DOCSLIB.ORG

THECB Progress Report Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THECB Progress Report Table of Contents THECB Progress Report Table of Contents Executive Summary Standard 4: Distinction of Roles Standard 7: Institutional Effectiveness Standard 8: Student Admission and Retention Standards 9 and 10: Faculty Qualifications and Size Standard 12: Curriculum Standard 15: Library Access to Information Items, Agreement between Information Sources ICRGS General Catalog 2008-2009 Appendices A Board Minutes regarding Distinction of Roles B Handbook for Effectiveness Assessment C Faculty Research and Publication D Position Description: Resumes of Applicants for Full-time Faculty Position in Science Education E Comparison of Program Titles F Comparison of Program Purposes G Comparison of Admission Criteria H Comparison of Instructional Delivery Systems I Comparison of Curricula J Comparison of Graduation Requirements K Scope and Sequence of the Program L Prerequisites for Each Course M Textbook Adoption Analysis N Professional Journal Subscriptions Supporting the Curriculum O Letter of Agreement for Library Staffing and Facsimile of the ICRGS Online Library Tutorial P Libraries Available for Online Students Q Comparison with Texas Teaching Domains R Special Comments regarding the ICRGS Institutional Viewpoint Distinctives S The Institute for Creation Research Graduate School Curriculum Syllabi T Exploring the Limitations of the Scientific Method Institute for Creation Research Graduate School Response to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Executive Summary Prepared and Submitted to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board by Henry M. Morris III Chief Executive Officer March 2008 Introduction The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and its educational ministry the Institute for Creation Research Graduate School (ICRGS) is pleased to provide additional information about our Master of Science degree program in Science Education. The following documents are in response to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) requests that aggregate from the THECB Visiting Team report on November 8, 2007, the interview with the THECB Certification Advisory Council on December 14, 2007, and a subsequent meeting with a special team of advisors assembled by Commissioner Parades on January 10, 2008. Relying on First Amendment principles, ICR has carefully reviewed and revised its online programs to meet, and in some areas to exceed, virtually all of the AAAS Project 2061 Benchmarks (in science, mathematics, technology, etc,) and National Science Education Standards. Variations would occur only on those content issues which dogmatically or substantively conflict with ICR’s sincerely held religious convictions and/or those which dogmatically or substantively conflict with ICR’s sincerely held scientific-interpretive positions. Although it is common for accredited universities in Texas and the United States to teach other disciplines with a “science” designation (i.e. military science; social science; political science, etc.), the real challenge is to accommodate the teaching of the natural sciences (e.g. bioscience and geophysical science) that is comparable to other Texas accredited institutions, and equal to the academic rigor standards Executive Summary Page 1 of 4 required of them, while duly respecting the academic freedom and religious freedoms prioritized in our U.S and Texas constitutions (and in the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1999). Accordingly, a short list of Special Comments regarding ICRGS’s “Institutional Viewpoint Distinctives” is provided in the accompanying Appendix R, to aid consideration of these types of special issues, in hopes that the ultimate outcome promotes educational diversity and liberty within the world of private online postsecondary education. The ICRGS has made a careful audit of all the THECB critiques of our program, and is confident that we have addressed each of the specified concerns identified by members of the THECB staff and advisors. We have arranged the material in the sequence of the various THECB Standard nomenclatures so that the documentation follows a coherent pattern. Standard 4: Distinction of Roles Although the ICR Trustee Board is large and diverse, concern was expressed about the apparent conflict of interest and possible lack of distinction of roles by the ICR Chief Executive Officer and the ICR President. In its January 26, 2008 meeting, the ICR Board of Trustees amended the Bylaws to designate these two offices as Ex Officio members of the Board. A copy of the appropriate section of those minutes is provided in Appendix A. Standard 7: Institutional Assessment The THECB visiting team recognized that the ICRGS Institutional Assessment was both cumbersome and difficult to administer. The ICRGS had been following a previous guideline from the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS) under which the ICRGS had previously obtained accreditation. Subsequent to the THECB visiting team’s report, the ICRGS adopted the Nichols model for assessment. A copy of the current draft of the ICRGS Handbook of Effectiveness Assessment is provided in Appendix B. Standard 8: Student Admission and Remediation Concerns were raised about the ICRGS admission requirements for the different minors within the Science Education program, requesting clarification and amplification in the catalog and on the website. Those concerns are addressed in the Tab for Standard 8 and the specific course requirements are