Creation News and Bob's Brown Palace Debate

Date: Jul 18, 2014 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* RSR on Science News & Bob's Important Debate: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams start off having fun reporting on the latest science news from Creation magazine and then get sidetracked playing a funny clip of audio from theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical) Lawrence Krauss. Well, that reminds Fred of Bob's debate from last week with theologian James White at Denver's historic Brown Palace hotel and then the startling debate aftermath. A beloved theologian, R.C. Sproul Jr. (and son of his namesake theologian father) and Dr. James White himself, in damage control and contradiction to admissions made repeatedly in the debate, both men have now denied, tragically, God the Son's humanity. For the context, you may want to first listen to the debate embedded here, and then read the post-debate comments from White and Sproul below...

 

* BEL Broadcasting James White's Open Theism Debate: By broadcasting last week's open theism debate between Dr. James White and Pastor Bob Enyart, that event before a live audience of 150 people at Denver's Brown Palace hotel is now being heard by a few thousand people tuning in to America's most powerful Christian radio station, Colorado's 50,000-watt AM 670 KLTT. The nationwide audience listening via our own KGOV.com should bring the listenership to more than 10,000 people. Adding to those efforts at dissemination, with the entire debate available right now at opentheism.org, and with the soon-to-be-released paperback and Kindle and e-book versions to be sold at Amazon.com and elsewhere, we are praying that more than 100,000 people will be edified by this historic event. Please pray!

QuakeFinder's Bleier on Earthquake Prediction

Date: Jul 11, 2014 Length: 28:17
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* To Save Lives and Understand the World: The mission of QuakeFinder is to save lives by finding a way to forecast major earthquakes. Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart interviews Tom Bleier, a QuakeFinder official. Bleier is vice president of aerospace engineering firm Stellar Solutions which operates QuakeFinder as a humanitarian research project.

Stephen Meyer Rebutting Critics on RSR

Date: Jul 4, 2014 Length: 30:56
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Post-Show Note: The CRSQ creation science journal has published Bob Enyart's review of Darwin's Doubt

* Paperback of New York Times Bestseller Released: RSR continues the discussion with old-earth anti-evolutionist Dr. Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute on the his instant bestseller, Darwin's Doubt. [Hear the first interview.] Amazon.com has about 500 reviews of this significant Intelligent Design (ID) movement book. Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart talks with Dr. Meyer about the more prominent critiques which are answered in a new chapter that now appears in the paperback release of Darwin's Doubt.

Location of the James White vs. Bob Enyart Open Theism Debate* Tuesday Night Open Theism Debate Enyart vs. White: Well-known theologian James White will debate Bob Enyart, the pastor of Denver Bible Church on Open Theism: Is the future settled or open? On Tuesday evening, July 8 at 6:30 p.m., the debate will be held downtown Denver at Colorado's historic Brown Palace hotel. If you're in the state, or can be, you are cordially invited to come on out and we'll have a great time in the Lord! Admission is free and seats for 100 attendees are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Quoting OpenTheism.org, "Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not settled but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative." That is, God can forever think new thoughts, design new works, write new songs. He has not exhausted His creativity and never will for. Of His kingdom there will be no end and thus by God's everlasting freedom and abilities, the future cannot be settled but must be open. In the meantime, check out Bob's previous efforts by clicking on the "Debate" tab at OpenTheism.org.

Darwin's Doubt by Dr. Stephen Meyer interviews on Real Science Radio* Bob's 2011 Comment Prefiguring Meyer: Part II of Stephen Meyer's 2013 book is about "The Cambrian Information Explosion", genes, epigenetics, etc. In a comment to an evolutionist on TheologyOnline.com in 2011, Bob wrote Alate_One, "And as for [Charles Doolittle] Walcott and the Cambrian Explosion, adding to his being stunned by the complexity of life so low in the geologic column, I imagine you've thought through the stunning discoveries in molecular biology that supercharges the 'explosive' part of all that variety?"

* Stephen Meyers is Not a Creationist: Sadly, Dr. Meyer, along with virtually all the Christians in the ID community, rejects the young earth as well as the need to take the scriptural account of the global flood as literal. As a further result, typically, old-earth Christians also reject the literality of many divine interventions taught in the Bible, including about the Tower of Babel, the creation of the Earth before the stars, etc. So, sadly, it is incorrect to refer to them as creationists. Still, we love those guys and pray for them!

* A Shared Antagonist Eugenie Scott: Dr. Meyer seemed interested in the claims made by anti-creationist anthropologist Dr. Eugenie Scott when debating Bob Enyart on national TV. Hear these select soundbites from Eugenie Scott, an adversary of both Meyer's ID community and Enyart's creationist allies. In 1998, answering Enyart's repeated request for her best evidence for evolution, Eugenie said that the non-coding regions of DNA were affirmatively known to be useless, that further research would not show otherwise, and so that Junk DNA was great evidence against the existence of a Creator. (Of course, as offered for decades by virtually the entire evolution community, that is not an argument based on the laws of science, but a metaphysical argument, based on what a Creator may or may not be inclined to do; and the irony of it all, is that the this neo-Darwinian assumption retarded the advancement of science, for many years, as an evolutionary bias set in against recognizing function in the regions of DNA that did not code for protein.

RSR's List of Shocked Evolutionists

Date: Jun 27, 2014 Length: 30:50
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Jaw-dropping, head-banging, surprise, shocked & stunned: Really. :) Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories.

