SCIENCE ARTICLES

ABOUT PDF      

July, 2007
What is the Biblical Evidence for Long Days in Genesis? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler)
There are many indications within the text of Scripture to support the belief that the creation "days" were longer than twenty-four hours. The authors offer five examples.

July, 2007
How Long Were the Days of Genesis 1-2? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler)
There are two major view with regard to the time involved in Creation: the old-earth view and the young-earth view. The latter believes the universe is no more than approximately 15,000 years old, while the former holds that it is probably about 13.7 billion years old.

July, 2007
Was There Death Before Adam? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler)
Those who hold to the young earth position deny that there could have been death before Adam's fall. They argue that the Bible declares death came only after Adam as a result of his sin. "Just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned."(Rom.5:12)

September, 2005
Where Did Everything Come From? (Dr. John Ankerberg)
Dr. Ankerberg explores, primarily through quotes from scientists and theologians, the failures of the Darwinian evolutionary model, and the marvelous wonders of creation.

March, 2005
The Current Debate on Creation and Evolution (Dr. Norman Geisler)
What is the difference between "old-earth creationists" and "theistic evolutionists"? What are the areas of agreement between young- and old-earth creationist? Where do they differ? What do both sides need to agree upon?

February, 2005
The Anthropic Principle (Dr. Norman Geisler)
The anthropic principle (Greek: anthropos, “human being”) states that the universe was fitted from the very first moment of its existence for the emergence of life in general and human life in particular. In order for life to be present today an incredibly restrictive set of demands must have been present in the early universe—and they were.

August, 2004
What is the Biblical Evidence for Long Days in Genesis? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler)
There are many indications within the text of Scripture to support the belief that the creation days were longer than twenty four hours.

July, 2004
Differing View of the “Days” of Genesis (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler)
There are two major views with regard to the time involved in Creation: six literal 24-hour days, or six long periods of time. This article presents arguments for the 24-hour-day position with response from Scripture and science.

June, 2004
“Young Earth” vs. “Old Earth”—Where Do They Agree? (Dr. John Ankerberg
There are actually a number of areas of agreement between those who disagree on the age of the earth. But there are other areas where they ought to agree—but that are still a problem. Dr. Ankerberg explains.
 

March, 2004
A Scientific and Biblical Response To: "Up from the Apes. Remarkable New Evidence Is Filling in the Story of How We Became Human" Time, August 23, 1999
by Fazale (Fuz) Rana, Ph.D. (Vice President of Science Apologetics), Richard Deem, MS (Apologist), Hugh Ross, Ph.D. (President, Reasons To Believe, Pasadena, CA, 91117) - Article courtesy Reasons to Believe: www.reasons.org ©Reasons To Believe
 

March, 2004
Design and the Anthropic Principle
by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

Summary : Human existence is possible because the constants of physics and the parameters for the universe and for planet Earth lie within certain highly restricted ranges. John Wheeler and others interpret these amazing "coincidences" as proof that human existence somehow determines the design of the universe. Drawing an illogical parallel with delayed-choice experiments in quantum mechanics, they say that observations by humans influence the design of the universe, not only now, but back to the beginning. Such versions of what is called the "anthropic principle" reflect current philosophical and religious leanings towards the deification of man. They produce no evidence to support the notion that man's present acts can influence past events. Furthermore, their analogies with quantum mechanics break down on this point. The "coincidental" values of the constants of physics and the parameters of the universe point, rather, to a designer who transcends the dimensions and limits of the physical universe. - Article courtesy Reasons to Believe: www.reasons.org ©Reasons To Believe

March, 2004
Fine-Tuning of Physical Life Support Body
by Hugh Ross
- Article courtesy Reasons to Believe: www.reasons.org ©Reasons To Believe

March, 2004
Facing Up to Big Bang Challenges
By Hugh Ross
- Article courtesy Reasons to Believe: www.reasons.org ©Reasons To Believe

February, 2004
Does Scientific Evidence Today Show That God Created the Heavens and the Earth? And What Does the Bible Say About When He Created?
By Dr. John Ankerberg

February, 2004
Six False Assumptions Concerning Evolution—Part 2 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Does the fossil record offer genuine scientific evidence that evolution is true? Can matter alone (without God) explain the origin of life and the complexity of the universe? Is scientific creationism only a religion, with no scientific merit?

February, 2004
Six False Assumptions Concerning Evolution—Part 1 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
What one concludes about human origins is crucial for deciding a whole range of other issues. In light of that, the authors explore three of the false assumptions that are often brought into the discussion: That evolution is a proven fact of science; that scientists are always objective; and that evolution is compatible with belief in God.

January, 2004
Evolution, Logic and Increasing Doubts (Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon)
Evolutionists tell us that the evidence for evolution can be found in numerable scientific disciplines. Ankerberg and Weldon say the real problem isn’t so much a lack of data—there’s plenty of it—the real problem, they suggest, is the bias against the biblical God that so many scientists bring in to their interpretation of the data.

