Gary Chiang

Celia Deane-Drummond and Theistic Evolution

2008-09-22T20:27:00.002-04:00

Dr. Deane-Drummond holds PhDs in plant physiology and theology, and has written several books on the topic of evolution and Christianity.

In September of 2008, she made a couple of presentations at Redeemer University College showing how she believes it is possible to relate Christ and evolution. (She believes evolution of microbes to man is a fact, therefore, a Christian needs to re-evaluate their understanding of redemption in light of this fact)

Unfortunately her mind is closed when it comes to discussing the pro's and con's of Darwinian evolution.

No wonder!!! Her career is based on evolution being a fact. Should she decide to question that belief, she might as well give up on years of work.

Evolutionary Creation? Another name - same mistake

2008-09-07T14:46:00.002-04:00

Oh my.
Seems that those who would rather believe in human wisdom rather than God's wisdom revealed in the Bible continue to hit their heads against the wall.
By putting together the terms evolution and creation, some well-meaning Christians actually think they can bring an end to the conflict between science and the Bible. How sad.
Evolutionary Creation is none other than Theistic Evolution by another name. Theistic Evolution was not able to alleviate the tension between science and the Bible, and neither will Evolutionary Creation be able to do so.
Only when one can actually see that it is their own prejudices, not the biblical or scientific facts, that determine what they believe to be true can one fully appreciate how much science fully supports the traditional biblical concepts such as a young earth, a real Adam and Eve, a virgin birth, and the resurrection of the dead.

Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution/Creation Debate

2008-04-30T10:43:00.000-04:00

After four years since it first appeared, this book is still of interest to many. The chapter on the Shroud of Turin has been a delight for several readers. The main point of the book is to help those Christians not well-versed in the sciences to understand why there has been, and continues to be, a debate on this topic. Why this debate continues has more to do with religion, and less to do with scientific facts, as is clearly described in this book. Copies can be ordered directly from the author (gchiang@redeemer.ca) or from the order page at www.custance.org where PayPal can be used to purchase the book.

Salvador, Brazil

2008-02-05T15:24:00.000-05:00

Jennifer and I posing with the ladies in the historic centre of Salvador, Brazil. This city is known as "black Rome" because, I guess, the natives are black (well, actually a nice chocolate brown) and there are over 300 churches in the downtown region. We are standing in a square that has as many of 3 to 4 churches facing it.

Not too many atheists down here, and although many are poor, the people were very friendly and happy. Maybe it's because they get no snow!

Redeemer University College: Creationists' Haven

2007-09-14T21:01:00.000-04:00

I have been teaching first year university-level biology at Redeemer University College for over 15 years. In the last 7 years I have taken a poll (by secret ballot) of the first year biology students to see if they believe in evolution, the theory supported by almost all scientists in academia, or in some form of creationism.

This year, 2% believe in some form of evolution, but 98% believe in some form of creationism. Of this 98%, an overwhelming majority believe in a young earth.

Do young-earth creationists come to Redeemer because they believe they don't have to deal with the scientific facts for evolution? If yes, then they may have to consider what science is all about.

CREATIONIST VS CREATIONIST: Ken Ham attack

2007-07-11T09:14:00.000-04:00

Nothing sells like controversy!
In his move to get his new museum up and running, Ken Ham appeared to have legally, but immorally, solicted funds by taking over the market that Creation Ministries International (CMI) had with the Creation ExNihilo magazine.
After years of trying to get some sort of compromise worked out, with no results whatsoever from Ken Ham, Carl Weiland of CMI has had to resort to the courts of the land to sue Answers in Genesis, and Ham directly.
According to John Mackay of Creation Research (another creation ministry from Australia), Carl Weiland does not think that 1 Corinthians 6 applies to him. But 1 Cor 6:7 states: "Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?"
So it seems that John Mackay believes that Weiland was wronged by Ken Ham, but as a Christian, Weiland should "take the punch" and "back-off."
But we do need to keep in mind a few things:
1) both groups are working on the same side - to save souls for Christ
2) both believe very strongly in recent six-day creation, and are anti-evolutionists
3) both share the same market (evangelical Christianity)
4) both are from Australia with Ken Ham being associated with CMI at the beginning of his work
5) the American organization (Creation Research International) has kept clear of all this
6) John Mackay's organization from Australia is fully supporting Ken Ham

