Researching Creation

January 27, 2010

General / God's Call to the Scientist in Faithfulness and Rebellion


The gospel is basically a love story.  In fact, in many ways, the scriptures directly make the comparison.  In Revelation, the Church is the bride of Christ. God is continually seeking after his people.  But, unfortunately, our hearts are often hard.

As a Creationist, my heart is God's.  Paul Garner's heart is probably more in the right place than my own, when he says,

I’m not at all interested in trying “to defend a literal reading of Genesis with scientific principles”. Rather, I accept the truth of creation by faith and investigate the world scientifically with that presuppositional basis. That’s not to say that I’m uninterested in evidence, just that my aim in scientific investigation is not “defending Genesis” or “proving Scripture”. I don’t think the Bible needs that kind of help. (see here in the comments)

The goal for Paul is to live faithfully.  And part of that living faithfully is finding new things in God's creation, and using God's scripture as a starting point for all things.

This used to be a common theme in science.  Newton, for instance, was foremost a theologian.  Kepler wanted to enter the ministry, but could not.  But he said, "God is the beginning and end of scientific research and striving".  

Sadly, this thought has been lost.  But God, now like before, still seeks us.  I have been realizing more and more that God often seeks scientists - and, I believe, leads them to discoveries which show God's handiwork - whether or not the scientists are willing to follow.

A case in point is Francis Crick.  Crick said that the reason he went into science was to disprove religion.  But God cared for Crick too much.  God, I belive, helped Crick in his scientific search, to see His creation for what it is.  And that's when Crick discovered DNA.  DNA was certainly a stumbling block for Crick's atheism.  The implications of Crick's discovery, while possibly not immediately obvious to the rest of us, was in fact immediately obvious to Crick - the naturalistic story of its origin just doesn't measure up.  In his book, Life Itself, Crick says, "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle."  So what was Crick's solution?  Sadly, it was not to turn to God in any way.  Instead, he proposed that the aliens did it.  And, thus, he was freed from looking too deeply into the evidence that God had shown him.

Hoyle's view seems to be similar to Crick's, though I have not done as much research into it.  Hoyle, though he did not believe in God, remarked that "the Universe is a put-up job!"  Meaning, there is just too much intricacy to the design of the laws of the universe.  Likewise, for life, Hoyle thought that we were created by another intelligence within the universe.

Stephen Jay Gould had this happen to him, too.  Here is how he describes the arthropods of the Burgess Shale:

Imagine an organism built of a hundred basic features, with twenty possible forms per feature.  The grabbag contains a hundred compartments, with twenty different tokens in each. To make a new Burgess creature, the Great Token-Stringer takes one token at random from each compartment and strings them all together.  Viola, the creature works - and you have nearly as many successful experiments as a musical scale can build catchy tunes.  The world has not operated this way since Burgess times.

Now, obviously, Gould put an evolutionary spin on this.  Nonetheless, it appears that Gould was looking on in amazement at the way in which the creatures of the Burgess were put together.  It is almost as if he was seeing creation, but not being able to quite admit to it.

What I'm saying is that, when you look at the major discoveries in science by the ones who research them, what you find is God searching for the scientists.  That doesn't often come out in media reports or even in reviews of scientific literature or textbooks.  Few textbooks report that Crick viewed DNA as a stumbling block to the origin of life, or that Gould saw a menagerie of form in the Burgess shale too wonderful to describe, and a pattern unlike anything which is thought to evolve today. 

But, I believe, God is seeking each one of us.  I only hope that the current generation of scientists are faithful to the call that God gives to them, and that they can be humble enough to reject the pride which plagued the science of the 19th and 20th centuries.

And, hopefully, my own work will reflect faithfulness instead of pride.  But I'm still working on that.















January 15, 2010

General / BSG 2010 Conference


The BSG (Creation Biology Study Group) just announced this summer's conference, and opened up for abstract submissions.  Here is the announcement and instructions for abstract submissions.  Abstracts are due April 2.

January 08, 2010

General / Creation Research Society Conference This Summer


The planning for the next Creation Research Society conference is underway.  The current plan is the following:

  • Location: University of South Carolina Lancaster
  • Cook-out planned for evening of July 22nd
  • Main conference July 23-24
  • Optional field trip July 25 to Wood's Bay, with possible aerial viewing option in a small plane
  • Transportation can be arranged from the Charlotte, NC airport
  • Price has not been finalized, but will probably be around $60 for pre-registered attendees

The request for papers has not yet been announced.  I will share it when it happens.


January 01, 2010

General / The Creation Research Society's Microscopy Laboratory


The Creation Research Society just put out a YouTube video with a bunch of images that they have taken in their microscopy laboratory.  Cool stuff!  I wish the video had a little more explanation attached, but nonetheless it is great-looking stuff.

Creation Research Society Microscopy laboratory video