Astronomer, Biochemist Say Creation Can Be Science
Recent court judgments have declared that neither creationism nor Intelligent Design is science and has no place in the public school classroom. However the team of scientists at Reasons To Believe (RTB) has demonstrated creation can be formulated and tested as a scientific theory. Over the past twenty years researchers at RTB have developed a verifiable/falsifiable model for creation that is anchored in the scientific method. "The RTB creation model embraces all the findings of research science, including the latest discoveries," says astronomer and physicist, Dr. Hugh Ross, founder and president of Reasons To Believe. "It integrates current data not only from paleontology and biology but also from astronomy, physics, geology, chemistry, biochemistry, genetics, and anthropology."RTB's positive approach emphasizes scientific credibility. "The scientists at Reasons To Believe don’t waste time bashing evolution," says biochemist Dr. Fazale ‘Fuz’ Rana. "We have instead produced a testable creation model that has greater explanatory power and predictive success than do the naturalistic models, including the Darwinian theory of biological evolution." Dr. Rana, a noted expert on origin of life research, is Vice President for Science Apologetics at Reasons To Believe.Aspects of the RTB model for creation appear in several books: The Creator and the Cosmos, A Matter of Days, Origins of Life, and Who Was Adam? A new book highlighting the scope and features of the model is scheduled for release in September 2006. "We continue to work on expanding our model—the quantity and quality of its predictions about what future research will uncover as well as the quantity and quality of its explanatory detail," says Ross.The RTB model has been presented in summary form to faculty and students at some major universities across the country. After attending the presentation at Rice University and reading Ross and Rana's recent books, the late Dr. Richard Smalley, Nobel Prize winning chemist (1996), commented, "Evolution has just been dealt its death blow." He went on to express his wish that other scientists would read and consider Ross and Rana's work. "All researchers who produce working, successfully predictive models should be granted support and encouraged to further develop and publicly present their theories," says Dr. Ross."As the Supreme Court ruled in Edwards v. Aguillard," continues Ross, "schoolteachers already have the constitutional right to ‘supplant the present science curriculum with the presentation of theories, besides evolution, about the origin of life,’ as long as those theories show genuine scientific merit."