Junk DNA

Junk DNA | What is Junk DNA and how does the studies in epigenetics show that scientists are still confounded as a creator God is definitely evident. Special guest, Dr. Jay Wile shares his expertise!  | #podcast #creationpodcast Junk DNA and EpiGenetics Episode 24 with Dr. Jay Wile

What is Junk DNA and how does the study in epigenetics show that scientists are still confounded as a creator God is definitely evident. Special guest, Dr. Jay Wile shares his expertise!

Visit Dr. Jay Wile, who has a Ph.D. in nuclear chemistry and he’s also the author of several different science series. Visit his website.

Thanks to our Sponsor, The Star Movie now out on DVD!

Experience The Star again December 7 and 8 in select theaters! Back by popular demand, you and your family can celebrate the true meaning behind the season. Be sure to check out all of the great resources for your family to use this holiday season! There are discussion guides, along with tons of FREE downloadable activities! Don’t wait, get your tickets today!
Find a theater near you at thestarmovie-tickets.com

What is Junk DNA?

For years, since the early seventies, junk DNA has been a staple of evolutionary thinking. Back in the 70s, we didn’t know a lot about DNA. The only stuff we really knew about DNA was parts of DNA contain these recipes for the cells. And it tells the cells how to make a particular kind of chemical called a protein. And that those recipes make up about 2% of DNA. And as far as we knew back the other 98% must be just useless junk. Evolution has had a ready explanation for why there’s junk DNA because after all, evolution is driven by mutations and mutations are random. They tend to destroy information much more than produced new information.

So if I’ve got a whole bunch of mutations, they’re mostly going to be degrading DNA. They’re not going to be improving it. So there must be a lot of DNA that got degraded from these mutations. But of course, the organism has to carry it along anyway. So the higher evolved an organism is the more junk DNA it should have. And so it’s not surprising according to evolutionists that 98% of the human genome is junk because we’re a very highly evolved species. Evolution had to make a lot of mistakes before it made us. And so a lot of those mistakes are reflected in the junk DNA. And that was a real popular view. Eventually, junk DNA became an engine for evolution because initially, evolution thought is that if you have a protein, you have a gene and a mutation occurs, maybe that mutation can make it a little better.

And if a series of mutations over a long period of time can take one gene and turn it into a completely new gene over time, evolution has found, well, the biochemical data doesn’t support that. We don’t see lots of little steps in genes and it’s extremely hard to understand how I can take a gene that the organism needs and mutate it to into something else and lose what it was originally coded for. So the thought was, well, if I’ve got all this junk DNA lying around, it’s just free to mutate, it’s not going to affect anything. And magical new genes can come out of that junk DNA. And by the early nineties, it was thought that the vast majority of evolution comes from this junk DNA.

Computer Junk DNA Simulations

A computer program called Avida is sort of the gold standard in computer simulations of evolution. In order for Avida to get evolution to happen at all, 85% of the genome of these organisms has to be junk because that’s where all the good stuff is coming from. Then a problem occurred. If the junk isn’t being used, then it’s free to mutate and eventually you’ll get something wonderful, right? In theory, all these great new genes are coming from this part of the genome that’s not used. And all this worked really well on the evolutionary view until 2012 and actually there were hints of this before then because there was a big study on the topic. But in 2012, the first big results from a study called nCode was produced now nCode was a huge study. It looked at more than 1600 data sets and had hundreds of scientists involved in it.

And basically they said, look, we have identified the cell using 80% of the human genome. So at a minimum, 80% of the human genome is functional. And in fact, the lead data analysis coordinator said that actually it’s going to be much more than that because they only looked at certain types of human cells. There are certain human cells they haven’t looked at yet. Those probably use different parts of the DNA. So in the end, he says he expects that 80% number to go up significantly.

Now, this is a real problem. If 80% of the genome is not junk and we now know that at most 20% of the human genome as junk, which means the lower evolved species have even less than 20% junk DNA. So in the end, it’s extremely hard to understand how evolution can function without a large pool of junk DNA.

A professor named Dan Grauer, who is a professor of evolutionary biology has made the statement that if nCode is right, then evolution is wrong. So what he’s saying is, if the results of this study is true, then evolution can’t happen. And he’s saying, not only do we need junk DNA to have a source for all these new wonderful genes. He’s saying it’s even worse than that because if you have the human genome, 80% of it is functional. That means natural selection has to keep 80% of the DNA from mutating significantly in order for it to work. And he said, in order for that to happen, on average, every couple would have to have 15 children and most of them would die because the mutations in their DNA would kill them.

But out of 15 children, 2.3 of them would live, which would allow the human population to continue. And so he’s saying, and code can’t be right. We can’t have that much functional DNA cause there’s no way natural selection can keep, keep it clean for millions of years. But I, and I agree with that. I agree. There’s no way natural selection is going to keep the human genome clean for millions of years. But humans have a, been around for billions of years. So it’s really easy to understand the encode results in from a creation standpoint because we know from a, a biblical standpoint that people lived longer in the past, specifically because their DNA was less mutated. And so natural selection has not been able to keep the DNA clean. It has been degrading and that’s why we have shorter lifespans than the people during Noah’s time and things like that.

So in the end, this whole idea of 80% or more of the gene of being functional perfectly fits in the young earth gracious perspective. And in fact, young-earth creationists, we’re predicting this all the way back when, when evolutionists were first talking about a junk DNA, a young earth creationist were saying, “No, there may be a little bit of junk DNA because of all of the degradation that’s occurred since the fall, but the vast majority of DNA has to be functional. And now we know that young-earth creationist prediction is correct. And the biochemical data strongly support that time. Now, a lot of times evolution just makes honest mistakes, many scientists make honest mistakes. So I never fault evolutionists for that. But when we look at the large number of fake fossils and the large number of faked experiments all trying to support the evolutionary view that to me is a real problem.

Sometimes evolutionists and some creationists both really distort science because evolutionists de desperately want their view to be true. And so they’re willing to lie in textbooks so that students are more likely to come to their view.