outlined in Appendix L. Standard 9 and 10: Faculty Qualifications and Size Requests were made to the ICRGS that we provide a list of the Faculty research and publication history in order to more effectively assess the faculty qualifications. A complete list of research projects and publications is contained in Appendix D. Concern was expressed that the Science Education component of the ICRGS faculty was insufficient for the number of courses, and a request was made that the ICRGS demonstrate an active recruiting process to obtain qualified faculty. The Executive Summary Page 2 of 4 public position announcement and subsequent resumes submitted are contained in Appendix D. Appendix T contains copies of three recent articles from our publications, Acts and Facts, which address the issue of scientific evidence. Standard 12: Curriculum Although the THECB visiting team carefully reviewed the ICRGS curriculum and recommended approval, the subsequent review by Commissioner Parades’ ICR Review Committee requested that the ICRGS conduct a comparative analysis of its curriculum against several specified “smaller” universities in Texas. A summary of the requests and the ICRGS basic response is provided under the Tab labeled “Standard 12: Curriculum.” The details of the comparative analysis are contained in the following Appendices: Appendix E: Comparison of Program Titles Appendix F: Comparison of Program Purposes Appendix G: Comparison of Admission Criteria Appendix H: Comparison of Instructional Delivery Systems Appendix I: Comparison of Curricula Appendix J: Comparison of Graduation Requirements The ICR Review Committee also requested additional information on Scope and Sequence, Prerequisites for Admission, Textbook adoptions, and a listing of the Professional Journal subscriptions. These data are supplied in the following Appendices: Appendix K: Curriculum Scope and Sequence Appendix L: Prerequisites for Admission Appendix M: Comparison of Textbook Adoptions Nationwide Appendix N: Professional Journal Subscriptions Standard 15: Library Concern was expressed by the THECB visiting team that the ICRGS did not have professional library support or personnel. Request was made that the ICRGS identify and secure agreements with strategically located libraries for the online student population to access, and that the ICRGS contract for professional librarian assistance to be immediately available for the student. It was further suggested that the ICRGS prepare an online tutorial to assist its students in the use of their research with the professional journals. These issues are addressed in Appendix O and P respectively. Changes in Access to Information During the Commissioner’s special committee meeting of January 10, 2008, concern was expressed that certain information was either difficult to find or verify on the ICRGS website, or that comparisons between ICRGS printed material and its website differed. The ICRGS has undertaken a complete re-write of its Catalog Executive Summary Page 3 of 4 (provided in the Tab so labeled) and has insured that its website conveys precisely the same information. Further to insure that all material presented to the THECB was consistent, the ICRGS has rewritten all of the course syllabi to conform to other publicly available information. Those syllabi are available in Appendix S. Executive Summary Page 4 of 4 Standard 4: Distinction of Roles “…pertaining to Standard 4 – the Distinction of Roles, and consist of removing the Chief Operating Officer and the President from governing board service…” Source: Recommendation from the Certification Advisory Council review conducted on December 14, 2007. Assurances were given verbally at the December meeting by CEO Dr. Henry M. Morris III that the ICR Board would take such action at its next scheduled meeting to be held on January 26, 2008. The ICR Board meeting was held as scheduled and an amendment to the ICR Bylaws was made by appropriate motion of the board. A copy of the relevant portion of the ICR Board Minutes appears in Appendix A. Distinction of Roles Page 1 Standard 7: Institutional Effectiveness
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Apologetic Resources
    APOLOGETIC RESOURCES A Young Earth ministry perspective, namely contrasting Scripture to true science now and during the ages. By Dr. Jim Pagels [email protected] 9/2016 Editor Dr. John Fricke, Emeritus Professor of Biology, Concordia University, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Copyright This book is offered as an educational resource on a no cost basis. Contents are not to be reproduced for the purpose of sale. Note that all Scriptural passages are taken from the English Standard Version. 1 I HAVE NO GREATER JOY THAN TO HEAR THAT MY CHILDREN WALK IN THE TRUTH III JOHN 1:4 Forward - Although there is much young Earth information available from commercial sources and on the internet, it was the impression of this writer that no resource that deals with basic topical issues correlating the young Earth philosophy and science exists for professional church workers. To this end, Apologetic Resources is being offered. Intended Audience – The intended audience of this reference material is primarily use by professional church workers, i.e., teachers, pastors, youth workers, etc., namely those who choose to uphold the literal interpretation of Genesis and the inerrancy of Holy Scripture. The focus in this regard is Young Earth Creationism and the catastrophic nature of the global Genesis Flood keeping in mind that Genesis 1-11 is foundational to most of the significant doctrines of Holy Scripture. Of course, laymen may well also find this reference a valuable resource. There is obviously a realistic interplay between Scripture, apologetics and true science. The goal of this document is to provide clarity to this interaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Answers to the Top 50 Questions About Genesis, Creation, and Noah's Flood