January, 2004
What is the Probability of Evolution Occurring Solely by Natural Means? (Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon)
Most modern scientists agree that the materialistic theory of evolution is an established fact of science and cannot logically be questioned as a view of origins. However, what one concludes about human origins has a bearing on a whole range of other issues, so it’s important to get it right!

January, 2004
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense (Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon)
The purpose of this article is to bring home the folly of belief in naturalistic evolution. The point is belabored intentionally because evolutionists frequently argue that probability considerations do not disprove evolution.

January, 2004
Darwin’s Leap of Faith (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Most people consider evolution to be an indisputable fact, but if that is true, how do we account for the statements by reputable scientists calling it a “myth” a “fairy tale” or admitting the evidence simply isn’t there?

January, 2004
Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part 1: How Convinced Was Charles Darwin About His Theory of Evolution? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Darwin himself expressed serious doubts about his theory, as we see expressed in letters to friends and colleagues.

January, 2004
Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part 2: Darwin’s Escape from God—Why Did Darwin Continue to Believe in Evolution? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Sadly, Darwin continued to hold to his theory despite his many doubts. Dr. Robert Clark (and others) suggest that Darwin’s motivation to hold on to his ideas was his continued rejection of the God of the Bible.

January, 2004
Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part 3: How Was Darwin’s Theory of Evolution First Received? (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
In fact, even the scientific community of his own day did not accept Darwin’s theory as either valid or possible.

January, 2004
Truth in Advertising: Damaging the Cause of Science (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Scientists who declare that evolution is a fact should recognize the damage they do to the credibility of science—and not just evolutionary science, but all of science.

October, 2003
The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah—Part 2 (Dr. Bryant G. Wood)
Further archaeological evidence that indicates the location of Sodom and Gomorrah, and which fits beautifully with the biblical account about them.

October, 2003
The Creation Debate: How Do Coal Beds Form? (Dr. John Ankerberg with Dr. Steve Austin)
Dr. Austin relates how he came to reject the conventional model of how coal beds formed—and how events at Mt. St. Helens confirmed his alternate theory.

September, 2003
The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, Part 1 (Dr. Bryant G. Wood)
We welcome new author Dr. Bryant G. Wood of the Associates for Bible Research. This fascinating article reveals the search for the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the amazing correlation between the on site evidence and the Biblical account of their destruction.

September, 2003
The Creation Debate: Mount St. Helens—Part 1 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Steve Austin)
Dr. Austin explains some of the observations he made at Mt. St. Helens following the 1980 eruption, and why they caused him to rethink his position on the evolutionary model...

August, 2003
The Creation Debate: Geological Evidence for the Age of the Earth—Part 2 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Steve Austin)
Dr. Austin relates why his observations at Mt. St. Helens caused him to rethink some of his assumptions about the age of the earth..

August, 2003
The Creation Debate: Geological Evidence for the Age of the Earth (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Steve Austin)
What evidence caused geologist Steve Austin to doubt the generally accepted dates for the age of the earth?

July, 2003
The Creation Debate: The Origin of the Universe—Part 4 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Don DeYoung, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
What theories have been put forth to explain the origin of the universe? What are some of the problems scientists have encountered with those theories?

July, 2003
The Problems with Human Cloning (T. M. Moore)
Most people aren’t quite sure what to make of the prospect of “engineering” human beings, although they are a little troubled by the thought. Writing from a biblical and Christian viewpoint, T. M. Moore points out three problems associated with the human cloning project

June, 2003
The Creation Debate: The Origin of the Universe—Part 3 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Don DeYoung, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
Oscillating universe? Second law of Thermodynamics? Moon rocks? Fission Theory? Capture Theory? Are any of these proof of, or pointers, to the Big Bang?

June, 2003
The Creation Debate: The Origin of the Universe—Part 2 (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Don DeYoung, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
Is the Big Bang theory credible? Is there scientific data that sheds doubt on that theory as the origin of the universe? Dr. Ankerberg’s guests for this discussion have Ph.D’s in physics, biochemistry and paleontology.

May, 2003
The Creation Debate: The Origin of the Universe—Part One (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Don DeYoung)
Dr. Don DeYoung (Ph.D. in Physics) explains the Big Bang Theory, and why it is not a reasonable explanation for the universe as it exists.

April, 2003
The Fossil Record—The Evolution of Man (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
What does the fossil record show about the evolution of man? Are there any transitional forms? What about Neanderthal? Lucy? Or Ramapithecus?

April, 2003
The Fossil Record—Part One (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Kurt Wise, Dr. David Menton)
Do we have an adequate fossil record? If so what does it show? Does it support evolutionary theory?

March, 2003
Feathers—Part Three (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. David Menton, Dr. Kurt Wise)
Is archaeopteryx a hoax? What about transitional forms? What can we learn about the evolutionary process in the fossil record?

March, 2003
Feathers—Part Two (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. David Menton, Dr. Kurt Wise)
More fascinating details about feathers that make their evolution from reptilian scales improbable at best.