With all these factors to consider, I believe this will turn out to be a publicity stunt carried out by some fun-loving, well-meaning, Aussies.
It will serve them right if, in fact, the American public has absolutely no interest in this.
BUT CONTROVERSY SELLS

My thoughts, anyways.
Gary

Insect sex and homosexuality

2007-04-27T11:47:00.000-04:00

This bug is called a blood-sucking cone nose. It spreads a parasite that causes a tropical disease referred to as Chagas' disease.

When examining a jar filled with adult male insects, a student observed that the males were trying to copulate (have sex) with each other, and wondered if their feable attempt at homosexuality (their parts just don't fit together) was part of our 'fallen' world.

No, I thought, these insects are simply not too bright. They don't have much of a brain.

Extraterrestrial Intelligence: Jill Tartar

2007-03-09T10:29:00.000-05:00

The Origins Institute at McMaster University hosted a talk by Jill Tartar, head of the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) program in the US.

It was an excellent presentation. She was clear, and entertaining. It is obvious that it has been her efforts that have maintained the SETI program despite, in over 40 years of looking and billions of dollars of funding, this program has had ZERO success.

Her efforts remind me of the similar amount of time and resources that have been devoted to proving that the theory of evolution is a scientific fact.

NOW, OVER 150 YEARS AFTER THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES WAS PUBLISHED, WE STILL HAVE NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF FOR EVOLUTION.

Biography of Arthur C Custance: a Christian in the world of Science

2007-03-08T15:35:00.000-05:00

The biography of Arthur C. Custance is almost ready to go to press.
Evelyn White has taken about 3 years to complete this task. Now his life story has been recorded, and it provides some interesting insights into a man who wrote 16 books about science and the Bible.

A Prophecy in a Picture

2006-10-08T22:18:00.000-04:00

Time: 1971
Place: Newmarket District High School (NDHS), Ontario, Canada
Figure caption: Discussions constitute part of the weekly meetings.

Here I am pictured in the middle of a group of students who appear to be very interested in what I am talking about.
This picture was placed on the I.S.C.F. (Interschool Christian Fellowship) page of the year book to illustrate, as the caption notes, an interesting discussion about the Bible and life. The picture looks good, but is misleading. We were not discussing the bible, and this was not an ISCF meeting.
On the other hand, what I am doing with these students, and the fact that this picture was placed in the ISCF page of the year book has turned out to be very prophetic.
Can you guess at what I am doing in this picture?

Hint: I have written books on the biological evidence against evolution.

How should the Amish respond?

2006-10-06T09:10:00.000-04:00

Romans 12:17-18
17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody.
18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"says the Lord.
20 On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

We are at this present time living in a world of considerable conflict and spiritual or emotional unrest.
Canadian soldiers are facing death each day as they try to fight an enemy who has no fear of death.
Our developed world, led by the US and Britain, is fighting against an enemy that has no borders, that has no organised armies, that has no institutional buildings. It is an enemy that lives in the hearts and minds of its followers. The world is taught to believe this enemy is called "Terrorism," but discerning Christians know that this enemy is the Spirit of the Anti-Christ.
But the Spirit of Anti-Christ is not just "out-there" in lands distance to us, for it also lives among us and will think nothing of taking the lives of innocent helpless Christians, as we have just seen in the shooting deaths of the Amish children in the US this week.
But how will the Amish respond?
Let us pray their response is, in fact, Christian and not the way the world has responded with its bombs and its own atrocities.
Let us pray, as Paul has written in Romans, that they will not be overcome by evil, but will have the faith and courage to overcome evil with good.

