[[File:Images.jpg|thumbnail|375px|right|The [[Creation Research Society]] is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons committed to the scientific study of special creation as given in the book of [[Genesis]]. They publish a quarterly peer-reviewed [[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal|creation science journal]].<ref>[http://www.creationresearch.org/index.html The Creation Research Society]</ref> ]]'''Creation science''' is an effort branch of [[science]] which sets out to show that scientific evidence [[supernatural]] [[creation]] of the material [[universe]] by [[God]] is consistent and compatible with the account of Creation available scientific evidence. Being in the Bible—usually with realm of [[origins science]], creation science is a literal sixhistorical science.<ref>[https://creation.com/its-daynot-science It's not science] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref><ref>[http://creationrevolution.com/2011/05/naturalism-doesn%E2%80%99t-work/ Naturalism Doesn’t Work]</ref><ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee/what-is-science What is science?]</ref> Most advocates of creation interpretationscience believe the [[young earth creationism|earth is about 6,000 years old]], and they publish scientific evidence supporting this view (See, for example, [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]). The ongoing discovery of hundreds of [[living fossils]] correlates well with creation science but finds no answer in Darwinian theory.<ref>Thomas, B. 2015. 'Living Fossils' Point to Recent Creation. Acts & Facts. [https://www.icr.org/article/8974/268]</ref> In addition, scientists in the discipline of creation science state that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and [[second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe. They also claim that these laws point to the universe being created by [[God]].<ref>[http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php Evidences for God From Space—and not with Laws of Science]</ref><ref>Thompson, Bert, [http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329 So Long, Eternal Universe; Hello Beginning, Hello End!], 2001 (Apologetics Press)</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref> Creation scientists also assert that naturalistic processes alone cannot account for the [[Theory origin of evolutionlife]] and that the [[Evolution|theory of evolution]]cannot account for the various kinds of animals and plants.Both evolutionary scientists and [[Young earth creationism|young earth creation]] scientists believe that [[speciation]] occurs; however, young earth creation scientists state that speciation generally occurs at a much faster rate than evolutionists believe is the case.<ref>[[Creation Ministries International]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3036/ Speciation: Questions and Answers]</ref>
[[Creation Ministries International]], a leading [[Bible|biblical]] [[creation]] science organization, declared: {{cquote|Creationist research is not accepted by having a global effect that is worrying the [[atheism|atheists]] and secularists of this world. They have had it all their own way for over a century but things are slowly changing. For almost twenty five years now, ''Journal of Creation'' has been publishing cutting-edge creationist research that has been fueling the war against [[evolution]], creating little fires all around the world, including [[Great Britain]]. Atheist evangelist, Prof [[Richard Dawkins]], speaking at the 20th anniversary of the Edinburgh International Science Festival in April 2008, said the rise of creationism in British schools raised a serious problem for science teachers. It is a very worrying trend,’ he said, ‘and I think a lot of it has come over from [[United States|America]] and [[Australia]].’<ref>https://creation.com/growth-of-creation-science-in-uk-worries-prof-dawkins</ref>}} == Creation Science and Genetic Programs and Biological Information =={{Main|Intelligent design}}[[Image:Foto Gitt.jpg|right|thumb|200px|Dr. [[Werner Gitt]]]]Scientists in the area of creation science and [[intelligent design]] advocates state the [[genetic code]], genetic programs, and biological [[information]] argue for an intelligent cause in regards to the origins question.<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences18.html</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/infotheory.asp</ref><ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=118</ref> Dr. Werner Gitt, former director and Professor of Information Systems at the prestigious German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology (Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt), wrote that human beings are the most scientistscomplex [[information]] processing systems on earth. Dr. Gitt estimated that the human body processes thousands of times more information than all the world's libraries contain.<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes17.html</ref> Dr. Gitt has written several points regarding the origin of biological information: #In his work ''In the Beginning Was Information'' Dr. Gitt stated that “There is no known law of nature, but no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.”