Dan Brower’s point is very true and I think what we’re gonna learn is the code is right and therefore evolution is wrong.


The term of the prefix epi means above. So your epidermis is the top layer. Your skin. Epigenetics is something that happens above genetics. So the way we typically talk about genetics, genetics are determined by the sequence of in of nucleotide basis in the DNA. So the DNA contains these chemicals called nucleotide basis. And they act like dots and dashes in the mall Morse code. If you have this the nucleotide basis in one sequence, it means one thing. If you have them in a different sequence, it means a different thing. And for a long time, it was thought that it was the sequence of these bases that determines everything structurally about an organism. So if I look at your eye color and I find enough genes that relate to eye color, I can look at the sequence of those genes and I can tell you exactly what your eye color is going to be.

And so all of your physical characteristics can trace back to a sequence on your DNA. And we now know that’s not true because we’ve gotten really good at using animals that are genetically identical while they’re there. There are cloned animals. So we know they’re genetically identical. And yet when we put them in different situations, they end up having different physical characteristics. And this has been really well known for a long time. There’s a a cat that was cloned from another cat and the cloned cat is called copy cat, which is kinda cute. And copycat never ever looked like the original cat that it was cloned from. It had a lot of features the same, but like its markings were different. And its personality was different because these things go beyond or are on top of genetics.

And we’ve learned that it’s surprising how much goes on top of genetics. A Study: Genetically identical mice were taught to be scared of a particular color. So they trained them. Every time they saw that color, they got shocked. So they trained them to be afraid of that color. Other of the same genetically identical mice didn’t get trained that way. Then they looked at the offspring of those mice. The offspring of those mice were immediately removed from the parents at birth. So the parents never raised the baby mice. Another surrogate parent surrogate mice raise the baby mites. So the baby mice never had any contact with the parents yet. The baby mice were never trained to be afraid of that color and the baby mice are genetically identical across the board. Yet since one set of parents was trained to be afraid that somehow got transmitted and we don’t know the specifics of how that happened, we only know that it did. And so that’s what epigenetics is. It’s stuff that’s going above just the sequence of the DNA.

Now that’s a pretty high-level mechanism. It took us a long time to learn genetics. So genetics is complicated enough. Now we add something on top of genetics that makes everything even more complicated. It was thought that only higher evolved organisms would have epigenetic processes, genetics evolve first and then epigenetics evolved later. It’s a higher level of control over an organism’s traits. So it should have come later. Well, it turns out that we’ve just looked at what is considered the most primitive kinds of bacteria that live on the planet. These are called thermophilic bacteria. They’re bacteria that live in hot springs. These are supposed to be incredibly primitive. They’re actually called archaea bacteria. And archaea means outdated or old because these are the oldest kind of bacteria that ever lived. They’ve got epigenetics too. It’s been shown that two of these bacteria are genetically identical. They are completely different when it comes to the kinds of environments they can live in.

And so it has to be epigenetic. So epigenetics is supposed to be an even higher level thing than genetics and now we find it appears in the most primitive organisms. And so once again, this whole idea of evolution is we start with really simple organisms and then over millions of years we get more and more complex organisms. That’s not what we see in nature. What we see in nature is even the simplest organisms are ridiculously complex. So this whole of life getting more complicated over time does not play out when you actually look at life from a scientific perspective.

The best example of that is professor Richard Lee Walton, he’s a geneticist and an evolutionist.  He says it is not that the methods, it is the institutions of science have somehow compelled us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world. But on the contrary, we are forced by our adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of contents that produce material explanations that materialism is absolute, we cannot allow a defined foot in the door.

He’s saying it doesn’t matter what the science says, we’re just not going to let it happen.

Materialism is the idea that there’s nothing supernatural. Everything can be reduced to atoms and molecules and energy. And there’s nothing else than that. So even this concept that we call love isn’t really real. Love is just a manifestation of the way electrical stimuli run through our nervous system.

It is extremely hard to be a knowledgeable geneticist and be an evolutionist. It used to be thought that once we figured out genetics, we’d finally figure out all these evolutionary trees. We’d know what evolved for what and so forth. Well, what we found is if I try and construct evolutionary trees based on genes, if I use one set of genes, I get one evolutionary tree. I use a different set of genes. I get a completely different evolutionary tree. We’ve learned that there’s no way natural selection can, can keep the genomes clean because the genomes have a lot more stuff that natural selection has to clean. And this whole epigenetic stuff is showing that if all of these sorts of things that we’ve always thought were based on the environment –  if there’s this whole other way of inheriting that adds a completely new level to what evolution has to keep track of.

And according to this study of on a thermophilic bacteria, this has been around since the most primitive organisms. And so here’s now another thing that has to pop out of nowhere, not only does DNA have to pop out of nowhere, but now epigenetic mechanisms have to pop out of nowhere. And so the more we learned about genetics the less and less tenable evolution has become. That’s why evolution, at least nowadays in papers in the scientific literature is questioning evolution. In the early 2000’s you could say there’s not a single paper in the peer-reviewed literature that questions the validity of evolution. Now there are lots of papers in the scientific literature, the peer-reviewed secular scientific literature that’s questioning evolution because, in the end, genetics is pointing so strongly against it.

Our next episode with Dr. Jay Wile is on Global Warming.


Exciting Creation News

Exciting Time For Creation | It is a fabulous time to be a creation scientist, especially with the exciting Creation Science News! Join Felice Gerwitz and Dr. Jay Wile, an author and acclaimed scientist who will discuss why this is a great time to be a Creation Scientist. | #podcast #creationsciencepodcast #creationscience Exciting Creation News ~ Episode 23


Thanks to our sponsor, Media Angels, and the Truth Seekers Mystery Series

Dr. Jay Wile – Learn more about here on his website and his blog.

