Cheap Pillslasix buy
Cheap lasixbuy clomid uk buy in Europe
Online MedicationsBuy Online diflucan
OnlinePharmacy No Prescription
Christians believe that God created the world. In that sense, they are all “creationists”. However, the word “creationist” has taken on a different meaning in the last few decades and now generally refers to people who argue against the scientific consensus that the world is several billion years old and that biological complexity emerged through evolutionary mechanisms. Advocates of this stance often refer to their views as “Young Earth Creation Science” (YECS).
YECS is very controversial, both amongst Christians as well as amongst the general public. On this page we list a selection of the ever expanding number of sites, both pro and contra, devoted in one way or another to YECS. Most groups are US based, but there is also an important Australian influence. It would be a near impossible task to include them all, but we have tried to be as complete as possible in our listing of British YECS groups. We also include a few links on intelligent design (ID), which is rapidly growing in popularity amongst the same constituency that supports YECS.
If you have any suggestions of further links, or find broken ones below, please email Ard Louis
UK based YECS sites
Large YECS groups/websites :
YEC Sites From Other Countries
Non-Christian Anti-YECS sites
Christian anti-YECS sites
I haven’t come across any Christian sites that counter YECS claims point by point like Talk.Origins does on its index to creationist claims page. However, there are a few sites that do explicitly discuss some YECS claims:
The strong reaction from YECS shows that this issue is crucial
Pro Intelligent Design
which ends withIk denk dat darwinistische evolutie op de lange termijn sterker onderbouwd zou kunnen worden door de uitdagingen van ID, hoewel waarschijnlijk met wat bescheidener claims en een nauwkeuriger scheiding van wetenschap en metafysica
I think that, in the longer term, Darwinian evolution could become more strongly founded through the challenge of ID, although probably with more modest claims and a more accurate separation of science from metaphysics.
(editors note: Although the ID literature teems with claims that it is a “scientific research programme”, I have yet to find an article by any major ID proponent in the USA that actually proposes a detailed research programme in the same direct manner that Dekker does. Surely this is a critical issue?)
Anti Intelligent Design