“We still don’t have a mechanism to account for the big structural changes that must have taken place: evolving from asexual to sexual, from single-cell to multi-cell, and the big one—going from non-life to a single cell that has DNA, has proteins capable of reading the DNA and using it to make new proteins including an exact copy of itself!” Read more about this here:...
Read More“Scientific evidence does not have to be interpreted. Science is science.”
The above was a response (“Scientific evidence does not have to be interpreted. Science is science.”) that I received while in a debate with an evolutionist. This is how I rejoined in the debate: Crime Scene Scientists, Paleontologists, and Archaeologists along with probably every other scientist is faced with the challenges of how to best interpret the evidence. If you were a crime scene investigator, you would come into a house and observe a dead body laying on the...
Read MoreA Crucial Question: What Is The Evidence?
One of the most important, but most difficult, things to accomplish in schools is to teach students to think. It’s easy for teachers to fall into the trap of allowing their students to just memorize all kinds of information and repeat it on a test. However, real learning entails much more than just memorizing. Real learning comes by comparing, contrasting, classifying, applying, analyzing and evaluating data. It starts with asking the right questions. Whenever we speak...
Read MoreSpeed of Light Revisited
A major area of research among creationist physicists concerns the speed of light. This has a real significance to the creation-evolution debate. Astronomers have frequently argued that, given the known speed of light and the apparent distance of most of the stars in the universe, the universe must be extremely old, just by virtue of the fact that we can see it. One major assumption of the argument is that the speed of light has always been a constant. If that one...
Read More