Dr. Jay L. Wile, who holds an earned PhD in nuclear chemistry. He is best known as the author of award-winning elementary, junior and senior high school science courses including the Science through HisStory, “Discovering Design with…”, and “Exploring Creation with…” series.

Exciting Creation News:

There’s an enormous amount of scientific work that keeps confirming creationist predictions. Some of it’s coming from the secular scientific community, but some of it is coming from the creationist community as well. And that’s probably the most exciting aspect.

Creationists used to be focused and still are focused on talking to the common person, the laypeople and letting them know, hey, look, science, that doesn’t support evolution in the way people, some people claim it does. And that’s a very important part of creationism.

And obviously I do that in my textbooks, but science moves forward when scientists do research about new things. For a long time, there just weren’t enough creationists. There wasn’t any money in creation, in research and so forth. So there wasn’t much actual research going on. But nowadays, creationists are doing experiments. Some of them are publishing in the secular literature, like Dr. John Sanford, is publishing several genetic studies in the standard secular literature.

Exciting Creation News:

The audio has details about the following:

  1. H1N1 virus showed that natural selection doesn’t weed out the harmful mutations.
  2. But that’s not what we see in the data. Fischer’s Theorem—which mathematically supports evolution in secular literature doesn’t work.
  3. Nylon digesting bacteria – thought they were new genes – but it was natural genes. This is fascinating and a lot of this is confirming predictions that creationists have made for years.
  4. Human genome project – and there’s a really famous scientist named Dr. Dan Graur. He says, if the findings are right, then evolution is wrong because there is no way evolution can maintain 80% of the human genome. (Read more about this on Dr. Wile’s blog here.) This has confirmed creation prediction and it goes way, way counter to everything evolutionists have taught us since the ‘70s when it comes to the human genome.

What Makes A Theory Scientific

What makes a theory scientific isn’t that it explains the data. It’s not that it makes sense. What makes a theory scientific is it can be used to predict data that are not known because that’s how you really decide whether a theory is useful and whether or not it’s close to reality. Because if it can make a prediction about something that is not known and then it’s investigated, it turns out that prediction is true. That gives you a lot of support for the theory

More Exciting Creation News:

  1. Dinosaur bones tested have been found to have C14
  2. This indicates that the maximum age is about 30,000 years old. Now, we think it is less than that because carbon 14, is very difficult to get a solid done number beyond 3000 years. But nevertheless the evolutionist says zero C14. The creationists say some and the creation is right.
  3. The lab (the best there is) with the particle accelerator refused to allow further testing when they realized the results found were on dinosaur bones –instead they’ve decided to do is put on the blinders and say, we don’t care that there’s carbon 14 in there and we don’t care to ever explain that because that challenges our belief that they’re millions of years old. That’s not science that’s religion.

When I started researching, different data related to the age of the earth, I became skeptical about these billions of years specifically because I saw how radioactive dating is done.

  1. Error bars: this is when the dating says plus or minus 10,000 years. This is the first thing that I (Dr. Wile) saw that was really ridiculous. These error bars are totally unrealistic. For example, several years ago now, there were diamonds from Zaire and they were dated to be 6 plus or minus point 3 billion years old. So according to that error bar, the youngest they could be is around 5.7 billion years old. Problem is the earth is supposed to be only 4.6 billion years old.
  2. Evolution requires billions of years because it requires complete luck. Initially, there’s no life on earth according to the evolution, the naturalistic evolutionary model. Suddenly we have to create something out of just random chemical reactions. Evolution says the chance of this happening is really low, but if you got billions of years to get it done, it’ll eventually happen. So it took billions of years to get the first life form. Although even when using their own numbers, they know that’s not right now. The earliest living thing in fossil records supposed to be 3.8 billion years old, so they absolutely need, billions of years or older for that to work, and that is why it’s just taught that way because, without it, there’s no evolution possible.
  3. Back in 2005, a paper was published by Mary Schweitzer, she found a fossilized femur dinosaur bone and found soft tissue in it. And she said, based on all of her analyses that she could do before publishing the paper, it wasn’t something that got introduced later. Nearly everyone on the planet said she’s nuts. There’s no possible way. This is true. If these bones are 65 million years old. Soft tissue doesn’t last that long. However, she kept doing some chemical tests and she found it in another dinosaur. So some people got interested.
  4. Other people started looking and finding soft tissue. They picked seven scrappy dinosaur bones from a museum. They didn’t even know what dinosaurs they’re from only that they’re found in Cretaceous rock. And out of those seven, four of them had soft tissue in them. And with a scanning electron microscope, this soft tissue looks like it’s got red blood cells in it.
  5. Most paleontologists, not all, now agree there is soft tissue in dinosaur bones and that’s exciting enough. Cause once again, how in the world can you expect soft tissue to hang around and still be soft 65 million years later.
  6. But what’s really cool about this as a creationist researcher has gone to the next step. He’s been taking dinosaur bones and dissolving them in weak acid. This gets rid of all the minerals and what’s left is the soft tissue, then he isolates bone cells from it. So he’s actually got soft bone cells from dinosaurs. He’s done it with a triceratops so in the end, he’s collecting soft dinosaur cells. And of course, the cell should have DNA in them. And in fact, he has actually extracted the DNA from the cell, nobody in the evolutionary literature has ever tried to extract the dinosaur cell before. See more information Mark Armitage and the video with dinosaur cell extraction here.Theories of Evolution.

Darwinism, neo-Darwinism, punctuated equilibrium model shows abrupt appearances of new organisms in the fossil record. (Creationists believe that was because of the Flood) Evolutionists see that most all of the organisms die, but a couple of them—by “happy coincidence” they have good mutations that they end up producing a new creature just in the span of a couple of generations or a few generations. They look at the fossil record and see things appear quickly because their intermediates only existed for a few generations. So those intermediate varieties existed, but they didn’t exist long enough to fossilize, to become part of the fossil record.