* Head-banging: As reported by LiveScience, cutting-edge researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment admitted that, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the (supposed) tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim. Of the 60 species of algae being studied for a five year period, Charles Darwin predicted how well and how poorly such organisms would compete for resources, based on their respective distances from each other on the (supposed) tree of life. But of the outcome, "It was completely unexpected. We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin's hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right? ... We should be able to look at the [supposed] Tree of Life, and evolution should make it clear who will win in competition and who will lose. But the traits that regulate competition can't be predicted from the Tree of Life." For more, see LiveScience and rsr.org/darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life.

* Horrendous: Dr. David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in the journal Nature that the human and chimp Y chromosomes are "horrendously different from each other." Horrendously? Is that a scientific term? Why not just, "different?" Is Saturn horrendously different from Mars? Why horrendously so? Because for modern Darwinism to not lose face, chimps have to be shown to be our closest relatives. Yet 15% of the gorilla genome is closer to us, and the chimp's Y chromosome (that which makes us males... well, males...) is so massively different that we have yet more evidence on its face that the human genome is not 98.5% identical to the chim. For more, see rsr.rog/list-of-genomes-that-just-dont-fit.

* Jaw-dropping: National Geographic quotes NASA's Messenger team member David Blewett saying, as RSR documents evolutionary scientists saying all the time regarding major observations that contradict predictions based on their most fundamental claims, "this jaw-dropping thing that nobody ever predicted," that Mercury has actively forming surface features, something judged impossible for a tiny, four-billion year old inert rock. :)

* And the Beat Goes On: For more really, really fun examples, just listen to today's program!

Location of the James White vs. Bob Enyart Open Theism Debate* Bob's Upcoming Open Theism Debate with James White: Well-known theologian James White will debate Bob Enyart, the pastor of Denver Bible Church on Open Theism: Is the future settled or open? On Tuesday evening, July 8 at 6:30 p.m., the debate will be held downtown Denver at Colorado's historic Brown Palace hotel. If you're in the state, or can be, you are cordially invited to come on out and we'll have a great time in the Lord! Seats are available on a first-come, first-serve basis. Quoting OpenTheism.org, "Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not settled but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative." That is, God can forever think new thoughts, design new works, write new songs. He has not exhausted His creativity and never will for. Of His kingdom there will be no end and thus by God's everlasting freedom and abilities, the future cannot be settled but must be open. In the meantime, check out Bob's previous efforts by clicking on the "Debate" tab at OpenTheism.org.

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?Today's Resource: Please check out our newest science resource...

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing!

What Do Thorns Have To Do With It?

Date: Jun 25, 2014 Length: 27:30
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* A Special Episode of Real Science Radio: Bob Enyart gives a run down of how far many Christian organizations, from Christianity Today (see magazine cover, right), to most of the major Christian colleges, have run from the many biblical teachings on the history of the Earth. For example, they tend to reject the six literal days of creation; the order of the days; no death before Adam; no thorns before the Fall; the global flood; the Tower of Babel; painless childbirth before the Fall; that God made man from the dust of the ground; and even the the fall of Jericho, Joshua's battles, Abraham's ancestry through Noah to Adam, the book of Jonah, and many other historical events recorded in the Bible. See more at rsr.org/christianity-today.

* Post-show SCOTUS Update: With a direct connection to Bob Enyart Live, the U.S. Supreme Court today struck down the Massachusettes "bubble law" which criminalized pro-lifers who attempted to leaflet or speak to people on the public sidewalk in front of an abortion mill. What is the connection to BEL? One of our occasional guest hosts, Jo Scott, was falsely convicted for a violation of Colorado's bubble law, and in her current appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, filed by KGOV friend and attorney Rebecca Messall, the brief directs the justices to go online to see the "evidence video" used in court against Jo at kgov.com/jo-scott-evidence-video.

John Hartnett on Galaxy Brightness

Date: Jun 20, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Google: evidence against the big bang, and click on the RSR article at kgov.com!* Physicist John Hartnett on the Surface Brightness of Galaxies: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews one of the creators of the most precise clock ever madeby human beings, physicist John Hartnett, on evidence that appears to contradict one of the most fundamental claims of the big bang. It turns out that surface brightness of furthest galaxies is identical to that of the nearest galaxies! A 2014 physics journal paper reports careful observations of about a thousand galaxies that fundamentally contradict the prediction of the big bang. Astrophysicists led by Eric Lerner from Lawrenceville Plasma Physics published, UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local universe to z ~ 5 , (i.e., to very far away) and found that, as reported in Sci-News, "Contrary to the prediction of the Big Bang theory, they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical." And further, "It is amazing that the predictions of this simple formula are as good as the predictions of the expanding Universe theory, which include complex corrections for hypothetical dark matter and dark energy," said one of the study's co-authors, Dr Renato Falomo of the Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Italy.

* Post-show Note -- Atheists Boot Bob: Tolerance by the atheists at RationalSkepticism.org lasted until Bob's 27th post. Was Bob the victim of spam entrapment? :) Get the links and see the story below...

RSR: When Did Adam and Eve Sin?

Date: Jun 13, 2014 Length: 30:43
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* The Timing of the Fall in the Garden of Eden: Today is Friday, June 13, 2014. Thanks for tuning in to Real Science Radio! We depart from our normal science programming to ask you a question: How soon after their creation on day six did Adam and Eve sin? It turns out that there are clues from biology, Scripture, and history that help to answer that question. In Creation magazine, in the article, Why Bible History Matters, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati makes three observations that provide a time frame.