    ANSWERS TO THE TOP 50 QUESTIONS ABOUT GENESIS, CREATION, AND NOAH’S FLOOD Daniel A. Biddle, Ph.D. Copyright © 2018 by Genesis Apologetics, Inc. E-mail: [email protected] www.genesisapologetics.com A 501(c)(3) ministry equipping youth pastors, parents, and students with Biblical answers for evolutionary teaching in public schools. The entire contents of this book (including videos) are available online: www.genesisapologetics.com/faqs Answers to the Top 50 Questions about Genesis, Creation, and Noah’s Flood by Daniel A. Biddle, Ph.D. Printed in the United States of America ISBN-13: 978-1727870305 ISBN-10: 1727870301 All rights reserved solely by the author. The author guarantees all contents are original and do not infringe upon the legal rights of any other person or work. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the permission of the author. The views expressed in this book are not necessarily those of the publisher. Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Print Version November 2019 Dedication To my wife, Jenny, who supports me in this work. To my children Makaela, Alyssa, Matthew, and Amanda, and to your children and your children’s children for a hundred generations—this book is for all of you. We would like to acknowledge Answers in Genesis (www.answersingenesis.org), the Institute for Creation Research (www.icr.org), and Creation Ministries International (www.creation.com). Much of the content herein has been drawn from (and is meant to be in alignment with) these Biblical Creation ministries.
    [Show full text]
  • CREATION SCIENCE BIBLIOGRAPHY Ray Mondragon (10/17, Rev 4/19)
    CREATION SCIENCE BIBLIOGRAPHY Ray Mondragon (10/17, rev 4/19) Note: This bibliography contains mainly the books that refute the evolution worldview and support the creationist young-universe view. There are only a few books from the old-universe view as noted at the end. CREATION vs. EVOLUTION Scientific Creationism, edited by Henry M. Morris, Institute for Creation Research, Master Books, 1974. Over 22 scientists with PhDs contribute a variety of scientific evidence supporting the creation view. Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?, Jonathan Wells, Regnery Publishing, 2000. The main evidence supporting the theory of evolution, “icons,” are explained and effectively refuted. The Lie: Evolution, Ken Ham, Master Books, 1987. The theory of evolution is refuted more philosophically than evidentially for a general audience. Biblical Creationism: What Each Book of the Bible Teaches about Creation and the Flood, Henry Morris, Baker Book House, 1993. The entire Bible is surveyed for passages referring to creation or God as Creator. Man’s Origin, Man’s Destiny: A Critical Survey of the Principles of Evolution and Christianity, A. E. Wilder-Smith, Bethany Fellowship, Inc., 1975. A professor with PhDs in organic chemistry and medical science supports the creationist position from both science and Scripture. This is an older but still a useful work. * The Creation of Life: A Cybernetic Approach To Evolution. A. E. Wilder Smith. Older but very valuable work by a British scholar who has a Ph,D in organic chemistry, a Doctor of Science in Pharmaceuticals from the University of Geneva, and a third doctorate from the E. T. M.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and the Bible
    Science and the Bible Robert M. Bowman Jr., Instructor Course Description A course surveying the issues and major views in contemporary controversies focusing on science—Bible issues, especially creation and evolution. Course Schedule Enter schedule for your venue here. Assigned and Recommended Readings Students will want to study carefully the assigned pages from the instructor’s course handout, Science and the Bible: Outlines and Notes, available free from The Theology Program. Students will also be assigned readings accessible free online representing varying perspectives on science and its relation to the Bible and Christian theology, on the assumption that students should be directly familiar with primary sources representing these perspectives. Inclusion of these readings in the curriculum does not, then, imply any endorsement of the views those readings express. See the detailed schedule below for a list of all these readings. Students are encouraged but not required to read one or more introductory books on science— Bible issues. Any of the following would be a very good choice: Carlson, Richard F., ed. Science and Christianity: Four Views. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000. Collins, C. John. Science & Faith: Friends or Foes? Wheaton: Crossway, 2003. Davis, John Jefferson. Frontiers of Science and Faith: Examining Questions from the Big Bang to the End of the Universe. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002. Moreland, J. P., ed. Three Views on Creation and Evolution. Counterpoints series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999. Poe, Harry L., and Jimmy H. Davis. Science and Faith: An Evangelical Dialogue. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000. Honors Reading: Any of the books listed above or elsewhere in this syllabus are acceptable for those doing honors reading.
