Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Workshops for Christian teachers. Clifford Lillo, another board member, contributes frequently to the Creation Research Society Quarterly (and, coincidentally, is reviewing my anti-evolution bibliography for CRSQ). Like the San Fernando Valley group, this group meets Saturday evening once a month (several Southern California Bible-science groups stagger their meetings so that they don’t meet the same weeks). Meetings are in a room at a local restaurant, with the lecture following dinner. (The San Fernando group now usually meets at the Coppedge “ranch,” which has meeting and kitchen facilities.) There is also a book table with creationist materials, and audiocassettes of most of the previous meetings are available. Speakers at the South Bay group have included Kelly Segraves of CSRC and Dennis Wagner of Students for Origins, plus several of the people already mentioned who have also lectured to the San Fernando Valley group, including Walter Lang. Thomas Kindell has given three presentations to this group, besides lecturing to the SFVBSA. Bolton Davidheiser, biology professor at Biola University in La Mirada and author of Evolution and Christian Thought (1969), has also lectured to both groups. Linn Carothers has lectured on ape language studies to both groups. Carothers, a Ph.D. candidate at The Master’s College in Newhall, has a science B.S. from USC and a biostatistics M.S. from Cal State Northridge. (Jim Owen of the Christian Wilderness Association, and George Howe of the Creation Research Society are faculty members at The Master’s College.) Galen Hunsicker, a zoology professor at Southern California College in Costa Mesa, spoke on design in zoology. Douglas Dean, the Pepperdine University biology professor, has also lectured; he said that the Bible provides answers to things that science doesn’t, and is therefore superior. He also said that the evolutionist BSCS high school biology textbook claims there are 300 similarities between humans and apes, but fails to tell us that there are 600 differences. Dean, who believes the earth is less than 10,000 years old, said that there were no anti-creationists on the faculty at Pepperdine (though not everybody openly advocates it either). He said that Nobel laureate W.F. Libby, who developed the radiocarbon dating method, admitted that it gave incorrect results under some conditions. Dean told the group that Libby, while a visiting professor at Pepperdine after his retirement from UCLA, said that he “gave up” on radiocarbon dating because it was so often in error. John Read, a senior engineer with Hughes Aircraft, spoke about radiometric dating methods, presenting standard creationist criticisms. Read heads an organization in Culver City called Scientific-Technical Presentations, which produces creation-science filmstrips and distributes other audiovisual materials and literature. Read, with “assistance from” Clifford Burdick, wrote Fossils, Strata and Evolution: A Test of the Credibility of the Evolution Theory (1979). In his talk, Read said that a presentation he gave to the Board of Education in Sacramento was picked up by Chick Publications, and that now he gets requests from around the world about the problems of various dating methods. Charles Cook, leader of the Creation Studies Ministry in Grand Terrace, and author of Exploding the Evolution Dogma Myth (1981) and similar works, has lectured twice on “Darwinism: The Greatest Deception in the History of Science Teaching.” Christopher Chui, leader of the Creation Science Association of Orange County, usually attends the South Bay meetings as well, where he distributes some of his literature. Chui, who grew up in communist China, moved to Hong Kong and converted from atheism to
Christianity, then emigrated to Canada where he became an ardent creationist after hearing Henry Morris speak. He founded the Creation Science Association of Ontario before moving to California, where he works as an engineer, and has presented at national creation conferences. LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE SPECTRUM OF BIBLE-SCIENCE BELIEFS Fundamentalist Bible-science includes various beliefs and doctrines which can be arranged in a spectrum from the most narrowly literalist and reactionary to the (relatively) liberal. Old-earth creationists of various sorts constitute the “liberal” wing of creationism. Strict young-earth creationists occupy the middle; even more conservative are the geocentrists, with flat-earthers on the extreme right. All these Bible-science types insist that the Bible is inerrant in the realm of science as well as religion, and that these doctrines are