<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes17.html#wp1484094</ref>#Dr. Gitt argued that the [[density]] and complexity of [[DNA]] information is millions of times larger than mankind's current technology and this means a supremely intelligent being was the author of this information.<ref>http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn58/tinycode_dna.htm</ref> Similarly, Dr. [[Stephen C. Meyer]] in his 1996 essay ''The [[Origin of life|Origin of Life]] and the Death of [[Materialism]]'', wrote that "the information storage density of DNA, thanks in part to nucleosome spooling, is claimed several trillion times that of our most advanced [[computer chip]]s.<ref>http://www.arn.org/docs/meyer/sm_origins.htm</ref>#Gitt stated that the author of the information encoded into the DNA [[molecule]], who constructed the molecular biomachines to encode, decode and run the cells was supremely intelligent.<ref>http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn58/tinycode_dna.htm</ref>#Dr. Gitt asserted that because information is a nonmaterial entity and does not originate from matter, the author of biological information must be due partly nonmaterial ([[spirit]]).<ref>http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn58/tinycode_dna.htm</ref> Dr. [[Walt Brown]] concurs in regards to the worldviews [[supernatural]] origin of biological information and states that the scientistsgenetic material that controls the biological processes of life is coded information and that human experience tells us that [[codes]] are created only by the result of intelligence and not merely by processes of nature.<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences18.html</ref> Dr. Brown also asserts that the "information stored in the genetic material of all life is a complex program. Therefore, rather than scientific evidencesit appears that an unfathomable intelligence created these genetic programs. Specifically"<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences18.html</ref> To support his creation science view regarding the divine origin of genetic programs,Dr. Walt Brown cites the work of David Abel and Professor Jack Trevors who wrote the following:a poll among United States scientists showed approximately 55% {{cquote|No matter how many "bits" of scientists believed possible combinations it has, there is no reason to call it "information" if it doesn't at least have the potential of producing something useful. What kind of information produces function? In computer science, we call it a God"program.[" Another name for computer software is an "algorithm." No man-made program comes close to the technical brilliance of even Mycoplasmal genetic algorithms. Mycoplasmas are the simplest known organism with the smallest known genome, to date. How was its genome and other living organisms' genomes programmed? - David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors, “Three Subsets of Sequence Complexity and Their Relevance to Biopolymeric Information,” Theoretical Biology & Medical Modelling, Vol. 2, 11 August 2005, page 8<ref>http://www.ovprcreationscience.ugacom/onlinebook/ReferencesandNotes17.eduhtml#wp1467742</researchnewsref><ref>http:/97su/faithwww.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1208958</ref>}} See also:*[[:Template:Algorithms and information processing in biology|Algorithms and information processing in biology]] == Creation Scientist Successfully Predicts Planetary Magnetic Fields ==Using a young earth creation model, physicist Russ Humphreys successfully predicted the strength of planetary magnetic fields while Darwinists failed.<ref>The Creation of Planetary Magnetic Fields, by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D., December 1984, CRSQ Vol. 21, No. 3 [http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/21/21_3/21_3.html] Also</ref> Since Humphreys' first success with the ''Voyager II'' results on Uranus and Neptune, a survey found <ref>D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. 1990. Beyond Neptune: Voyager II Supports Creation. Acts & Facts. 19 (5).[https://www.icr.org/article/beyond-neptune-voyager-ii-supports-creation]</ref> subsequent explorations yielded additional successes for Mercury.<ref>Thomas, B. 2011. Mercury's Fading Magnetic Field Fits Creation Model. Acts & Facts.[https://www.icr.org/article/mercurys-fading-magnetic-field-fits]</ref>Dr. Donn Chapman invited Dr. Humphreys on the Origins TV series presenting his theory.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7manZ1WF-Lc&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=26 Magnetic Fields, part 1 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amDk5rgoThA&list=PLT8IFvbAQauhBny_7LoWat_ZrjXx159Y7&index=47 Magnetic Fields, part 2 of 2 with Dr. D. Russell Humphreys - Origins]</ref> Other recent successful predictions were that 93% Pluto would show active geology, it's atmospheric escape rate would be too great for millions of the years, and that Pluto's moons would not yield evidence for being formed from collision.