There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.
If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.
| Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.|
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with !
Answers Research Journal volume 6
| The divine comedy|
Volume 6 of the Answers Research Journal ran through 2013.
- 1 Volume 6 articles
- 1.1 Is There a Dominion Mandate?
- 1.2 An Initial Estimate Toward Identifying and Numbering Amphibian Kinds within the Orders Caudata and Gymnophiona
- 1.3 A Further Examination of the Gospel in the Stars
- 1.4 Comprehensive Analysis of Chimpanzee and Human Chromosomes Reveals Average DNA Similarity of 70%
- 1.5 German and American Eugenics in the Pre-World War 1 Era
- 1.6 Evangelical Commentaries on the Days of Creation in Genesis One
- 1.7 Did Death of any Kind Exist Before the Fall?
- 1.8 A Response to Peter Enns’s Attack on Biblical Creationism
- 1.9 Is There a Dominion Mandate: A Response to Darek Isaccs
- 1.10 Is There a Dominion Mandate? Discussion: In Defense of Human Dominion
- 1.11 Is There a Dominion Mandate? Discussion: The Dominion Mandate: Yesterday, Today, and Forever
- 1.12 Is There a Dominion Mandate? Reply: A Response to Hennigan, Kulikovsky, and McDurmon
- 1.13 An Analysis of the Dodwell Hypothesis
- 1.14 Bibliography of Creationist Astronomy
- 1.15 The Importance of an Historical Adam
- 1.16 Astronomical Distance Determination Methods and the Light Travel Time Problem
- 1.17 Stone Tools From the Early Tertiary in Europe—A Contradiction to any Evolutionary Theory About the Origin of Man and to Long Geological Periods of Time
- 1.18 The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs: Stanley Fish, The Pragmatic Presuppositionalist
- 1.19 A Proposal for a New Solution to the Light Travel Time Problem
- 1.20 Does Natural Selection Exist? A Critique of Randy Guliuzza’s Claims
- 1.21 The Human Beta-Globin Pseudogene Is Non-Variable and Functional
- 1.22 An Evaluation of Plasma Astronomy
- 1.23 Chimeras, Cybrids, and Hybrids: A Christian’s Observations and Critique of Some Aspects of the Controversy Involving the Mixing of Human and Animal Materials for Scientific Research
- 1.24 An Initial Estimate toward Identifying and Numbering the Frog Kinds on the Ark: Order Anura
- 1.25 Alleged Human Chromosome 2 “Fusion Site” Encodes an Active DNA Binding Domain Inside a Complex and Highly Expressed Gene—Negating Fusion
- 1.26 Jesus, Scripture and Error: An Implication of Theistic Evolution
- 1.27 Thoughts on the Goodness of Creation: In What Sense was Creation “Perfect”?
- 1.28 The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the Curse
- 1.29 An Initial Estimate of Avian Ark Kinds
- 1.30 Recent, Functionally Diverse Origin for Mitochondrial Genes from ~2700 Metazoan Species
- 2 See also
- 3 External links
- 4 References
Volume 6 articles
- 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
- Danny Faulkner, February 6, 2013
How the stars and constellations got their names baffles some young-earth creationists even though it is well known to have nothing to do with ancient Judaism. Faulkner is not a fan of 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
- 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 Genesis 1:29-30 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
- 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 magically ascribe to kinds.
- Jeffrey P. Tomkins, October 16, 2013
- Simon Turpin, October 30, 2013
- Lee Anderson, November 13, 2013
- Danny Faulkner, November 13, 2013
- 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.
- An abstract to an upcoming article appears on the website. We await the proposal!