the BLOG

Explore by Topic

Explore by Format

Search Results | 360 results found

Shattering the Icons of Evolution

Tonight’s the night! Join me right here, on Google+, or on YouTube at 6:30 p.m. (PT) to see the live video feed of “Shattering the Icons of Evolution.” I’ll be talking about how to recognize and respond to the different categories that arguments for macroevolution fall into: exaggerated extrapolations, egregious errors, and equivocal evidence.

Blog Post | Apologetics | Tim Barnett | April 25, 2016

The Soul Hole

Video | Philosophy | Greg Koukl | April 12, 2016

Live Online Event with Tim Barnett on April 25th

Mark April 25th on your calendar—we’ll be streaming a live event with Tim Barnett on “Shattering the Icons of Evolution.” You can view it on Google+, YouTube, or right here on the blog at 6:30 p.m. (PT):

Blog Post | Apologetics | Amy K. Hall | April 9, 2016

A Scientist’s Answers May Reflect His Worldview More than Science

In this short video from Ligonier, Stephen Meyer demonstrates not only some evidence for a beginning of the universe, but also how a scientist’s worldview and biases can direct and constrain his findings, distorting what he considers to be “scientific”—sometimes without his even realizing it. Even a scientist as great as Einstein.

Blog Post | Apologetics | Amy K. Hall | April 6, 2016

Yes, the Evolutionary Process Does Depend on Randomness

Atheists will often assert that evolution is not random. (In fact, I was having this conversation just last night!) This is true if we’re talking about the natural selection part of the process, but natural selection can only select from what already exists. It’s the mutations that must provide the new genetic information, and mutations do not occur according to what is needed for an organism to survive; they can only cause the being to survive (and thus be selected) after they happen to occur.

Blog Post | Apologetics | Amy K. Hall | March 31, 2016

Challenge Response: The Bible Doesn’t Teach Scientific Insights

Here's my response to this week's challenge: COMMENTS

Video | Science | Brett Kunkle | March 28, 2016

Challenge Response: The Bible Doesn’t Teach Scientific Insights

Here's my response to this week's challenge: COMMENTS

Blog Post | Science | Brett Kunkle | March 24, 2016

Challenge: The Bible Doesn’t Teach Scientific Insights

Here’s another challenge from “40 Problems with Christianity”—one I’ve heard atheists cite before:

Blog Post | Apologetics | Amy K. Hall | March 22, 2016

Are Vestigial Eyes Evidence of Evolution?

Evolutionists love to point to vestigial structures in the biological realm as evidence for evolution. The argument goes like this: Some organisms contain structures that were once functional in their evolutionary past but have now become useless (or almost useless). In The Greatest Show on Earth, Richard Dawkins writes, “Vestigial eyes are evidence of evolution. Given that a cave salamander lives in perpetual darkness so has no use for eyes, why would a divine creator nevertheless furnish it with dummy eyes, clearly related to eyes, but non-functional?”

Blog Post | Apologetics | Tim Barnett | March 12, 2016

February Newsletters: Columbo, Evolution, and Adam

Alan’s, Tim’s, and Brett’s February newsletters are now posted on the website:

Blog Post | Apologetics | Amy K. Hall | February 24, 2016