DOCSLIB.ORG

Determining the Ark Kinds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Determining the Ark Kinds Answers Research Journal 4 (2011):195–201. www.answersingenesis.org/contents/379/arj/v4/Ark_kinds_Flood_baraminology_cognitum.pdf Determining the Ark Kinds Jean K. Lightner, Independent Scholar, Mentor, OH Tom Hennigan, Associate Professor of Biology, Truett-McConnell College, 100 Alumni Drive, Cleveland, GA 30528 Georgia Purdom, Research Scientist, Answers in Genesis, P. O. Box 510, Hebron, KY 41048 Bodie Hodge, Answers in Genesis, P. O. Box 510, Hebron, KY 41048 Abstract As part of the Ark Encounter Project at Answers in Genesis, a research effort has been initiated to provide information necessary for the best possible reconstruction of the animal kinds preserved on the Ark. This initial paper outlines the basic rationale that will be used and the underlying justification for it. The biblical text provides strong evidence for each kind being a reproductive unit. Based on this and biological evidence that reproduction requires significant compatibility, hybridization will be considered the most valuable evidence for inclusion within an “Ark kind.” The cognitum and statistical baraminology are discussed as they are relevant to this venture. Where hybrid data is lacking, we have chosen to use a cognitum method. Using current taxonomic placement as a guide, pictures and/or personal experience with the animals will be used to find obvious groupings. If the grouping seems excessively high taxonomically, the family level may be used as the default level to avoid underestimating the number of kinds on the Ark. Results from statistical baraminology studies and other information will be used where appropriate. It is hoped the result will be a valuable resource for future studies in baraminology. Keywords: Ark, Flood, created kinds, baraminology, cognitum Introduction Nevertheless, there is information that can be used to Long before the Ark Encounter project was make educated guesses about these animals preserved announced by Answers in Genesis, it was realized on the Ark. While it is important to recognize that that a considerable amount of research would be these are informed guesses, and therefore not to necessary to allow for a high quality exhibit. How be accepted with the level of certainty of Scripture, many kinds were there on the Ark? What might they they can help us gain a general appreciation for what have looked like? How can we even begin to answer things may have been like on the Ark. these questions? This paper is the first in a series that will attempt to address these questions. Biblical Evidence At a time when the world was filled with violence, A comprehensive understanding of biology should God chose to destroy all land-dwelling, air-breathing necessarily include the origin of life. While the secular life on it by a global Flood (Genesis 7:21–23). Noah, a world ignores the Bible and speculates naturalistic righteous man, was instructed to build an Ark that origins for life, a Christian should recognize that would protect him, his family, and pairs of animals reliable eyewitnesses are invaluable for establishing and birds from this coming destruction (Genesis 6: historical facts (Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 17:6; 9–22). God told Noah: 19:15, Isaiah 8:2; 43:9–12; 44:6–8, Jeremiah 6: Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their 16–18, 32:12, Matthew 18:16, Acts 2:32, 2 Corinthians kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19). Clearly, in the first few chapters of kind, two of every kind1 will come to you to keep them Genesis, we have a historical account of the creation of alive. (Genesis 6:20) the world and life on it from the most reliable eyewitness, This designation of flying and terrestrial creatures God himself. So this is where we will begin. preserved on the Ark “after their kind” is repeated in During Creation Week God created plants (Day 3), Genesis 7:14 and is reminiscent of how these creatures sea creatures and flying creatures (Day 5), and land were created (Genesis 1:21, 24–25).2 Since the Bible animals (Day 6) each “according to its kind” (Genesis does not mention specifically how many kinds there 1:11–13, 20–25). This phrase is used of all animal life were, nor give us specific physical descriptions of except humans, who were created in the image of God them, any attempt to discern what they were will (Genesis 1:26, 27). So it is important to understand necessarily include a significant amount of conjecture. what is being conveyed. 1 Italicized words are not in the Hebrew, but are necessary for the sentence to make sense in English. 2 “after its kind” and “according to its kind” are two different ways to translate the same underlying Hebrew phrase, which appears in Genesis 1, 6, and 7. ISSN: 1937-9056 Copyright © 2011 Answers in Genesis. All rights reserved. Consent is given to unlimited copying, downloading, quoting from, and distribution of this article for non-commercial, non-sale purposes only, provided the following conditions are met: the author of the article is clearly identified; Answers in Genesis is acknowledged as the copyright owner; Answers Research Journal and its website, www.answersresearchjournal.org, are acknowledged as the publication source; and the integrity of the work is not compromised in any way. For more information write to: Answers in Genesis, PO Box 510, Hebron, KY 41048, Attn: Editor, Answers Research Journal. The views expressed are those of the writer(s) and not necessarily those of the Answers Research Journal Editor or of Answers in Genesis. 