<ref>"Will Pluto Surprise Scientists?" by David F. Coppedge, ''Creation Evolution Headlines,'' July 9, 2015 [https://crev.info/2015/07/will-pluto-surprise-scientists who were members /]</ref> This was confirmed by the ''New Horizons'' flyby.<ref>"“Overdose of Awesomeness”: New Pluto Images Show Unpredicted Activity", by David Coppedge, Creation Matters 2015 Vol. 20, Num. 5 [https://www.creationresearch.org/index.php/extensions/s5-creation-matters/cm-archive/creation-matters-2010-to-2019]</ref> == Effect of the growth of creation science and Christian apologetics == ''See also:'' [[United States National Academy Atheism vs. Christian revival and Christian apologetics]] and [[Atheism vs. Christianity]] The effect of Sciencesevolutionism/[[atheism]] do /[[agnosticism]] on the [[Western World]] and the world at large was mitigated by the growth of modern creationism and [[Christian apologetics]] in the latter half of the 20th century and today [[global creationism]], Christian apologetics and [[global Christianity]] is seeing rapid growth.<ref>[http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity Thriving Christianity]</ref><ref>[http://www.brethrenassembly.com/Ebooks/Apol_001A.pdf Introduction To Integrated Christian Apologetics, Dr. Johnson C. Philip & Dr. Saneesh Cherian]</ref><ref>[http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2014/10/04/evolution-under-attack-from-muslims-and-evangelicals/ Evolution rejected by hundreds of millions of Muslims and evangelicals], ''Vancouver Sun'', October 4, 2014</ref> == Biblical creation publications == ''See also:'' [[Biblical creation journals]] Some prominent biblical [[creation]] publications are given below: *''[[Creation magazine]]'' *''[[Journal of Creation]]'' - Peer reviewed *''[[Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal]]'' - peer reviewed ==Creation Science and the Evolutionary Science Community==Creation science is considered as pseudoscience by the majority of the scientific community. It is also commonly rejected by [[Atheism|atheists]] as they generally hold the [[worldview]] of [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]]. Liberals reject Creation Science with the spurious pretext that it cannot be disproved ([[falsifiable|falsifiability]]) and therefore cannot be considered "[[science]]".<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/19991013122341/https://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/evolutionviews990816.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> '''''However, Dr. [[Walt Brown]] argues that the field of creation science is scientific'''''<ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ13.html#wp2727001</ref> and the evolutionists' objections to creation science are due to their worldviews and preconceptions, rather than on the basis of scientific evidence or the scientific validity of the idea.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref>Also, [[Karl Popper]], a leading philosopher of science and originator of falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation of science from nonscience,<ref>* http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/* http://www.discovery.org/a/3524</ref> stated that Darwinism is "not a testable scientific theory, but a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] research programme."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref> Michael Ruse, a leading Darwinist and philosopher of science, conditionally acknowledged Popper's statement: "Since making this claim, Popper himself has modified his position somewhat; but, disclaimers aside, I suspect that even now he does not really believe there that Darwinism in its modern form is a Godgenuinely falsifiable. "<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref> However prominent evolutionist [[J. B. S. Haldane]], when asked what would falsify the theory of evolution, said "Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian." {{Creation vs. evolution}} ==See also ==*[[Bill Keith]], author of the Louisiana Balanced Treatment Act, struck down by U.S. Supreme Court*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]*[[Creation vs. evolution debates]]*[[Creation]]*[[Creationism]]*[[Revolution Against Evolution website]]*[[Christianity and Science]]*[[Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]*[[Creationist contributions to science]]*[[Scriptural geologists]]*[[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]] ==External links==*[http://associationforcreation.org/ The International Association For Creation]*[http://creationnetwork.org/ The Creation Network]*[http://visitcreation.org/ The Big Map of Creation]*[https://creation.com/ Creation Ministries International]*[http://www.naturecreationscience.com/natureIn the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood] the website of Dr. [[Walt Brown]]*[http:/journal/v394www.creationresearch.org/n6691Creation Research Society]*[http:/full/394313a0www.creationresearch.org/crsq.htmlCreation Research Society Quarterly Journal]*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/ Answers in Genesis]*[https://www.icr.org/ Institute for Creation Research]*[http://www.nwcreation.net/ NorthWest Creation Network] == Notes =={{reflist|2}} [[Category:Science]][[Category:Creation science]]