Copyright © 1984,
2000 by the Creation Research Society. All rights reserved.
Volume 21, Number 1
A Creationist Environmental
John W. Klotz, Ph.D.
A consistent creationist
is an environmentalist. All of nature belongs to God since He is the
Creator. Man is a steward of the natural world and he should be a good
one. Many instances are cited when man has foolishly upset the balance
of nature, not understanding the consequences of his acts.
A Trip To The Grand Canyon
George F. Howe, Ph.D.
An exploratory investigation
of the Creation Research Society Grand Canyon Experiment Station and
surrounding area is discussed. Possible future projects are offered
and a catalogue of some local plants and animals is given.
The Universe Is Bigger Than
15.71 Light Years
G. Russell Akridge, Ph.D.
Moon and Spencer's 15.71
light year model universe does not approximate the real universe. Their
model universe is far too dense, and far too short-lived. Such a model
for the universe should not be used in support of a short travel time
for light from the distant stars as a solution for the light from distant
Global, Continental and Regional
Sedimentation Systems And Their Implications
Glenn R. Morton, M.S.
The geologic record displays
a trend in which certain lithologies are more prominently deposited
during certain geologic periods. The trend is a worldwide phenomenon
which seems to better fit within creationist views of earth history.
Survival Of Freshwater And
Saltwater Organisms In A Heterogeneous Flood Model Experiment
E. Norbert Smith, Ph.D
and Stephen Hagberg, B.S.
The Noahic flood destroyed
all the air breathing animals except those on the ark. No doubt the
flood also took a major toll on freshwater and marine organisms due
to the turbulence, turbidity, changes in salinity and temperature. Some
marine animals survived by simply tolerating changes in salinity. Survival
of a marine reef fish, Blue Damsel, Abudefduf uniocellatus, was
tested at different rates of freshwater dilution. It was found that
the salinity where the fish lost the ability to swim was the same when
exposed to dilution rates of 15 0/00/hrs (parts per thousand per hour)
and 1.5 0/00/hr but was higher with the slow dilution rate of 0.031
0/00/hr. These data suggest that the marine organisms could not have
survived a homogeneous freshwater deluge.
A heterogeneous flood model
was set up in a 55-gallon aquarium. A quantity of saltwater 20 cm deep
was overlaid with freshwater and the system was exposed to outdoor summertime
weather conditions in western Oklahoma. Marine algae (Phaeophyta and
Chlorophyta), brine shrimp (Artemia nauplii), a hermit crab and
some marine gastropods wee introduced int the saltwater portion. A goldfish
(Carassius auratus), two mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis),
and freshwater plants were introduced into the surface layer. Although
some mixing occurred, all the organisms survived four week exposure
to outdoor conditions suggesting that protected pockets of marine organisms
may have survived the flood by being overlaid with freshwater.
Darwin's Last Hours Revisited
Wilbert H. Rusch, Sr.,
The material presented in
hte tract, Darwin's Last Hours, does not correspond with the
facts known about Charles Darwin. It is suggested that Christians not
use the tract in any creation-evolution discussions.
The Divine Essence In Evolutionary
Theorizing - An Analysis Of The Rise And Fall Of Evolutionary Natural
Selection, Mutation, And Punctuted Equilibria As Mechanisms Of Megaevolution
It is the author's thesis
that true science, namely, experimentation and observation, is inseparably
united with God. Science as a reasoning process and our ability to reason
as human beings have the Creator as their common source. The inseparability
between science and God is especially apparent in the question of the
orgin of life. This article describes the futility confronting materialistic
theorizers to explain the origin of life without invoking miracles.
The problem confronting
materialistic theorizers is the requirement of formulating a testable,
on-going mechanism for the origin of life as opposed to a nontestable,
discontinuous mechanism. The former is within the realm of science,
while the later is not. Darwin's on-going evolutionary natural selection
mechanism met that requirement. The article goes on to explain how,
hwen Darwin finally did deal honestly and objectively with the data,
he abandoned evolutionary natural selection. Then, in order to avoid
conceding to special creation and continue to meet the scientific requirement
of postulating an on-going mechansism, he switched to Jean Lamarck's
theory of acquired characters, which never had credibility. Darwin's
correct insistence that a materialistic explanation for the origin of
life must be by means of an on-going mechanism, perhaps can only be
fully appreciated at a time when special creation is the predominant
Darwin's reaction to the
dilemma is contrasted to the reactions of Hugo De Vries and present-day
evolutionists, like Stephen Jay Gould, who also found evolutionary natural
selection untenable as an on-going mechanism. Their reaction has been
to abandon true science by postulating periodic mutability and punctuated
equilibria, which, because they are not on-going, are statements of
belief. Essentially, they were led back to creation in spite of themselves.
Science, within its limitations, will always reveal creation, because
it reveals intelligent design in nature, while not revealing an on-going
mechanism; together they add up to creation.
© Copyright 2001-2013, Creation
Research Society. All rights reserved.
Copyright & Permissions