The Origin of Sex

2006-09-30T19:33:00.000-04:00

I came across this entry about the origin of sexual reproduction:

The Origin of Sex: Cosmic Solution to Ancient Mystery
By Robert Roy Britt, Senior Science Writer, posted: 10 July 2001

"Now a new study out of Caltech and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has used digital organisms to simulate life before sex and yielded a possible mechanism for instigating Earth's first courtship.
Comet or asteroid impacts could have stressed asexual organisms enough to send them down the path of sexual reproduction after forcing a flurry of genetic mutations, the study shows. Heavy doses of radiation might also have done the trick."

At present, there is no satisfactory naturalistic (that is to say, evolutionary) theory to explain how sexual reproduction came about. Sexual reproduction gives rise to variation in offspring, but at such a tremendous cost to the species that in evolutionary terms it makes no sense.

The Bible states that Eve was a product of Adam's body, and if all sexually reproducing animals were created in the same way, with the female being created from the original created creature, this would explain how God created sex and why such creatures only reproduce after their own "kind."

This notion is more fully explored in my book, Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution/Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity.

BIOGRAPHY OF ARTHUR C CUSTANCE

2006-09-25T14:30:00.000-04:00

Soon to appear: The Biography of Arthur C. Custance
Written by Evelyn White, his personal assistant for the last 30 years of his life, this biography weaves a tale taking us from upper class British society, through the depression days in the West and the bread lines in Toronto, and finally to the success in the military laboratories in Ottawa. It is informative and uplifting. It provides a story of faith that will be an encouragement to any Christian coping with the secularization of our modern world.
The works of Arthur C. Custance (for example, The Doorway Papers) are noted for their clarity of thought, and academic rigor. This biography will tell you of the man behind the Doorway, and how the Lord Jesus Christ prepared him for his appointed task.
I have been blessed in having had a small part to play in creating this biography, and look forward to its completion.

Does anyone know what bug this is?

2006-09-13T09:02:00.000-04:00

We found it in leaf litter as we were collecting other critters.
Its outside shape, and its insides, are very much like Leptoglossus, the cone-seed sucker, but its colour is quite different. It is also bigger than any of the cone-seed suckers we have collected this summer.

EVOLUTION takes another HIT

2006-09-07T21:20:00.000-04:00

One more weapon in the arsenal against evolution has just become available.
More longer does the Christian creationist need to rely only on the Bible and some quasi-scientific facts to fight against this doctrine of Atheism.
This book lays out the biological evidence against evolution in an easy to understand way, and it also provides a depth to science that few books have been able to do.
This book is a must for senior highschool students who want to know what biology can tell them about origins.
It shows that biology, loud and clear, supports the belief that the human race started with Adam and Eve, that Noah's flood wiped out all the people on the earth except for those saved in the Ark, that species were created to reproduce after their own kind, and that the evolution/creation debate can be used as a fantastic way to show the redemptive work of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Note: This book should not be read by Evolutionists.
Read the preface ....

Leptoglossus - the cone-seed sucker

2006-08-23T14:29:00.000-04:00

A picture of the cone seed bug taken on a spruce tree on the campus of Redeemer University College.
This bug poses a major thread to seed orchards, and I plan to expand my research on insects to include this species.
It will be interesting to compare the physiology of the blood sucking insect, Rhodnius prolixus, on which a lot is known, to this "sap" sucking insect on which very little is known. They are both fluid feeders, but suck very different types of fluids.

So what is the Seed of Adam?

2006-08-20T15:54:00.000-04:00

In Genesis 3:15, God said that he will put enmity between the serpent and the woman (notice, it's the woman... no mention of Adam), and between the serpent's seed and the woman's seed.
In his book, The Seed of the Woman, Arthur Custance uses both science and fundamental Christian theology to argue that the seed of the woman is the ovum (see www.custance.org).
If the Bible is correct theologically and historically, then what is the seed of Adam? Why was it not mentioned in Genesis 3? Did it ever exist, and if so, what became of it?
Interesting...

