Research Is Lacking—Agreed!

However, the research that I am referring to—and the lack thereof—is that of Stephen S. Young, the author of a letter to the editor entitled, “Research is lacking” (Lexington-Herald Leader, January 25, 2011).

His letter is in response to an editorial authored by myself and several other AiG scientists entitled, “Some scientists also embrace creationism.”

I have put excerpts from his letter in red and my response in black following each excerpt.

There are some errors and misleading statements [in our editorial] which need correction.

The scientists at AiG do not claim to be infallible and we always welcome appropriate correction.

The authors make the following statements: “We are full-time Ph.D. researchers” (the implication being that they are scientists using scientific methodology) and “there are thousands of serious scientists who doubt evolution.”

The added comment by Mr. Young, amid quotes from our editorial, is nothing more than an ad hominem attack. He infers that we are not being truthful when we state that we are scientists who use scientific methodology, presumably because we are biblical creationists.

First, simply possessing a degree (no matter from what institution or in what field) does not make you a scientist.

Agreed. Many people get degrees in areas that are unrelated to the biological and physical sciences such as history, art, music, English, etc. and would not be considered scientists. However, our degrees come from the aforementioned fields of science.

Scientists practice science. They engage in credible research, identifying a problem, generating hypotheses, testing those hypotheses, drawing conclusions from the evidence, then submitting that research to respected, refereed scientific journals for publication and discourse.

Agreed again. AiG scientists have published numerous papers in respected, refereed scientific journals based on the observational/operational science they have done, and many times, the implication that has for historical science. See my previous blog for a small sampling of these articles.

Either Mr. Young has not done any research to find these articles or because AiG scientists have not recently published in secular refereed scientific journals, the research is somehow invalid. That is merely his arbitrary opinion.

Why are these “thousands” of scientists who support creationism not conducting scientific research and having it published in respected scientific journals? Perhaps one reason is that you will be hard-pressed to find virtually any practicing scientists who support creationism.

Again, AiG scientists have published in respected scientific journals, but in Mr. Young's arbitrary opinion the only scientific journals that are “respected” are the secular ones. Secular journals often practice a form of viewpoint discrimination that usually precludes biblical creationists from publishing in secular journals. It has very little to do with the actual science and everything to do with our starting point of biblical authority. Dr. Snelling, Dr. Menton, and I personally know many, many practicing scientists who are creationists so Mr. Young's last statement is simply not supported by the evidence.

There is no longer any real debate among real scientists as to the validity of the concept of evolution. The debates now center on the mechanisms of how, not whether, evolution works.

Notice the use of the word “real” modifying the word “scientists.” The implication is that because we start with the Bible’s authority we are not real scientists. However, if we start with God’s Word as the ultimate source of truth, we know that God is a logical, orderly God. Thus, we have a basis for believing that we can study and understand the world and universe that God has created. If the world and universe are nothing more than the product of random chance then there would be no point to studying it at all.

I hope Mr. Young will put more research into future letters to the editor and consider visiting the Creation Museum.

By the way, I found the book The Ultimate Proof of Creation very useful in writing this blog. It is a powerful tool that I hope you’ll get.