196 J. K. Lightner, T. Hennigan, G. Purdom, and B. Hodge ,(English Standard Version, New English Translation ,מין The underlying Hebrew word for kind here is clarifying things since the modern English word ,ברא) mîn. It, along with the Hebrew word for create bārā’), was used to coin the word baramin, a creationist “seed” has a narrower semantic range than the term for created kind. While the word baramin has Hebrew word. The New International Version, which strong taxonomic connotations to most creationists, is more of a dynamic equivalence translation, renders Hebrew scholars have warned against assuming that the encompassing phrase: “to keep their various is מין is a technical term (Turner 2009; Williams 1997). kinds alive throughout the earth.” Thus, where מין Both Williams (1997) and Turner (2009) suggest that used in the Creation or Flood accounts, it seems to be can be understood to refer to subdivisions within referring to distinct groups of animals and strongly מין a larger group much like the meaning of the English implying that reproduction occurs within these word kind. So caution needs to be exercised in this groups (Table 1). area. Plants are described as being created according to Methods for Ascertaining Baramins (zera’), implying they were (Created Kinds ,זרע) their kinds with seed to reproduce (Genesis 1:11–12). Aquatic and flying Hybridization creatures, after being created according to their kinds, Based on the concept that living things reproduce were blessed and told to reproduce to fill the earth according to their kinds, hybrids between different (Genesis 1:22). A similar blessing was pronounced species of animals has long been considered conclusive on humans (Genesis 1:28) along with a command evidence that both species belong to the same created for them to rule the earth. Since life was created kind (baramin). For example, crosses between dogs “according to their kinds” and told to reproduce, it is and wolves, wolves and coyotes, and coyotes and often assumed that life reproduces according to its jackals are interpreted to mean that all these species kind. While Scripture does not emphatically state of animals belong to a single baramin. that life reproduces only after its own kind, there is a Reproduction is a complex process and sometimes very strong inference given both the biblical text and barriers arise that make it more difficult. This can observations made in the world today. be seen in attempts to form hybrids between different The account of the Flood seems to reinforce this species. When cattle are crossed with bison, live understanding. God told Noah: hybrids are formed. However, the males are sterile. And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring The females can generally reproduce and can be two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with crossed with either parent species. For this reason, you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after cattle and bison are considered to belong to the same their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every baramin, but are not the same species because they creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every cannot consistently produce fertile offspring. Crosses kind will come to you to keep them alive. (Genesis between horses and donkeys produce a mule, which is 6:19–20). rarely fertile in either sex. Notice verse 19 mentions two of all living things, More serious barriers to reproduction can be apparent a male and a female, are to come on the Ark. The within a baramin. Sheep and goats were identified as obvious purpose is for reproduction (cf. Genesis 7:2, belonging to the same baramin because several live 3, and 9). This is adjacent to a verse mentioning the hybrids have been produced between them. However, preservation of animals according to their kinds, a live hybrid is not the most common result when again specifying two of each. A very similar situation these species mate with each other. In one study, when is found in the next chapter. rams were mated with does (female goats) fertilization they [Noah and family] and every beast after its kind, was fairly common, although not as high as matings all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that within the respective species.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Baraminological Analysis of the Land Fowl (Class Aves, Order Galliformes)
