Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

Did you Know ?

Plants, according to evolutionary theory, evolved from prehistoric green algae. But where is the evidence? Is there a fossil plant series that backs up this claim? Click here and you'll be very surprised to find out how much evolutionists don't know about plant evolution.

Next Creation Forum

Please join us for our next Creation Forum on Thursday, May 1, 2014

7:00 PM


In the Earth's crust, we see thousands of sedimentary layers, but how did they get there? What would we expect to see if it happened rapidly, as we assume from the Genesis account? What would we expect to see if they were laid down over millions of years, as the evolutionists keep insisting?

Join us for the next Creation Forum as we explore these questions

ISBR is a non-denominational Christian ministry which meets the first Thursday of each month from September through May at Grace Baptist Church, 1899 Marietta Avenue, Lancaster.

Please click here for directions to Grace Baptist


Creation/Evolution in The News ...

Does scientific knowledge grow with every experiment and/or theory? This article basically says that we need to cut the scientists a little slack. Not all results, it says, should be expected to be exactly reproducible or even reliable. Surprise! Scientists are actually human and will even fudge their results to give an answer they want, even if all the data does not support it. Incomplete bits of data that are "useful" qualify for publication in the "cut-throat publish-or-perish world of contemporary science," even if unwarranted conclusions are prematurely drawn. Due to irreproducibility, doubt exists about results from such notables as Galileo, Einstein, and yes, even Darwin. This is how science evolves, so to speak. "In reality, science progresses in subtle degrees, half-truths and chance." This article calls this a "dirty little secret" of science. Why is a secret even needed? Two basic answers: public faith and funding. A doubting public is bad for business. Applied to evolution, it is even worse than a "half"-truth. It is actually a "non"-truth because of the "bait-and-switch" between the truth of adaptation and the assumption of evolution and the inability of mere molecules to write the genertic messages which they carry. Messages, of course, originate outside of molecules, requiring intelligence. This is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help us God!

Fifteen years ago, NASA's Galileo spacecraft sent back photos of Europa, one of 60 moons of Jupiter. New research of the images has led scientists to conclude that a collosal impact by a comet or asteroid occurred. The images apparently show that organic (i.e., carbon-based) compounds were delivered by the impact. Well, so what? Organic compounds are "important building blocks for life," so, voila, we reach the conclusion that life could develop there! They claim "Finding the rocky residues of this comet crash on Europa's surface may open up a new chapter in the story of the search for life on Europa." What? How did we go from "building blocks" to life itself? Just add time and energy (from the sun) and life is inevitable, right? Wrong! Missing ingredient, of course, is information or codes, conveniently left out of all such scenarios because scientists have no idea how codes can develop from molecules. As Creationists, do not let this point be swept under the rug because evolution is dead without it. Since molecules do not have this ability, evolution is dead but still walks among us because secularism is so highly invested in it.


Think evolutionists have trouble explaining how a code can develop from molecules without intelligence? Well, their job just got twice as hard, with the revelation that not only is there the genetic code to produce proteins, the code we have all been familiar with since the 1950's, but there is also a second code embedded within the first, related to gene control. The second code was "hidden" within the first. So is this new discovery hailed by evolutionists as conclusive evidence of a Creator? Of course not - the reaction is that "both apparently evolved in concert with each other." Sure. Why not? If molecules can write messages, then there is no stopping them. Embedding one message within another, no problem. On the other hand, if molecules can't write one message then they obviously can't write two. Give God the praise He deserves for being the Supreme Software Engineer!