So in the end evolution happens too quickly to fossilize. But then if you ask an evolutionist, why don’t you see new species, or not new species, of original organisms appearing now, they’ll say because evolution happens too slowly to observe. So it happens too slowly to observe and to quickly to fossilize. And that’s, that’s where we are right now. And some people are calling that science. That’s punctuated equilibrium. And that’s the only model right now that’s at least consistent with the paleontological data. However, a lot of folks are moving beyond that even.


Single-celled organisms can swap genes from different species. Bacteria are particularly good at this, and they can actually absorb DNA from dead organisms that are not even anywhere close to them in terms of species and so forth. And if some of that DNA is useful, it gets incorporated. There’ve been a couple of cases where it’s been shown in fairly simple animals. The sea slug for example, when it eats a photosynthetic organism can actually incorporate it and has the ability to do photosynthesis. This is called horizontal gene transfer. It’s not vertical in a sense. It’s going from parent to child. It’s horizontal in a sense. It’s going from one organism to a completely different organism that’s well known in single-cell creatures known in a few animals but not many.

There are a lot of evolutionists are saying that’s the big deal. All sorts of horizontal gene transfer are occurring. And that’s why we can’t track evolution the way it happened because it’s getting blurred by all of this horizontal gene transfer. Other folks are saying that it’s all in development. We do know that there are some genes that make radical changes during embryonic development, and if those genes get changed just a little bit, the results can be radically different. So evolution during development is Evo-Devo.



Yellowstone – Earth History




















Christians have three main sources for determining the age of Yellowstone:

  • The genealogies and chronologies of chapters 5 and 11 of Scripture



Rock Strata and Fossils

Rock Strata and Fossils | scientific basis of this and key information. | #podcast #creationscienceRock Strata and the Fossils in Geology Episode 21

Does rock strata and the fossils in geology show anything important? Absolutely in this presentation with Patrick Nurre, he’ll share the scientific basis of this and key information.

The study of rock layers in secular geology and what they mean is called stratigraphy. The study of the fossils as they appear in the rock layers is called biostratigraphy. The literal rendering of the Greek word stratigraphy is layer writing.

A good book on this subject is The Key to Earth History – An Introduction to Stratigraphy, (by Peter Doyle, Matthew R. Bennett, and Alistair N. Baxter, 1994). The whole premise of secular stratigraphy is that the physical history of the Earth is written in the rock layers. Secular geologists believe that they can discern and write the history of the Earth by studying the rock layers. Remember, however, that there are no words or dates written in the rocks. There is no history book or history revealed or recorded. The rock layers must be interpreted. And that involves human reasoning and ideas. Science is that which can be observed, tested and repeated. Science should ask the question, “Has anyone ever observed these rock layers in the process of forming? Has anyone ever seen the rock layers accumulate with petrified remains?”

Rock layers are just that, rock layers. We can tell what kind of sedimentary rock is contained in the layers, and we can often identify the fossils in the rocks. But the rock layers do not tell us how old they are or how they got that way. That deals with the realm of history. History deals with one-time unique events recorded by eyewitnesses or written documents. Secularists interpret the history of rock layers using a particular philosophical framework that they claim gives us or writes a history of the Earth.

From a secular perspective, stratigraphy is the key to Earth history. History should ask the question, “Has anyone seen this process or know of a record or eyewitness account of this process?” The Biblical account gives a fairly detailed and historical record of an event that can explain the rock layers and the fossils in them. Modern geology does not have this kind of record. The secularist constructs the story as he/she believes it happened based on a purely naturalistic paradigm. The Biblicist, on the other hand, looks at the written record of the Bible and uses it to interpret the history of the rocks and fossils. Therefore, we don’t make up the explanation as we go but frame it according to these very old written records.

These rock layers with fossils in them have never actually been observed in their formative process. Coming at the problem from a whole different perspective – Biblical history, the rock strata containing the fossils can easily be explained by a creation and global flood. It is a historical question. How the rock layers got that way cannot be solved by science because there was no observation involved.


Secular scientists believe that the rock layers containing fossils can not only be dated by these fossils but also that evolutionary history is contained in the rock layers and can be ascertained by studying the fossils. Bio means life. And it is the life that is preserved as fossils in the rock layers that secular geologists believe tell the story of evolution over millions of years.

By the late 1800s, the study of fossils and the rock layers were so thoroughly intertwined, that it is now impossible in modern geology to study one without the other. A belief in evolution tells us how old the fossils are and therefore how old the rocks are.

How did rock layers come to be interpreted as millions of years of Earth history? The Father of Modern Geology, James Hutton, is credited with developing an idea called uniformitarianism in the 1700s. Uniformitarianism has to do with uniformity of geological processes and rates operating over long periods of time.

James Hutton was a man of his time – the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was a time of questioning and skepticism regarding the Bible and the church. Hutton was one of the Fathers of the Scottish Enlightenment. As he contemplated the sedimentary rock layers at Siccar Point, Scotland, he reasoned that these layers of rock must have been deposited and eroded over an immense amount of time, and had to be older than the Biblical timeline. The Enlightenment was a reactionary movement. If the Bible declared one thing, the Enlightenment declared just the opposite.

This is what gave birth to the word agnosticism, coined by Thomas Huxley a century later. Huxley insisted that one could not know the truth of what was declared in the Bible, because it had not been observed by qualified scientists. Of course, this is the same complaint that creationists lodge against the secularists. You could reasonably come to the conclusion that the word agnosticism was born because what had been declared in the Bible and by Jesus had been rejected. The Christian witness teaches that we can know certain things because God made them known through His Scriptures. If you take away the revelation of God, obviously it is impossible to naturally know the things declared in the Bible. But He has left us an account in the Scriptures and Jesus verified this over and over again.

If the Scripture declared that the Earth was created in six days, the Enlightenment declared that the Earth must be ancient. And it must have been formed by processes we can now observe, not as a result of the involvement of any supernatural being or god. If the Scripture declared that a Flood, lasting a year, destroyed the Earth that existed before Noah, then the Enlightenment insisted that the Earth must have been a product of slow processes of sediment deposition and erosion. This meant that stacks of rock layers represented time – lots of time. Rocks on the bottom of any given set of layers were not only older but were the oldest. This also meant that fossils buried in these bottom-most layers of rocks were the oldest biological creatures. Time took on a completely new dimension – deep time as opposed to a young Earth that the Bible taught.

The process of redefining time, the layers of rock and the origin of fossils took about a hundred years to complete. By the end of the 19th century, no scientist spoke of Scripture in terms of actual geological history. The account of the creation and the flood were relegated to myth. All of these changes were accomplished by philosophical reasoning, not by actual science. The new paradigm was set first and then used to interpret the stacks of rock layers. This is one of the reasons why secular geology is such a bewildering subject. It is philosophy dressed in scientific language.

Stratigraphy is actually a belief that the rock layers tell a history which must be interpreted by the men and women of science. In reality layers on the bottom of any stack of rocks gives us a relative positioning in relation to the rocks on top. There is nothing in the rocks themselves that tells us how old they are. If we simply lay a different template over the rock layers, the template of the historical Flood, then if the rock layers have been undisturbed since their inception, then the layers on the bottom were laid down first in relation to the ones above them. In other words, they may actually be quite young!

It falls to biostratigraphy to guide a secular geologist to interpret the rock layers as to how old they are. Biostratigraphy is also a belief. Secular geology believes that since fossils must tell a story of gradually evolving life, and life must have taken millions of years to evolve, then the fossil life in the bottom-most layers must be millions of years old and consequently the rocks are also. But again, if we simply shift our belief to a Genesis global flood which took place about 4,500 years ago, then the arrangement of the fossils are the result of burial and sorting by the catastrophic flood over a very short period of time. The rock strata are there and so are the fossils. But the age of these things must be determined not by science, but by history and philosophy.

When science speaks of millions of years (deep time), it is almost impossible to fathom. History over the last few thousand years makes sense because of commonly shared human experiences and the records that have been preserved. But a million years or even millions of years is incomprehensible. We have nothing to relate it to.

The John Day Fossil Beds National Monument in north-central Oregon lately is a fascinating “other world” of badland topography, layers and interesting formations. And it is a great place to study stratigraphy. Stratigraphers have worked out the evolutionary order and timeframe for the rock layers of the John Day fossil beds. The stratigraphic column of time and the evolution for this area spans about 55 million years according to secular reasoning. It comprises three distinct geological units, which if stacked one on another, would total about three miles in thickness, each having some similar and some different fossils in them. This hypothetical column, published by the National Park System, is portrayed as a vertical column emphasizing the passage of time from the bottom-most layers to the present.

The National Parks has a road guide that helps you orient where you are. This guide shows that the same portions that comprise the Monument are the same three units that comprise the stratigraphic column. But the units are spread out and separated by miles from one another and are horizontal to each other, not vertical. In other words, the units have been humanly arranged into a vertical column on paper so that we can visualize what secular geologists believe took place.

So, how do geologists know that these units should be on top of one another? How do we know that they didn’t in fact exist together at the same time? We don’t. We must accept the premise that both the uniformitarian and Biblical perspectives are paradigms; that both are beliefs about what happened here. Secular geologists ridicule this approach as religious and devoid of understanding. That is because they have accepted their paradigm as scientific fact. The history of modern geology is filled with examples of the confusion of paradigms with scientific facts.

Secular geologists have arranged the three units of the John Day fossil beds into a time column based on the belief that the fossils found in these units have evolved over millions of years. In fact, these various sedimentary rock layers and the fossils in them could have been arranged by a catastrophic flood washing bones and mixtures of sand, silt, and volcanic ash into the area.

Stratigraphy and biostratigraphy are two foundational paradigms in modern geology. Secular stratigraphy and biostratigraphy are fundamental to education in secular geology. If you want to pursue the study of geology as a career, you will need to thoroughly understand these two important areas of study and thought.

Conclusion: The rock layers and the fossils in them were either deposited, eroded, and evolved over millions of years, or they were deposited and buried during a catastrophic global flood which has been recorded as a historical event in the Bible. Both of these are ideas. Both are paradigms or perspectives. Neither can be proven scientifically. Only one, however, is based on a historical document. One of these paradigms will destroy faith in the Scriptures and in the God of the Scriptures, the other will promote faith in the Scriptures. For the Biblicist, the whole of the Christian faith rests on the accuracy of Biblical history.

There is secular stratigraphy based on naturalistic reasoning and a rejection of the Scriptures, and there is Biblical stratigraphy based on the historical framework of the Bible. Both cannot be true.

Special Thanks to Our Network Sponsor -Overcomer Movie



Click here to learn more!

Evolution Taught To Kids

Evolution Taught To Kids As Truth | I've heard it all! Evolution has nothing to do with a kid's faith. But when evolution is taught to kids as truth the problems begin. It is one of the reasons that kids leave their faith as they get older. | #podcast #creationscienceEvolution Taught To Kids As Truth ~ Episode

I’ve heard it all! Evolution has nothing to do with a kid’s faith. But when evolution is taught to kids as truth the problems begin. It is one of the reasons that kids leave their faith as they get older. There are many excuses given for how a kid raised in a Christian, God-loving home can leave their faith behind. Maybe the kids never believed. Maybe they didn’t really mean it when they accepted the Lord as their personal Savior. Maybe they didn’t make their faith their own, or they weren’t really “saved.” No one can answer this question other than the person who once believed and now doesn’t.

In my experience talking to hundreds of parents in the years since I co-authored my first book on the topic of Creation, in 1994 the common theme was, evolution. The child bought into the lie taught as fact in the schools they attended. The biggest question I’ve asked is why is a theory taught as a fact? I think the answer is as varied as the person asking the question. Again, the common theme is because the “other” (Creationism) is faith and evolution is science. Evolution is a theory. It is not a scientific law.