   1. Adam and Eve did not conceive any children prior to the Fall
   2. Eve would likely have become pregnant during her first menstrual cycle
   3. Lucifer also would have rebelled in the short time between Creation and the Fall

Bob Enyart's verse-by-verse study of Genesis 3Recognizing that Adam and Eve fell prior to conceiving their first child is the primary realization for chronicling the earliest days in human history. Our Bible study album, Genesis: The Fall, makes these and other biblical, biological, and historical observations (some of which are presented below) that may further narrow the timing of the fall of Adam and Lucifer. Scripturally, Dr. Sarfati is on solid ground concluding that Satan fell in that short time period. For as traditionally understood, the passage interpreted as Satan's fall in Ezekiel 28 says about Lucifer that, "You were in Eden, the garden of God." And in Isaiah 14, the parallel passage about the perfect and wise Lucifer, “you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven… I will ascend above the heights of the clouds…"

Lucifer was "fallen from heaven," not geographically, for He was on the Earth in the Garden of Eden coveting to rise above the clouds and ascend of his own will into heaven. So he fell not from heaven, but from God's kingdom of heaven, which initially encompassed everything created, including, in a special way, our planet's surface, which God prepared for the kingdom of heaven on Earth. For Lucifer was, "perfect… from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you." And prior to his temptation of Eve, he was not cursed to be lower than the animals, and prior to Eve's fall he was not at enmity with Eve nor with her future descendants. For God said, "Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all cattle… And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed."

Real Science Radio Goes To Math Class

Date: Jun 6, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* How Einstein and Others Can Use Their Minds To Make Discoveries: As pointed out by author James Nickel, mathematicians turn away from the physical universe and yet make astounding discoveries that help to explain the world of matter and energy. Using their minds, rather than microscopes or telescopes, these discoveries come decades and even centuries before their real-world counterparts make the discovery by observational science, or before technological advance enables confirmation. RSR suggests as an example mathematician and astronomer Joseph-Louis Lagrange who discovered the gravitationally stable Lagrange Points where today we position our most important exploratory satellites. Lagrange was born in Turin, Italy in 1736 and discovered these points with his mind. Time Magazine's Albert Einstein: The Enduring Legacy says that today's "high precision instruments such as atomic clocks and lasers... have shown that he was absolutely on target with the equations he worked out with nothing more than a pencil." And describing an Einstein visit in 1931 to California's Mount Wilson Observatory where Edwin Hubble had been making astronomy history with a 100-inch reflecting telescope, Richard Lacayo writes for Time that, "When the astronomers there boasted that their telescope could probe the structure of the universe, Elsa quipped: 'My husband does that on the back of an old envelope.'"

* Einstein's Lab Where He Discovered Special Relativity: Materialists often claim though, along with many similar atheist cliches, that you can only know that which your five senses tell you. (But which of their five senses told them that?) For today's atheists are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the reality of logic, with the existence of truth, and even with information itself.

* Einstein Confuses Lawrence Krauss: As an extraordinary example of today's atheists trying to distance themselves from the realm of ideas, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss (emphasis on the theoretical), in his book A Universe from Nothing, attempts to refute the phenomenon described by Nickel, that mathematicians often use their minds, rather than scientific equipment, to make astounding discoveries of the physical universe. In support of his denial, he presents an anecdote about Albert Einstein which, even in Krauss' own telling, EXACTLY contradicts Krauss' own reason for telling the story. Einstein used telescopes, yes, to make an astronomical observation, yes, but NOT to form his theory, for his theory had already been written on paper. Discover magazine's Richard Panek explains:

In the late 17th century, Isaac Newton helped inaugurate a scientific revolution by taking Galileo's observations of the heavens' motions and expressing them mathematically. Then in the early 20th century, Albert Einstein helped inaugurate a second scientific revolution by reversing that process, taking his own calculations and looking for their physical expression in the heavens.

* Rather Touchy Atheists: Atheists are rather touchy on this subject. For example, when this RSR article was first posted, we provided Cherenkov radiation as an example of a pre-discovery as already described for years on Wikipedia. Yet shortly after we made that point (and the link), the Wikipedia article was edited (as happens, including for example when we posted about mammoths) to downplay the extraordinary significance of the prediction of this radiation made in the 1880s by Oliver Heaviside! But to take this further, this self-taught physicist also illustrated the main point of this article when he realized that complex numbers which include the imaginary square root of -1 were useful in describing electrical circuits! In the Krauss' example above, Einstein used his eyes to make an observation to confirm the theory he already established with his mind. For Einstein is not renowned for his eyesight but for his intellect.

* Comprehending What Einstein Said Was Incomprehensible: Einstein wrote that it was "incomprehensible" that the non-physical realm of "ideas" could even exist in a physical world. It was incomprehensible to him that non-physical mathematics, which itself is not composed of matter or energy, could describe so beautifully the physical universe. (Richard Walker, in his value-added re-airing of today's RSR program on Boston's WROL radio, mentioned an article with a title that reiterates Einstein's point, The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, by Nobel-prize winning physicist Eugene Wigner.) The explanation for this phenomenon is one that Einstein (and Krauss) reject a priori. Mankind can understand the correspondence between pure ideas and physical phenomenon only by the realization that the universe was designed in the mind of God. So its workings can be discovered by the mind of men who are made in God's image. However, Einstein denied the existence of a personal God. Yet in more accurate science, as Kepler is paraphrased, we are thinking God's thoughts after Him.