    Galliform Baraminology 1 Running Head: GALLIFORM BARAMINOLOGY A Baraminological Analysis of the Land Fowl (Class Aves, Order Galliformes) Michelle McConnachie A Senior Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in the Honors Program Liberty University Spring 2007 Galliform Baraminology 2 Acceptance of Senior Honors Thesis This Senior Honors Thesis is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation from the Honors Program of Liberty University. ______________________________ Timothy R. Brophy, Ph.D. Chairman of Thesis ______________________________ Marcus R. Ross, Ph.D. Committee Member ______________________________ Harvey D. Hartman, Th.D. Committee Member ______________________________ Judy R. Sandlin, Ph.D. Assistant Honors Program Director ______________________________ Date Galliform Baraminology 3 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, without Whom I would not have had the opportunity of being at this institution or producing this thesis. I would also like to thank my entire committee including Dr. Timothy Brophy, Dr. Marcus Ross, Dr. Harvey Hartman, and Dr. Judy Sandlin. I would especially like to thank Dr. Brophy who patiently guided me through the entire research and writing process and put in many hours working with me on this thesis. Finally, I would like to thank my family for their interest in this project and Robby Mullis for his constant encouragement. Galliform Baraminology 4 Abstract This study investigates the number of galliform bird holobaramins. Criteria used to determine the members of any given holobaramin included a biblical word analysis, statistical baraminology, and hybridization. The biblical search yielded limited biosystematic information; however, since it is a necessary and useful part of baraminology research it is both included and discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation, Evolution, and the Historical Evidence
    Creation,Evolution, and the Historical Evidence DUANE T. GISH classifiedand more or less colligated by being broughtunder general laws, and which includes trustworthymethods for the discoveryof new truth withinits own domain"(emphasis added). Thus,for a theoryto qualifyas a scientifictheory, it mustbe supportedby eventsor processesthat can be observedto occur,and the theorymust be useful * Althoughthe views presentedin this article are not acceptable to the majorityof life scientists,the in predictingthe outcome of future natural phenom- ena or laboratoryexperiments. An additionallimita- editorial stafffeels that our membershipshould be Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/abt/article-pdf/35/3/132/30638/4444262.pdf by guest on 26 September 2021 aware of the creationistposition as described by tion usually imposedis that the theorymust be Duane T. Gish. capable of falsification;that is, one mustbe able to conceivesome experiment the failure of which would disprovethe theory. It is on thebasis ofsuch criteria F OR A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING of the issuesto be dis- thatmost evolutionists insist that creation be refused cussedin thispaper, I mustbegin by definingevolu- considerationas a possibleexplanation for origins. tionand creation.When the term evolution is used it Creationhas not been witnessedby humanobserv- will referto the generaltheory of organicevolution, ers,it cannotbe testedscientifically, and as a theory or themolecules-to-man theory of evolution. Accord- it is nonfalsifiable. ing to this theoryall livingthings have arisen by The generaltheory of evolution (molecules-to-man naturalistic,mechanistic, evolutionary processes from theory)also failsto meetall threeof thesecriteria, a single living source,which itselfhad arisen by however.Dobzhansky (1958), while seeking to affirm similarprocesses from inanimate matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution and Original Sin: Accounting for Evil in the World by Dr
    Evolution and Original Sin: Accounting for Evil in the World by Dr. Daryl P. Domning and Dr. Joseph F. Wimmer The Washington Theological Consortium (WTC) produced this discussion guide as part of a series titled "At the Crossroads of Science and Theology." The series aims to connect the interests and expertise of faculty in Washington-area theological schools with the questions and concerns of people in congregations regarding the relationship between science and religion. We hope to bring theological reflection and scientific research to adult education groups, in an interdisciplinary and ecumenical exploration of fundamental issues in this relationship. You may contact WTC at (202) 832-2675 for further information about this series, or visit the organizaton's Web site at http://washtheocon.org . The$Washington$Theological$Consortium$is$a$community$of$Theological$Schools$of$diverse$Christian$ traditions—with$partners$in$education,$spirituality$and$interfaith$dialogue—that$supports$ ecumenical$unity$and$interfaith$understanding$in$four$ways:$ $ • By$supporting$ecumenical$study$and$dialogue$that$explores$the$distinct$theological$traditions$of$ the$churches,$analyzes$barriers$to$Christian$unity,$and$explores$opportunities$for$shared$public$ witness.$$ $ • By$providing$an$ecumenical$context$for$equipping$clergy$and$laity$to$serve$the$mission$and$ ministry$of$the$Church$in$the$world$through$diverse$communities$and$in$ways$that$witness$to$ the$unity$that$is$ours$in$Christ.$$ $ • By$providing$member$institutions$the$means$of$sharing$their$rich$theological,$spiritual,$and$ practical$resources$by$developing$programs$and$services$that$are$best$done$in$collaboration,$ and$which$enrich$the$mission$and$programs$of$each$member.$$ $ • By$engaging$in$interreligious$study$and$dialogue,$with$members$of$other$faiths,$$that$explore$the$ differences$and$shared$values$of$the$theologies$and$practices$of$the$great$world$religions.$$$ $ $ About the Authors Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Destroys the Evolutionary Paradigm
