Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
In light of the discussion from this report, what can we conclude from the debate between Dr. Herman Mays and Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson?
The ethical use of human stem cells controversy has cooled and almost subsided. But not for the reasons you might expect.
Genetics confirms the recent, supernatural creation of Adam and Eve and refutes the evolutionary narrative on human origins.
The progress of science over the last 150 years has not only rebutted Darwin’s central arguments for evolution; it has also replaced them with an entirely different scientific explanation for the origin of species. Recent research on Darwin’s finches has confirmed this bold pronouncement.
The claim that biblical creationists reject natural selection is based on an outdated notion. The young-earth creationist view has been so maligned in popular culture that many people think creationists deny basic facts of life.
Venema took Tomkins’ claims to task on the BioLogos website regarding the supposed remnants of an egg-laying gene (vitellogenin) in human DNA.
BioLogos has engaged in systematic scientific error on one of their “evidences” for evolution, and they have misrepresented the arguments for several years.
In this article, we explore Venema’s claims in Adam and the Genome about genetic sequences that he thinks have lost their function.
Venema claims that the published, comprehensive genetic comparisons between humans and chimpanzees reveal a genetic identity of 95–98%.
In our series, we’ve discovered ample support that evolutionists fit facts to conclusions. In this article, we’ll continue to explore whether it is true.
In this post, we begin exploring Venema’s evidences in chapter two of Adam and the Genome, titled “Genomes as Language, Genomes as Books.”
In this article, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson reviews chapter 1 (written by Venema and titled “Evolution as a Scientific Theory”) of Adam and the Genome.
It appears that Venema fits facts to his preconceived conclusions. Data and facts from YEC scientists that contradicted his claims were left out.
No results found in .