    [Show full text]
  • BST702 Creation Science
    Syllabus for Creation Science (BST 702) Front Range Bible Institute (Winter 2018) Professor Timothy L. Dane I. Course Description This course is designed to expose the student to the subject of science in the light of Scripture and how these two relate to one another. The class is both theological and apologetical in nature. It is theological in that its content helps students better understand the meaning of God and His creation. It is apologetical in that it helps the student to be better equipped for presenting and defending these same theological truths. II. Course Objectives At the conclusion of this course, the student should be able to: A. Have a basic understanding of what the text of Genesis teaches about creation according to Literal, Grammatical, Historical hermeneutics. B. Have a basic understanding of the major tenets of evolution and why the popular idea of macro- evolution should be rejected. C. Have a basic understanding of how micro-evolution—as it is sometimes called—has operated over the ages, and how this process explains the variation that one finds within each species (DNA studies, etc.). D. Have a basic understanding of the assumptions used in present dating methods by many non- Christian scientists, and how these assumptions are used to argue for an “old earth.” E. Have a basic understanding of what proper conclusions can be safely drawn from the facts of geology and the fossil record, and how these facts lend considerable credence to the fact of a global flood. F. Have a basic exposure to how the Bible relates to the study of astronomy based upon valid scientific findings.
    [Show full text]
  • 10-2-441.Pdf
    First printing: August 2013 Copyright © 2013 by Answers in Genesis. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations in articles and reviews. For information write: Master Books®, P.O. Box 726, Green Forest, AR 72638. Master Books® is a division of the New Leaf Publishing Group, Inc. ISBN: 9780890517888 Library of Congress Number: 2013947562 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture is from the New King James Version of the Bible, copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Please consider requesting that a copy of this volume be purchased by your local library system. Printed in the United States of America Please visit our website for other great titles: www.masterbooks.net For information regarding author interviews, please contact the publicity department at (870) 438-5288. ® ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND SPECIAL THANKS Our many thanks to the following for the work of reviewing, editing, or illustrating this book. Dr. Jason Lisle, Dr. John Whitmore, Dr. Ron Samec, Dr. Elizabeth Mitch- ell, Dr. Tommy Mitchell, Dr. Andrew Snelling, Dr. Danny Faulkner, Dr. Terry Mortenson, Dr. Georgia Purdom, Dr. John Baumgardner, Gary Vaterlaus, Mike Matthews, Bob Hill, Roger Patterson, Troy Lacey, Steve Golden, Jeremy Ham, Buddy Davis, Randall Hedtke, Wayne Strasser, Mike Oard, Scott Chadwick, Erik Lutz, Gary Vaterlaus, Mike Matthews, Dan Stelzer, Dan Lietha, Doug Rummager, Laura Strobl, Bodie Hodge, Steve Fazekas, and Diane King. Contents Introduction: Atheistic Devices: Spotting Them . but Countering Them, Too? Ken Ham .................................................7 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Arguments We Think Creationists Should NOT
    Frequently asked questions listed by topic Arguments Arguments we think creationists Creationists Should NOT Use should NOT use (DVD) Jonathan Sarfati The primary authority for Creation Ministries International is the infallible Word of God, the Bible (see Q&A Bible). All theories of In this candid presentation before science are fallible, and new data often overturn previously held an international conference of theories. Evolutionists continually revise their theories because of nearly 600 creationist speakers new data, so it should not be surprising or distressing that some and writers, Dr Jonathan Sarfati creationist scientific theories need to be revised too. reveals the out‐of‐date, faulty, and downright flaky evidences The first article on this page sums up what the creationists’ attitude should be about various ideas and theories. The other articles that reputable creationists must provide examples of arguments that should no longer be used; avoid. In his trademark