Preaching at Keswick Christian Church

2006-08-16T15:48:00.000-04:00

On August 13, 2006, I preached at Keswick Christian Church, and sang with my sister, Coleen.
My sister is at the piano, and my younger brother, Greg, is the guitar player next to her.
My topic: What can biology can tell us about Scripture?

Canadian Society of Zoologists

2006-05-03T14:54:00.000-04:00

Papers on Rhodnius Prolixus presented by Gary Chiang at the 45th annual Canadian Society of Zoologists meeting at the University of Alberta, Edmonton.

2005 Custance Award Winners

2006-04-01T02:14:00.000-05:00

The Custance Awards for Christian Perspective in Science are given at the Ontario Christian Schools Science Fair which takes place every other year at Redeemer University College, Ancaster. The fair which has been held since 1995 is for grade 7 and 8 students at non-publically funded schools and will next take place in April 2007.

At the last fair Arthur Custance trophy winners were Ashley Hagen, Erika Scott, Bethany Wallar and Brittany Veldboom.

Science and Faith: the scientific perspective

2006-02-12T14:34:00.000-05:00

Long before the distinction between faith and science became blurred, one of the greatest scientists in the 20th Century, Sir V.B. Wigglesworth (1899-1994)stated:
"The philosopher has no use for faith; that is why he speaks a totally different language from the scientist, whose entire system of thought is based on faith. It is curious to note how long it took for philosophers to recognize this obvious fact."
(from Wigglesworth, Insects and the Life of Man, London, Chapman and Hall, 1976, p.206)

He also stated in the same address:
"For the laws of science, which are the immediate objects of our faith, are not regarded by the scientist as for ever true. They are temporary, provisional, or partial truths."

What does this mean for the evolution/creation debate?

It means that the scientific theory of evolution (molecule to man) is no more, or no less, valid than the Bible's account of creation. Both should be taught in schools since both depend on faith.

Intelligent Design ain't dead yet!

2006-01-27T15:57:00.000-05:00

A recent Horizon's program on BBC reported that in the UK, 22% believed in creationism, 17% in Intelligent Design, 48% in evolution and 13% had no opinion.
As reported in Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution/Creation Debate, a 2001 Gallop Poll in the US showed that 57% believed in creationism, 33% in evolution and 10% had no opinion.
What can be inferred from this data?
1. more Britons believe in evolution that Americans
2. ID is a viable alternative for those who believe in creationism
3. neither ID nor creationism are dead.
4. evolution has yet to become the theory of choice for the majority

One problem with these types of polls is the differences in definitions. The figure above helps to distinguish between different types of Evolutionists, and different types of Creationists.

In a previous post, Monk called himself a religious theist. I wonder where on the spectrum of categories in the above figure he would actually place himself?

Being Honest with Monk

2006-01-08T17:23:00.000-05:00

OK Monk, to be absolutely and completely fair to you, let me deal with each of your points directly.

Point #1
"Offspring have traits inherited from their parents. Surely you won't disagree with such an obvious fact. Not only is it obvious to anyone who studies genetics, but it is attested to by the simple observation that children resemble their parents."

OK, this one seems true. After all, that is how God created us. He used the genetic machinery to ensure that every living thing produces after its kind. Dogs look like dogs, cats look like cats, humans look like humans. Never has anything in the history of biology ever produced an organism that did not belong to the species from which it came. This is a law of biology called: the limitation in variation in progeny. (read more about it in my books)

Point #2
"Creatures which, by chance, happen to be better adapted to survive are more likely to survive. This is simple common sense. If the winter is particularly cold and you have a thicker fur coat than the other guy, you are more likely to survive than he is."

