For the time being I am taking a break from blogging and (as the BCM website explains) from speaking engagements too. I may post here occasionally, but there won’t be any regular updates for a while. Don’t worry. I fully intend to be back, although it will be in months rather than weeks. I have some other “irons in the fire” at the moment that need my full attention.

In the meantime, the BCM website will continue to have all our latest news. And make sure you visit Todd Wood’s blog, where he is beginning an irregular series on what would convince him that evolution is correct. Sounds intriguing and I’m looking forward to seeing what he has to say.

For now – from me – it’s au revoir though not goodbye!

As regular readers of my blog know, I didn’t make it this year to the Origins 2012 conference. However, my BCM colleague, Stephen Lloyd, did. Here’s his report with a few photographs:

This was my first time at the Origins conference organised by the Creation Biology Society and the Creation Geology Society.

The conference this year was held at Patrick Henry College, a Christian College in Purcellville, Virginia, about a one hour drive from Washington DC.

The first day of the conference was taken up with a field trip to the Shenandoah National Park. As we drove across the Blue Ridge Mountains we learnt about the local geology and ecology and we also had plenty of time to talk.

The technical sessions the following day covered geology, biology and theology. One of the highlights for me was John Whitmore’s talk on deformation features in the Coconino sandstone that provide further evidence of its formation in water.

In the evening we were treated to an overview of various key topics. Kurt Wise set out the current state of the Catastrophic Plate Tectonics model and Andrew Snelling explained the latest creationist thinking on radiometric dating including proposals for the further work that is needed. Todd Wood discussed various approaches to creation biology and summarised the progress that has been made. He also set out a stimulating new framework for creation biology research that derives from a biblical doctrine of creation rather than the questions that arise in responding to evolution.

Steve Austin finished the (long!) evening giving a fascinating account of his ongoing research on Dead Sea sediments that provide evidence for earthquakes in Israel’s history, including the one associated with the crucifixion in AD 33.

The final day was open to the public with various speakers invited to address different areas of theological importance for creation. Topics included the alleged mythical character of Genesis 1-3 and the historicity of Adam. I finished the conference giving a talk entitled: ‘Flood Theology: why does Noah’s flood matter?’

Conference abstracts and powerpoint presentations from some of the theology talks can be downloaded from the Creation Biology Society website.

Sorry, but I just couldn’t resist sharing this. Hilarious.

Courtesy of Velica and with a hat tip to Robert Yerby for drawing it to my attention.

Just a quick plug today. The latest edition of CMI‘s Creation magazine (Vol. 34, No.4, October 2012) is out now and it features my article on ‘The Church Fathers and the Genesis Flood’ (pp. 14-15). Check out the contents here.

In this week’s Nature, Meave Leakey and others (2012) describe new fossils from Koobi Fora, northern Kenya, that clarify the taxonomic status of KNM-ER 1470, the type specimen of Homo rudolfensis. Ever since 1470 was discovered in 1972, there has been controversy about whether it belonged with other lower Pleistocene Homo fossils in a single, highly variable species or whether it provided evidence of multiple species of early Homo. This new study supports the multiple species hypothesis. Assuming that these early Homo species are members of the human holobaramin, it seems that post-Babel humanity underwent quite a bit of diversification and that modern human variability is much diminished from what it was in the past.

Elsewhere, Mitchell et al. (2012) present a new phylogenetic analysis suggesting that the modern pterobranch hemichordates known as rhabdopleurids should be regarded as extant graptolites, a group otherwise known only from fossils. The authors state that “Rhabdopleura nests among the benthic, encrusting graptolite taxa as it shares all of the synapomorphies that unite the graptolites.” Now I think that Rhabdopleura as a living graptolite is quite exciting. Graptolites are important zonal fossils for the Lower to Mid Palaeozoic, and were thought to be long extinct. Take my word for it: if this were a dinosaur or something it would be a big deal.

References

Leakey M.G. and six others. 2012. New fossils from Koobi Fora in northern Kenya confirm taxonomic diversity in early Homo. Nature 488:201–204.

Mitchell C.E. and three others. 2012. Phylogenetic analysis reveals that Rhabdopleura is an extant graptolite. Lethaia DOI: 10.1111/j.1502-3931.2012.00319.x.

This story is a few days old now, but I thought it was worth drawing attention to it all the same.