* Astounding and Unexpectedly Beautiful Equations: E = mc2. Exploring unexpected and even startling symmetry and patterns from the microscopic to the galactic scale, mathematicians often describe their work as an aesthetic pursuit of beauty, as Lacayo quotes Einstein that relativity was his "most beautiful discovery." Similarly, scientists enjoy the inverse square law, the beauty of Maxwell's equations, and of Boltzmann's formula for entropy, which is even engraved on his tombstone. And as math becomes increasingly purely theoretical, it seems to do an even better job at describing reality, as with the use of the square root of negative one, not only as in describing electrical circuits in the 1800s, but also today for describing quantum mechanics. Ludwig von Mises similarly writes in Human Action, that contemporary philosophers "are entirely wrong in their endeavors to reject any kind of a priori knowledge and to characterize logic, mathematics and [economics] as empirical and experimental disciplines. ... Moreover, it is not experience but thinking alone which teaches us that, and in what instances, it is necessary to investigate unrealizable hypothetical conditions in order to conceive what is going on in the real world" pp. 32, 65.) So ignoring their five senses, the mathematicians who turn away from the physical world to the non-material world of ideas, seeking pleasure from pure intellectual elegance, often end up being the ones who come closest to describing the physical nature of the cosmos. Atheists struggle with this phenomena because it suggests that the universe originated with the desire for beauty in the mind of a personal Creator.

* Mathematics Useless for Moral Truth: Conversely, while math helps man to understand physical reality, it is no use whatsoever regarding moral truth. Moral understanding never involves numbers. As American Right To Life put it in their Albert Einstein: In His Own Words article:

Earth & Mercury's Decaying Magnetic Fields

Date: May 30, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Boy do the atheists have a problem: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews physicist Russell Humphreys on the Earth and Mercury's rapidly decaying magnetic fields, and on Dr. Humphrey's fulfilled predictions about the magnetism of the distant planets Uranus and Neptune. With Earth losing 10% of it's magnetic field in just the last 150 years, and Mercury's even faster drop, materialists have to appeal, once again, to claims of wildly coincidental occurrences to explain our observation of such rapid loss on planets that are allegedly billions of years old.

* From the Popular RSR Site YoungEarth.com:

* Earth's Magnetic Field Decay: As summarized by University of Maryland geophysicist Daniel Lathrop, “In particular, over the last 150 years or so, the Earth’s magnetic field has declined in strength about ten percent, and continues to decline in strength [as is evident] every time people go and make new measurements.” Creationists point out that this rapid decay is not expected in such a brief snapshot in time if our planet were 4.6 billion years old. On the other hand, these careful, long-term, and worldwide measurements that document the rapidly decreasing strength of Earth's magnetic field are consistent with a young Earth. Lathrop, not surprisingly, is an old-earth geophysicist who nonetheless acknowledged this data at the opening of and midway through the 2013 program Magnetic Shield, an episode of The Weather Channel's Secrets of the Earth with theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), Michio Kaku.

RSR's Annual Soft Tissue Show: The Deniers

Date: May 23, 2014 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Real Science Radio DNA logo* Soft Tissue Deniers / Science Deniers: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams list the soft tissue deniers, aka the science deniers, among leading evolutionists, media outlets, and anti-creation websites.

* RSR's List of Soft Tissue Deniers (and Doubters): This brief representative list documents the evolutionist science deniers and doubters for this specific topic. We'll occasionally update it and if any of these popular evolutionists sends a retraction or clarification to RSR, we'll note it here.

After two decades of extensive research and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, soft tissue deniers seem to be the rule rather than the exception among atheists and evolutionists. (Further, as of April 2014, the existence of dinosaur soft tissue, likely the greatest paleobiology discovery ever, remains virtually unknown to the general public as anyone can extrapolate by asking a few dozen people. RSR is working toward educating the public through radio shows, websites, and by presenting the information in easy-to-use formats.)

Soft tissue deniers (and such science doubters) include:

- Smithsonian Dinosaur Expert Brian Switek: This evolutionist, as late at Sept. 27, 2012, wrote, "The supposed dinosaur leftovers may be microfossils created by bacterial biofilms..."

- Oxford-educated widely-published anti-creation activist Paul Braterman: On March 8, 2014,  wrote, "despite much hype the only surviving material is in the form of a collagen-bone composite.” (Prof. Braterman is a British Eugenie Scott and made his claim even after browsing our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue, which is the world's most complete catalog of such findings.)

- Anti-creationist YouTube star AronRa: Just click the link and then just search for: No. :)

- RationalWiki: The science deniers over at the atheist, anti-creation RationalWiki.org, as late as May 14, 2014, are still denying the overwhelming hard science that has documented the existence of endogenous, extant dinosaur soft tissue. :)

- Talk Origins quote from their Age of the Earth article as accessed on March 2, 2012 though May 23, 2014:

"Answers in Genesis claims that paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found 'obvious, fresh-looking blood cells' and traces of blood protein hemoglobin in a Tyrannosaurus rex bone… all these claims are absolutely false." -Talk Origins :)

- League of Reason moderators and members (click and search for: soft).

Real Science Radio

Real Science RadioBest of Real Science Radio

Welcome to Real Science Radio: with co-hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams who talk about science to debunk evolution and to show the evidence for the creator God including from biology, geology, astronomy, and physics. (For example, mutations will give you bad legs long before you'd get good wings.) Not only do we get to debate Darwinists and atheists like Lawrence Krauss, AronRa, and Eugenie Scott, and easily take potshots from popular evolutionists like PZ Myers, Phil Plait, and Jerry Coyne, but we also occasionally interview the outstanding scientists who dare to challenge today's accepted creed that nothing created everything.

