The Amazing Story of Creation: From Science and the Bible

If you are looking for a book on creation, here it is. Read it to your kids. Great explanation of creation with Bible references and history facts. Will explain why Evolution is complete theory and its flaws. Great book!

In this book, designed to explain creationism in simple terms, Duane Gish, with his strong knowledge and clear thinking, starts with the Bible and goes on to show that true science favours creation and not evolution. As he discusses the different topics of the creation /evolution debate, and as he points the different design features of the living creatures and of the universe, he is able to show how darwinist geologists, biologists and astronomers have been engaging in "scientific bootstrapping". Gish demonstrates, beyond reasonable doubt, that evolution is both a theological and scientific impossibility. As he points out, when he discusses the subject of "ape-to-man evolution", the evidence for evolution gets so vague and fuzzy, that some evolutionists are now suggesting that we have "man-to-ape evolution" instead. Such is the quality of the evidence!!Many people think that Biblical creationism, because it is based on a religious text, is more a matter of faith than of science. I blame them, because they are terribly wrong and should know better. Creationists start with assumptions, alright. So do darwinists. Creationists put their supernaturalistic assumptions forward. Darwinists tend to hide their naturalistic assumptions as long as they can (at least most of them). Creationists come up with some predictions clearly falsifiable on popperian grounds. Here are some of them:1) Nature has many signs of complex specified information; 2) Information is a non-materialist entity with elements of statistics, syntatics, semantics, pragmatics and apobetics. 4) The accidental origin of life is so highly improbable as to be virtually impossible; 5) Since there is design, there is abundant evidence of appearence of design; 6) Methods used to detect design and information in other areas of human activity will detect design and information in the universe. 7) In the fossil record, in molecular biology and in today's fauna there are no transitional forms between kinds (vertebrates; investebrates; fish, amphibians; reptiles, mammals, birds, etc; 8) Mutations will be rare, mostly harmful and unable to code for new structures and functions; 9) Geology will show many signs of catasthrophism;10) One can expect many living fossils and many polystratic fossils. 11) The few alleged links will prove not to be such on a closer inspecion (v.g. Archaeopterix is a bird; Neandertals are Man)12) There are no vestigial organs nor junk DNA. One should look for design functions; 13) There is no such thing as embrio reccapitulation; 14) Astronomical evidence will insist in debunking the big bang and the cosmological principle; 15) The universe should be fine-tuned for life;16) Dating methods that assume uniformitarianism will give conflicting ages among themselves; 17) The Ice Age and Continental Drift can only be explained by a a global catastrophe. As you can see, when one is dealing with biblical creationism, one is doing much more than engaging in biblical exegesi

The book is about the biblical view of creation, get a clue! If you want to read about evolution, get a book on evolution! This is a excellent resource for homeschoolers and others who want to teach the creationists view of creation to their children. If you don't believe in the billions and billions of years thing, then this book gives a wonderful review of God's 7 day plan. The book is excellent even if you disagree with the thinking. It's a shame unethical people use a book review as a platform to promote their bias thinking.

Scientists like to be accepted as clear-thinking, objective scholars who observe and measure natural processes as they actually occur, documenting and confirming experimentally the physical phenomena of the real world. Their scientific method involves careful testing and replication of experimental data, without regard to personal beliefs. Such ideals are not always attained, unfortunately. Scientists are fallible human beings, just like everyone else. Often they are downright bigoted, especially when asked to consider a concept outside their naturalistic worldview. Their process of "peer review" screens out all other worldviews and any data which support them. For example, consider the complaint of one of their number, Dr. Lynn Margulis: "More and more...today's universities and professional societies guard their knowledge. Collusively, the university biology curriculum, the textbook publishers, the National Science Foundation review committees, the Graduate Record examiners, and the various microbiological, evolutionary, and zoological societies map out domains of the known and knowable; they distinguish required from forbidden knowledge, subtly punishing the trespassers with rejection and oblivion; they award the faithful liturgists by granting degrees and dispersing funds and fellowships. Universities and academies...determine who is permitted to know and just what it is that he or she may know. Biology, botany, zoology, biochemistry, and microbiology departments within U.S. universities determine access to knowledge about life, dispensing it at high prices in peculiar parcels called credit hours." [Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan, "Slanted Truths: Essays on Gaia, Symbiosis, and Evolution" (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1997), p. 265] One might almost think that the above had been written by a committee of creation scientists complaining about their ostracism by the evolutionary establishment. The fact is, however, that Dr. Margulis is a doctrinaire evolutionist herself, strenuously opposed to creationism. She has impeccable credentials (a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley) and is Distinguished Professor of Biology at the University of Massachusetts.Note also the complaint of one of the world's most distinguished evolutionary astrophysicists. Referring to his own theory of the origin of the universe which differs from the orthodox "Big Bang" theory, Dr. Hannes Alfvèn, says: "This has been a great advantage because it gives me a possibility to approach the phenomena from another point than most astrophysicists do, and it is always fruitful to look at any phenomenon under two different points of view. On the other hand, it has given me a serious disadvantage. When I describe the phenomena according to this formalism, most referees do not understand what I say and turn down my papers." [Hannes Alfèn, "Memoirs of a Dissident Scientist,"American Scientist (volume 76, May/June 1988), p. 250]Neither Margulis nor Alfvèn are creationists

This book is well worth reading. There is a great deal of thought provoking information and well structured logical arguments. As you read the reviews, please take note that most of the "one star" reviews resort to gross generalization and name-calling. If you are interested in this subject, get this book and keep an open mind. Don't let the intolerance of this books detractors sway you. You must think for yourself.