the truth is? If the answer is “No”, then be honest. Don’t keep other people from knowing the truth through the spread of misinformation. If the answer is “Yes,” then perhaps this can be a starting point on your journey.

The matter of whether the world came about through evolution or Creation is paramount to our view of life. If we are willing to ignore scientific evidence, and believe that we evolved, then we ignore the testimony of everything around us, and eliminate the need for God. When we eliminate God, we unwittingly remove the only true source of goodness, love, peace, and hope, and replace Him with our fallible selves and our self-centered, vacillating opinions. Life reveals a beauty and purpose of design, and the beauty and purposefulness of a Designer. The desirable character of God is evident in the goodness of His creation, and draws us to Him.

But we see another law in the world of death, suffering, and evil, plain to us at every level. These things tell us about sin in the world, and that a life without these things is more desirable. We witness pain and destruction and wickedness in life, in others, and in ourselves, and if we are honest, we yearn for the perfection and peace that the beauty manifests. When we recognize that God created us, we recognize that we also have sin, which is the spoiler of perfection.

When our eyes are open to this, we would rather pursue God’s goodness then sin’s destruction. But when we ignore God and His revelations, we instead pursue our own desires, based on our own authority, and each one of us applies the law of survival of the fittest. When we are the children of apes, then we believe that we control our own destiny. When we are the children of Adam and Eve, then we recognize the nature of sin in us, and seek resolution with God, who holds our life preciously in His hands.

God has revealed Himself to us through the Bible. He is the God that made heaven and earth, and every plant and creature in it. He created the physical, chemical, and biological laws that we witness today. He made humans on the earth for a relationship of love, and to share His goodness with us. Adam and Eve rebelled back then, as we do today, and did not resist their own desires. Humanity’s sin opened the door of death and destruction, allowing the devil to have dominion in our world. From then on, our sin separated us from God, dividing our hearts against Him with the rationale of self-concern. But though we could never obtain that perfect innocence again, and dwell in the presence of God, He had a plan to restore what was once perfect, and reconcile us to Himself.

He came into this world as the man Jesus, showing us the heart of God, and setting a path of righteousness before our feet. This path to God was through Himself, as He lived a perfect life, fulfilling sinless perfection on our behalf, and then removed our sins from us through subjecting Himself willingly to death on the cross. In John 15:13, Jesus explains what we all know intuitively: “Greater love has no man than this; that he lay down his life for his friends.” After suffering death in our place, Jesus rose from the dead to show that He had conquered both sin and the consequences of sin, death. Now, God offers us salvation through our faith in what Jesus did for us. Through our faith, we are washed from our sins, and are brought to God in perfect newness, no longer burdened by our past.

By accepting His gift of life, we are assured of our place in heaven for all eternity. But if we reject this gift from the one who so evidently created us, there is nothing to bring us close to Him. There is nothing that we have that He did not give us, so His only desire from us is our heart, willingly offered to Him. Trying to be good is not sufficient because God’s holiness is perfect, and we can never obtain that on our own. We cannot earn it, or follow the path of our own choosing to Him.

When we reject His only provision for our salvation, we reject Him entirely, and we cannot enter into His eternal life, but are separated from God in death to hell. If we refuse eternal life, how can He force us to take it? But God is gracious in that He offers eternal life to anyone who responds with his or her heart and seeks the true God through the free gift of His Son as our Savior. If you follow after Jesus, “. . .then you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” (John 8:32)

The Bible says in James 3:17 “The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to bear, full of mercy, and good fruits, without strife, and without hypocrisy.” Opening your heart to this wonderful God that made us, is opening your heart to the peace of truth.

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Throughout the Bible, God warns us to not be deceived:

“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt.” (Ps. 14:1).

“In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” (Gen 1:1)

“God Lord, that created the heavens, and stretched them out; He that has spread forth the earth, and that which comes out of it; [it is] He that gives breath to the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk on it.” (Is 42:5)

“The heavens declare the glory of God: and the firmament shows his handiwork. Day after day utters speech, and night after night shows knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.” (Ps 19:1-3)

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven . . . against men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is revealed to them; for God has shown it to them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (Rom 18:21)

“ . . . they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved. And for this cause, God shall send them strong delusion, that they might believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (II Thes 2:10-12)

“It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement.” (Hebrews 9:27)

But the Bible also reveals God’s heart toward us:

“In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shined in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” (John 1-5) “That was the true Light, which lights every man that comes into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and His own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on His name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” (John 9-14)

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.’” (John 14:6)

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16)

“Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither is his ear heavy that He cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you.” (Isaiah 59:2)

“But God demonstrates His love for us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)