Creation News and Bob's Brown Palace Debate

Date: Jul 18, 2014 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* RSR on Science News & Bob's Important Debate: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams start off having fun reporting on the latest science news from Creation magazine and then get sidetracked playing a funny clip of audio from theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical) Lawrence Krauss. Well, that reminds Fred of Bob's debate from last week with theologian James White at Denver's historic Brown Palace hotel and then the startling debate aftermath. A beloved theologian, R.C. Sproul Jr. (and son of his namesake theologian father) and Dr. James White himself, in damage control and contradiction to admissions made repeatedly in the debate, both men have now denied, tragically, God the Son's humanity. For the context, you may want to first listen to the debate embedded here, and then read the post-debate comments from White and Sproul below...

 

* BEL Broadcasting James White's Open Theism Debate: By broadcasting last week's open theism debate between Dr. James White and Pastor Bob Enyart, that event before a live audience of 150 people at Denver's Brown Palace hotel is now being heard by a few thousand people tuning in to America's most powerful Christian radio station, Colorado's 50,000-watt AM 670 KLTT. The nationwide audience listening via our own KGOV.com should bring the listenership to more than 10,000 people. Adding to those efforts at dissemination, with the entire debate available right now at opentheism.org, and with the soon-to-be-released paperback and Kindle and e-book versions to be sold at Amazon.com and elsewhere, we are praying that more than 100,000 people will be edified by this historic event. Please pray!

QuakeFinder's Bleier on Earthquake Prediction

Date: Jul 11, 2014 Length: 28:17
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* To Save Lives and Understand the World: The mission of QuakeFinder is to save lives by finding a way to forecast major earthquakes. Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart interviews Tom Bleier, a QuakeFinder official. Bleier is vice president of aerospace engineering firm Stellar Solutions which operates QuakeFinder as a humanitarian research project.

Stephen Meyer Rebutting Critics on RSR

Date: Jul 4, 2014 Length: 30:56
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Post-Show Note: The CRSQ creation science journal has published Bob Enyart's review of Darwin's Doubt

* Paperback of New York Times Bestseller Released: RSR continues the discussion with old-earth anti-evolutionist Dr. Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute on the his instant bestseller, Darwin's Doubt. [Hear the first interview.] Amazon.com has about 500 reviews of this significant Intelligent Design (ID) movement book. Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart talks with Dr. Meyer about the more prominent critiques which are answered in a new chapter that now appears in the paperback release of Darwin's Doubt.

Location of the James White vs. Bob Enyart Open Theism Debate* Tuesday Night Open Theism Debate Enyart vs. White: Well-known theologian James White will debate Bob Enyart, the pastor of Denver Bible Church on Open Theism: Is the future settled or open? On Tuesday evening, July 8 at 6:30 p.m., the debate will be held downtown Denver at Colorado's historic Brown Palace hotel. If you're in the state, or can be, you are cordially invited to come on out and we'll have a great time in the Lord! Admission is free and seats for 100 attendees are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Quoting OpenTheism.org, "Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not settled but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative." That is, God can forever think new thoughts, design new works, write new songs. He has not exhausted His creativity and never will for. Of His kingdom there will be no end and thus by God's everlasting freedom and abilities, the future cannot be settled but must be open. In the meantime, check out Bob's previous efforts by clicking on the "Debate" tab at OpenTheism.org.

Darwin's Doubt by Dr. Stephen Meyer interviews on Real Science Radio* Bob's 2011 Comment Prefiguring Meyer: Part II of Stephen Meyer's 2013 book is about "The Cambrian Information Explosion", genes, epigenetics, etc. In a comment to an evolutionist on TheologyOnline.com in 2011, Bob wrote Alate_One, "And as for [Charles Doolittle] Walcott and the Cambrian Explosion, adding to his being stunned by the complexity of life so low in the geologic column, I imagine you've thought through the stunning discoveries in molecular biology that supercharges the 'explosive' part of all that variety?"

* Stephen Meyers is Not a Creationist: Sadly, Dr. Meyer, along with virtually all the Christians in the ID community, rejects the young earth as well as the need to take the scriptural account of the global flood as literal. As a further result, typically, old-earth Christians also reject the literality of many divine interventions taught in the Bible, including about the Tower of Babel, the creation of the Earth before the stars, etc. So, sadly, it is incorrect to refer to them as creationists. Still, we love those guys and pray for them!

* A Shared Antagonist Eugenie Scott: Dr. Meyer seemed interested in the claims made by anti-creationist anthropologist Dr. Eugenie Scott when debating Bob Enyart on national TV. Hear these select soundbites from Eugenie Scott, an adversary of both Meyer's ID community and Enyart's creationist allies. In 1998, answering Enyart's repeated request for her best evidence for evolution, Eugenie said that the non-coding regions of DNA were affirmatively known to be useless, that further research would not show otherwise, and so that Junk DNA was great evidence against the existence of a Creator. (Of course, as offered for decades by virtually the entire evolution community, that is not an argument based on the laws of science, but a metaphysical argument, based on what a Creator may or may not be inclined to do; and the irony of it all, is that the this neo-Darwinian assumption retarded the advancement of science, for many years, as an evolutionary bias set in against recognizing function in the regions of DNA that did not code for protein.

RSR's List of Shocked Evolutionists

Date: Jun 27, 2014 Length: 30:50
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Jaw-dropping, head-banging, surprise, shocked & stunned: Really. :) Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams have fun providing so many examples of evolutionists (chemical, stellar, biological) being jaw-dropping surprised, shocked, even stunned and horrified, when their huge discoveries contradict some of the most fundamental predictions of their materialist theories.