One of the great successes of the standard big bang model is its ability to predict the abundances of light elements observed in the universe. According to the standard model, the light elements (hydrogen, helium and lithium) were produced by nuclear fusion in the first few minutes of the big bang 13.7 billion years ago. And in the case of hydrogen and helium the predictions of the standard model appear to be confirmed to a high degree of accuracy.

But there has always been a problem with lithium: there simply doesn’t seem to be enough. In fact, observed lithium levels are three or four times lower than the standard model predicts. So the unresolved question is: where did all the primordial lithium go?

Now a study in the 13 July edition of Physical Review Letters complicates the matter further. Fabio Iocco of Stockholm University and Miguel Pato of the Technical University of Munich have found that microquasars – small black holes left behind by supernovae – may be a potential source of lithium. As matter spirals into the black hole, it approaches the speed of light and is heated up to 100 billion degrees Kelvin. Under such conditions, lithium can be produced by the collision of pairs of helium nuclei, and ejected out into space.

Iocco and Pato calculate that if such microquasars make up just one percent of the stellar-mass black holes in our galaxy, then this mechanism could have produced as much lithium as the big bang. Iocco adds a proviso: “We do not claim to know that microquasars necessarily have that kind of yield. But our provocative message is that physics could allow it.”

If confirmed, this finding would exacerbate the problem of the missing primordial lithium and may suggest that the standard model is in need of some modification.

Reference

Iocco F., Pato M. 2012. Lithium synthesis in microquasar accretion. Physical Review Letters 109:021102.

Spotted this in our local Oxfam charity shop the other day:

If you can’t read the Oxfam label it says:

LIZARDS OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
by I. Skinks
First edition
£15

Well it made me chuckle.

I want to commend to you an excellent article by Roger Nicole on the Founders Ministries website. Entitled ‘Polemic theology: how to deal with those who differ from us’, it does what it says on the tin. Structured around three questions – (1) What do I owe the person who differs from me? (2) What can I learn from the person who differs from me? and (3) How can I cope with the person who differs from me? – it offers some superb advice on handling matters of controversy.

Although it has as its focus areas of theological disagreement and is not addressed specifically to the creation-evolution controversy (which encompasses scientific disagreements as well), it doesn’t take too much imagination to apply the principles that the article sets out in that area also. And if they were, perhaps the whole landscape of the origins debate (among believers at least) might be transformed, and in a good way.

It’s a searching and challenging article, and complements Todd Wood’s recent contribution, ‘Surrender’, on the Colossian Forum.

Of course, as I read these articles, I ask myself whether I have personally lived up to these standards, and know that I have not. May God grant me – indeed all of us – a fresh measure of his Spirit to do so.

HT: Steve Jeffery on Facebook for drawing Roger Nicole’s article to my attention.

It was probably never going to end well.

I predicted a couple of weeks ago that the new Giant’s Causeway visitor centre was going to prove controversial because it dared to mention creationism. And so it proved. Never mind that the entire exhibition presents the geology of the causeway from the mainstream perspective and that the only mention of creationism is a modest acknowledgement that some people don’t accept the mainstream view. This was sufficient to reduce hordes of crusading anti-creationists to red-faced apoplexy. So it is unsurprising that the National Trust has today announced that it will be reviewing its exhibit, presumably with a view to appeasing its critics.

To be honest I feel rather sorry for the National Trust, which was probably trying to make its new visitor centre a model of inclusiveness. Sadly they failed to anticipate just how irrational “rationalists” can be.

Coming up very soon is Origins 2012, the annual joint conference of the Creation Biology Society and the Creation Geology Society, which takes place this year at Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia. The full conference schedule (including some special bonus talks) is now available on the CBS website.

Once again, creation is being hotly debated among evangelicals, and now you have the chance to consider these issues for yourself. At the ORIGINS 2012 conference, July 26-27, creation scientists will gather in northern Virginia to present their latest cutting-edge research. Then on Saturday, July 28th, seven creationist theologians from Europe and America will address the vital importance of Genesis. This conference is ideal for Christian pastors, teachers, students and those struggling to make sense of science and the Bible.

I’m sorry to say that I can’t make the conference this year and I shall miss being there very much. But I’d certainly encourage anyone who can make it to do so. I’m sure you won’t be disappointed.