February, 2003
Feathers (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. David Menton)
Dr. Menton explains how his hobby of studying feathers has led him to some interesting conclusions regarding the fossil evidence.

January, 2003
The Creation Debate: Fossil Record—Part Two (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Kurt Wise, Dr. Steve Austin)
Is the fossil record adequate? Are there gaps that would still allow for the evolutionary model? Drs. Kurt Wise and Steve Austin help us to see the evidence.

January, 2003
The Creation Debate: The Fossil Record—Part One (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
Does the fossil record support evolution? What does the lack of transitional forms mean? Are there sufficient fossils to draw reasonable conclusions?

December, 2002
The Creation Debate: Oxygen—The Deathblow to Life? (Dr. John Ankerberg, moderator)
Dr. Ankerberg's guests explain that one reason why the lab experiments that "created" life were not valid is that they were done in a controlled environment that lacked oxygen—a condition that is not "normal" true on most of the planet.

December, 2002
Form Versus Complexity (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. David Menton)
Dr. Menton answers the question, “Is there a difference between form and complexity,” by using the illustration of two picket fences.

November, 2002
The Creation Debate: Some Intelligence Required (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Kurt Wise)
What good is having information if there is no one to understand and use it? Dr. Gish points out that the same principle applies to DNA.

November, 2002
The Creation Debate: What Do Genes Do? (Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. David Menton)
How do genes actually function in the body? What is their role in creation? What implications does this have for the evolutionary theory?

October, 2002
The Creation Debate: Part Two—Life in the Laboratory? (Dr. John Ankerberg with Dr. Duane Gish)
Is it possible to create life in the laboratory? Some years ago an experiment conducted by Stanley Miller was reported as having produced the components necessary to form DNA thus, theoretically, “proving” it was possible to produce life. Dr. Gish explains why that conclusion was wrong.

October, 2002
The Creation Debate: Part One—DNA and the Origin of Life (Dr. John Ankerberg with Dr. Duane Gish)
Dr. Gish explains why the complex structure of DNA indicates that the probability of the spontaneous generation of life is, as Francis Crick put it, “equal to the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard would assemble a Boeing 747.”

September, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Eight (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Darwin gathered and systematized a good deal of data, but he proved nothing. He no more proved evolution by amassing facts than scientists of an earlier era proved the world was flat by amassing facts. Facts are facts, but they can be interpreted quite differently depending upon presuppositions and other considerations.

September, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Seven (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Many people assume that upon publication of Darwin’s The Origin of Species that its weight of argument was so convincing, belief in his theory was compelled from all quarters. Not so. In fact, most scientists initially rejected it.

August, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Six (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
W. R. Bird, author of The Origin of Species Revisited suggests that Darwin tended to “jump to conclusions without adequate evidence”, and “stubbornly maintaining his theories regardless of the arguments and evidence against them”. Ankerberg and Weldon give examples to back up this charge.

August, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Five (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Robert Clark, author of Darwin: Before and After, says that “Darwin was determined to escape from design and a personal God at all costs.” What affect did that have on his reasoning processes? On his science?

July, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Four (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
People believe in evolution for a variety of reasons. One reason is so they can reject the Christian faith. Darwin himself lost his faith, and the repercussions in his life were quite profound.

July, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Three (Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon)
Darwin, and indeed, followers of his Theory today must go to extreme lengths to overcome some of the difficulties raised by the Theory of Evolution. But their efforts are absolutely necessary. The authors explain why they must make evolution work.

June, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part Two (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
How convinced was Darwin about his theory of evolution? The authors say that he frequently expressed doubt about the feasibility of the theory, in one place stating: “Some of them [the difficulties] are so grave that to this day I can never reflect on them without being staggered.” So why would he continue to hold to the theory? Why do many scientists today ignore the evidence against it?

June, 2002
Evolution and Recent History: Darwin, Evolution and His Critics—Part One (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
How convinced was Charles Darwin about his theory of evolution? Did it gain immediate acceptance within the scientific community? What changed?

May, 2002
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense—Part Eight (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
In the end, a creator God is our only logically possible explanation for origins. The authors list four options to be considered for the origin of the universe, then point out that only one—that it was created by something self-existent—does not contradict the laws of logic.

May, 2002
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense—Part Seven (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
Modern science’s assigning the origin of the universe and all life in it to pure, random chance does an incalculable disservice to science because it “reduces scientific investigation not only to chaos but to sheer absurdity.” The authors suggest that modern science’s sin against reason is, in fact, a sin against God.

April, 2002
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense—Part Six (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
What are the odds that televisions will evolve into elephants? There are none—no matter how much time we allow or the event to occur. But this is essentially what evolutionists ask us to believe—dead matter + time + chance = life.

April, 2002
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense—Part Five (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
“Faith Beyond Reason” The authors point out that even secular scientists have trouble dealing with the overwhelming odds against “the so-called neo-Darwinian Theory” of evolution.

March, 2002
The Evolution of Life, Probability Considerations and Common Sense—Part Four (Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon)
The authors give additional illustrations to show the overwhelming odds against evolution as the source of life.