    SCIENCE DESTROYS THE EVOLUTIONARY PARADIGM An Inservice Manual for Young-Earth Creationists Free Images – Snappygoat.com Materialistic Naturalism, an Immoral and Incoherent Philosophy!!! Dr. Jim Pagels – 4/18/2018 1 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it. Isaiah 55:9-11 This book along with its predecessors including Apologetic Resources, Lesson Plans for Biblical Apologetics and Touching Lives through Apologetics, a Counseling Perspective are offered free for personal and professional use in ministry, being available as downloads on the Michigan District website under schools-curriculum. Scriptural references are typically taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) although the King James Version (KJV) is also periodically utilized. 2 Contents Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………..…….5 Preface…………………………………………………………………………………………...6 Intended Audience ……………………………………………………………………………....8 Inservice Perspective……….…………………………………………………………….……..9 Inservice Questionnaire……………………………………………………………..…………10 1. Evolution, an Attack on the Supernatural Nature of God…………………………………..21 2. In Search of Truth…………………………………………………………………………..23 3. Creation Apologetics, Simple for Some, Incomprehensible to Others………..……..…….35 4. Two Typical Approaches to Young Earth Creationism……………………………………38 5. The Absolute Veracity of the Supernatural…………………….…………………………..40 6. A Tactical Approach to Creationism………………………….………………………..…..43 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Theism Everything Can Be Agnosticism Explained on the Basis of Natural Law
    O3 SB Three • Spring Board to Life • Chapter Three • By Pastor Dan Domke Six Day Creation Number of Days of Creation. –Six Day Creation not millions of years. –With in six days, everything was created. –Plants – for food –All the animals, fish, birds, cattle etc. –And finally Man Genesis is scientific, just in a different way than modern day science. • Lineus – classification Key – By structure • e.g. radial summitry, bi-lateral summitry • Biblical classification Key – By habitat • Sky –Water- Land • Not unscientific just a different methodology Baraminology- Bara=created / Min = Kind •Study of created kind. Science - Knowledge • Descriptive Science - Based on Fact • Prescriptive • Based on Assumptions Secular World View –Evolutionary Materialism –Uniformitarianism –Man a chance and random product of evolution, has no more intrinsic value than other animals. In practice – man –Man is lefthas to fendless for value Himself. than – No God or if there is He/She is impersonal.the animals. Biblical World View 1. Creationism 2. Catastrophism 3. Man is the result of special creation, created by God to be in fellowship with Him. And to care for the planet. 4. Man is above the animals and has infinite value. 5. God provides everything for man’s life, and knowledge, (science) etc. 6. God is the living God, and He is personal. Two World Views Compared REALITY Naturalism The material universe is all that exists. Reality is "one-dimensional." There is no such thing as a soul or a spirit. Atheism Everything can be Agnosticism explained on the basis of natural law. Existentialism Two World Views Compared Naturalism MAN Man is the chance product of a biological process of evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Flood of Noah
    THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. DEDICATION This book is dedicated with deep appreciation to Joe and Beryl Nisbet, two “wee Scots” who, as husband and wife, have devoted their entire adult lives to teaching the Gospel in their native Scot- land and who, through their many personal sacrifices and exemplary conduct on behalf of the Lord and His church, have become such an endearing example for everyone around them. APOLOGETICS PRESS, INC. 230 Landmark Drive Montgomery, Alabama 36117-2752 © Copyright 1986 Revised Editions © Copyright 1999, 2005 ISBN: 0-932859-78-X All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in articles or critical reviews. -i- TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................1 Mankind’s Response to the Genesis Flood .....................................1 CHAPTER 2 THE FLOOD IN SCRIPTURE AND HISTORY....................5 The Importance of the Doctrine of the Global Flood ......................5 The Reason for the Flood................................................................6 Supernatural Elements of the Flood ................................................8 The Ubiquity of Flood Stories.........................................................9 CHAPTER 3 THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH.......................................11 The Antediluvian World ...............................................................11 The Necessity of Constructing
    [Show full text]
  • Creation /Evolution
