January 29, 2008

Peer Reviewed Creation Science Website Now Up

AIG (Answers In Genesis)is sponsoring new science website
Peer reviewed papers will be published, but non creationists are frowned upon to be the reviewers.

Here is one of the papers from the site (gotta love this term: creation microbiologists):

p7–10Microbes and the Days of Creation

by Alan L. Gillen

The world of germs and microbes has received much attention in recent years. But where do microbes fit into the creation account? Were they created along with the rest of the plants and animals in the first week of creation, or were they created later, after the Fall? These are some questions that creation microbiologists have been asking in recent years. Ongoing research, based on the creation paradigm, appears to provide some answers to these puzzling questions. The answers to these questions are not explicit in Scripture, so the answers cannot be dogmatic. However, a reasonable extrapolation from biological data and Scripture can be made about the nature of microbes in a fully mature creation. This article attempts to provide reasonable answers to when microbes were created and is meant to stimulate discussion and further research in this area.

Very little has been written in Bible commentaries or in creation literature on the subject of when microbes were created. Some have postulated that microbes were created on a single day of Creation, such as Day Three—when the plants were made. This is partially due to the “seed-like” characteristics that bacteria and fungi have—therefore classifying microbes as plants. In addition, we observe microbes (such as Escherichia coli) isolated in the lab and we tend to think of microbes as individual entities much like birds or fish or animals and, therefore, created on a single day. However, in nature, the vast majority of microbes live in biological partnerships, not in total isolation. The natural symbiosis of microbes with other creatures is the norm. Therefore, we postulate that microbes were created as “biological systems” with plants, animals, and humans on multiple days, as supporting systems in mature plants, animals, and humans. This idea is further supported by the work of Francis (2003). Francis calls microbial symbiotic systems a biomatrix, or organosubstrate. He proposes that microbes were created as a link between macroorganisms and a chemically rich but inert physical environment, providing a surface (i.e., substrate) upon which multicellular creatures can thrive and persist in intricately designed ecosystems. From the beginning, God made His creation fully mature, and complex forms fully formed. This would ensure continuity and stability for the times to come. Although we cannot be certain as to specifically when the Creator made microbes, it is within His character to make entire interwoven, “packaged” systems to sustain and maintain life.

Getting a little lazy of late, I posted the above at Raving Atheists. Check the thread out.

I like this response by RA member UBS: "What is Sanskrit for microbe?"

Typical creationist bs. Lots of scientific jargon but next to zero science. Just philosophical nonsense in another attempt to fit in part of the observable world into a literal bible.

I not a scientist, but isn't man made up of bacteria, and don't we need it to survive? I pretty much pointed this out in an earlier post: Revelation: All Life Evolved From Bacteria. So maybe God created microbes on Day 1 or Day 2:) God needed microbes to create all life forms, and since man is created in Gods image, God is full of microbes too. Which came first? God or microbes?


  1. I've been working on a Dickhead Award and I think the first recipient will be the Creationist Website you refer to.

  2. The day God created plagues, he created microbes.

  3. I am sponsoring a contest to see who can be the first to get a crank paper published in Answers in Genesis new abomination...er, peer-reviewed journal. Stop by my site for details.


  4. I love it. When I found out about this a bit ago, they had ... three things (two papers and that symposium thing, or whatever it was). Today I just downloaded the entire Jan issue of PLOS biology with more articles. I'm sure there will be a lot more "scientific" articles published soon. Maybe some day, there will even by an ID paper. LOL.

    The very idea that this might be considered peer-reviewed is sad. Of course, an EBSCO search yesterday gave me (as peer reviewed) some Journal of Religion and Psychical Research (IIRC). When all your peers are crackpots too, maybe that does make it "peer reviewed".

  5. What else needs to be said?

    Answers in Genesis never ceases to amaze me with their dishonesty and complete lack of regard for the scientific method.

  6. But, but....the Bible says that illnesses are caused by demons/evil spirits! This research is satanic!!


    Foolish theistfucks.

  7. Technically we need bacteria to digest food. It's in our gut. A supreme being wouldn't need to eat, since he's divine, so he wouldn't need bacteria. Besides, I think we're only supposed to look like God on the outside.

    Of course there's mitochondria in every single cell, which evolved from bacteria, but if evolution never happened, mitochondria can't have evolved from anything and thus was always just as it is now. Whee!

    "The natural symbiosis of microbes with other creatures is the norm."

    FAIL. The vast majority of microbes are not connected to larger organisms. Pretty much every non-sterilized surface is coated in free-living bacteria and prokaryotes, and they exist deep in the topsoil as well. The ocean is filled with them. The vast majority of microbes that we've cataloged have been from living creatures, specifically humans, but there are probably quadrillions of species of bacteria, more, out there that we don't have a way to culture or aren't interested enough in. So the science isn't just ignored, the bits they throw in are false.

    Must be nice to be a creation "scientist." You only have to read one book.

  8. What to say? Yawn...

    Amazing how these "Righteous People" resort to quack science to try and convince the gullible that "Every Word Is True". Needless to say, it works: it's much easier to convince laymen with a pot-pourri of scientific sounding "stuff" that confirms the belief systems they've been imbibed with since birth, even if the science is a flimsy smoke screen at best, and plain old snake oil merchandise a la Ken Hovind, at worst.

    Unfortunately, real science has to keep an open mind (there are drawbacks to everything) and so considerable time and effort will be spent on debunking their silly arguments.

  9. We thought you might be interested --

    Inquiring into the Origin of Matter and Life
    January-March 2008

    Bhaktivedanata Institute's latest quarterly newsletter
    is now available online.

    You can download the January-March 2008 issue from:

    ______________________________ ______________________________ __

    What's it about?

    Modern science has generally been directed toward investigating
    the material world, excluding consideration of the conscious
    scientist who is essential to the whole process, since, of
    course, the very existence of the scientific endeavor itself
    depends upon consciousness. Complete scientific knowledge must
    consequently include both objective science and subjective

    In addition to other programs, Bhaktivedanta Institute's Science
    and Scientist Newsletter is humbly offered to inspire scientists
    and scholars to contribute their sincere efforts toward
    developing this grand synthesis. The result will be valuable not
    only for helping to better understand the "hard" problems of
    science such as the nature and origin of life and the cosmos, the
    mind-brain connection, artificial intelligence, etc. But the
    pressing problems of ethics in science, world peace, and
    interfaith dialog will also benefit from a more inclusive
    scientific worldview.

    In our modern era science and religion are the predominating
    influences determining the fate of mankind. Promoting and
    developing a culture of harmony between such diverse fields has
    the potential to expand our conception of reality and advance
    human knowledge in the new millennium, in which it is said the
    study of life will be pre-eminent. Let us welcome the dawn of
    that new epoch with great hope and determined endeavor.
    ______________________________ ______________________________ __

    Newsletter Homepage: http://www.scienceandscientist.org

    Newsletter Subscription:

    Please send comments/questions to: