Category Archives: Creation Corner

Global flood astronomical date range

Comet Halley was launched during the Global Flood
Print Friendly

Dr. Walt Brown, nearly three months ago, announced an astronomical fix for the Global Flood. When he did that, he provoked the precise sort of debate scientists ought to have. Brown, with his customary boldness, challenged anyone who doubted him: “Check my math!” Dr. Matthew Jachimstahl, a skeptic (both of the Hydroplate Theory and of the Bible), accepted Brown’s challenge. Brown recently released the full results of that challenge.

Global flood astronomical fix revised

Comet Halley was launched during the Global Flood
Print Friendly

Dr. Walt Brown, Director of the Center for Scientific Creation, recently announced a new figure for his astronomical fix for the Global Flood. Like his earlier fix, he based this one on a common close-approach date for comets. But the new fix uses true orbital periods, not the hypothetical periods in the cometary catalog.

Global Flood gains astronomical fix

Comet Halley was launched during the Global Flood
Print Friendly

The Center for Scientific Creation and the Creation Science Hall of Fame separately announced today that an astronomical date for the Global Flood is now available.

Censorship: key to sustaining evolution

Does Bill Nye hold to this?
Print Friendly

Tina Dupuy recently called on government, or maybe voters (she never made clear), to “save our schools from Creationism.” I’m sure Ms. Dupuy believes her argument is based on logic and credibility. It is not. She has been fooled by censorship masquerading itself as science.

Genesis 1-11: a scientific apologetic

Genesis tells how the universe, and the world, began.
Print Friendly

For centuries, beginning with Leonardo da Vinci, scientists accepted the account in Genesis chapters 1-11 as almost self-evident. As a result, they made few efforts to validate it. (Athanasius Kircher, who wrote a scholarly treatment of the voyage of Noah’s Ark, was one notable exception.) As a further result, those who doubted the Genesis account could easily persuade people not to believe it. But since 1960, many creation scientists have sought to show not only that those eleven chapters of Genesis happened as Moses wrote them down, but how they might have happened. Today, a careful scholar can read those chapters and imagine at least one, and often several, ways their story might have played out.

Life before Earth – or with it

Life before earth requires panspermia
Print Friendly

Recently two scientists showed an amazing mathematical chimera: life before earth. They think they showed that life began 9.7 billion years ago – four billion years after the universe began. They really showed that life could not have come from non-life. At least, not on earth. In the process they made the creation story far more likely than they might care to admit.

360 day year: no coincidence

The 360 day year raises an interesting astronomical riddle.
Print Friendly

The most ancient calendars all assumed a 360 day year. But why, when astronomers have long known that a year is about 365.24 days? Because the earth once had a 360 day year, and something changed. The ancients remembered the 360 day year. But they forgot how the year changed, or even that it changed, for centuries after the event.

Without Darwin, wither faith?

Charles Darwin. Some rely on him for an extreme misanthropic doctrine.
Print Friendly

Three days ago, Michael Flannery at Evolution News and Views suggested that without Darwin, the worlds of science and faith would look vastly different today. He is correct as far as he goes. But the world without Darwin would not necessarily lack its strife and its sins. It would also have a complacency the world with Darwin now lacks.

Asteroid games

Iron sulfide, or pyrite, is a perfect metaphor for spending government money to drag an asteroid to earth and land on it.
Print Friendly

Why is the federal government planning to bring an asteroid into orbit around the Moon? Even in “flush times” that would be a bad investment. It’s a worse investment with the country, and the world, in debt already almost non-repay-able. Especially when the world faces a natural disaster closer to home.

Creation reborn

Radioactive decay chains. Radioactive decay was a key argument against creation, until Austin, Shelling, and Vardiman demolished three key assumptions.
Print Friendly

Creation was once the ruling paradigm of science. A century and a half ago, it fell out of favor. Now it’s coming back, as people realize what the evidence really suggests. Which is: the earth is not old. It is young – and just as young as the Bible says.