    Creation /Evolution • •^'•vs A Creationist Walk Through the Grand Canyon : Issue XX : : :: CONTENTS ; . Spring 1987 ARTICLES :;/ •:: ::- •; '•• •;. ':'••. •';•• ••• •' •••••••• •• .'• •. I A. Creationist Walk Through the Grand Canyon by Thomas Mclver 13 Fossil Insects: Pests of Creatioh by Gene Kritsky 19 Design; Created Kinds, and Engineering by FrancisJ, Arduini 25 Tbe Origin of Species by Punctuated Equilibria byi Frank J, Sonleitner : •REVIEWS.. :. .•-.-;;.: • ;• •;. ; • . .. ; . ; ; . ' ; 31 Reviews . ; . ' .'. ;. .• ' ;' ' V • v .". ... : . 39 Letters to the Edit or :• • • .. LICENSED TO UNZ.ORG ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED About this issue ... For years, the Institute for Creation Research has made much of its fre- quent student expeditions to the Grand Canyon. Since we have so often published investigations of other creationist "field research." we began to feel that it was about time we reported on one of these. Torn Mclver, a cultural anthropologist who had gained the confidence of the ICR. felt the same way and. In June 1985, went down into the Grand Canyon with a creationist study group. His recently completed and quite detailed report on the actual nature of that expedition, this issue's lead article, is an eye-opener. If you had thought that creationist "field research" on Mount Ararat and along the Paluxy River was short on scientific merit and objectivity, you will be amazed at how much less there is of it in these regular ICR treks. According to Henry Morris's cover letter accom- panying the April .1987 Acts & Facts, creationist students will once again enjoy "the inspiration and excitement of the ICR Grand Canyon Tour, climaxed by a glorious Easter morning service on the Canyon rim." From Tom Mclver's article, you will see how Morris's statement sums up the actual purpose of these trips so nicely.
    [Show full text]
  • ANOPA: 'Statistical' Systematics for Young-Earth Creationists
    ARTICLE ANOPA: ‘Statistical’ Systematics for Young-Earth Creationists Dan Bolnick, University of Texas, Austin reationists has been working hard to make been active members in the Baraminology Study Ctheir views appear as legitimate science. Part Group, whose website proclaims its “ultimate goal is of this strategy has been to get papers pub- to develop origin models that accommodate empiri- lished in peer-reviewed scientific journals. cal data in a biblical framework of earth history Creationists have used two strategies to achieve this through scientifically sound analysis of biological data goal. First, the recent review paper on “intelligent and scholarly analysis of biblical texts” design” (Meyer 2004) in the Proceedings of the (<http://www.bryancore.org/bsg/aboutmain.html>). Biological Society of Washington was published by To this end, Cavanaugh has been developing a bypassing the normal peer review process.According quantitative method for identifying whether a collec- to a recent statement from the Council that publishes tion of species represent a single “created kind”or are the journal, the editor Richard Sternberg handled the sufficiently distinct as to qualify as members of differ- paper in a manner “contrary to typical editorial prac- ent holobaramins. This method,called ‘Analysis of tices”(<http://www.biolsocwash.org/>). Pattern’(ANOPA) is touted as a method to “reduce the The second approach is to sanitize the content of dimensionality of multi-dimensional data with mini- the paper. Two other papers written by creationists mal loss of information and no assumptions about the have been published in peer reviewed journals in data’s distribution”(Wood and Cavanaugh 2003: 2).
    [Show full text]
  • The Beginning Linda Ebert Student Handout 1
    A Bible Overview, Session 1: The Beginning Student Handout Genesis 1:1: Attributes of God 1. God is eternal • By creating a beginning, God started time 2. God is the Creator • God created “ex nihilo”= out of nothing 3. God is separate/distinct from His creation Day 1: • Time • The “heavens” = space Building blocks of the universe: • matter • light The light-dark cycle establishes a system of measuring time Day 2: space between the waters= sky Day 3: God separated the waters and dry land appeared and vegetation Day 4: “God made two great lights”: sun and moon and also stars Day 5: fish and birds • KIND: if two things can breed together they are of the same created kind. Day 6: • animals • humans: “Let us make humans beings in our image to be like us.” Genesis 1:26 o “Elohim”= plural noun with singular meaning o “Trinity” concept introduced: ABOV- 2020 Spring Session 1: The Beginning 1 Linda Ebert Student Handout www.abibleoverview.org o One God, three distinct Persons, all involved in creation: § Genesis 1:2 § John 1:1-4 o humans, male and female, made “in the image of God” (Genesis 1:27) o charge to humans Genesis 2 God formed Adam from the dust of the ground & breathed life into him God placed Adam in the Garden of Eden • “tree of life” • “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” o Warning: may eat of every tree “except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” because “If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die.” • God made Eve from Adam’s rib o “male” and “female”, “man” and “wife”, “united into one” o Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24 quoted by Jesus in Matthew 19:4,5 ABOV- 2020 Spring Session 1: The Beginning 2 Linda Ebert Student Handout www.abibleoverview.org Creation: God says vs the world says: God says: • He existed before creation • He created time (a beginning), measured in days • He spoke creation into existence • His Creation is ordered and He sustains it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Beginning Linda Ebert Script Facilitator
