Friday, 30 September 2011

The Rainbow Shows Us That the Genesis Flood Was Global

God promised Noah that He would never again destroy all life on earth by a flood. Image courtesy of Jerry Magnum Porsbjer, Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

After the Flood described in Genesis, God told Noah:

I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life.” (Gen. 9:13-15, NIV).

Many progressive creationists and theistic evolutionists believe that the Flood of Noah’s day was a local deluge.

However, after the Flood God promised never again to send a watery catastrophe to destroy all life on earth. The rainbow guarantees that God will keep His word.

We have heard of many local floods in recent years. The local flood hypothesis fails to explain why they keep on occurring.

The only explanation is that the Genesis Flood was unique.

Thursday, 29 September 2011

Migratory Birds Cause Problems for the Genesis ”Local Flood” Hypothesis

The Sooty Shearwater's (Puffinus griseus) long migration suggests that Noah’s Flood could not have been local. Image courtesy of Mike Baird, Flikr/Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

Some Christians and especially sceptics think that the Flood of Noah’s days was a local inundation in either Mesopotamia or the Black Sea area.

However, this view that many progressive creationists and theistic evolutionists promote has several serious problems.

The ark would have been unnecessary in a local flood. According to Genesis, Noah also had to take birds on the ark:

You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.” (Genesis 6:19-20, NIV).

Even today, many migratory birds fly thousands of kilometres from one continent to another twice a year. For instance, the Sooty Shearwater (Puffinus griseus) migrates from the Falkland Islands, Tierra del Fuego or New Zealand to Norway, a distance of some 14,000 kilometres (9,000 miles). And then the same way back.

The only reason why Noah had to take birds on the ark was that the Flood was global.

In a world entirely covered by water, the only shelter for migratory birds was inside the ark.

Tuesday, 27 September 2011

The Neanderthals Were ”Technologically Skilled” Toolmakers

The Neanderthals obviously loved making music.

Joel Kontinen

Once upon a time evolutionists promoted Neanderthal man as a stooped, grunting ape-like creature. That time has passed ages ago.

Recent research suggests that the Neanderthals were fully human, just like you and me.

In the 1970s, archaeologists discovered a ravine at La Cotte de St Brelade on the Channel island of Jersey. They found over 250, 000 stone tools, including hand axes, manufactured by the Neanderthals.

According to BBC news, ”The huge amounts of carefully manufactured tools show just how technologically skilled early Neanderthal groups were.” They honed the tools to make them better and even re-used old materials.

The research shows that Neanderthals were surprisingly hi-tech.

Read more about the Neanderthals here, here, here and here.


Evans, Becky. 2011. Neanderthal survival story revealed in Jersey caves. BBC News (30 August).

Sunday, 25 September 2011

Research: Evolution Is Slower Than Assumed

New research suggests that one should not regard small changes in the beak size of Darwin’s finches as evidence for evolution. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

Evolutionists acknowledged recently that Darwinian evolution is slower than they had assumed. In August, Josef Uyeda, a zoologist at Oregon State University, and colleagues published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on the long-term changes supposedly caused by evolution.

The researchers compared the changes incurred in 10-100 years with the assumed millions of years of the fossil record and concluded that “rapid changes in local populations often don't continue, stand the test of time or spread through a species”, as described it.

The result is interesting because school textbooks for instance have regarded slight changes in the beak size of Darwin’s finches as evidence for evolution.

Detailed studies indicate that the changes are temporary.

Long-beaked finches flourish during times of drought and short-beaked finches during the rainy season. There is no clear trend from one generation to the next, however.

In other words, evolutionists should not use small changes in beak size or shape as evidence for evolution because the changes are not cumulative. The finches remain finches although their beak size and shape might vary a little.

In reporting on the study, used an interesting analogy: ”Just because humans are two or three inches [5-7 cm] taller now than they were 200 years ago, it doesn't mean that process will continue and we'll be two or three feet [60-90 cm] taller in 2,000 years.”

