Raising the Banner for Creation Truth


Dr. Henry M. Morris founded the Institute for Creation Research in 1970 with a vision to uncover and present evidence for the accuracy and authority of the Bible. For almost 40 years, ICR has distinguished itself as the leader in creation science research and education, ably assisted by the many fine scientists whom God has led to work here. These men and women have dedicated their training and skills to raising the banner for the truth of our Creator God. We would like you to meet our current on-site scientists and hear their thoughts on the purpose, significance, and importance of the creation science research they do.

John D. Morris, President

B.S., Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, 1969
M.S., University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, 1971 Ph.D.,
University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, 1980

At its core, ICR discovers and uncovers information about creation. Yes, we teach what we know, elevating Scripture and giving glory to God, but we also expand our understanding through research. Scripture gives us the basic framework within which we must view everything, but it doesn't give us all the details. God has given us a great blessing in allowing us to fill in some of the details. I think He is pleased when His "image" in man discovers more of what He has done, attributing it all to Him, praising Him for His creative majesty, and utilizing it for man’s overall good.

Steve Austin, Senior Research Scientist; Chair, Geology Department

B.S., University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, 1970
M.S., San Jose State University, San Jose, California, 1971
Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University, College Park, Pennsylvania, 1979

Research in the earth sciences will continue to remain one of the most interesting and vital topics to the young earth creationist movement. Focused earth science research by creationists will continue to validate the distinctive history of the Flood and the framework of earth history within the pages of Scripture.

The doctrine of uniformitarianism has yielded significantly to extraordinary geologic evidence of global catastrophe. Sedimentology is showing us that powerful water currents deposited large-scale crossbedding in the Coconino and Navajo sandstones. Fragile molecules and degradable biological structures within dinosaur bones are showing us that fossils are young. Tectonics is showing us that mountains were formed by catastrophic faulting. Erosion features on our planet are demonstrating that catastrophic drainage was responsible for the major landforms we see today. A totally new structure called a "supervolcano" is being widely recognized.

Lastly, many geologists are recognizing earth's catastrophic past and the exponential decline in ancient processes toward the present world in which we live. Earth science research by creationists continues to bear fruit. A new organization of geoscientists called Creation Geology Society shows us that creationist earth science will continue into the future.

Randy Guliuzza, ICR National Representative

B.S., South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, South Dakota, 1984
B.A., Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 1982
M.P.H., Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2003
M.D., University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1996

One area of creation research of great importance is writing technical responses to the highly publicized claims of Darwinists. Creationists provide essentially the only independent critical peer review of many evolutionary assertions published in the most prestigious scientific journals. Creationists invariably highlight numerous flaws in evolutionary literature pertaining to methodology, unsubstantiated statements, logical fallacies, and an endless stream of "just-so" story telling.

These types of things would never be tolerated in the scientific journals related to my fields of engineering and medicine. But in the unverifiable world of evolutionary literature, peer reviewers regularly let all of these scientific blunders straight through to publication. The published creationist's criticisms are almost always proved correct when the high profile evolutionary claims are later quietly withdrawn (Ida is a recent example).

Every day, creationist reviews show that evolutionism is much more akin to religious philosophy based on academic authority and consensus opinion, rather than real, observable, repeatable science. In addition, creationist reviews routinely include a better scientific explanation of the data in question that is actually consistent with data from other fields and known scientific principles, and does not stretch imagination to the breaking point.

Nathaniel Jeanson, Research Associate

B.S., University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, Wisconsin, 2003
Ph.D., Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2009

Creationism is unique among the apologetic fields, first by virtue of the nature of the arguments used against Scripture. If the major objections to Genesis were based solely on nuances of Hebrew prose, the creation model could be buttressed by additional language studies. However, since many challenges to Genesis come from scientific data, scientific data must be used to counter these attacks. Furthermore, since the purpose of Genesis does not include many scientific details of the events recorded, research is needed to fill in these details and to resolve apparent discrepancies between science and the Bible. Finally, one of the best defenses against evolution is a good offense; as we are able to build a comprehensive creation model that explains the scientific data better than evolution does, evolutionists would become defensive and creationism would become determinative.

Due to the rapid rate of scientific discovery, evolutionists are relentlessly pointing to the latest scientific data as justification for their hypothesis. For example, the "smoking gun" of evolution these days is not (according to evolutionists) the fossil record, but the data from DNA sequence comparisons. Who would have predicted in 1970 (ICR's founding) that molecular biology, and not paleontology, would be the major talking point for evolution in 2009? A robust research program, the arsenal of creation counter-arguments, is vital to the strength of an apologetic response to the"strongholds" of evolutionary dogma.

Charles McCombs, Associate Professor of Chemistry

B.S., California State University, Long Beach, California, 1973
Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles, California, 1978

It is time for everyone to stand boldly against those doctrines opposed to the Bible, just as it says in Ephesians 6:11-12. In years past, the battle has usually been against "evolution" and its errors (which are many), but today that battle seems to be deep within our own ranks. There is a very real battle going on, and it is no longer just a spiritual battle.