straightforward readings of Scripture. Each type advocates the Biblescience doctrines of those to their left, but insists that they have not gone far enough. Old-earth creationists reject evolution because the Bible plainly teaches creationism, but young-earth creationists further insist that it clearly teaches recent creation in six literal days. Geocentrists reject evolution just as strenuously as other creationists, but argue that for these same reasons we should accept geocentricity, which the Bible clearly presupposes. Each type also argues that Bible-scientists to their right on the spectrum are mistakenly trying to force literal interpretations on passages which are obviously metaphorical or phenomenological. Recall that fundamentalist Bible-scientists insist that the Bible is wholly inerrant, but all admit that some passages cannot be taken literally. Those on the conservative end of the spectrum are more thorough-going literalists than those on the liberal end. Creationists, of course, have gained widespread public recognition and support (though most people mistakenly assume that all creationists are young-earthers), but geocentrists constitute a large and growing minority among creationists. Walter Lang, long-time head of the Bible-Science Association, is sympathetic to geocentrism. Harold Armstrong, editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly from 1973 to 1983, is a geocentrist. Modern geocentrist creationists advocate the Tychonian system rather than the Ptolemaic. Tycho Brahe converted Copernicus’s heliocentric system back to geocentrism by conceding that the planets all revolved around the sun, but insisted that the sun revolved around the earth, which remained motionless in the center. Gerardus Bouw, who has a Ph.D. in astronomy from Case Institute of Technology (now Case-Western) and now teaches computer science at Baldwin-Wallace College in Ohio, is editor of the Bulletin of the Tychonian Society, a geocentrist journal. The Society’s Statement of Belief reads: The Tychonian Society holds that the only absolutely trustworthy information about the origin and purpose of all that exists and happens is given by God, our Creator and Redeemer, in His infallible Word, the Bible. All scientific endeavor which does not accept this Revelation from on High without any reservations, literary, philosophical or whatsoever, we reject as already condemned in its unprovable first assumptions. We believe that Creation was completed in six twenty-four hour days and that the world is not older than about six thousand years, but beyond that we maintain that the Bible teaches us an Earth that cannot be moved...and hence absolutely at rest in the centre of the Universe.
- Page 121 and 122: make it conform to this straightfor
- Page 123 and 124: If the Bible and Christ and Christi
- Page 125 and 126: Jesus was either a “lunatic or th
- Page 127 and 128: EVOLUTION AS MAN’S ESCAPE FROM GO
- Page 129 and 130: Design, according to fundamentalist
- Page 131 and 132: disease, death, and decay all origi
- Page 133 and 134: “If God had not given each specie
- Page 135 and 136: In a book on astronomy, John Whitco
- Page 137 and 138: Pentecostalists typically affirm be
- Page 139 and 140: member. In the 1920s, Aimee Semple
- Page 141 and 142: James Kennedy, pastor of Coral Ridg
- Page 143 and 144: ook, calling it ‘a fairy tale,’
- Page 145 and 146: In the second half of his book O’
- Page 147 and 148: any species from another species. I
- Page 149 and 150: never heard of Marra before, but I
- Page 151 and 152: accuse him, as already noted, of fo
- Page 153 and 154: Jay Sekulow is a lawyer who represe
- Page 155 and 156: to “internal” evidence, Islamic
- Page 157 and 158: What initially strikes the reader c
- Page 159 and 160: Journal of the Victoria Institute,
- Page 161 and 162: (all of ICR and/or CRS), and Malcol
- Page 163 and 164: Creationism in South Africa is infl
- Page 165 and 166: also includes other Bible-science i
- Page 167 and 168: oard of advisors includes Gunther S
- Page 169 and 170: Evolution on Trial (1985), one of s
- Page 171: sponsored by UCLA, and partly funde
- Page 175 and 176: R.G. Elmendorf, the whimsical Catho
- Page 177 and 178: YOUNG-EARTH CREATIONISM CHAPTER 6 D
- Page 179 and 180: attacking evolution. Of the three,
- Page 181 and 182: (1970), arguing for the Gap Theory.
- Page 183 and 184: “These extinct animals and vegeta
- Page 185 and 186: Prior to Darwin the Gap Theory was
- Page 187 and 188: survived the catastrophic judgment
- Page 189 and 190: ut it did at least welcome all such
- Page 191 and 192: Convinced of the geological ages an
- Page 193 and 194: Science (1862), by Mrs. George J.C.