Well, this one is not as obvious as it might first appear to be.
Creatures best fit for the environment are not necessarily the ones that survive. In fact, any study that has been done to try to show that natural selection can lead to a better "fit" genotype of a species has failed to actually do so. Instead, all the evidence we have is from what we see in nature already. We look at an environment, we see a surviving creature (such as a black peppered moth), and we say that it is best fit because it survived. We have not actually proved that the best fit creature survived. Biologists can tell us NOW what is surviving, but they cannot tell us if that organism was actually the best fit of the group from the PAST.
Monk, the reason why Evolutionists think it is obvious that the best fit survive is because this statement is an example of classical circular reasoning. Saying that the best fit survived is the same logic that tells us it is obvious all widows are women.
So Monk, this point might seem obvious to you, but it lacks any scientific evidence, and it has never been proven to be true. Even today, the peppered moth, which is one of the most familiar examples of natural selection, has been under criticism from the legitimate scientific community. Textbook authors recognize the problem with the concept of "best fit" or "survival of the fittest" and many are even changing the definitions of this concept to try and get around the circular reasoning. None have yet been successful.

Point #3
"The environments in which creatures live change over time. Weather patterns, average temperatures change, and so forth"

In Canada, we experience considerable extremes in weather. But, is this enough to cause organisms to "evolve"? No, not at all. Why? A lot of our folk go south in the winter, along with the animals.
The point I am making is of monumental importance in understanding how organisms cope with the environment. We have had changes in weather, BUT these changes are seasonal and depend on location. Populations of animals will simply move to the more comfortable locations. The polar bears also move around a lot, but tend to stay on the ice fields where hunting is a lot easier for them.
The point you are making Monk is really meaningless. Animals can move, so why would a change in climate cause evolution? It will simply cause migration, not evolution.
But the reason you think this point makes sense is because you have been taught, incorrectly, that in the past there were periods when the environment of the earth was uniform all over (e.g. all cold, or all warm). But the world has always experienced many different environmental conditions at any single time. So, first of all, we don't know if the weather was uniform throughout the earth at any specific time, and second, we don't know if that could have caused evolution.
This is another topic I deal with in my book "Overcoming prejudice in the evolution/creation debate."

Monk's conclusion
"If you take these three very basic assumptions, it becomes rather obvious that species change over time. Because of inherited characteristics, those creatures which survive better in changing conditions will be "selected" and those which are not as well adapted will be "selected against."

Monk, your conclusion is very well stated, but incorrect.
You have been brain-washed into believing in only one way of thinking, and until you can break away from that, you will forever see black as being white.
I don't expect you to agree with anything I say, but please consider the possibility that you just might be wrong.
I have succeeded in demonstrating why your points 2 and 3 are not as obvious as you may think they are. Therefore, to the logically-thinking mind, your conclusion is not obvious at all. It is based on faith, not science.

Note: I have not changed any of your words, and I have dealt with each of your points directly and honestly.

Now Monk, I hope we can get past the mental barrier that has prevented you from seeing the "facts" from another perspective, and that you will now be able to ask questions that really have some scientific merit.

The Ghost of Gould

2006-01-03T12:49:00.000-05:00

Stephen Jay Gould died a number of years ago, but his legacy lives on.
In the previous post, Monk has asked that I consider three known facts, and believes that if I should agree these facts are true, then I must accept evolution as a scientific fact.
What Monk has done is to provide a variation on the reasoning proposed by Gould - a thinking that sounds logical, but is overwhelmingly flawed.
The argument Gould makes starts off with 3 postulates: 1. animals produce more offspring than they need to (many will die off), 2. offspring will vary in appearance to each other, and 3. the environment will select for the offspring that are best fit. Gould states that these 3 postulates are obviously true (it's a matter of common sense), and therefore evolution is a fact of life.
But unfortunately for Stephen, he made an error in logic.
Can anyone tell me what that error is?

So Where Is the Proof for Evolution?