“For by grace you are saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, unless anyone should boast.” (Ephesians 2:8,9)

“Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Romans 5:1)

“. . . for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

“For whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Romans 10:13)

“For with the heart man believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:10)

Conclusion

The single most significant question that presses on the hearts of humanity is whether or not there is a God that will meet us the day we die. Everyone is going to die, but not one of us can pass through that moment and come back and warn the rest of what is to come for each of us. We all of us stand at the gates of death, like a crowd wondering what awaits us inside. We listen to the rumors, and shake our heads in wonder. All our lives we stare with trepidation as we happen by the gates. Sometimes stopping with others that are standing by, we say, “What to you think is in there?” but they don’t know. They tell you, like the latest gossip, what they have heard—things they think. We listen to the theories that we like, or the ones that fit our sense of things, but to us it is still only gossip.

The mystery, though, is that we don’t know. The images posted around the entrance of these gates, like billboards, fill our minds with messages of beauty and promise, declaring the sure hope within. Anyone of us who wanted to know, could stop and look and understand for ourselves what awaited us if we only believed. We could confirm who had the truth if we would just pay attention. We would be assured by the testimony of the wisdom and love, joy and life because the proclamation is easily discerned. If we would only stop and look. But we are afraid. We think “If there were only a way to know for sure.” We would certainly choose this peace and beauty. We would certainly rather escape judgment if we knew for sure it awaited us. But who can really know? Who can go there for us and bring back a worthy report, so our faith is not in vain?

Can you answer this Question?

Question A to scientist: Can a body of dead tissue be reanimated, or can the dead live again without technology or human interference?

Possible Answer #1 No, it has no life, it cannot live again without help.

Question B: If you do not believe that an already fully functional biological machine can come to life again, how can you believe that life began when there was no biological machine at all?

Possible Answer #2: Yes, life can occur again in that dead body.

Question C: Then why don’t you consider that Jesus, the prophesied Son of God, and His followers said that He rose from the dead to conquer death and sin on our behalf?

Answer: Because this event cannot be proven scientifically, and there is no evidence.

Question D: Then why do you believe in evolution, which cannot produce a single undisputable fact or witness to support its claims? Why do you reject Creation, and the life and Resurrection of Jesus, which are well witnessed and factually substantiated?

All of history reflects the fact that people witnessed Jesus alive after His death, yet there is not a single witness of evolutionary history. There is not even the witness of rocks and fossils, which testify in support of the Genesis account affirmed by this Jesus. If people choose not to believe in God, that is their choice, but what should we make of an evolutionary community that must generate propaganda and self-contradicting scientific fables in order to prevent the less knowledgeable from entering into the truth? What is their agenda seeing they must lie to convince even themselves that God doesn’t exist?

INTRO PHYSICS BIOLOGY FOSSILS GEOLOGY back to top

Homepage

Works Cited

Ackerman, Jennifer. "Dinosaurs Take Wing." National Geographic July 1998.

Atlas of Life on Earth. New York: Barnes & Noble, 2001.

Austin, Steve A. "Impact #379: Mount St. Helens." Acts & Facts, Institute for Creation Research Jan. 2005.

Behe, Michael J. “A True Acid Test: Response to Ken Miller” http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_trueacidtest.htm, 2000

Berg, Barbara. “The Battleground Called Centromeres.” Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Website: http://www.fhcrc.org/about/pubs/center_news/2003/jan16/sart2.html (April 2009)

"Bible Tech." Modern Marvels. The History Channel. 12 Apr. 2006 (reairing).

Brett-Surman, Michael K. A Guide to Dinosaurs. San Francisco: Fog City P, 2002.

Browne, Malcolm. "Biologists Debate Man's Fishy Ancestors." New York Times [New York] 16 Mar. 1993.

Brum, Gill, Larry McKane, and Gery Karp, eds. Biology Exploring Life. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994.

Carroll, Robert L. Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co, 1988.

Chiappe, Luis. "Dionosaur Embryos." National Geographic Dec. 1998: 34.

Coenraads, Robert. The Nature Company Guides Rocks and Fossils. Ed. Arthur Busbey III. Australia: Time-Life Books, 1999.

Cuozzo, Jack. Buried Alive. Green Forest: MasterBooks Inc, 1998.

Daintith, John. The Facts on File Dictionary of Physics. New York: Charles Letts & Co, 1988.

Darwin, Charles. The Origin of the Species: Great Books of the Western World #49. The Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. International, 1952.

Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design. New York: W. W. Norton & Co, Inc, 1986.

The Day the Earth Nearly Died. Discovery Channel Production.

DeYoung, Donald. Dinosaurs and Creation. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000.