The forewords and introductions in many college science text-books are filled with anti-creation science jargon. We get letters from parents whose Christian children go off to college, and within months they are rejecting their biblical teachings. The only way to successfully fight this attack is to counter with creation science research. We need to capitalize on the successes of our past and get the creation message out to the church, but that is not sufficient. To meet tomorrow’s needs, we are currently pioneering new areas of research to argue against those hot topics in the news today.

As an organic chemist, my entire career was dedicated to studying the process by which things can change. Chemistry is a science that studies the process, but evolution is only a hypothesis based solely on analysis of the end result. As a creation scientist, I want people to realize that evolutionary scientists have never studied the process before claiming that life came from chemicals; they never studied the process before claiming that dinosaurs turned into birds or before monkeys allegedly turned into humans. If evolutionists had studied their processes, they would have learned that evolution violates those same laws of science their theory is supposedly based on.

I predict that within the very near future, we will hear about a protein being created from an RNA molecule in a synthetic cell. Along with this discovery, we will also hear again the claim that life was formed in the laboratory. When this happens, we will need to have our own creation science research data to counter with. Genesis 2:7 says that life is a gift from God. Let's not let false claims of man-made life take away or deny the truth that "in the beginning, God created" everything--including you, me, the cell, the RNA molecule, and the protein.

Patricia Nason, Chair, Science Education Department

B.A., Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, 1984
M.Ed., Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, 1991
Ph.D., Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, 1994

The secular understanding of forensic/historical science issues is purely evolutionary and promotes humanistic and atheistic perspectives. Creation research in all scientific fields relating to origins helps teachers (homeschool, Christian school, and Bible classes at church) and their students to have confidence in God as the Creator.

Although God and His Word do not need defending, scientific proof that God's Word is truth strengthens faith. Creation science research provides an interpretation of scientific observations that supports the biblical model of creation. We live in an era when individuals are taught to think through ideas and critically analyze them. When most Bible-believing Christians are confronted with purported evidence from the evolutionary perspective and that idea makes sense to them, it is because the believers have not been taught the scientific evidence that disproves evolution and/or supports creation.

Believers must know how to be skeptical observers of scientific articles, nature and science programs, and museum artifacts to defend their faith. But without being taught the creation model from a scientific perspective, they might begin to rationalize that evolution is a fact. Therefore, the scientific research that ICR has done in the past and will continue to do in the future is relevant to the nature of science and scientific inquiry, as well as necessary to advance belief in the God of the Bible.

Jeffrey P. Tomkins, Research Associate

B.S., Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, 1985
M.S., University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, 1990
Ph.D., Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, 1996

Creation science research is essentially twofold. First, it entails the close following and analysis of published and popularized research in the leading scientific journals and media access points across a wide variety of fields. Second, it involves original research projects in the lab or field that the secular world is not addressing or is avoiding because of its potential to produce results that go against evolutionary philosophy. At ICR, we are doing both. My focus is in the area of biology, genetics, and genomics.


Larry Vardiman, Chair, Astrogeophysics Department

B.S., University of Missouri, Rolla, Missouri, 1965
M.S., St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, 1967
M.S., Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1972
Ph.D., Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1974

I've been privileged to conduct creationist research at ICR for over 25 years. My specialty is atmospheric science and I explore issues relating to weather and climate, particularly those dealing with the Ice Age. It's exciting trying to fill in some of the details the Bible only discusses briefly.

For example, when did the Ice Age occur and how could thousands of feet of snow fall in the polar regions during only thousands of years since creation? When one thinks biblically the answer is simple--a warm ocean heated by catastrophic processes during the Genesis Flood produced a massive El Niño event. Moisture evaporated from the oceans, fell as snow over cold continents, and formed glaciers and ice sheets for several hundred years after the Flood until the oceans cooled to today’s lower temperature. Both numerical simulation studies and analysis of ice core data confirm this model.

God has given man an insatiable desire to know and understand what He does and how He does it. He has given us the ability to reason and to explore the evidence found in the world around us. But He expects us to first study and understand His Word. In it, He has informed us what happened in the past, which is not now directly observable. If we don't understand and believe what is revealed in His Word about the past, we will be led astray and reach false conclusions when we try to interpret evidence from the world today.

Thinking biblically doesn't come naturally if we've been trained to believe in evolution and billions of years. But what a joy to do creationist research when we believe God's Word and, like Isaac Newton and Johann Kepler from previous generations, think God's thoughts after Him.

Cite this article: 2009. Raising the Banner for Creation Truth. Acts & Facts. 38 (12): 4-6.


© 2014 Institute for Creation Research. All Rights Reserved.

Proclaiming Scientific Truth in Creation | www.icr.org