I’m sure the last two articles have been difficult for a lot of people to accept. Depending on your presuppositions you might accept or reject many of the science arguments like Helium diffusion in zircon crystals. The facts remain the same. Do you interpret the time period offered by the lead created from the decay of uranium at 1.5 billion years old or the helium created by the same decay which says 6,000 years old. (Arguments in some papers that the heat in the region altered this are erroneous.) One is right and one is wrong, but it depends on your interpretation.

Creationists have many presuppositions that are based on the Word of God and science is viewed with those glasses on. Evolutionists (old earthers) have a different set of presuppositions that they view the same evidence with. Which view is correct?

Many evolutionists like to declare that no creationist is a real scientist. Creation Scientists are responsible for these science items: establishing the scientific method, 3 planetary laws of motion, co-invented calculus, fathered microbiology field, discovered laws of electricity and magnetism, invented the MRI, to name a few. Having a biblical presupposition, including a short earth belief, does not make anyone a poor scientist. Believing God made the world with order and purpose, leads one to find the order He created. However, believing the world is random and constantly changing, leads you to not expect any order? Which supposition is more logical for good science observation and experimentation?

All scientists agree on observational science: things like gravity and laws of electricity. They all use observation and experimentation to come to conclusions about nature. However, when we talk about historical events we have only circumstantial evidence to consider and direct observation and experimentation is not possible. It is then, we use our presuppositions most.

For example, evolutionism states that we evolved from minerals or gases and slowly changed into more complex beings.

Creationists believe God when He said that He placed everything according to their kind.

Genesis 1:24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so.

Now when we examine this in the present we see from the DNA that everything is still within the original boundaries, whether it is degraded or not. Thousands of generations with forced mutations and you still get flies being flies. Real science supports the biblical interpretation.

That is only one example that appears correct in the present day you say? How about the Human Genome Project which determined that we are all one race, descendents of one set of parents. That again would confirm the biblical presupposition.

This has been troubling to many evolutionists over the years. Darwin’s answer to this problem, is that we would find more evidence to prove that things actually do "change kind". This desire for credible proof is a huge motivational force for anthropologists. After all, if you find just another ape fossil or a man fossil who cares? But, you are bound to have an endless source of funds if you find an apeman.

The research has been incredibly frustrating for evolutionists. However, at various times many Creationists have had their faith shaken by fraudulent claims. For instance the picture below was seen in textbooks and newspapers for a number of years. It was a picture created from one found tooth and was called Nebraska man. Later it was determined to be a pig’s tooth.

Another tooth was found of a supposed apeman, and the London Illustrated News ran a picture of the apeman complete with wife, children and cave. Obviously we aren’t really talking "science" here.

A number of Neanderthals have been found. After examining two of them a Frenchman declared that they were intellectually inferior and walked hunched over in an apelike manner. This theory was expanded on for 50 years, and then they were examined by others, and determined to have slightly larger brains then normal and had arthritis in the jaw and back. They are indeed fully human and without the arthritis would look like some humans today, only they lived longer.

Lucy being the most famous of apemen actually has evidence of having hands and feet like pygmy / common chimpanzees. She is an extinct monkey.

Dawn man (Piltdown) had a man’s skull and an ape jaw bone that appeared to have manlike teeth. It was calculated to be 500,000 years old. It was later found to be a hoax. A man’s 500 year old skull was put together with a female orangutan’s jawbone with the canine teeth ground down and filled in to appear human. The hoax lasted 50 years despite world authorities scrutinizing it. This led one of their own to state, "It is doubtful if there is any science at all, in the search for man’s ancestry."

The prediction of evolutionists is that we would find many missing links. Creationists said we would find none. Except for fraud and creative imaginations we have found none.

There are many verses in the Bible that also deal with how long man has been around for. Here are a few for you to review:

Jesus said referring directly to Adam and Eve, "But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.' Mark 10:6

Paul said, "The first man Adam became a living being." 1 Corinthians 15:45 and followed it up with verse 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust," describing us being Adam’s descendants.

This line of descendents is described with dates in genealogies found in Genesis 5 and 11. These dates lead us back approximately 6,000 years. This is the presuppositions that creationists have in mind.

We expect civilizations to have less then 6000 years of recorded history. The same for circumstantial historical evidence uncovered.

Whether it is the human genome project describing one pair of ancestors we all descended from, or everything being after its own kind when we look at evidence with a biblical presupposition, we find that real science confirms the Bible.

However, evolutionists looking at the same hard facts with a different set of lenses may make other interpretations. CNN and FOX view the same facts and present vastly different interpretations of the events. We see this all over.

When you see evidence using the viewpoint of the Word of God as your supposition, see if real science along the way doesn’t verify the Bible as truth. For me, the Bible becomes more obviously correct as the days go by.

The Fear of the Lord and His Word is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom. There is much we do not know, but as we learn more - directly considering the Word of God - we build upon it. When we try to make sense of the world without God, we become lost.

2 Timothy 3:14-17 "But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."