Answers Research Journal volume 6

Volume 6 of the Answers Research Journal ran through 2013.


 * Darek Isaacs, January 9, 2013

Some straight-up theology: Isaacs presents a case that humans do not in fact have dominion over the earth, citing Hurricane Sandy (can't control that one) and the dangers of non-domesticated animals, ever since The Fall. (By the way, did you know the dominion mandate has been used as proof that aliens don't exist and couldn't visit Earth?)


 * Tom Hennigan, January 9, 2013

A continuation of the effort to enumerate kinds by making it up. Sometimes kinds are equated with families and sometimes not. Uses the latest from real biology to inform baraminology.


 * Danny Faulkner, February 6, 2013

How the stars and constellations got their names baffles some young-earth creationists even though it is to have nothing to do with ancient Judaism. Faulkner is opposed to the "gospel in the stars" theory. This piece extensively discredits a model by Frances Rolleston that Adam named the stars and constellations.


 * Jeffrey P. Tomkins, February 20, 2013

Tomkins continues his obsession with the percentage of similarity between chimps and humans, in the long-running creationist quest to discredit claims of 98%+ similarity between human and chimp (and bonobo) DNA and show that humans are a different "kind."


 * Danae M. McGregor, March 6, 2013

Lead picture of Charles Darwin, of course, even though he's mentioned only in passing. The word "Creation" does not appear once in this article, nor are the ideas in it


 * Simon Turpin, March 20, 2013

A "day" in Genesis is so 24 hours, despite all these morally defective heretics (acknowledged here as a "vast majority") who dare make concessions to uniformitarian geology.


 * Simon Turpin, April 3, 2013

Turpin argues that no death, human or animal (plants are handwaved away as not dying in the same way), occurred prior to the Fall. He excuses the obvious dietary issues for obligate carnivores by reading as not merely permissive but restrictive, thereby claiming that God ordained a vegetarian diet even for now-carnivorous animals. While employing this shiny plastic shoehorn, he also goes out of his way to commend very liberal application of excommunications. Lovely.


 * Lee Anderson, Jr., April 17, 2013


 * Thomas Hennigan, May 1, 2013

The dominion discussion that started in January continues with wildlife ecologist Thomas Hennigan discussing points of disagreement with Darek Isaacs and expressing an opinion that references concerns about the environment and animals' rights. Hennigan believes that Isaacs' definition of "dominion," e.g. that humans were directed to dominate the world and that all animals were to bow to man, is not consistent with man being an "image bearer" for Christ. Though he doesn't state it explicitly, Hennigan seems concerned that understandings of the nature Isaacs advances encourage a reckless disregard for the health of the planet and spends considerable time discussing caring for and protecting animals in his work. He goes so far as to acknowledge that mankind is the probable reason many animal species have gone extinct. He makes a theological case that man has a responsibility to steward God's creation as rulers with a "finite" or "limited" dominion. At base, the discussion is over the implications of various definitions of the Hebrew word וְיִרְדּוּ, with some evangelicals taking an anthropocentric view and translating it as "dominion," and Catholics and other evangelicals believing that the better translation is :stewardship: in a "Christ-centric" view.


 * Andrew S. Kulikovsky, May 1, 2013


 * Joel McDumon, May 1, 2013


 * Darek Isaacs, May 1, 2013


 * Danny R. Faulkner, May 15, 2013


 * Danny R. Faulkner, May 22, 2013

ARJ puts a bibliography of creationist astronomy articles in its website.


 * Simon Turpin, May 29, 2013

A dig at those backsliders, including the BioLogos Foundation, who consider Adam as possibly being in any way allegorical.


 * Danny R. Faulkner, June 12, 2013

Danny admits that the astronomers are measuring distances correctly and hence YEC is problematic. But, "we have a number of solutions already in the creation literature, but further proposals are welcome." Yep, try to backfill, Danny.

========
 * Michael Brandt, June 26, 2013


 * Mark L. Ward, Jr., July 10, 2013

Apparently, social constructionism literally means that anything you want to be true is true, and anything you want to be false is false.


 * Danny R. Faulkner, July 24, 2013

You would think the creationists would give the speed of light problem a rest after such terrible proposals as c-decay and the anisotropic synchrony convention. But, no, Faulker comes up with another that is just as terrible. The solution: As I have previously argued (Faulkner 1999), I submit that God’s work of making the astronomical bodies on Day Four involved an act not of creating them ex nihilo, but rather of forming them from previously-created material, namely, material created on Day One. As a part of God’s formative work, light from the astronomical bodies was miraculously made to “shoot” its way to the earth at an abnormally accelerated rate in order to fulfill their function of serving to indicate signs, seasons, days, and years. I emphasize that my proposal differs from cdk [c-decay] in that no physical mechanism is invoked, it is likely space itself that has rapidly moved, and that the speed of light since Creation Week has been what is today.

Yes, God's perfect creation screwed up again to backfill for literal Genesis. Right.


 * Nathaniel T. Jeanson, August 7, 2013

An apparent academic fight between creation scientists at ICR. Jeanson refutes Guliuzza's claims that natural selection doesn't occur, as other creationists have done on the past.


 * Jeffrey P. Tomkins, August 21, 2013


 *  Danny R. Faulkner, September 4, 2013

========
 * Callie Joubert, September 18, 2013


 * Tom Hennigan, October 2, 2013

Another list of animals which the creationist arbitrarily ascribes to kinds.

========
 * Jeffrey P. Tomkins, October 16, 2013


 * Simon Turpin, October 30, 2013

Jesussaysso; therefore, not theistic evolution.


 * Lee Anderson, November 13, 2013


 * Danny Faulkner, November 13, 2013

Two articles on the Second Law of Thermodynamics, both of which say that there is no problem with it, except that it didn't function right for a while. Ad hocery at its finest!


 * Jean K. Lightner, November 27, 2013

Another baraminology paper, this time on birds. This time, Lightner arbitrarily places the kind at the family or order level. Even Lightner says, "This is overly simplistic." She continues,

There are many unanswered questions at this point. We still need to further assess diversity within kinds identified by hybrid data. This will help us understand what characteristics God designed to vary to enable birds to fill the earth. Hopefully this will suggest parameters for delimiting the kinds. Thus there is plenty of room for more exciting research to better understand how our magnificent Creator designed and provides for His Creation.

That is, we have no clue what we are doing. It's almost like taxonomy without biology is an exercise in bullshitting.


 * Nathaniel T. Jeanson, December 11, 2013

"The evolutionary model is so robust that it leads to predictions of molecular function... Unlike the evolutionary model, the creation model lacks a clear, predictive explanation for molecular diversity." In other words, he admits his model lacks all predictive power, but Goddidit.