    ABOV- Session 1: The Beginning Script Facilitator Slide: Summary Introduction • Bible is unique in: o how it’s written o it’s circulation o it’s survival o its predictive prophecy- 1000 of them with 700 already fulfilled o its content • Organizational structure: Historical Highway handout • 12 themes will be used, which connect dots throughout history of Bible • YouVersion.com Start video- Session 1: The Beginning (Video clip SR-01A 00:00.0) Welcome to A Bible OverView session one and the book of Genesis which means "beginning." It starts out telling us the creation of the universe, the earth, and life on the earth in an easy to follow chronological manner. Although there were no witnesses to creation and we cannot recreate it in a laboratory, the Bible's account reveals the creation process using days with God as the Creator. Let’s read about these days starting with chapter one. * Day 1. Genesis 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. In the first ten words of Genesis 1:1 we learn about several attributes of God. First, we learn God is eternal, when it says, “In the beginning God…” This means God has no beginning. He has always been. He was not created and is outside of time. By creating a beginning, God started time. We think of time as a line. We “remember” the past, “live” in the present, and “expect” the future. But there was no time before creation. End video SR-01A (1:28:36) Slide: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Genesis 1:1 • How would you answer someone who asked “Who created God?” o No one did.
    [Show full text]
  • The CRS Ekinds Research Initiative: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Headed from Here
    The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism Volume 8 Print Reference: Pages 185-190 Article 25 2018 The CRS eKINDS research initiative: Where we have been and where we are headed from here Jean K. Lightner Liberty University Kevin Anderson Creation Research Society Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings Part of the Biology Commons DigitalCommons@Cedarville provides a publication platform for fully open access journals, which means that all articles are available on the Internet to all users immediately upon publication. However, the opinions and sentiments expressed by the authors of articles published in our journals do not necessarily indicate the endorsement or reflect the views of DigitalCommons@Cedarville, the Centennial Library, or Cedarville University and its employees. The authors are solely responsible for the content of their work. Please address questions to [email protected]. Browse the contents of this volume of The Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism. Recommended Citation Lightner, J.K., and K. Anderson. 2018. The CRS eKINDS research initiative: Where we have been and where we are headed from here. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, ed. J.H. Whitmore, pp. 185–190. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship. Lightner, J.K., and K. Anderson. 2018. The CRS eKINDS research initiative: Where we have been and where we are headed from here. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism, ed. J.H. Whitmore, pp. 185–190. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship. THE CRS eKINDS RESEARCH INIATIVE: WHERE WE HAVE BEEN AND WHERE WE ARE HEADED FROM HERE Jean K.
    [Show full text]
  • How Postcreationism's Claim of Hyperrapid Speciation Opposes Yet
    Duf et al. Evo Edu Outreach (2020) 13:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-020-00124-w Evolution: Education and Outreach REVIEW ARTICLE Open Access Dissent with modifcation: how postcreationism’s claim of hyperrapid speciation opposes yet embraces evolutionary theory R. Joel Duf1* , Thomas R. Beatman2 and David S. MacMillan III3 Abstract The development of creationism to its multiple modern forms has been made possible in part by its appropriation and misuse of mainstream scientifc terms. Here we illustrate how anti-evolutionary advocates have redefned the terms macroevolution and microevolution to advance their view of the origins of biological diversity. We identify and describe an ideological movement within modern young-earth creationism we call postcreationism, those that have embraced a hyperrapid speciation model of the origin of biological diversity. Postcreationism is demonstrated with specifc examples from young-earth creationist publications and Ark Encounter creationist theme park, with takea- ways for addressing these ideas in evolutionary biology education. Keywords: Young-earth creationism, Creationist, Macroevolution, Microevolution, Evolution, Natural selection, Postcreationism, Ark Encounter Introduction of living things, including humans, on earth were inde- Young-earth creationism, also known variously as literal- pendently created at about the same time as the earth. day creationism, literal creationism, or creation science, In their description of natural history, the supernatural is a movement dedicated to providing
    [Show full text]