If you have not read Stories Versus Truth, you may want to read that before reading this.

New Scientific Method

It should be mentioned that scientific method does not, in itself, have the capacity to prove either a young or an old Earth. Both positions use the same scientific facts to come to very different conclusions based on either presupposition or direct revelation. Some would say it this way: the differences are in the beliefs, and those beliefs are based either in presuppositions or in revelation. The same applies to Evolution. Scientists apply scientific method in order to use their beliefs to make speculations that are consistent with those beliefs about what happened in the past. Some are aware that this is the process that they are using, but most, especially those on the side of Evolutionism and Old-Earthism, are totally oblivious to their bias. Logic can only have at its basis one of three things: revelation, circularity, or assumption (which is vapor).

There is a new type of scientific method that requires no observation. It was developed because no hypothesis of origins can be proven using true scientific method. With real science, all we can do is to compare the theoretical conjecture / fabrication to the world around us. We can only examine it and see if it matches what we can observe. With that in mind, it is interesting to note that the intelligent design model does fit the physical scientific evidence while the molecules-to-man evolution conjecture / fabrication does not. (Intelligent design is a term that is being used to pacify evolutionists.  Within the limits of the evolutionist's presuppositions there can be no God--a basic Atheist theology.  Why they chose to add this unscientific limitation to their conjecture / fabrication in the first place, one could only guess.) So evolutionists prefer the words, "intelligent design." Evolution isn't science.

See "The Scientific Case for Creation," Henry M. Morris, Ph. D., Pages 11-13.

Ungodly people are forced to hold on tightly to some basic presuppositions.  These presuppositions are just simple-minded assumptions.  They are filters and a way to filter out any information that supports the existence of God.  They set up a web of rules to filter out God.  They will only accept those things that conform to Naturalism, materialism, and uniformitarianism.  Naturalism claims that God does nothing.  Materialism claims that there is no God or spiritual realm.  Uniformitarianism claims that there was not creation and that there was no violent worldwide flood, as the Bible and numerous other historical accounts record.  Whatever they observe that does not conform to this complex filter is censored.  The way that it is censored can take several forms.  The ungodly may boldly proclaim that, though the data appears to support God's version and refute the version of the ungodly, yet it still must be interpreted to mean just the opposite of what it does mean.  A backup method that ungodly people use is to prophecy that in the future, science will be able to explain what they see as an anomaly.  If that fails, they will hide the data, set it aside, or lie to keep the public from knowing the truth.  The data clearly demolishes the story of the ungodly and clearly supports the reality of the Creator God, His Bible, and His abiding Presence in His people.  When confronted with the obvious, a closed-minded ungodly person says, "I can't understand it."  They are willingly ignorant because they refuse to hold God in their knowledge.  The reality is that these people, for whatever reason, don't what to know the Creator.  They don't want to truly know Jesus, their Creator.

Astronomy

• Astronomy and Astrophysics (evidence for design, big bang problems, dark matter, seeing distant starlight)
• Solar System and Extra-solar planets Q&A (evidence for design, age, the Sun, planets, moons, comets, extra-solar planets)
• Aliens/UFOs (are extra-terrestrial aliens visiting us?)
• Galileo, geocentrism, and Joshua's long day

Bible, God, theology

• Bible (is it the Word of God? How are we to understand it?)
• Genesis (real history or mythology/polemic?)
• God (does God exist? what is He like?)
• Jesus Christ (the 'Son of God'? Why did He die? Resurrection?)
• Atheism, agnosticism and humanism: godless religions

Biology (creation vs evolution)

• Origin of life (origin of life theories critiqued, including life-from-space)
• Design features (dozens! ID, biomimetics, 'bad' design, astronomy, irreducible complexity)
• Natural selection (yes, it happens but it is not the same as evolution)
• Mutations (yes, they happen, but they can't change microbes into microbiologists)
• Speciation (yes, it happens, but it is limited to variation within the created kind)
• Genetics ('mitochondrial Eve', ape vs human DNA, gene duplication, genetic engineering, cloning, longevity of patriarchs)
• Information theory (including DNA) (information defined, claimed new information) Evolution has a troubling information problem.
• Probabilities (could life arise by chance? What about computer simulations of evolution?)
• Thermodynamics and order (how the laws of thermodynamics contradict Naturalism)
• Vestigial organs (including 'junk' DNA)
• Embryonic recapitulation and similarities (Haeckel's fraudulent concept, plus similarities due to common design)
• Charles Darwin (his religious views, contribution to human suffering, natural selection vs evolution)

Creation: relevance to Christianity, society and science

• Creation: Why It matters
• Death and suffering (Why? Origin of bad things such as poisons, carnivory, Satan)
• Creation compromises (theistic evolution, gap theory, progressive creation, framework, etc.)
• Apologetics defending the faith (proof & presuppositions, New Age, postmodernism, hell)
• Philosophy (logic and faith, proof of God, evolution and materialism)
• Countering the Critics (anti-creationists, 'bad' design, probability, 'proof' for an old earth)
• Bible 'contradictions' and 'errors' (answering attacks on the Bible)
• Communism and Nazism (the evolution connection)
• Science (what is it? Is creation or evolution science?)
• Arguments creationists should NOT use
• Creation Scientists (and other biographies)

Geology, the Flood, the Ice Age and the age of the earth

• Young Age Evidence (astronomy, botany, geology, fossils, caves, coal, glaciology, human history, oceanography)
• Radiometric Dating (radiometric dating problems, flaws, rapid decay? radiohalos)
• Flood (global? fish survival? Black Sea flood? flood legends).
• Noah s Ark (size, construction, stability, feasibility, care for animals, diseases, biogeography)
• Geology (Flood evidences, coal formation, limestone caves, rapid rocks, age of fossils?)
• Plate Tectonics (continental drift and catastrophic plate tectonics)
• Ice Age (post-Flood Ice Age, ice core dating, multiple Ice Ages? mammoths)

History

• Archaeology (archaeology and the Bible, from the Flood to New Testament times)
• History (including biblical chronology, genealogies, origin of deep time beliefs)
• Scopes Trial (What is the truth?)
• Linguistics (languages point to the Tower of Babel, animals talking?)

Paleontology

• Fossils (rapid formation, missing links, living fossils, dino-birds?, whale origins, tetrapods)
• Anthropology (human ancestry, alleged ape-men)
• Dinosaurs (humans coexist with? evidence against millions of years, birds from dinosaurs?
• Mammoths (how they fit with the post-Flood Ice Age)