Traced and the Critics

“Traced marks the dawn of a new era in creation science…Traced meets the gold standard of what defines science, and the research in Traced exceeds the demands that evolutionists have made of creationists for decades.”1 In March of this year, we released a new book on human origins and human history, and we announced it with this provocative claim. Evolutionists have noticed—and responded.

Several PhD biologists at US universities have published critiques of Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise.2 Have they found a flaw? Or have they gifted the creation science community an unprecedented confirmation of the claims we made about Traced?

For a full answer, you’ll have to follow our ongoing, freely accessible video series on Traced.3 But if you’re looking for a preliminary answer, one of the critics has already provided a means to find out.

On June 2, I participated in Apologetics Live, typically a two-hour online show where audience members can participate and ask questions of the guest and host. I was invited to discuss the research in Traced. Unbeknownst to me until right before he appeared live, Daniel Cardinale, a PhD evolutionary biologist at Rutgers University, joined the audience and turned his part of the session into a one-hour debate.

You can find the full, uncut 3 hour and 40 minute interview for free here. I’m deliberately linking to the entire session so you can verify the context and completeness of our debate for yourself. For just the debate section of the video, start approximately at the 1 hour and 39 minute mark. From that point forward, you’ll see a largely uninterrupted and, I think, cordial exchange between Dr. Cardinale and me.

After watching the linked video, you won’t leave with a comprehensive knowledge of all the points that I raised in Traced, or of all the objections that he raised in his critique. But I think you’ll still find the interaction eye-opening. Dr. Cardinale appears to have come prepared: his main objections in the video matched some of his main objections in his published critique. But (without spoiling too much of the surprise) I think you’ll find that he was not prepared for my answers.

This informal debate represents the first public interaction I’ve had with the mainstream academic community about Traced. Given what transpired on June 2, I anticipate that it won’t be the last.