* Head-banging: As reported by LiveScience, cutting-edge researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment admitted that, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the (supposed) tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim. Of the 60 species of algae being studied for a five year period, Charles Darwin predicted how well and how poorly such organisms would compete for resources, based on their respective distances from each other on the (supposed) tree of life. But of the outcome, "It was completely unexpected. We sat there banging our heads against the wall. Darwin's hypothesis has been with us for so long, how can it not be right? ... We should be able to look at the [supposed] Tree of Life, and evolution should make it clear who will win in competition and who will lose. But the traits that regulate competition can't be predicted from the Tree of Life." For more, see LiveScience and rsr.org/darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life.

* Horrendous: Dr. David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in the journal Nature that the human and chimp Y chromosomes are "horrendously different from each other." Horrendously? Is that a scientific term? Why not just, "different?" Is Saturn horrendously different from Mars? Why horrendously so? Because for modern Darwinism to not lose face, chimps have to be shown to be our closest relatives. Yet 15% of the gorilla genome is closer to us, and the chimp's Y chromosome (that which makes us males... well, males...) is so massively different that we have yet more evidence on its face that the human genome is not 98.5% identical to the chim. For more, see rsr.rog/list-of-genomes-that-just-dont-fit.

* Jaw-dropping: National Geographic quotes NASA's Messenger team member David Blewett saying, as RSR documents evolutionary scientists saying all the time regarding major observations that contradict predictions based on their most fundamental claims, "this jaw-dropping thing that nobody ever predicted," that Mercury has actively forming surface features, something judged impossible for a tiny, four-billion year old inert rock. :)

* And the Beat Goes On: For more really, really fun examples, just listen to today's program!

Location of the James White vs. Bob Enyart Open Theism Debate* Bob's Upcoming Open Theism Debate with James White: Well-known theologian James White will debate Bob Enyart, the pastor of Denver Bible Church on Open Theism: Is the future settled or open? On Tuesday evening, July 8 at 6:30 p.m., the debate will be held downtown Denver at Colorado's historic Brown Palace hotel. If you're in the state, or can be, you are cordially invited to come on out and we'll have a great time in the Lord! Seats are available on a first-come, first-serve basis. Quoting OpenTheism.org, "Open Theism is the Christian doctrine that the future is not settled but open because God is alive, eternally free, and inexhaustibly creative." That is, God can forever think new thoughts, design new works, write new songs. He has not exhausted His creativity and never will for. Of His kingdom there will be no end and thus by God's everlasting freedom and abilities, the future cannot be settled but must be open. In the meantime, check out Bob's previous efforts by clicking on the "Debate" tab at OpenTheism.org.

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?Today's Resource: Please check out our newest science resource...

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set or HD Download

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing!

What Do Thorns Have To Do With It?

Date: Jun 25, 2014 Length: 27:30
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* A Special Episode of Real Science Radio: Bob Enyart gives a run down of how far many Christian organizations, from Christianity Today (see magazine cover, right), to most of the major Christian colleges, have run from the many biblical teachings on the history of the Earth. For example, they tend to reject the six literal days of creation; the order of the days; no death before Adam; no thorns before the Fall; the global flood; the Tower of Babel; painless childbirth before the Fall; that God made man from the dust of the ground; and even the the fall of Jericho, Joshua's battles, Abraham's ancestry through Noah to Adam, the book of Jonah, and many other historical events recorded in the Bible. See more at rsr.org/christianity-today.

* Post-show SCOTUS Update: With a direct connection to Bob Enyart Live, the U.S. Supreme Court today struck down the Massachusettes "bubble law" which criminalized pro-lifers who attempted to leaflet or speak to people on the public sidewalk in front of an abortion mill. What is the connection to BEL? One of our occasional guest hosts, Jo Scott, was falsely convicted for a violation of Colorado's bubble law, and in her current appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, filed by KGOV friend and attorney Rebecca Messall, the brief directs the justices to go online to see the "evidence video" used in court against Jo at kgov.com/jo-scott-evidence-video.

John Hartnett on Galaxy Brightness

Date: Jun 20, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Google: evidence against the big bang, and click on the RSR article at kgov.com!* Physicist John Hartnett on the Surface Brightness of Galaxies: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews one of the creators of the most precise clock ever madeby human beings, physicist John Hartnett, on evidence that appears to contradict one of the most fundamental claims of the big bang. It turns out that surface brightness of furthest galaxies is identical to that of the nearest galaxies! A 2014 physics journal paper reports careful observations of about a thousand galaxies that fundamentally contradict the prediction of the big bang. Astrophysicists led by Eric Lerner from Lawrenceville Plasma Physics published, UV surface brightness of galaxies from the local universe to z ~ 5 , (i.e., to very far away) and found that, as reported in Sci-News, "Contrary to the prediction of the Big Bang theory, they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical." And further, "It is amazing that the predictions of this simple formula are as good as the predictions of the expanding Universe theory, which include complex corrections for hypothetical dark matter and dark energy," said one of the study's co-authors, Dr Renato Falomo of the Osservatorio Astronomico di Padova, Italy.

* Post-show Note -- Atheists Boot Bob: Tolerance by the atheists at RationalSkepticism.org lasted until Bob's 27th post. Was Bob the victim of spam entrapment? :) Get the links and see the story below...

RSR: When Did Adam and Eve Sin?

