Jeremy AuldaneyThe presentations were very good as usual. I used to know all the creation scientists and they knew me by name Henry Morris, John Morris, Larry Vardiman, Carl Baugh, Joe Taylor, Duane Gish, Doris Bowers, Michael Oard, David Coppage. Now most are dead or retired. I remember John Morris greeting me when I walked by him at a conference. Now few know me now, even though I have published two books and run a newsletter BiblicalScienceNews.blogspot.com and have many videos on YouTube since then. I have passed on their advertising but they do not want to support me even though I agree with everything Henry Morris, and John Morris believed and supported in my books..
Jeremy AuldaneyJason did a great presentation on how to debate an evolutionist. The problem he did not address was, what if the evolutionist is willingly ignorant and will not listen to anything. He assumes the evolutionist is being sincere about what he believes. He says giving them facts does no good, they always have a counter argument. Like when you show them that comets do not last millions of years. They bring up the Oort cloud which brings new comets to pass the sun. Of course this argument is not scientific because the Oort Cloud is based on faith in evolution which is considered to be a fact even when there is no observational evidence, and 'know' the universe is billions of years old so comets cannot be old. Same with stars, they assume based on faith that new stars are forming simply because stars die and need to be replaced. Many stars have been observed to die by explosions, but no new stars have ever been seen. Faith in evolution keeps them looking for these. The same thing the discovery of dinosaur soft tissue, tracks of giant men with dinosaurs, and Carbon 14. Evolutionists 'know' these cannot be true because their philosophy says these cannot be possible. The Bible calls this ever searching but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. The Design Movement says something similar, they say evolutionists base their belief in philosophy and not the facts of science.The interpret and force the facts to fit their preconceived conclusions. The only evidence for evolution is circumstantial and can be better explained by purposeful design rather than a natural process. The Bible says they are without excuse. You can try to explain how design is only the appearance of design. And try to explain how this miracle could happen by a natural process, but this contradicts logic and observations. Another problem is it is not just the appearance of design, it is beautiful, extremely complex, and always has an important useful purpose. This has been observed over and over in science. Now draw 3 random letters out of a can. Notice it can create CAT, DOG, MAN, etc. every now and then. Now try doing this to produce the first verse of the Bible. It will never happen because the words cat, dog, man, etc. have no message there is no purpose, it only appears to say something by random purposeless accident.
However, during the question and answer they only took questions from a host, not from the audience. When the subject of no rain before the Flood the canopy theory came up, which collapsed during the Flood causing some of the water. They claimed that ICR found no mechinism for a water canopy surrounding the earth. The problem, is there is evidence of a radiation shield, because we know that the Bible says there was no rain before the Flood. And we know that the earth was perfect. But today we have cosmic rays, ultra violet, and infra red. All this was shielded before the Flood and is one reason things lived longer before the Flood.