It seems that there are limits to such growth, which incidentally might be due to better nourishment.


Not so fast -- researchers find that lasting evolutionary change takes about one million 22 August 2011.

Help a Christian Lady Facing the Death Sentence

Joel Kontinen

We cannot go to see a Christian woman who is in prison awaiting the death penalty because of her faith in Jesus Christ but but we sign a petition for the release of Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian.

You can sign the petition here.

Saturday, 24 September 2011

How to Refute Evolution

Joel Kontinen

This brief video from Answers in Genesis shows why Darwinian evolution cannot have happened. There is no real evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, which ultimately requires life to have appeared from non-life, without which it could never even have started.

80 Years Ago: C. S. Lewis Was Converted in a Motorcycle Sidecar

The statue of C. S. Lewis in Belfast. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

When C. S. Lewis stepped into the sidecar of his brother’s motorcycle in September 1931, he did not believe in Jesus. However, before they reached their destination, he had become a Christian.

A little earlier he had given up on his atheism.

Historians do not tell us how fast C. S’s brother speeded on their way to a zoo, but two days before his conversion Lewis (or Jack as he was called) had talked with his Christian friends J. R. R. Tolkien and Hugo Dyson about God, myths and Christianity.

It was a long debate. By 3 AM Tolkien had had enough. Dyson, however, continued with his arguments for Christianity. He said that it works, giving us peace and setting us free from sin.

Sitting in the sidecar, Lewis had time to think about Christianity with the result that he accepted the call of Jesus Christ and began following Him. Lewis was 33 years old.

Lewis became one of the most popular Christian authors of the 20th century.


Graves, Dan. 2011. C.S. Lewis' Sidecar Conversion.

Thursday, 22 September 2011

British Humanists Want to Silence Criticism of Darwinian Evolution

Sir David Attenborough does not tolerate criticism of Darwinian evolution. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

Last May Philip Bell of Creation Ministries International (UK) spoke at a Church of England school in Exeter.

The consequences were surprising: While Bell visited the school on a Religious Education study day, that did not stop some British humanists from assuming that creationists were infiltrating the education system. They promptly began a campaign in support of the teaching of evolution in schools.

Later our old friends Sir David Attenborough and Richard Dawkins joined the fray. They emphasised that no view that challenges Darwinian evolution, such as creation or intelligent design, can be presented as a scientific alternative to evolution in government schools.

The campaign is strange because CMI scientists and speakers do not usually give presentations in schools but rather in churches. But Darwinists seem to be worried that evolution is not exactly popular on Charles Darwin’s home island.

Recent scientific research does not favour evolution. It seems that the only way humanists and other atheists can keep their ground is by proclaiming in a loud voice that they will not tolerate a critical approach to Darwinism.


Statham, Dominic. 2011. Heavyweights move to ban creation. Creation Ministries International named as a ‘threat’ to Britain’s school children. (21 September).

What The Media Do Not Want to Tell You About Israel

Joel Kontinen

The pro-Palestinian bias is probably the most prominent trait in the media’s reporting on the Middle East. This brief video illustrates the approach:

Monday, 19 September 2011

Interview With Dr. John Whitcomb (Co-author of The Genesis Flood)

Joel Kontinen

50 years ago, when evolutionist Sir Julian Huxley had just claimed that creationism was dead, two Christians – a scientist and a theologian – published a book that started the modern creationist renaissance. Drs. Henry Morris and John Whitcomb’s The Genesis Flood (1961) has become a Christian classic. Watch an interview with Dr. Whitcomb:

Sunday, 18 September 2011

Discerning Truth

This brief book exposes faulty logic in evolutionary arguments.

Joel Kontinen

PhD astrophysicist Jason Lisle has written a much-needed introduction to the way evolutionists attempt to discredit Christians. In doing so, they often use faulty logic and even evasion. A common ploy is to add the ending ism to creation, portraying the origins debate as one of evolution vs. creationism.