style, Dr some arguments are definitely fallacious, while others are merely Sarfati challenges some of the doubtful or unsubstantiated. We provide brief explanations why, most‐loved arguments of modern and/or hyperlinks to other articles on this Web site with more creationists, while encouraging us detailed explanations. We don’t claim that this list is exhaustive—it to focus intensely on God’s will be updated with additions and maybe deletions as new written Word as the absolute evidence is discovered. Many of these arguments have never been guide to evidence interpretations! promoted by CMI, and some have not been promoted by any major Bottom line: hold ‘facts’ loosely creationist organization (so they were not directed at anyone in and focus intensely on God’s particular), but are instead straw men set up by anti‐creationists.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation Science Assoc., Mid-America Lending Library
    CASE FOR A CREATOR – Lee Strobel (60 min) Based on CREATION SCIENCE New York Times bestseller, this is a remarkable film with mind-stretching discoveries from cosmology, cellular biology, ASSOC., MID-AMERICA DNA research, astronomy, physics, etc. leading to the Creator. LENDING LIBRARY CHEMICALS TO LIVING CELL: FANTASY OR SCIENCE? – by Dr. Jonathan Sarfati (57 min) This Ph.D. VIDEOTAPES – AUDIO TAPES chemist shows how the laws of real chemistry prevent non- SLIDE SETS – FILMSTRIPS - BOOKS living chemicals from arranging themselves into living cells. Excellent resources for Schools, CLIMATE CHANGE AND CREATION – by John Mackay Churches, Home Schools, Bible Study (60 min) Is man causing global warming? Does the Bible speak about global warming? A picture of the world’s Library services are available on a free-will offering basis. weather from the Word of the Creator who was there, CSA LENDING LIBRARY CREATED COSMOS - designed by Dr. Jason Lisle (23 8904 Mastin; Overland Park, Ks 66212 minutes) Creation Museum planetarium presentation journeys (913) 492-6545 through the solar system to the edge of the known universe to email: [email protected] discover the magnitude of our universe and its Creator. Website: WWW.CSAMA.ORG CREATION ASTRONOMY: Viewing the Universe through Biblical Glasses – by Dr Jason Lisle (36 min) When Updated November 5, 2008 the evidence is properly understood, it supports the Biblical view of a supernaturally created universe only thousands of years ago versus from a ‘big bang’ billions of years ago. HOW TO USE THE CSA CREATION LENDING LIBRARY CREATION & COSMOLOGY – by Dr. Danny Faulkner (63 minutes) Dissects flaws in past and current big bang Audiovisuals from the Lending Library are available without models.
    [Show full text]
  • I-March05 Johnb Mnts
    “VITAL ARTICLES ON SCIENCE/CREATION” March 2005 Impact #381 RECENT RAPID UPLIFT OF TODAY’S MOUNTAINS by John Baumgardner* An ongoing enigma for the standard geological community is why all the high mountain ranges of the world—including the Himalayas, the Alps, the Andes, and the Rockies—experienced most of the uplift to their present elevations in what amounts to a blink of the eye, relative to the standard geological time scale. In terms of this time scale, these mountain ranges have all undergone several kilometers of vertical uplift since the beginning of the Pliocene about five million years ago. This presents a profound difficulty for uniformitarian thinking because the driving forces responsible for mountain building are assumed to have been operating steadily at roughly the same slow rates as observed in today’s world for at least the past several hundred million years. But the uplift history of today’s mountains is anything but uniformitarian in character. Observational evidence indicates that the terrain where these mountains now exist, in many if not most cases, was nearly flat and near sea level when the recent intense pulse of uplift began. The expectation of uniformitarian thinking generally is that most of the time denudation by erosion ought to be more or less in equilibrium with uplift. This lack of agreement between field observation and uniformitarian expectation has led to conflict among specialists in the ranks of the larger earth science community. Theorists who address these matters, confident that their uniformitarian models are sound, tend to ignore the observational reports or reinterpret them as much as they can to match the predictions of their theories.
    [Show full text]
  • The Futility of Old Earth Arguments
    Abstract Young earth creationists have often supplied responses to arguments used by old earth creationists. These responses typically take one of two forms. Either they are in the form of a short article designed to refute one argument or an entire book is written to respond to the views of one particular old earth creationist or viewpoint. This paper represents a comprehensive critique of the old earth creationist’s biblical and theological arguments used in an effort to refute young earth creationism. Although the scientific evidence certainly bears weight in the debate between these two camps, this paper focused entirely on biblical and theological arguments. After all, if one side cannot support their view from Scripture then it cannot be the proper view. Also, the debate over flood geology and uniformitarianism was purposely avoided as well. This debate is just as important as the focus of this paper and may be the subject of a future study. Finally, since this is such an important debate, suggestions for improving the debate are provided for both sides. God will be honored when both “old earthers” and “young earthers” engage in honest debate rather than resorting to fallacies of distraction and ambiguity. It is this author’s hope that this paper will serve to clarify the debate primarily by eliminating the many fallacious arguments so often employed by one side or the other. Outline I. Introduction II. Summary of Young Earth Creationist Major Arguments III. Old Earth Creationist’s Responses to Young Earth Creationist Arguments a. Misrepresentation of Young Earth Position b. Revisionist History c.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.06.13 Basil Jackson Thesis Final Corrected Version
    NORTH-WEST UNIVERSITY (POTCHEFSTROOM CAMPUS) in association with Greenwich School of Theology UK The Faith Dynamic in Creationism and Evolutionary Theory by E. BASIL JACKSON, MD, MA Thesis submitted for the degree Doctor of Philosophy at the Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University Promoters: Dr JF Gosling / Dr ST Rochester Co-Promoter: Prof Dr CFC Coetzee November 2012 ABSTRACT This study attempts to examine evolutionary theory and creationism objectively without engaging in an apology for or a criticism of either. It compares the presuppositions and assumptions of both systems, and examines the role of faith in religion and in the scientific theory of evolution. After discussing the nature of the scientific method and the development of the theory of evolution, the study explores the dichotomy of faith and reason, the ways in which these operate in theories of intelligent design and theistic evolution, and the question of whether scientific evolutionary theory can be considered to be a secular religion. The thesis argues that acceptance of the scientific theory of evolution is as dependent upon a faith commitment as is adherence to religion, though the type and quality of the two respective faith systems are very different and, therefore, worthy of comparison and contrast. The study concludes that, while science and evolutionary theory share many of the same features and characteristics of faith and presumption, it is presently not appropriate to claim that evolutionary theory is a secular religion, and that when this opinion is asserted it is worthwhile to analyze the motivation, conscious and unconscious, involved. KEY WORDS: Creationism, Evolution, Faith, Religion, Intelligent Design, Theistic Evolution, Naturalism, Scientific Method, Presuppositionalism.
    [Show full text]
  • A Challenge to Evolutionary Naturalism by Brian Mariani and Sam Byers
    The Grand Canyon – A Challenge to Evolutionary Naturalism by Brian Mariani and Sam Byers (This is one chapter out of a book project that I have been working on. The purpose of this book is to really try to investigate these topics from both the Naturalistic/Evolutionary Worldview and from the Biblical Creation Worldview. Evidence has to be interpreted so the desire of this project is to better look at the whole picture. In studying both sides, we want to be able to analyze which answers the topics addressed better. I have compiled around 75 different topics that I believe are challenges to the Theory of Evolution and therefore we can see that the Creation Worldview has better answers to each of those topics. Take this also as good practice in thinking critically about both sides and asking good questions! Try thinking like a geologist, and like a creationist, and like an evolutionist.) Introduction: The Grand Canyon is a tremendous example of the rock layers that cover the continents of the Earth. The Grand Canyon is 277 miles long, 18 miles across at the most, and more than 1 mile deep and has been carved out due to the power of running water.i How were the rock layers formed initially? How long did it take to form the rock layers? How long did it take to carve the Grand Canyon? What can we learn about the history of the Earth from the Grand Canyon? Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer: The Grand Canyon is an amazing display and one of the best places to study and learn about Earth’s geologic history and to gain more clues about the age of the earth.
    [Show full text]