In fact on further examination evolution contradicts scientific laws like Thermodynamics. But of course, we sweep this under the rug. Upon digging deeper we also learn that Darwinian evolution is discounted (because the fossil record never substantiated Darwin’s theory) and neo-Darwinism is in. Or is it? Now scientists think neo-Darwinism is in need of a replacement.

Many Christian households teach a Biblical Creation as stated in Genesis 1: God created… and many also are at a loss on how to fit their faith into evolution. News Flash! You don’t have to “fit” faith into evolution because evolution is a lie. Is there microevolution, changes within a kind. Absolutely. But macroevolution – goo to you by way of the zoo is a myth. Now scientists realize that what they thought was DNA “junk” randomly evolving human genome can’t happen. In fact, 95% of human genomes can not evolve. Really? We knew this. So, why do evolutionists keep insisting that Genesis is a myth?

Evolution Taught To Kids as Truth – The Problem

Once kids are taught that evolution is a “valid” theory (aka educated guess) kids think their parents lied, or worse. They park their faith at the door and feel that maybe Genesis is the fairy tale. In my many years of study into creationism and evolution, I learned that kids need to be taught both of the faith systems because truthfully both are based upon faith. We have faith in the unseen, we were not present when God created the world and we were not present when the big-bang or whatever other theory started the world, and from this disorder came order – and everything in between. There are many theories of origins and as demonstrated earlier, they keep changing. Some Christian believe that Almighty God chose to begin the world by evolution (Theistic Evolutionists).

So much of this has been debated and truthfully, it is up to each one of you to make this determination on your own. But, I’m warning you, if your kids are brought up with a strong faith and yet believe in evolution as a theory of molecules-to-man, they will be hard-pressed to defend their faith when they are in higher education. My co-author on the Creation Science Series, Jill Whitlock use to lament that those who believed in Theistic Evolution were lost, souls. I don’t go that far. Sure, you can believe in God, have a relationship with the Almighty and still believe in evolution. But what a loss.

Explaining to children that the Bible (especially Genesis) is an allegory or fairy tale, and then jumping to Genesis 1:27 – “Oh, but we believe that God created Adam and Eve, just not as He said in Genesis. You see, these organisms evolved and then at some point when a human was formed, God infused a soul into the first man and then the first woman, and called them Adam and Eve.” That is confusing to say the least. We must believe that Almighty God used death and destruction and “chance” as the molecules formed themselves eventually into a human, to then infuse a soul? Wow.

Never mind that there is no evidence that evolution happened. No fossil record. No verifiable scientific data. Only a theory.

Why are people so adamant that Creationism is false? That Genesis is not to be read literally? Because then a person must change and follow God and the “rules” which they believe are limiting.

Recently some big names in the Christian world have abdicated their faith. They’ve decided they are no longer Christians because of the “definition” of what it means to be a Christian. In the same sentence they added – oh, by the way, I am also getting divorced. We see the tragedy of sin in the priest scandal. We see pastors of various denominations falling prey to sin. How does this happen? It begins by turning away from the truth and coming up with the slang of the day “speaking your own truth.”

And when evolution is taught to kids as truth then nothing is sacred. Kids begin to question:

  • We don’t have to believe the Bible as written?
  • Do we have to believe in Noah’s ark? That was pretty far fetched, anyway.
  • Jonah and the whale – yeah, that was hard to believe, too.
  • Moses parting the Red Sea – yeah, totally weird.
  • Jesus born of a Virgin? How can that be?
  • Jesus the Son of God? Wow. I don’t know.
  • Jesus and the miracles of the loaves and fishes. How can that happen?
  • Jesus dying for our sins? If Adam and Eve didn’t exist then why did he have to die?
  • Jesus rising from the dead? Not sure about that one either.

Never mind that the disciples that walked with Jesus (except for John) were all martyred for their faith as well as thousands upon thousands of Christians. You don’t give your life for a myth or allegory.

Kids think in ways that many adults tend to think and if we begin questioning the truth of the Bible or a loose interpretation of it, then nothing is sacred. Friends, don’t believe me. Research creationism side-by-side with evolution. No one has all the answers but evolution is sure based on a bunch of theory by scientists who have very little if any evidence that points to a conclusion that is substantiated.

Hug your kids. Teach them the truth. You will be happy you did.

Special Thanks to Our Network Sponsor -Overcomer Movie



Click here to learn more!

Deism and Modern Geology

Deism and Geology | Deism and Geology, what this have to do with geology? This is an important area to study if we are to understand the evolution/creation debate. #podcast #creationpodcastDeism and Modern Geology – Episode 19

Deism and Geology, what does this have to do with geology? This is an important area to study if we are to understand the evolution/creation debate.

The word, Deism comes from a Latin word, deus, meaning god. It was used to describe a particular belief about god that was distinguished from the Greek word used in the New Testament of God, – theos – from which we get the word, theology.

The idea of deism took shape during the Enlightenment (1700 1800s) and was a period of intense challenge for the church. Most deists were part of the church of England but struggled with traditional Christian belief. Many deists were Unitarians, who did not accept the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the Scriptures as inspired writings nor miracles. They believed that Jesus was a good moral teacher only.

In 1795 James Hutton introduced the idea that the Earth was much older than the Bible stated,  based on rocks he was studying at Siccar Point, Scotland; to him, long ages was the only way to account for the formation of the rock layers. Hutton developed his own ideas about their formation, calling his new idea, uniformitarianism (uniformity of geologic processes operating the same way and at the same pace throughout all of time). Instead of maintaining the standard that had been established in the Garden several thousand years before, to listen to and trust what God had revealed in the Scriptures, Hutton abandoned it in favor of a totally naturalistic process for explaining the rock layers he saw. So, instead of interpreting the rock layers in light of the historical geology of the Flood, he concluded that the rock layers had been formed over perhaps millions of years, much longer than the Bible’s chronology would allow. This is really the beginning of modern geology.