Instead of arguments based on facts, evolutionists prefer equivocation or “shifting from one meaning of a word to another within an argument”. They might, for instance, change the meaning of evolution in mid sentence from merely change into what is known as molecules-to-man evolution.

Reification is another approach evolutionists often use. They attribute almost human characteristics to natural selection.

Begging the question, bifurcation (claiming that there are only two possible solutions to an issue), ad hominem (attacking the person instead of the issue) and the use of emotional language are typical approaches that evolutionists often prefer to use.

The book also includes real-life examples of arguments that evolutionists use in spreading their favourite dogma.

Saturday, 17 September 2011

Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions

This book deals with some of the most common misconceptions people have of the Bible.

Joel Kontinen

Sceptics often see contradictions in the Bible. While there may be difficult passages in Scripture, a closer look at the assumed discrepancies will show that the sceptics are wrong.

Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions (Master Books, 2010), edited by Ken Ham, deals with 40 of the most common misconceptions of Scripture. The book, written by Answers in Genesis scientists and staff members, is easy to read and is meant for the non-expert.

Let us take a couple of examples. Sceptics will for instance claim that Moses (or whoever they think was the author) made a mistake in Leviticus 11 by saying that a bat is a bird. However, the Hebrew word owph used there simply means a flying creature. Leviticus does not give a biological classification of animals but describes how they move.

Another common claim is that Genesis 1 uses Babylonian cosmology in describing a solid dome above the earth. The word raqia suggests no such thing, however. It can be translated as expanse, like some versions have done. Other Bible passages, like Isaiah 40:22, describe God stretching out the heavens, which does not fit in with the idea of a solid dome.

Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions shows that the 66 books that make up our Bible are not full of contradictions.

Evolution Researchers: Christianity Inspires Believers to Care for the Sick

Jesus’ example inspires Christians to care for the sick, new study shows. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

Recently, David Hughes, an evolutionary biologist at Pennsylvania State University, and colleagues presented their research results on religion and epidemics. Richard Dawkins and every other extreme atheist should definitely read their conclusions.

Christianity in particular inspires believers to care for the sick, even for complete strangers. According to the theory of evolution this does not make sense but Jesus gave His followers an example: ” I was sick and you looked after me” (Matt. 25: 36, NIV), He said in the parable of the sheep and goats.

In contrast, Muslims and Jews tend to have a more fatalistic view of diseases: they regard them as acts of God and are not so eager to help the sick.

The gospel is a manifestation of God’s love towards fallen mankind. It inspires Christians to care for the sick.


Pennisi, Elizabeth. 2011. Does Religion Influence Epidemics? Science NOW (23 August).

Thursday, 15 September 2011

Operational Science vs. Historical Science

Joel Kontinen

Answers in Genesis recently posted a brief video on the importance of making a distinction between two kinds of science, i.e., operational science and historical or origins science:

Who Doesn’t Want Peace in the Middle East? – The Media, Perhaps?

Joel Kontinen

Here’s an interesting video on the objectivity of the media’s reporting on Israel:

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

When A Fox Put On Sheep’s Wool

A red fox. Image courtesy of Bernd Blumhardt, Wikipedia.

Joel Kontinen

Approximately a hundred years ago Nature published a fascinating article about a fox that had a habit of wearing sheep’s wool. A Mr James Day told the journal that he and his father had noticed that a fox used to search for something in a hedgerow.

It turned out that the fox was collecting sheep’s wool caught in the thorny branches. When he had got enough, he backed into a small pool tail first and walked deeper into the water until only his nose and the wool attached to it were dry.

Finally the fox let go of the wool. Then he shook himself dry and went away, leaving the wool in the water.

Mr Day and his father were intrigued by what they had seen. They took a shepherd’s crook and pulled the wool out of the water.

The wool was teeming with fleas.

The fox reminds us that when God created the animals he gave them intelligence so that they could cope with unpleasant circumstances in a fallen world.


100 Years Ago. Nature 471 (7339): 454.