Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Readers Respond - AM v3n2
You say that Werner von Braun was a devout Christian. Didn’t he use Jewish slave labor to build his V-2 rockets? It was said that 10,000 people died building the rockets, while the rockets themselves only killed 5,000.
Bogdan F., Romania
Author’s Note: There is controversy about von Braun. I think that most people who have investigated this subject believe that von Braun had nothing to do with the actual construction of the V-2, though he did tour the production facility on at least one occasion. On that occasion he did not like what he saw, but he was in no position to do anything about it. Again, he headed up design and testing, not production. Like you, I find the deaths totally horrific.
I just wanted to tell you that the latest magazine (Answers Jan.–Mar. 2008) is wonderful. You have really out-done yourselves with this one. I have read it through once, and am on my second reading. I never do this with a magazine. My grandchildren have also shown a great interest in this issue, asking questions and reading some articles. Thank you so much for such a special issue. Whoever put this one together deserves a raise!
Kathy B., Bothell, Washington
My parents receive Answers magazine, and I read it when I’m back from school and enjoy it very much. I would like to hand it out to evolutionary friends but . . . the magazine is wonderfully un-technical. This is fabulous for the vast majority of people . . . but for people like me, who are on their way to becoming (or already are) non-lay-persons, it leaves a bit to be desired.
When I saw the most recent issue, I was excited that the topic [distant starlight] would actually be addressed. Alas, only six small paragraphs discussed the (in my mind, huge) dilemma. What would be absolutely lovely is if there were some supplements or more technical resources [on issues such as distant starlight].
Chad O., Pennsylvania State University
Editor’s Note: We agree that the topic of distant starlight is worthy of more space in the magazine, and we are not afraid to tackle complex subjects that even “techies” would enjoy. We plan to publish an article on distant starlight in the future.
Also, our parent organization, Answers in Genesis, has just launched a new cutting-edge creation research journal called Answers Research Journal (ARJ). This professional, peer-reviewed technical journal offers interdisciplinary research within a biblical, young-earth framework. All published papers are free to download at www.answersingenesis.org/arj.
I have enjoyed all of the issues of Answers, but the astronomy issue I’ve especially enjoyed. I’ve been an amateur astronomer for many years; however, my interest in astronomy took a hit after the April 2005 issue of Sky and Telescope encouraged readers to resist creationist attempts to undermine evolution. It had the opposite effect for me, however, as I quickly quit my subscription for Sky and Telescope. It was encouraging for me to see articles of other amateur astronomers who believe God’s Word.
Eric H., Plainfield, Indiana
The special astronomy issue is—well—stellar! It’s packed with more information than I can recall getting from any single issue of any magazine. From black holes, to penguins, to the extra web content about Venus flytraps, I learned stuff I’d never heard anywhere before. Looking forward to the next issue . . . if I can wait that long!
Alan L., Pensacola, Florida
“The Gospel Message Written in the Stars” (Jan.–Mar. 2008) does not get it quite right. Dr. Faulkner mainly critiques the work of Francis Rolleston instead of taking a closer look at The Gospel in the Stars by Joseph Seiss, published in 1882.
Ross O., Minneapolis, Minnesota
Author’s Note: I did consider the work of Joseph Seiss in an earlier paper in 1998. When I wrote that earlier paper, Rolleston’s book was out of print.
Seiss repeated much of Rolleston but did supplement with some of his own ideas. To his credit, Seiss did omit some of Rolleston’s more egregious and fanciful things. Though I obviously disagree with the entire thing, I do agree that Seiss’s book easily is better.