ISBR Creation Science
Tuesday, Aug 2, 2016
6:30 - 8:00 PM
Farm and Home Center of Lancaster
Prior to the “official” beginning of our Creation Science Forums in September, we will have an ISBR Movie Night. Our film is entitled "God of Wonders."
Through a combination of Scripture and science, this film gives convincing evidence of the truly awesome nature of God. Spectacular video and interviews with experts declare the message that only the God of the Bible could have caused the wonders which we see, from the microscopic world of DNA to the cosmological scale of the universe. Also, interviews with ordinary people are presented, challenging them to consider how the knowledge of God through the wonders of his creation affects them personally. To quote the host, Dr. John Whitcomb (co-author with Dr. Henry Morris of the classic book
The Genesis Flood
), the film presents “creation, conscience and the glory of God.”
Please join us and bring a friend!
Also, for the answers to the questions from our video presentation "Fearfully and Wonderfully Made" at our May Forum, click
Creation/Evolution in the News
Did You Know ?
The duckbill platypus is an amazing creature, with features characteristic of both mammals and reptiles. For instance, it has hair like a mammal and lays eggs like a reptile. When evolutionists point to Archaeopteryx as a "transitional form" in the evolution of birds from reptiles because it is was a bird with teeth, keep in mind that a combination of features does not imply transition but rather a "mosaic" of features, especially since we see this in a living animal
Also, here is a video about the duckbill platypus
Is the Universe Real or Fake?
The universe certainly has mathematical properties, as seen in physical laws such as gravity, electromagnetism and thermodynamics. It has these properties because it is real, created and engineered by an omnipotent God. So why point this out? The referenced article poses the notion that the universe is not actually real, but a mathematical simulation. Even a conference of five "deep" thinkers including Neil deGrasse Tyson (remember “Cosmos”?) was convened to discuss this possibility, in front of a sold-out audience at New York’s American Museum of Natural History.
A simulation is a mathematical representation of some reality, such as a computer program that computes the trajectory of a ballistic missile as it flies through the air with a thrusting stage, then out of the atmosphere along a non-powered ballistic trajectory and then back into the atmosphere, where it is affected by atmospheric drag. The result of the simulation would be the position and velocity of the missile at each discrete point in time, taking into account mathematical representations of the physical effects at each phase of flight. Note that this is a mathematical representation of a reality, not the reality itself (i.e., the missile itself). Also note that the representation is “discrete,” meaning that it only exists at specific the time points for which the computations were performed, such as every 1 second, as opposed to existing continuously in time. The latter distinction is particularly relevant to the referenced article, since evidence for this idea would presumably be found in the discreteness of the universe in space and time, like colors on the pixels on your TV that exist only at discrete positions and at discrete times based on how often the screen is refreshed.
What is underlying this simulated-universe thought? If the universe is simulated, these thinkers think it is easier to explain than a real universe, with a real purpose, created by a real Creator. Also, all computer simulations are run many times (“instantiations”) with slightly different conditions each time in order to extract behavior of the system being simulated. Combined with the ideas of the “multi-verse” enthusiasts, who think that our universe is the way it is simply because it is only one instantiation of an infinite number, they try to make their case. The irony for the simulated universe is that all computer programs require a computer programmer and do not write themselves. Excluding God from the universe excludes the universe itself, as well.
Man and apes are categorized as “primates,” diverging from a common ancestor around 7 million years ago by a slow rate of mutations and natural selection. A long timescale is needed by evolution because mutational changes are considered random and small, so they must be accumulated for any real change to occur. But now, some scientists think the process might have been fast, instead. This article describes research into the possibility that a virus-fighting enzyme that rapidly bombards its enemy with many mutations might also rapidly bombard DNA with beneficial mutations that can be passed on to future generations powering fast evolution. Why do evolutionists continually insist that random mutations contain complexity-increasing information? The great divide between creationists and evolutionists remains the irrefutable fact that molecules do not write genetic messages, but only serve as the physical medium for their transmission, analogous to your phone being a physical medium transmitting messages and not creating the messages themselves. Imagine the lunacy of believing that the metal, plastic and glass making up your phone could create its own voicemail. Similarly, the DNA molecule is a physical medium on which genetic messages ride but is not the source of these messages. Messages only come from intelligence, whether transmitted by your phone or by the DNA in your body.
Problems with Cosmology? Say it Ain’t So!
How many times have you heard that some new discovery has been made that totally changes our understanding of some subject? This article discusses a new theory of how fast the universe expands and could “completely change our understanding of cosmology itself.” As usual, this discovery is related to the 95% of the universe that we don’t understand, namely dark matter and dark energy, hypothetical combatants in a tug-of-war. Dark matter is supposed to cause the universe to contract, while dark energy is supposed to cause the universe to expand. The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is the chief piece of evidence but this article points out that the latest measurements do not support the predictions of the theory. The new measurements imply an 8% faster expansion than the theory predicts. So, being boxed in by the only possible participants in the theory (dark matter and dark energy), these evolutionist cosmologists have proposed that either dark matter isn’t pulling so hard or that dark energy is pulling harder. But wait.. Why put all of your eggs in one cosmological basket? Because naturalism is the only basket they have. It turns out that creationist cosmologists such as Dr. Russell Humphreys and Dr. John Hartnett have been working on alternate cosmological theories that do not even require dark matter or dark energy to explain observations. But of course, being creationists, they are routinely marginalized and ignored by the media. For more information, please search for cosmology articles on