Posts

Creation Celebration and Free Money

Image
This weekend is our 2021 Creation Celebration.  We began this online event last year in the middle of COVID lockdowns, and we're back for another go at it.  We've got video presentations from Joe Francis, Paul Garner, Marcus Ross, Matt McLain, and many more.  And if that's not enough, I'll be doing some live events on each day of the celebration. I'll be talking to Steve Gollmer about storms and Jeremy Blaschke about parasites, and Paul Garner and I will be doing a live "podcast" on Saturday morning to answer questions from the audience.  (If you have a question for us, send it to my email listed below).  It's all starting on this Thursday, so get your tickets now! Get your tickets for Creation Celebration 2021 right here. This Friday is also a big day: Applications for the 2021 Sanders Scholarship are DUE!  We're awarding at least one Sanders Scholarship worth up to $4,000 to a student working on a creation research project with an established men

What am I again?

Image
Every couple of years, I spend a little bit of time trying to think of what to call myself and my position.  Sometimes it's inspired by insulting names other people try to pin on me, and other times it's inspired by genuine attempts to classify creationists by recognizing the "really important" distinctives.  I'm inspired this morning by a short piece in a recent BCT newsletter from Stephen Lloyd, where he suggests this: More recently I have come up with: ‘ A dam from the B eginning of C reation’ ( ABC ). This has the advantage that the terminology is all biblical (and avoids the ‘ism’ of ‘creationism’ which is more a sociological label). It also closely echoes the word of Jesus himself (Mark 10:6). ... Making sure the order of events – Adam or death first – is correct (i.e. the chronology) is crucial for Christian theology. What do you think of ABC? We would love to hear your views! My view?  Eh.  I'm not wild about "ABC," to be honest.  I guess it

Thoughts on Origins 2021

Image
What a weekend!  We just finished up the Origins 2021 conference yesterday, and I'm both excited and exhausted (as usual).  In total, we had nineteen presentations, a panel discussion, and a field trip over the course of three days.  It was also the first time the new Creation Theology Society joined us, and their presentations elicited a lot of good reaction and conversation. Since last year's conference was entirely online, this was our first in-person conference in two years.  Since we expected COVID to still be a problem, we wanted to keep the conference as simple as possible and easy to cancel.  So we opted for multiple live venues with video streaming from one site to another.  That worked OK.  We did have to cancel one venue because of COVID, so that worked exactly as we expected.  But the technical challenges were predictably challenging. Even though there were a lot of technical problems, I think people generally enjoyed being together at the California and Tennessee s

Origins 2021 abstracts now available

Image
Origins 2021 starts tomorrow (registration is today), and the conference abstracts are now available.  Check it out! 2021 Biology Abstracts 2021 Geology Abstracts Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com. If you enjoyed this article, please consider a contribution to Core Academy of Science. Thank you. Have you read my book?  You should check that out too!

Do you get this by email?

Image
This post is for followers' information only. If you are accustomed to seeing my posts by email, and you wish to continue doing so, I'll need you to switch your subscription to a different service altogether.  The Feedburner service that I set up a decade ago is going away at the end of the week (not my choice), and I've set up shop at a new email subscription place called Follow.It.  You can subscribe to this new deal right here: Get new posts by email: Subscribe Powered by I'm told this will work just like the old way and send you my latest posts by email.  We shall see.  Just in case, I've downloaded the email list from Feedburner (201 subscribers as of today), and maybe I'll transfer that directly to Follow.it if people are having trouble. And if you never knew you could subscribe by email but that sounds interesting, well, there you go.  Sign up through Follow.it, and you'll get my latest ramblings delivered right to your email.  Lucky you! Thanks for

Finding created kinds

Image
All of you who've followed my career would recognize those baraminology diagrams with the squares and circles.  Those graphs are summaries of something called baraminic distance correlation  (BDC), where each pair of critters could be said to be significantly close or significantly far apart.  Based on the pattern of these correlations, I think we can find created kinds.  Although I did not invent the method, it's basically been my standard procedure for dozens of studies.  I've done additional work (like adding a procedure called bootstrapping) to rectify the obvious shortcoming of the method, and I've tried to use it to answer the big question: Can we say that created kinds really exist? In a new pair of papers in this week's Answers Research Journal , Colin Reeves outlines his objections to the basic methodology.  He criticizes nearly every step of the process and me in particular for using it uncritically.  He then proposes that we just use standard cluster anal

Is creationism just white supremacy? The answer is no.

Image
A recent editorial published by Scientific American  makes the bold claim that "evolution denial" is not religiously motivated but is instead a form of white supremacy.  Given the current concerns about racism and anti-racism, I guess it's no surprise that someone would accuse creationists of being white supremacists.  The article's author, Allison Hopper, is not a scientist but a journalist who mostly seems motivated by the lack of pro-evolution children's books. Now you might expect me to rail against this article like Jerry Coyne (who I find myself strangely agreeing with to some extent), but I think the reality is more complex than either Hopper or Coyne present.  On the one hand, Hopper's article really is kind of a mess, with very little actual evidence of lingering white supremacy in modern creationism.  I think there could  be a correlation between modern racist attitudes and creationist views, but Hopper doesn't demonstrate it.  And correlation i