Date: Jun 13, 2014 Length: 30:43
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* The Timing of the Fall in the Garden of Eden: Today is Friday, June 13, 2014. Thanks for tuning in to Real Science Radio! We depart from our normal science programming to ask you a question: How soon after their creation on day six did Adam and Eve sin? It turns out that there are clues from biology, Scripture, and history that help to answer that question. In Creation magazine, in the article, Why Bible History Matters, Dr. Jonathan Sarfati makes three observations that provide a time frame.

   1. Adam and Eve did not conceive any children prior to the Fall
   2. Eve would likely have become pregnant during her first menstrual cycle
   3. Lucifer also would have rebelled in the short time between Creation and the Fall

Bob Enyart's verse-by-verse study of Genesis 3Recognizing that Adam and Eve fell prior to conceiving their first child is the primary realization for chronicling the earliest days in human history. Our Bible study album, Genesis: The Fall, makes these and other biblical, biological, and historical observations (some of which are presented below) that may further narrow the timing of the fall of Adam and Lucifer. Scripturally, Dr. Sarfati is on solid ground concluding that Satan fell in that short time period. For as traditionally understood, the passage interpreted as Satan's fall in Ezekiel 28 says about Lucifer that, "You were in Eden, the garden of God." And in Isaiah 14, the parallel passage about the perfect and wise Lucifer, “you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven… I will ascend above the heights of the clouds…"

Lucifer was "fallen from heaven," not geographically, for He was on the Earth in the Garden of Eden coveting to rise above the clouds and ascend of his own will into heaven. So he fell not from heaven, but from God's kingdom of heaven, which initially encompassed everything created, including, in a special way, our planet's surface, which God prepared for the kingdom of heaven on Earth. For Lucifer was, "perfect… from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you." And prior to his temptation of Eve, he was not cursed to be lower than the animals, and prior to Eve's fall he was not at enmity with Eve nor with her future descendants. For God said, "Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all cattle… And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed."

Real Science Radio Goes To Math Class

Date: Jun 6, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* How Einstein and Others Can Use Their Minds To Make Discoveries: As pointed out by author James Nickel, mathematicians turn away from the physical universe and yet make astounding discoveries that help to explain the world of matter and energy. Using their minds, rather than microscopes or telescopes, these discoveries come decades and even centuries before their real-world counterparts make the discovery by observational science, or before technological advance enables confirmation. RSR suggests as an example mathematician and astronomer Joseph-Louis Lagrange who discovered the gravitationally stable Lagrange Points where today we position our most important exploratory satellites. Lagrange was born in Turin, Italy in 1736 and discovered these points with his mind. Time Magazine's Albert Einstein: The Enduring Legacy says that today's "high precision instruments such as atomic clocks and lasers... have shown that he was absolutely on target with the equations he worked out with nothing more than a pencil." And describing an Einstein visit in 1931 to California's Mount Wilson Observatory where Edwin Hubble had been making astronomy history with a 100-inch reflecting telescope, Richard Lacayo writes for Time that, "When the astronomers there boasted that their telescope could probe the structure of the universe, Elsa quipped: 'My husband does that on the back of an old envelope.'"

* Einstein's Lab Where He Discovered Special Relativity: Materialists often claim though, along with many similar atheist cliches, that you can only know that which your five senses tell you. (But which of their five senses told them that?) For today's atheists are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the reality of logic, with the existence of truth, and even with information itself.

* Einstein Confuses Lawrence Krauss: As an extraordinary example of today's atheists trying to distance themselves from the realm of ideas, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss (emphasis on the theoretical), in his book A Universe from Nothing, attempts to refute the phenomenon described by Nickel, that mathematicians often use their minds, rather than scientific equipment, to make astounding discoveries of the physical universe. In support of his denial, he presents an anecdote about Albert Einstein which, even in Krauss' own telling, EXACTLY contradicts Krauss' own reason for telling the story. Einstein used telescopes, yes, to make an astronomical observation, yes, but NOT to form his theory, for his theory had already been written on paper. Discover magazine's Richard Panek explains:

In the late 17th century, Isaac Newton helped inaugurate a scientific revolution by taking Galileo's observations of the heavens' motions and expressing them mathematically. Then in the early 20th century, Albert Einstein helped inaugurate a second scientific revolution by reversing that process, taking his own calculations and looking for their physical expression in the heavens.

* Rather Touchy Atheists: Atheists are rather touchy on this subject. For example, when this RSR article was first posted, we provided Cherenkov radiation as an example of a pre-discovery as already described for years on Wikipedia. Yet shortly after we made that point (and the link), the Wikipedia article was edited (as happens, including for example when we posted about mammoths) to downplay the extraordinary significance of the prediction of this radiation made in the 1880s by Oliver Heaviside! But to take this further, this self-taught physicist also illustrated the main point of this article when he realized that complex numbers which include the imaginary square root of -1 were useful in describing electrical circuits! In the Krauss' example above, Einstein used his eyes to make an observation to confirm the theory he already established with his mind. For Einstein is not renowned for his eyesight but for his intellect.

* Comprehending What Einstein Said Was Incomprehensible: Einstein wrote that it was "incomprehensible" that the non-physical realm of "ideas" could even exist in a physical world. It was incomprehensible to him that non-physical mathematics, which itself is not composed of matter or energy, could describe so beautifully the physical universe. (Richard Walker, in his value-added re-airing of today's RSR program on Boston's WROL radio, mentioned an article with a title that reiterates Einstein's point, The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, by Nobel-prize winning physicist Eugene Wigner.) The explanation for this phenomenon is one that Einstein (and Krauss) reject a priori. Mankind can understand the correspondence between pure ideas and physical phenomenon only by the realization that the universe was designed in the mind of God. So its workings can be discovered by the mind of men who are made in God's image. However, Einstein denied the existence of a personal God. Yet in more accurate science, as Kepler is paraphrased, we are thinking God's thoughts after Him.