- Page 195 and 196: evidence for evolution, even in its
- Page 197 and 198: P.J. Wiseman, a British air commodo
- Page 199 and 200: ut he also criticizes “hyper-orth
- Page 201 and 202: espect, except in this one, that th
- Page 203 and 204: Men complain, however, that God wou
- Page 205 and 206: Davidheiser does not speculate whet
- Page 207 and 208: Paul Johnson, in Creation (1938), a
- Page 209 and 210: “fundamentalist groups-.called sc
- Page 211 and 212: God precipitated by shifting the ea
- Page 213 and 214: Heavenlies (1984). This book gives
- Page 215 and 216: contemptuous of academics, scientis
- Page 217 and 218: may be closer to the actual intent
- Page 219 and 220: addressed to Christian students fac
- Page 221 and 222: Despite disclaiming any direct link
Christianity, then emigrated to Canada where he became an ardent creationist after<br />
hearing Henry Morris speak. He founded the Creation <strong>Science</strong> Association of Ontario<br />
be<strong>for</strong>e moving to Cali<strong>for</strong>nia, where he works as an engineer, and has presented at<br />
national creation conferences.<br />
LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE SPECTRUM OF BIBLE-SCIENCE BELIEFS<br />
Fundamentalist Bible-science includes various beliefs and doctrines which can be<br />
arranged in a spectrum from the most narrowly literalist and reactionary to the<br />
(relatively) liberal. Old-earth creationists of various sorts constitute the “liberal” wing of<br />
creationism. Strict young-earth creationists occupy the middle; even more conservative<br />
are the geocentrists, with flat-earthers on the extreme right. All these Bible-science types<br />
insist that the Bible is inerrant in the realm of science as well as religion, and that these<br />
doctrines are straight<strong>for</strong>ward readings of Scripture. Each type advocates the Biblescience<br />
doctrines of those to their left, but insists that they have not gone far enough.<br />
Old-earth creationists reject evolution because the Bible plainly teaches creationism, but<br />
young-earth creationists further insist that it clearly teaches recent creation in six literal<br />
days. Geocentrists reject evolution just as strenuously as other creationists, but argue that<br />
<strong>for</strong> these same reasons we should accept geocentricity, which the Bible clearly<br />
presupposes. Each type also argues that Bible-scientists to their right on the spectrum are<br />
mistakenly trying to <strong>for</strong>ce literal interpretations on passages which are obviously<br />
metaphorical or phenomenological. Recall that fundamentalist Bible-scientists insist that<br />
the Bible is wholly inerrant, but all admit that some passages cannot be taken literally.<br />
Those on the conservative end of the spectrum are more thorough-going literalists than<br />
those on the liberal end.<br />
Creationists, of course, have gained widespread public recognition and support<br />
(though most people mistakenly assume that all creationists are young-earthers), but<br />
geocentrists constitute a large and growing minority among creationists. Walter Lang,<br />
long-time head of the Bible-<strong>Science</strong> Association, is sympathetic to geocentrism. Harold<br />
Armstrong, editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly from 1973 to 1983, is a<br />
geocentrist. Modern geocentrist creationists advocate the Tychonian system rather than<br />
the Ptolemaic. Tycho Brahe converted Copernicus’s heliocentric system back to<br />
geocentrism by conceding that the planets all revolved around the sun, but insisted that<br />
the sun revolved around the earth, which remained motionless in the center.<br />
Gerardus Bouw, who has a Ph.D. in astronomy from Case Institute of Technology<br />
(now Case-Western) and now teaches computer science at Baldwin-Wallace College in<br />
Ohio, is editor of the Bulletin of the Tychonian Society, a geocentrist journal. The<br />
Society’s Statement of Belief reads:<br />
The Tychonian Society holds that the only absolutely trustworthy in<strong>for</strong>mation about the origin and purpose<br />
of all that exists and happens is given by God, our Creator and Redeemer, in His infallible Word, the Bible.<br />
All scientific endeavor which does not accept this Revelation from on High without any reservations,<br />
literary, philosophical or whatsoever, we reject as already condemned in its unprovable first assumptions.<br />
We believe that Creation was completed in six twenty-four hour days and that the world is not older than<br />
about six thousand years, but beyond that we maintain that the Bible teaches us an Earth that cannot be<br />
moved...and hence absolutely at rest in the centre of the Universe.