A: There is a real difference between experimental (operational) science, which deals with how things operate in the present, and origins science, which deals with what happened in the unobserved past to produce what we are observing in the present.

Well-controlled, objective tests that can be replicated for confirmation are used to find answers in experimental science but are not truly possible in origins science.

For example, determining the strength of a metallic alloy under various conditions is a matter for experimental science. So is the design of new technological uses for the alloy. But theorizing about the chemical origins of life from non-living matter or how the Grand Canyon formed is built on assumptions about unobservable, untestable, hypothetical, scientifically unverifiable processes.

Continue reading about the powerful implications of creation science.

Science Confirms the Bible DVD

Ken Ham tackles the biggest creation/evolution questions he's constantly asked by teens. Over a dozen “hot topics” are answered with humor and intensity in this fast, illustrated presentation. See how real science really does confirm the Bible! (Also available as a video download.)

Designer dogs: Doggie DNA analysis published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests no dog today resembles the original.

The threat of skeptics: Famous evolutionist considers skeptics a threat to human survival.

Tales told by teeth: Teeth track patrimony (property inherited through the male line) and prosperity in early agricultural society.

Recipe for the perfect planet: Just where would alien life be, if it exists?

Not clueless about climate: Scientifically literate people can disagree about the causes and cures of climate change, study finds.