Tag Archives: scientific theory

Creation ex nihilo – void

Blake's Image of Creation should be a warning to fools who deny God

Genesis tells us God created an earth “without form and void.” As we shall see, that comes remarkably close to the understanding of early creation by modern physicists.

Precambrian late embryos?

A quarry along the Provincial Road 228 near Sancha exposes the transition between the uppermost Doushantuo Formation (black, organic-rich shales known as 'algal coal') and the lowermost Dengying Formation made of bright, brittle dolostones. From http://www.sqfo.info, CC BY 2.0 Generic License

A Chinese-American team may have discovered, if not a “Precambrian rabbit,” the next best thing: Precambrian embryonic fossils showing the kind of development only multicellular organisms show. The team leaders do not know whether they found an early plant or animal. But their find, if it holds, threatens to shake the foundations of biological evolution.

Creation ex nihilo – intro

Blake's Image of Creation should be a warning to fools who deny God

Since Darwin first wrote On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured (sic) Races in the Struggle for Life (which title was shortened in the 1872 second edition to “The Origin of Species”), the hypothesis of Evolution has had an impact on the educated world. By strongly suggesting that the biblical account of Creation is nothing more than a myth for the uneducated and weak-minded, Evolution has indirectly served as the subliminal evangelist for atheism and agnosticism.

Creation: clash of theories

vapor canopy theory illustrated

The creation science movement has not been able to speak with one voice for years. And now we know why. Less than two weeks ago, a bold commentator broke decades of unproductive silence on the real issue. One man, among all creation scientists, has a unified and comprehensive theory of the Global Flood. That man is Walter T. Brown Jr., and that theory is the Hydroplate Theory. Now we know the real reason why the larger creation movement rejected it out-of-hand. And the grounds were not scientific, and still aren’t.

Sea plankton in earth orbit?

Diatoms, the smallest of sea plankton

The Russian flight director for the International Space Station said this week two cosmonauts had found sea plankton, or traces of them, on the outer hull and window of a Russian module of the International Space Station. If this proves out, they might have proved a key part of the hydroplate theory of the Global Flood without knowing it.

Energy of month redux

moon

In the days since CNAV published an article on the change of the length of the month, something interesting happened. Walt Brown, originator of the Hydroplate Theory, realized he’d overlooked something. This often happens when one proposes a unifying theory to explain all the changes in our world, and the solar system, from one event. Especially an event as violent as the Global Flood.

Energy to change a month

moon

The Global Flood did more than change the length of the day. It changed the length of the month, or the period of the moon. Is that even feasible? Yes, once we know the Flood produced enough nuclear energy to eject three percent of the earth’s mass into space. Much of that material cost the moon enough of its energy to drop it into a lower orbit.

Energy to change a calendar

Amenemhet I, adopter of the 365-day Egyptian solar calendar

On July 7, the National Creationism Examiner discussed the history of the calendar. At issue: the ancient Egyptians, of all people, had the best natural season indicator: the Nile flood season. Why, then, did they keep a 360-day calendar for centuries? The natural calendar of the earth changed. The Egyptians took time to readjust their official calendar, but they did, beginning with the Twelfth Dynasty (Amenamhāt I, the “Pharaoh who did not know Joseph.”)

Science, religion and law

Triceratops horridus as a scientist thinks it might have looked.

Must science always contradict religious tradition to stay valid? What happened to following evidence where it leads? Lawyers for a scientist who lost his job over his work will now ask that in court.

Scientist fired for discovery

Triceratops horridus as a scientist thinks it might have looked.

Can a scientist lose his job for discovering something new and telling the community about it? It happened recently. And the scientist who lost his job, is going to court to get it back. And that case threatens to pit creation against evolution in a trial to rival Tennessee v. Scopes.