Answers in Genesis is excited to announce the launch of its online technical journal called Answers Research Journal (ARJ). Hosted at www.answersresearchjournal.org (but linked to AiG’s website), this will be a professional peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework.
Addressing the need to disseminate the vast fields of research conducted by creationist experts in theology, history, archaeology, anthropology, biology, geology, astronomy, and other disciplines of science, Answers Research Journal will provide scientists and students the results of cutting-edge research that demonstrates the validity of the young-earth model, the global Flood, the non-evolutionary origin of “created kinds,” and other evidences that are consistent with the biblical account of origins. The newly expanded research effort at Answers in Genesis, with the establishment of its Research Department, will facilitate this further venue for publication and dissemination of the results of creationist research.
Answers in Genesis, Answers in Genesis 62 Comments
[12/31/2010 9:29:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 51
1 2 3
"My investigashun was peer-reviewed by my mommy!"
1/1/2011 11:43:58 PM
Raised by Horses
Peer-review this. (grabs crotch)
1/2/2011 3:16:56 AM
Be sure to write it so that it isn't an obvious hoax...that a creationist can get sucked in without knowing!
Are you kidding? Obvious hoaxes are what suck in creationists.
1/2/2011 3:37:20 AM
Having one quack read the scibbles of another quack does not constitue peer review.
1/2/2011 4:55:48 AM
"Creationist research" is the worst kind of oxymoron.
1/2/2011 8:46:15 AM
Science = having a hypothesis, then seeing where it leads you, looking at all possible outcomes, trying to be the first with something completely new.
Creationism = having a goal, then looking for evidence that supports it, while discarding the evidence that debunks it, trying to stay with 2000+ years old myths.
Are there really creationist experts enough to create "vast fields of research"?
Will you also look into the cutting-edge research demonstrating the validity of alchemy, astrology, the existence of Nessie, and comparative studies in holocaust-deniers vs 9/11-deniers.
As others have already said; first come to a consensus as to what constitutes a "kind", then we can discuss the origin of the different kinds of "kinds".
1/2/2011 9:15:04 AM
The they are starting with a preconceived conclusion and still trying to pretend that they are doing science? That manner of "research" can only lead to wannabe "creation scientists" simply disregarding any and all evidence that doesn't fit their preconceived conclusions.
On the plus side however, this venture will do far, far more to discredit Aig than it will to aide their notion of "creation science" as a valid scientific field of study.
1/2/2011 3:53:59 PM
"Creationist research" eh? No scientific bias there then.
1/16/2011 3:32:40 PM
Creationist research. As futile as hunting unicorns.
1/18/2011 2:38:24 AM
Seriously, you have your little Bronze-Age story, and you want to stick with it. What is the reserch for ?
A scientific approach of research would be to observe facts without preconceived idea, see if it fits with currently admitted theories, if not, run other tests to confirm the anomaly, and if the anomaly is confirmed, come with a better theory.
What you are doing is twisting reality to make it fit in your book. This is not, and never will be Science, unless you take over English language and change the word meaning.
11/25/2011 8:08:26 AM
"Answers in Genesis is excited to announce the launch of its online technical journal called Answers Research Journal (ARJ)"
It should change it's name to 'A
Thus Jim Royle (from BBC TV's "The Royle Family") could then say:
'"Creation Research"? MY ARSE
...ey up, I've got some bumdirt to make an Adam from, that's nearly touching cloth! Make us a cup of tea will yer, Barb, while I'm on the bog?! And 'and me that copy of 'A
ssays' will yer, seems like this one's gonna take more than six days to create!'
11/25/2011 10:09:48 AM
"In particular, we find that an observer-centric anisotropic synchrony convention eliminates the distant starlight problem by reducing radially inward-directed light travel-time in the reference frame of the observer to zero."
Dang it, it's supposed to be "an observer-centric QUANTUM anisotropic synchrony convention".
11/25/2011 12:05:51 PM
1 2 3