Forget about the New Year's resolutions; they seldom survive January anyway. (Besides, healthy living should already be automatic, right?) Perhaps it's better to focus on more reliable scenarios, such as daily doses of science apologetics that affirm belief in biblical creation.
For several years now, RTB science scholars have posted a brief, usually creation-model-validating discovery each day on the RTB home page. That fact by itself is nothing spectacular, but what it represents is. For every discovery reported, many more go unreported due to lack of time and resources. Once in a while I grab a copy of Nature or Science here at RTB and browse through the table of contents just for fun. (It must be noted that pulling a science journal away from the science guys is like pulling a PlayStation away from a kid.) As a layperson I usually don't understand the technical details, but I try to guess anyway if the guys might cover a particular discovery that I find interesting. I'm usually wrong, but that's not the point. The point is that we live in a time when scientific discoveries accumulate at an astonishing rate.
To be sure, some discoveries don't have a direct bearing on RTB's creation model or on alternative evolutionary models. But many do, and the ones that apparently support evolution always make news. Thus, in addition to discussing evidence that bolsters RTB's biblical creation model, RTB often finds itself in the position of explaining discoveries that seem to challenge its views. The question then comes to mind: Does the trend favor evolution or creation? Obviously, RTB is biased, but as a layperson I find it compelling that the archives for Today's New Reason To Believe are loaded with discoveries from many disciplines. Pick a topic: junk DNA, design in the universe, life's minimum complexity, big bang cosmology, biochemical design, human origins, and many others; in each topic, numerous discoveries have strengthened the case for RTB's testable creation model.
Naturally, such evidence will be interpreted differently by an evolutionary scientist, but does the trend line justify support in an evolutionary model? RTB doesn't think so. The fact that a "trend line" exists at all is remarkable. In a highly skeptical age, the evidence to answer such skepticism is at its strongest. It almost seems purposeful. Lest we be tempted to gloat over a superabundance of evidence, humility's always more attractive. It's important neither to overstate the case for creation nor understate the case for evolution. Evolutionists are people created in the image of God. Therefore they deserve respect and the benefit of the doubt when they present their views. There's some evidence for evolution; the key is to put all competing models to the test. That's why 2007 offers at least 365 reasons to celebrate. Stay up-to-date by checking out the TNRTB feature on this site each day, and at the end of the year let's see how creation fared.
Subjects: General Apologetics