2005-12-26T16:02:00.000-05:00

In a previous post (Is ID Dying?) one participant firmly believes that ID is not just dying - it is DEAD!
Why would they believe this? Because the courts in the Dover case have agreed that ID is based on religion, and should not be taught in the public schools.
However, the theory of evolution is also based on faith, yet it seems to avoid a similar fate. If what I say about evolution is true, then why is it still taught in the schools?
The answer to this riddle is provided in my book "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution/Creation Debate." If you are interested, I can provide a pdf of the chapter in which I deal with this topic.
And for all those of you who like to quote flowery rhetoric from uninspired scientists, let me make a deal with you.
Give me just one solid proof (please, no opinions - just proof) that the theory of evolution is a scientific fact, and I will give to you TWO solid proofs that God is as real as the air you breathe!!!

Redeemer University Science Fair

2005-12-22T21:15:00.000-05:00

Since 1995 the Natural Sciences and Mathematics Division of Redeemer University College has hosted the Ontario Christian Schools Science Fair. The Sixth Biennial Fair occured April 14-15, 2005. First overall individual project was 'Feelings and Faces' by Carolyn Daichendt, Maranatha Christian Academy, Windsor.

Previous winners

Is ID Dying?

2005-12-22T21:14:00.000-05:00

Comment on the Evolutionblog
At 8:04 AM, Dr. Gary Chiang said...

Much of what we see about the debate between evolution and creation is essentially religious. Few of the opponents on either side understand what the debate is really about. It is about what we WANT to believe, not what we HAVE to believe.

Is ID dying? NO, it will never die. Although reworked to address a modern world, it is still as compelling an argument as it was when William Paley first used he "Watch on a path" analogy.

But is it science? I say yes, but as long as it challenges naturalistic evolution, the courts of the land will labeled it religious.

I have never had trouble refuting evolution in any of my university biology courses. Why? Because I stick to the scientific understanding of what evoluton really is. Once the religious nature of evolution is known, it is much easier to bring in other "religiously-based" scientific theories such as ID and Creation Science.

Michael Rose and a longer life

2005-12-13T15:18:00.000-05:00

In a Body and Health article in the National Post (Monday Dec 12 2005), Michael Rose claims that evolutionary biology tells us that prolonging the human life span is scientifically reasonable.
If Michael Rose were to look into the Bible, he would see that his evolutionary biology actually supports Genesis and creationism. The human body was designed not to die, but to live on forever. Even with the detrimental effects of sin, that body lived for hundreds of years!
So the novel idea that Rose believes he has discovered has been known by Christians for centuries. (for other examples, see Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution / Creation Debate)

INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS NOT AN INTELLIGENT ARGUMENT

2005-12-07T16:53:00.000-05:00

During the taping of ListenUpTV program, the interviewer became confused because she had never heard any Creationist say that Creation Science and Intelligent design are religiously based concepts. She became even more confused when I said I did not want to teach ID nor creation science in the science classroom, but wanted to teach evolution!
Stephen (see previous posts) is also confused about my position.
The question I have to these creationists:
Are you so overwhelmed by the scientific support for evolution that you would rather not examine it scientifically, or are you afraid to learn some biology? I wonder.

Creation Science in Disguise

2005-12-07T12:21:00.000-05:00

I posted the following comment in response to: creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2005/12/kansas-prof-apologizes-for-e-mail-etc.html

Over my years of experience as a university professor engaged in teaching and research, I have come to the realization that the Evolutionists are right about one thing. Creation Science is religiously based, and teaching young-earth, six-day creationism in the public school system is bringing religious ideas into the classroom. Even the concept of Intelligent Design, which claims that the design in nature is scientific proof of a designer, is Creation Science in disguise.

On the other hand, Evolutionists are dead wrong when they claim that the natural world can only be understood from an evolutionary perspective. Creationists can stand firm on the reality of scripture, and rid science of religious presuppositions by attacking the scientific merit of evolution, rather than promoting creationism.

[please note: Jones has misquoted me. The last sentence in the first paragraph should read "Even the concept of intelligent design, which claims that the design in nature is scientific proof of a designer, has been accused by Evolutionists as being Creation Science in disguise."
I never wrote that I claim that ID is creation science in disguise. I tried to correct this misquote on Stephen's blog, but he still insists that I wrote it. Strange...]
Stephen E Jones answer on his blog was:

Thanks for your comment above, but I disagree with it.