Deism and Geology:

Uniformitarianism became the bedrock of modern geology, and it involved belief. This meant that geologists would have to jettison the foundational Biblical concepts of a young earth or recent creation and a global flood. Uniformitarianism would serve as the new revelation, and substitute a new religion called Deism. These two faiths, uniformitarianism and Deism were the children of the Enlightenment and the foundation of the new geology we now embrace in our modern culture.

Deism is really a heresy of theism and an intermediate step to the atheism so prevalent in our modern culture. The god of Deism was a god removed from his creation. He did create at some distant time in the past, but then left natural laws to govern his creation. Man no longer needed a god or religious writings to understand Earth history. Man was to use his powers of observation within a naturalistic view of Earth history. This belief would soon be endorsed by the scientific community and taught in science classes as scientific fact.

Deism and Geology, what this have to do with geology? This is an important area to study if we are to understand the evolution/creation debate.Deism has elements of both atheism and theism, but clothes itself in scientific jargon. As a religion, however, Deism has sort of slipped back into the shadows so that it looks like just another religious bygone component of Christianity. But it is here in the form of uniformitarian geology.

Deism is neither an active belief in God nor an active disbelief in God. It allows the conscience to simply deal with God by considering Him irrelevant. And this is what many scientists of that time (1800s) did.

One of the biggest consequences of Deism is what it does with accounts in the Scripture that document God’s direct involvement in His creation. For example, read Psalm 78:43-55, concerning what God did in the land of Egypt when He brought Israel out of Egypt.

When He performed His signs in Egypt and His marvels in the field of Zoan, and turned their rivers to blood, and their streams, they could not drink. He sent among them swarms of flies which devoured them, and frogs which destroyed them. He gave also their crops to the grasshopper and the product of their labor to the locust. He destroyed their vines with hailstones and their sycamore trees with frost. He gave over their cattle also to the hailstones and their herds to bolts of lightning. He sent upon them His burning anger, fury and indignation and trouble, a band of destroying angels. He leveled a path for His anger; He did not spare their soul from death, but gave over their life to the plague, and smote all the firstborn in Egypt, the first issue of their virility in the tents of Ham. But He led forth His own people like sheep and guided them in the wilderness like a flock; He led them safely, so that they did not fear; but the sea engulfed their enemies. So, He brought them to His holy land, to this hill country which His right hand had gained. He also drove out the nations before them and apportioned them for an inheritance by measurement and made the tribes of Israel dwell in their tents.

What is the practical consequence of Deism on Biblical history?

  1. Deism denies this historical account. It treats it as myth.
  2. It denies this account of God’s involvement in history. The account recorded in this passage was an unenlightened scribe’s way of explaining the unexplainable.
  3. It denies the miraculous nature of the events that are recorded in the passage. Since Deism denies the existence of miracles and insists that everything must be explained in terms of naturalistic processes, the whole of God’s nature and even His existence is in question.
  4. It denies the legitimacy of Israel’s appointment to the land apportioned to them by God. As Deism denies the Biblical story of Israel, as secular archaeologists tell us, then Israel has no foundation for their insistence that Israel and Jerusalem belong to them.
  5. As this history, as recorded in this passage, is in doubt, then the whole ascendancy of the Messiah (Jesus) is in doubt. Jesus came out of Israel. If Israel is in question, so is the Messiah. Consequently, the whole Bible is in doubt.

Deism in the guise of uniformitarianism is not a science, but another religion masquerading as scientific geology.

Deism is also a different presentation of history. It is a different story about a different god than the story and the God of the Bible. It is that secular geologists say that the recent history of the Earth (as the Bible teaches) is a myth and cannot be trusted because it cannot be verified by scientific research. And yet, these same geologists ask us to trust their work and their teaching about an alternative Earth history that happened hundreds of millions of years ago, which also cannot be tested or verified by science.

The effects of deism have left their mark on our modern fields of science and history. Modern geology has combined two different subjects, Earth Science and Earth History, to come up with a respectable-looking academic subject. In reality, however, we are learning a religious, atheistic view of Earth history that has earned the respect of the scientific establishment.


Genesis Rock Solid
and Bedrock Geology (the book)
and Bedrock Geology (the kit)

Tower of Babel – Myth or Real

Tower of Babel | To get an idea of when the event at the Tower of Babel took place, we have to refer to the genealogies in Genesis. From these, we can figure out that it happened after the Flood, but before the birth of Abraham. #podcast #creationscience The Tower of Babel – Episode 18

To get an idea of when the event at the Tower of Babel took place, we have to refer to the genealogies in Genesis. From these, we can figure out that it happened after the Flood, but before the birth of Abraham. Following the genealogies, we can determine that the Tower of Babel event took place before year 2,008, which was about the time that Abraham was born. And going back from there, we trace Abraham’s genealogy back to Peleg, who was born in the year 1,757, about 100 years after the Flood.

Peleg makes a good historical marker to work from and to analyze what happened at Babel. So we are going to look at the events surrounding the days of Peleg, starting with a person named Nimrod.

The Tower of Babel includes understand genealogy:

Nimrod was the grandson of Noah’s son, Ham. Nimrod built Babel, or Babylon, among other cities. Nimrod was called a mighty hunter before the Lord. It appears that Nimrod was bent being a ruler who conquers, and God sees this. Nimrod’s name means rebel, and more properly, it means The Rebel. Outside of Scripture, he is credited with the introduction of a new religion that was contrary to God’s standards and person. All throughout history, there has been a division between those that want to follow the Lord, and those that don’t. It is very likely, given Nimrod’s rebellious nature, that the Tower was set up by Nimrod to cause division between the people of God and a new religion.

Back to Peleg: Peleg was a descendant of Shem, and, according to the genealogies,  could possibly have known Nimrod. Peleg was in the line of Seth, so likely he was given the knowledge of the true God through Shem. Peleg’s name means division. It is very possible that his name is a reflection of the division that took place at the Tower of Babel.

The result of the division that happened at the Tower was that men scattered throughout the earth, divided by language. It would not be surprising that they divided further based on shared skills or ideas. In particular, when looking at Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon people, it is likely we are looking at the results of some of these groupings that happened after the division at Babel.