Dorling Kindersley Science Encyclopedia. London: Dorling Kindersley, 1994.

Fields, Helen. "Dinosaur Shocker." Smithsonian May 2006: 50.

Gardom, Tim, and Angela Milner, eds. Natural History Museum Book of Dinosaurs. London: Carlton Books Ltd, 1989.

Gingrich, Philip. "Origin of Whales from Early Artiodactyls: Hands and Feet of Eocene Protocetidae from Pakistan." Science Sept (2001).

Gingrich, Philip. "Research on the Origin and Early Evolution of Whales." 23 Feb. 2009.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gingeric/PDGwhales/Whales.htm

Gish, Duane. Evolution: the Fossils Still Say No. El Cajon: Institute for Creation Research, 1995.

Gould, Stephen J., and Niles Eldredge. Paleobiology 3 (1977): 147.

Gould, Stephen J. "Hooking Leviathan by Its Past." Natural History May 1994.

Hall, B. G. (1982b). Evolution on a Petri dish: The evolved ? B-galactosidase system as a model for studying acquisitive evolution in the laboratory. In Evolutionary Biology. (M. K. Hecht, B. Wallace, and G. T. Prance, Eds.) pp. 85-150. (Plenum Press: New York.)

Ham, Ken and Sarfati, Jonathan and Weiland, Carl. The Revised & Expanded Answers Book. Green Forest: Master Books, 2000.

Hanegraaff, Hank. The Face that Demonstrates the Farce of Evolution. Nashville: Word, 1998.

Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History if Time. New York: Bantam Books, 1998.

Hoesch, William, and Steven A. Austin. "Impact # 370: Dinosaur National Monument: Jurassic Park or Jurassic Jumble?" Acts & Facts Institute for Creation Research Apr. 2004.

IBM Corp. World Book Encyclopedia Millennium Edition. Computer software. World Book, Inc, 1999.

Johnson, Philip E. Darwin on Trial. Downers Grove: Intervarsity P, 1993.

Koster, John. "What Was the New Zealand Monster." www.gennet.org/facts/nessie.html

Lee, Robert E. Anthropological Journal of Canada (1981).

Lee, Robert E. "Radiocarbon: Ages in Error." Anthropological Journal of Canada (1981).

Luhr, James F., ed. Smithsonian Earth. New York: Dorling Kindersly, 2003.

Mayell, Hillary. “Four-Winged Dinosaurs Found in China.” National Geographic News January 22, 2003.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0121_030122_dromaeosaur.html

McDowell, Josh. More than a Carpenter. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1977.

Morris, Henry, and Gary Parker. What is Creation Science? Green Forest: Master Books, 1999.

Mount St. Helens, Explosive Evidence for Catastrophe. Perf. Steve Austin. DVD. Institute for Creation Research, 1993.

Muncaster, Ralph O. Science, Was the Bible Ahead of its Time? Eugene: Harvest House, 2000.

Noah's Ark, The True Story. The Discovery Channel. 18 Jan. 2004.

Oleny, Harvey. "Letter to the Editor." Editorial. Chemical and Engineering News 1977.

Oxnard, Charles. "The Order of Man." New Haven: Yale University Press (1984).

"Primitive Whales and Whale Evolution." Whale Fossil Evolution. Enchanted Learning Software.

22 Feb. 2009. http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/whales/

Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. Tenney, Merrill C. editor. Vol. 1 A-C, “Biblical and Post-Biblical Aramaic” pg 254. Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI. 1972

Quammen, David. “Was Darwin Wrong?” National Geographic Nov 2004, page 28.

Raup, David M. "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology." Comp. Chicago Field Museum of Natural History. Field Museum Bulletin (Jan. 1979).

Richard, Bliss, and Parker Gary. Fossils: Key to the Present. El Cajon: Institute for Creation Research, 1996.

Starr, Cecie, and Ralph Taggart, eds. Biology The Unity and Diversity of Life. 8th ed. Wadsworth Company, 1998. Division of International Thomson Publishing Inc, London

Stone, Henry. "The Other Ancient Egypt." Tour Egypt. 22 Feb. 2009.

www.touregypt.net/featurestories/fossils.htm

Super Volcanoes. Discovery Channel. 6 May 2002.

Walker, Gabrielle. Snow Ball Earth: The Story of the Great Global Catastrophe that Spawned the Earth as We Know It. New York: Crown, 2003.

West, Ronald R. Compass May 1968.

Woodmorappe, John, comp. Studies in Flood Geology: A Compilation of Research Studies Supporting Creation and the Flood. Tech. El Cajon: Institute for Creation Research, 1993.

Zimmer, Carl. Evolution, the Triumph of an Idea. New York: Harper Collins, 2001.