"Creation Science" (as commonly understood) is based on the Bible. That is why it tries to present scientific evidence for an Earth only ~10,000 years old, and also that the fossil record was laid down by a worldwide Noah's Flood (not that the Bible requires either of those two interpretations).

You won't find *anything* like that in ID. ID is based *only* on the evidence for design in nature, not the Bible. Some IDists are not even theists (e.g. David Berlinski). Also some IDists accept universal common ancestry (e.g. Mike Behe and myself). There are *no* advocates for "Creation Science" (as commonly understood)who are not theists or who accept universal common ancestry.

To be sure, one can believe in both "Creation Science" and "Intelligent Design" but they are two different beliefs. Not all who believe in "Creation Science" also believe in "Intelligent Design", and not all who believe in "Intelligent Design" also believe in "Creation Science".

However, if after this you *still* maintain that "Intelligent Design ... is Creation Science in disguise", then we must agree to differ.

He went on to elaborate at:
creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2005/12/intelligent-design-is-creation-science.html

"Like confessing a murder"

2005-12-02T20:04:00.000-05:00

This phrase is found in a letter written by Darwin to Hooker in January 1844. In the ListenUp TV program called By Design or Chance, it was used by a Darwinian historian as proof of the inner turmoil that Darwin was going through, an inner turmoil that was occurring as the scientific evidence forced Darwin to recant his faith in Christianity.
This historian is absolutely WRONG!
Darwin was not going through any internal turmoil at the time of this letter. He was living a care-free life of a happily married man with lots and lots of money to spare.
If this historian cared to read the actual letter, in this letter Darwin was happy and excited about his work, and not depressed and worried that he was challenging Christian theology. The comment was directed to Hooker, and Hooker alone, and it was to warn Hooker (a casual acquaintance that Darwin barely knew) that Darwin had some ideas that were considered lame by everyone else he had shared them with.
This letter was not a confession of the soul, but was a light-hearted way to get Hooker to take Darwin's idea seriously.
Moreover, Darwin had no solid evidence for evolution, so the evidence would not have caused any inner conflict for him. That this evidence was missing, and is still missing, can be read about in Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution/Creation Debate, as well as in The Christian's Guide to Defeating Evolution.

Arsenic in the Garden

2005-12-01T10:37:00.000-05:00

This summer raised beds were created in Redeemer University's Teaching Garden using 4x4 pressure treated landscape lumber. Only flowers are planned for the beds. If vegetables were to be grown there might be some concern as the wood contains chromated copper arsenate which could leach into the soil and be absorbed by the vegetables; there is an article in Kitchen Gardener Magazine discussing this.

Sonar Harmful to Marine Life

2005-11-25T09:38:00.000-05:00

This month the Natural Resources Defense Council reported that sonar from military training, industry and shipping threatens whales, dolphins, fish and other marine species. Whales suspected of having been exposed to sonar were found to have bleeding in the brains and ears, as well as lesions in their livers and kidneys. A leading theory suggests that the mammals suffer from the bends; sonar causes them to panic and surface or descend too quickly, causing nitrogen bubbles to form in their blood.

Full Report in PDF Adobe Acrobat file (size: 2.4 mb)

Listen Up TV

2005-11-20T10:57:00.000-05:00

This weeks Listen Up television program deals with Intelligent Design. Guests are William Dembski, Associate Research Professor, Conceptual Foundations of Science, Baylor University; Pamela R. Winnick, author of 'A Jealous God: Science's Crusade Against Religion'; Alanna Mitchell, author of 'Dancing at the Dead Sea'; Robert Mann, Chair of the Physics Department at the University of Waterloo; Gary Chiang.