This brings up the question about evolution as envisioned by Charles Darwin and the fossil skulls that have been found. This is why understanding what happened at the Tower of Babel is so critical.

The fossil skulls are seen as the various stages of evolution of man from an ape-like creature to modern man. And it is not just the skulls that are pointed to, but also the tools that have been found with these civilizations. They are said to point to the evolution of man. But if the Tower of Babel really took place, then these different tools and skulls are just relics of a great division that took place at Babel. The differences among the skulls and tools are just evidence of a struggle that was taking place in a hostile world. Man was struggling for survival, not for evolutionary progress. These mistaken ideas are really the root of racism. Darwin and others like him during his time thought that the pinnacle of evolution of man was the white European, and he believed that black people represented inferior races. These ideas influenced other evolutionists. For example, the famous dinosaur hunter, E. D. Cope believed in this idea and advocated for the return of the former slaves to Africa. Henry Fairfield Osborn of Nebraska Man fame advocated for the sterilization of what was thought to be inferior people.

Anthropology is the study of man, and Paleoanthropology is the study of ancient man. It is based in the study of ancient fossils in order to establish the evolutionary history of animals and plants, including man. In the early days of anthropology, it was believed that you could determine a person’s intelligence by measuring the size of their brain. If you had a larger brain, then you were more intelligent. Darwin and Thomas Huxley both followed this line of thinking.

The Christian and Hebrew position has always been that God created from one man and woman, the human race. One race. That race was divided at the Tower of Babel into various cultures and languages, which were the forerunners of what we have today.

Perhaps the differences that we are looking at are the differences between varieties of apes, and, on the other hand, different human beings, some of which could have been related to the incident at the Tower of Babel.

This explanation certainly would line up with the account of the Tower of Babel. The story in Scripture gives a credible framework that we can then fit the evidence into.






Global Flood

Global Flood | As we talk about the Genesis Global Flood and its significance, it is important to, first of all, determine if it was a global or a local event. Did the Flood cover the whole earth or just Mesopotamia? | #podcast #creationpodcast The Global Flood Episode 17

The Four Great Global Events of Genesis The Flood


Genesis indicates that the Flood was global, affecting all of the earth. If this was not the case, then the rainbow that the Lord gave as a sign of His promise would have been a promise given just to the people of Mesopotamia and would have had no significance for the rest of the world. Why does the world need to be reminded that the Lord would never flood Mesopotamia again? This would have been a huge waste of time and space to take four chapters of Genesis to tell a story that is irrelevant to future generations.

Global Flood:

We also need to decide if the story of the Flood is anything more than a myth. It is true that the Flood cannot be proven by science, but the same is true of the uniformitarian view of our earth. Uniformitarianism also can not prove that the earth is a product of processes over millions of years. To be classified as science, it must be able to be tested, observed, and repeated. This is not possible with uniformitarianism.

Scripture is not intended to be a scientific dissertation on geology, but it is a historical record that presents the global Flood as a real historical event. The real question to address is, can the Flood explain the geological landforms, rocks, and fossils that we see today? And the answer is, yes.

Global Flood:

There are two major stages as recorded in the Scripture concerning the Flood – the filling stage, or the inundation stage. This is found in Genesis 7:23-24. The second stage, the receding stage, is found in Gen 8:1-16. Although there is no scientific terminology in either of these passages, there are quite a few geological implications in these passages.

Here are the verses and activity/geological implications:

Gen.7:4 – Extinction

Gen. 7:11 – Tectonic upheaval

Gen. 7:11 – Torrential and violent rain, massive flooding

Gen. 7:17 – Massive amounts of rock and sediment torn up and moved

Gen. 7:18 – The waters and their strength increase, causing erosion and transportation of sediments

Gen. 7:19 – The Flood was deep, covering the entire earth

Gen. 7:21 – The Flood was devastating to life, which is what the fossil record shows

Gen. 7:22 – Dead things buried in rock layers all over the earth

Ge. 7:23 – All air-breathing, land-dwelling life outside of the ark perished

Gen. 7:24 – It took 150 days for the water to reach a maximum depth

Gen. 8:1 – Water draining off the earth carved great ravines, channels, and planation surfaces

Gen. 8:2 – Wet sediments torn up by the Flood begin to settle

Gen. 8:3 – Receding flood waters would have caused rapid and catastrophic cutting and planation

Ge. 8:5 – Continued planation and channelized erosion

Gen. 8:34 – Some sediments during this time would have hardened, others would have warped during the tectonic processes of the Flood


And the products that we would highlight are:

A Novel Approach – Teach Creation To Kids






Truth Seekers Mystery Series

Mystery Series | Has you child wanted to write a book? What about a mystery? Join Felice as she interviews her co-author and daughter. | #podcast #homeschoolpodcast #creationscienceTruth Seekers Mystery Series Episode 

Join Felice Gerwitz as she interviews her co-author in the Truth Seeker’s Mystery Series, Christina (Gerwitz) Moss. Christina shares her homeschool experience and how the series evolved from an idea to three books in the series.

Thanks to our sponsor a Free HomeschoolConnectExpo — Felice Gerwitz is presenting three video teachings and there are over 70 speakers and sponsors. Sign up to get more information about upcoming events. And, thanks to our sponsors who make these episodes free!

Christina began the idea of writing a novel and finally convinced her mom it was a good idea. When Felice, a non-fiction author with a publishing company, Media Angels, Inc. explained she didn’t know how to write a novel, her daughter shot back. “We are homeschoolers we can figure it out!” And figure it out they did.

First In The Truth Seekers Mystery Series

Christina’s first novel, The Missing Link Found (Book One in the Truth Seekers Mystery Series) outsold her mother’s Creation Science: A Study Guide at the convention debut. In fact, this book helped children learn about Creation science in a fun way and in turn they were enthusiastic about attending creation science events.