SITES OF SCIENCE & CREATIONISM

This is more than a little disingenuous, given that the same author has also produced such epic works as The Bible is a Textbook of Science (1964) and A Creationist's Defence of the King James Bible (1996). Furthermore, a reading of the ICR Tenets page will show you that they start with the assumption that the Bible is divinely inspired and quite infallible.
(And the fact remains that, were it not for the Noachian Flood being in the Bible, creationists would not be engaging themselves in the ludicrously hopeless task of trying to fit forty five hundred million years of geological history into one tiny little year-long flood. It's like trying to fit a mountain into a molehill.)

Douane Gish, a leading spokesman, debater and senior Vice-president of ICR, wrote, in The Moon Creation and Composition: The Apollo Missions (1994):

"Creation scientists, based on the clear and unequivocal statements in the Word of God, and firmly supported by well-established natural laws and the failure of all theories on the evolutionary origin of the universe, accept the supernatural, special creation of the universe, which, of course, includes the origin of the solar system with its earth and moon.......(bible quotes)...Thus, using special processes operating nowhere in the natural universe today, God created all the heavenly bodies, including the earth, the moon, the sun, and all the other objects in the solar system. Furthermore, Scripture makes clear that at the close of the sixth day of creation God had finished the work of creating the universe—the heavens and the earth for He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made."

It should also be noted that ICR describes itself, not as a scientific research organisation, but as a "Christ-focused Creation Ministry.

So here, for your edification, are a number of creationist sites. Some from leaders in the movement, and some from various members of that vast army of devout ignorami that has gathered about them.

INSTITUTE FOR CREATION RESEARCH The Centre for the Propagation of Pseudo-Science.	ANSWERS IN GENESIS The Aussie creationist organisation.
CREATION SCIENCE Highly rated by Brittanica.	ORIGINS Resources for Intelligent Design and Philosophical Theism.
NATIONAL ACADEMY FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE Despite the noble-sounding title, this organization aims to introduce the supernatural into science and education.
HUMAN EVOLUTION The NAAS take on human evolution.	THEOLOGY Wherein the NAAS blames the Theory of Evolution for all the current ills of the world.

WWW.CREATIONISM.ORG Creationist articles and Links.	IS EVOLUTION FACT OR FICTION Asks a creationist. So you might be able to guess the answer!
CREATION SCIENCE EVANGELISM The title says it all! Kent Hovind's Rants	STATEMENT FROM A CHRISTIAN EVOLUTIONIST A very refreshing and literate change from the usual creationist dogmatism.
AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION HOMEPAGE For Religious Scientists.	ACCESS RESEARCH NETWORK "Origins and Design" An Interdisciplinary Journal with an Intelligent Design bent.
THE Y FILES Collection of Creationist Articles; expect the usual junk 'science'.	A CREATION PERSPECTIVE A wide-ranging collection of articles favouring a young-earth viewpoint.
CREATION-EVOLUTION ENCYCLOPEDIA Another failed Creationist attempt to achieve legitimacy.	A NEW LOOK AT AN OLD EARTH Online book by Old-Earth Creationists .
EVOLUTION: FACT OR FICTION Creationist article loaded with the usual stuff from Good News Magazine.	TEN MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE GEOLOGIC COLUMN Steve Austin, Ph.D and ICR hack, puts a creationist spin on Geological Column.
FOSSIL EVIDENCES OF CREATION Peddling a Book.
WAS DARWIN WRONG? Critics of Evolution, Pro and Con. Book reviews.	GEOSCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE "Integrating Science and Faith". Some of the'Reports' are surprisingly good (Considering the GRI's close connection to the Seventh Day Adventist Church.)

Return to Top of Page

---------------SOME OF THE SILLIER IGNORAMI---------------

In the introduction to the Creationist pages above I mentioned the army of devout ignorami that has gathered around the creationist standard in the belief that they are thereby serving their God. One of their common attributes is arrogance: an arrogance due to the certainty that they are right and that all "evolutionists" are absolutely and irremediably wrong. Another common attribute is their devotion to old creationist sources for their mis-information. Hence they all tend to regurgitate the same old stuff that has long been shown to be wrong.
I wouldn't have thought that the recycling of old lies was of any service to any God.

EVOLUTION vs CREATIONISM
An appalling idiocy!. This is a long article that is full of half-truths and outright falsehoods: (The author writes that it is a problem in science that new discoveries cause new theories to supplant old ones!) A useful exercise might be to read it and count up how many stupidities you can find. I've already done my bit!

NOAH'S FLOOD: AS IN THE DAYS OF NOAH
Collection of Essays. A notable display of ignorance of the many scientific topics upon which the author dwells.

CREATION
In a series of pages starting with, of course :-), the 2nd. Law of Thermodynamics, the author exhibits a level of scientific knowledge that could at best be termed "Primitive Creationist".

UNMASKING EVOLUTION
One of the most arrogant, this author has produced an enormous book on the errors of Evol. the first of which is that there are no absolute proofs of evolution! Ten years he's been researching the subject and he still doesn't know that, outside of mathematics, there's no such thing as 'absolute proof' in science. (sigh!)

DRIFT AND TECTONICS
A hilariously infantile account of the "flaws" of tectonic plate theory. Part of a "Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia" which is mostly a product of extensive quote-mining.

SCIENCE AGAINST EVOLUTION
Some pages are just silly; others, like this one, resort to outright falsehood as well. One quote from the front page of this site: "The old ages for the Earth come primarily from the ages of rocks, which are dated by the presumed ages of the fossils in them. Radioactive measurements of rocks are based on assumptions that were chosen to make the radioactive measurements agree with the presumed ages of the fossils." I challenged the author on this point but, not surprisingly, have never had a reply.

Return to Top of Page

Well, that's about it for a while; I'll be entering more sites when I have enough to make it worth the effort.
If you have any comments or suggestions, I'd appreciate hearing from you. You could do this NOW or later at:

rjbw@shaw.ca