Science meets Religion Comments

2005-11-14T10:35:00.000-05:00

You can leave comments on Science Meets Religion: Shroud of Turin here. The article begins with the question "What do science and scientists have to do with the Shroud of Turin, an old piece of cloth which folklore describes as being the very linen that wrapped the body of Jesus as it laid in the tomb over 2000 years ago?" Read Shroud of Turin by Gary Chiang

Wollemi Pine

2005-11-07T10:38:00.000-05:00

It's not everyday you see a tree in a cage. Animals at a zoo yes... evergreens in a park, not likely. Well, here is an evergreen in a cage in Wakehurst Place, Sussex. It is the Wollemi Pine, one of the world's oldest and rarest tree species. Once only known in the fossil record, living specimens were discovered in 1994 by a bushwalker in the Wollemi National Park just outside Sydney, Australia. Thus the reason for the cage; It keeps people out, not trees in.

Cuttings were sent to Botanical Gardens in Europe, Taiwan and Japan and until October there was no public access to the trees. October 23 Sotheby's auctioned trees grown from the first cuttings taken from the wild population. The 292 trees sold for A$1.5 million with each tree fetching between A$2000 and A$7000.

Unfortunately, it was reported November 4 that root rot fungus has infected one wild tree and that all of the wild trees are now at risk.

New Minister in St Marys Ontario

2005-10-31T10:30:00.000-05:00

St Marys Ontario Presbyterian has a new minister! The call to The Rev. John Fraser was passed by a unanimous vote from the 200 members present at an October 30 meeting. The elders are now getting signatures from everyone including those not in attendance. The call will be taken to Presbytery for approval on November 23rd. The call will then travel to the Barrie Presbytery for approval and then it's official. The induction date is not known yet (it will be decided at Session on Monday, November 7th), but it is reasonably certain that Rev. Fraser will preach his first Sunday on December 4th.

More photos of the church are at
http://www2.ministries-online.org/stmarysont/churchp2.html

A Christian's Guide to DEFEATING EVOLUTION

2005-10-24T20:38:00.000-04:00

Too often a Christian will defend the Bible and creationism on terms dictated by an evolutionist. Christians end up spending a lot of effort trying to prove that Creation Science is a science, or that the earth is only a few thousand years old, or that there is intelligent design (ID) in the universe. These "smoke screens" are set up to mask the one fundamental truth that evolutionists fear the most:

Biology, the science upon which the theory of evolution is based, has absolutely no empirical proof for evolution.

Read the Preface to Gary Chiang's new book

Costs: $25.00 plus $10.00 shipping. For more information email: gchiang@redeemer.ca

About Gary Chiang

2005-10-17T09:55:00.000-04:00

Dr. Gary Chiang received his B.Sc., M.Sc. and Ph.D. from the University of Toronto where he studied the electrophysiology and electron microscopy of invertebrates. He is currently a Professor of Biology at Redeemer University College (Ancaster, ON, Canada), where along with his wife, Jennifer Chiang, he developed and maintains a comprehensive undergraduate biology program. The Chiangs have also taught biology courses at McMaster University (Hamilton) and Tyndale University College (Toronto), and were instrumental in initiating the Ontario Christian Schools Science Fair.

Doorway Papers

2005-10-10T10:43:00.000-04:00

Arthur C. Custance was born and educated in England and moved to Canada in 1928. In his second year at the University of Toronto he was converted to faith in Christ. The experience so changed his thinking that he switched courses, obtaining an honours M.A. in Hebrew and Greek. In his 13 years of formal education, he explored many facets of knowledge and was particularly interested in anthropology and origins. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Ottawa in 1959 while serving as head of the Human Engineering Laboratories of the Defence Research Board in Ottawa (Canada) and was engaged in research work for 15 years. During that time he also wrote and published The Doorway Papers. In retirment in 1970, he wrote 6 major books, including Two Men Called Adam (3rd edition editors E M White and R Gary Chiang). His writings are characterized by a rare combination of scholarly thoroughness and biblical orthodoxy.

2005-10-03T10:50:00.000-04:00