A Challenge Met

Book Review:
In Six Days

John F. Ashton (ed.) / Master Books / 2000

We have reached the point where science has so utterly and thoroughly demonstrated the possibility and likelihood of evolutionary processes being the operating mechanisms behind the generation and variation of all life on earth that it has essentially been proven as fact, right?

Wrong. What we have reached is the point where scientists have become such slick storytellers that they can take a hypothesis which continues to be so buried in unanswered questions and riddled with holes that it is downright laughable, and present it with such grandiose verbiage and all the certainty of great actors that the public has swallowed it.

They also have become masters at scorning (but not disproving) the Bible's view that the earth was created complete in a six-day period. It is such scorn that prompted John F. Ashton to assemble the book In Six Days.

In a university class, Ashton heard a visiting lecturer state that no scientist with a Ph.D. would advocate a literal six-day creation of the earth, a claim also made by scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould and Ernst Mayr. The pondering of that claim resulted in this book: Ashton sought out doctorated scientists who did believe in the act of creation as presented in the first chapter of Genesis and asked them to explain their positions. He then selected fifty from among them and published the results.

And the results are very interesting. All fifty of the testimonies included are from scientists with at least one doctorate in a scientific field, ranging from geneticists to geologists to astronomers to biologists to orthodontists. All fifty of them have no trouble reconciling science to the Bible, because, as many of them point out, the presentation of evolution that scientists have foisted on the world is nothing more than theatrics. Behind the scenes, pro-evolution scientists have been observed ignoring contrary evidence, suppressing facts that would shatter their ideas, and even distorting their findings to fit their pre-conceived notions.

It is those testimonies in this book that specifically demonstrate the flaws in evolution that were the most fascinating to me. Though sometimes in such complex scientific terms that I could not follow everything being presented, I enjoyed hearing of the problems inherent in radiometric dating and the fossil record in the geologic column, both of which are two of the more common "proofs" of evolution. In fact, dating methods and the geologic column are so unreliable as to be useless in substantiating the evolution hypothesis, but those conflicting results rarely ever escape the laboratory because they are such an embarrassment to evolutionary thinking.

The irrational defense of evolution is also discussed in some of the testimonies, as many of these fifty scientists had first-hand experience with peers and colleagues ignoring or denying discoveries that would force them to discard their evolutionary views. Even published author Richard Dawkins is taken down in a handful of the essays; the inconsistencies within single volumes of his own books are plainly exposed, along with Dawkins' own admission that scientists have yet to discover one single example of a genetic mutation that has added information to the genetic code, an absolute necessity for evolution to be true. To date, all genetic mutations have resulted in a loss of information, which is in perfect harmony with the Bible and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but which makes evolution entirely implausible.

The essays come in a wide range, from the highly technical explorations of radiometric dating and discussions of the mathematical impossibility of having all of the correct-"handed" amino acids form a protein for life to begin, to brief overviews of broad topics. Some of the scientists clearly do not specialize in writing essays for the lay reader, but the information presented is still positively juicy in its decimation of the naturalist view of the origins of life.

The book has two difficulties, the first of which is a repetitious feeling. Because they were all writing independently, many of the scientists present similar information or reference similar sources. By the time I was halfway through the book, I felt like I was not receiving any new information.

Second, the latter half of the book has very little to do with actual scientific evidence: While I suppose it is meant to be reassuring to hear even generic affirmations of the Genesis account from doctorated scientists, ten to fifteen of them said little more than just that – "I believe in the Genesis account" – in their essays.

But I am very glad I discovered the book and had the opportunity to read it. Those interested in exposing some extremely severe flaws (and deceptions) in the "facts" of evolution in future encounters would do well to keep a pen or highlighter handy, as there is enough testimony here on key points of argument to shatter naturalist thinking.

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth in six ordinary days. I have known that with complete confidence since I was in high school. It is encouraging to hear from doctorates of science that their research leads them to the same conclusion.

Worth The Read?: Most definitely