It is important when discussing creation/evolution to understand the assumptions in any of the debates.
There are no natural (this excludes human gene engineering) massive rapid helpful changes in any life forms being observed today. It is assumed that they occurred over long periods of time in the past and that they were sequentially helpful.These are not scientific assumptions as they can not be tested and there are many, many examples of observed mutational changes being harmful that argue against these unobserved assumptions.. As they,life forms, can not be tested for similarity except by comparison of design/structure at whatever level-it becomes meaningless in terms of progenic(association by offspring) relationships.This is because common design, without progenic relationships,by a single Creator, can be the philosophic framework used instead of an atheistic one. Thus, the evolutionary changes in life forms over time are un-testable non-verifiable assumptions.
As well, Historical Geology,is built on assumptions of a long age of the earth and universe. But the methods that are used to justify these ages are unable to verify accuracy of assumptions used in estimating these ages like the ratios of the initial precursor/product, a constant rate of decay, and a closed system (where there is no leakage of the reaction components over time).
Creation Ministries and Institute for Creation Research have several geologists and physicists that have written articles.I am attaching links to 3 here today
There are no natural (this excludes human gene engineering) massive rapid helpful changes in any life forms being observed today. It is assumed that they occurred over long periods of time in the past and that they were sequentially helpful.These are not scientific assumptions as they can not be tested and there are many, many examples of observed mutational changes being harmful that argue against these unobserved assumptions.. As they,life forms, can not be tested for similarity except by comparison of design/structure at whatever level-it becomes meaningless in terms of progenic(association by offspring) relationships.This is because common design, without progenic relationships,by a single Creator, can be the philosophic framework used instead of an atheistic one. Thus, the evolutionary changes in life forms over time are un-testable non-verifiable assumptions.
As well, Historical Geology,is built on assumptions of a long age of the earth and universe. But the methods that are used to justify these ages are unable to verify accuracy of assumptions used in estimating these ages like the ratios of the initial precursor/product, a constant rate of decay, and a closed system (where there is no leakage of the reaction components over time).
Creation Ministries and Institute for Creation Research have several geologists and physicists that have written articles.I am attaching links to 3 here today
What About Carbon Dating?
Diamonds Creationist's Best Friend
Radiometric Dating (This is a Summary)
Religion, Philosophy and Science
There is an article I have written regarding the interfacing of Religion, Philosophy, and Science that relates to the above comments. It is under the Tab of Dissertations/Papers of John G Leslie on this website, or it can be found online.
RSS Feed