* Astounding and Unexpectedly Beautiful Equations: E = mc2. Exploring unexpected and even startling symmetry and patterns from the microscopic to the galactic scale, mathematicians often describe their work as an aesthetic pursuit of beauty, as Lacayo quotes Einstein that relativity was his "most beautiful discovery." Similarly, scientists enjoy the inverse square law, the beauty of Maxwell's equations, and of Boltzmann's formula for entropy, which is even engraved on his tombstone. And as math becomes increasingly purely theoretical, it seems to do an even better job at describing reality, as with the use of the square root of negative one, not only as in describing electrical circuits in the 1800s, but also today for describing quantum mechanics. Ludwig von Mises similarly writes in Human Action, that contemporary philosophers "are entirely wrong in their endeavors to reject any kind of a priori knowledge and to characterize logic, mathematics and [economics] as empirical and experimental disciplines. ... Moreover, it is not experience but thinking alone which teaches us that, and in what instances, it is necessary to investigate unrealizable hypothetical conditions in order to conceive what is going on in the real world" pp. 32, 65.) So ignoring their five senses, the mathematicians who turn away from the physical world to the non-material world of ideas, seeking pleasure from pure intellectual elegance, often end up being the ones who come closest to describing the physical nature of the cosmos. Atheists struggle with this phenomena because it suggests that the universe originated with the desire for beauty in the mind of a personal Creator.

* Mathematics Useless for Moral Truth: Conversely, while math helps man to understand physical reality, it is no use whatsoever regarding moral truth. Moral understanding never involves numbers. As American Right To Life put it in their Albert Einstein: In His Own Words article:

Earth & Mercury's Decaying Magnetic Fields

Date: May 30, 2014 Length: 28:19
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

* Boy do the atheists have a problem: Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews physicist Russell Humphreys on the Earth and Mercury's rapidly decaying magnetic fields, and on Dr. Humphrey's fulfilled predictions about the magnetism of the distant planets Uranus and Neptune. With Earth losing 10% of it's magnetic field in just the last 150 years, and Mercury's even faster drop, materialists have to appeal, once again, to claims of wildly coincidental occurrences to explain our observation of such rapid loss on planets that are allegedly billions of years old.

* From the Popular RSR Site YoungEarth.com:

* Earth's Magnetic Field Decay: As summarized by University of Maryland geophysicist Daniel Lathrop, “In particular, over the last 150 years or so, the Earth’s magnetic field has declined in strength about ten percent, and continues to decline in strength [as is evident] every time people go and make new measurements.” Creationists point out that this rapid decay is not expected in such a brief snapshot in time if our planet were 4.6 billion years old. On the other hand, these careful, long-term, and worldwide measurements that document the rapidly decreasing strength of Earth's magnetic field are consistent with a young Earth. Lathrop, not surprisingly, is an old-earth geophysicist who nonetheless acknowledged this data at the opening of and midway through the 2013 program Magnetic Shield, an episode of The Weather Channel's Secrets of the Earth with theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical), Michio Kaku.

RSR's Annual Soft Tissue Show: The Deniers

Date: May 23, 2014 Length: 28:20
Download: Dialup / Broadband Stream: Dialup / Broadband Comment: at TheologyOnline

Real Science Radio DNA logo* Soft Tissue Deniers / Science Deniers: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams list the soft tissue deniers, aka the science deniers, among leading evolutionists, media outlets, and anti-creation websites.

* RSR's List of Soft Tissue Deniers (and Doubters): This brief representative list documents the evolutionist science deniers and doubters for this specific topic. We'll occasionally update it and if any of these popular evolutionists sends a retraction or clarification to RSR, we'll note it here.

After two decades of extensive research and publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals, soft tissue deniers seem to be the rule rather than the exception among atheists and evolutionists. (Further, as of April 2014, the existence of dinosaur soft tissue, likely the greatest paleobiology discovery ever, remains virtually unknown to the general public as anyone can extrapolate by asking a few dozen people. RSR is working toward educating the public through radio shows, websites, and by presenting the information in easy-to-use formats.)

Soft tissue deniers (and such science doubters) include:

- Smithsonian Dinosaur Expert Brian Switek: This evolutionist, as late at Sept. 27, 2012, wrote, "The supposed dinosaur leftovers may be microfossils created by bacterial biofilms..."

- Oxford-educated widely-published anti-creation activist Paul Braterman: On March 8, 2014,  wrote, "despite much hype the only surviving material is in the form of a collagen-bone composite.” (Prof. Braterman is a British Eugenie Scott and made his claim even after browsing our rsr.org/dinosaur-soft-tissue, which is the world's most complete catalog of such findings.)

- Anti-creationist YouTube star AronRa: Just click the link and then just search for: No. :)

- RationalWiki: The science deniers over at the atheist, anti-creation RationalWiki.org, as late as May 14, 2014, are still denying the overwhelming hard science that has documented the existence of endogenous, extant dinosaur soft tissue. :)

- Talk Origins quote from their Age of the Earth article as accessed on March 2, 2012 though May 23, 2014:

"Answers in Genesis claims that paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found 'obvious, fresh-looking blood cells' and traces of blood protein hemoglobin in a Tyrannosaurus rex bone… all these claims are absolutely false." -Talk Origins :)

- League of Reason moderators and members (click and search for: soft).

Syndicate content