AIG sponsoring new science website

ANSWERS RESEARCH JOURNAL
Peer reviewed papers will be published, but non creationists are frowned upon to be the reviewers

Here is one of the papers from the site (gotta love this term: creation microbiologists):

p7–10Microbes and the Days of Creation

by Alan L. Gillen

This paper may also be downloaded in full as a PDF.

The world of germs and microbes has received much attention in recent years. But where do microbes fit into the creation account? Were they created along with the rest of the plants and animals in the first week of creation, or were they created later, after the Fall? These are some questions that creation microbiologists have been asking in recent years. Ongoing research, based on the creation paradigm, appears to provide some answers to these puzzling questions. The answers to these questions are not explicit in Scripture, so the answers cannot be dogmatic. However, a reasonable extrapolation from biological data and Scripture can be made about the nature of microbes in a fully mature creation. This article attempts to provide reasonable answers to when microbes were created and is meant to stimulate discussion and further research in this area.

Very little has been written in Bible commentaries or in creation literature on the subject of when microbes were created. Some have postulated that microbes were created on a single day of Creation, such as Day Three—when the plants were made. This is partially due to the “seed-like” characteristics that bacteria and fungi have—therefore classifying microbes as plants. In addition, we observe microbes (such as Escherichia coli) isolated in the lab and we tend to think of microbes as individual entities much like birds or fish or animals and, therefore, created on a single day. However, in nature, the vast majority of microbes live in biological partnerships, not in total isolation. The natural symbiosis of microbes with other creatures is the norm. Therefore, we postulate that microbes were created as “biological systems” with plants, animals, and humans on multiple days, as supporting systems in mature plants, animals, and humans. This idea is further supported by the work of Francis (2003). Francis calls microbial symbiotic systems a biomatrix, or organosubstrate. He proposes that microbes were created as a link between macroorganisms and a chemically rich but inert physical environment, providing a surface (i.e., substrate) upon which multicellular creatures can thrive and persist in intricately designed ecosystems. From the beginning, God made His creation fully mature, and complex forms fully formed. This would ensure continuity and stability for the times to come. Although we cannot be certain as to specifically when the Creator made microbes, it is within His character to make entire interwoven, “packaged” systems to sustain and maintain life.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arj

[ubs]

Very little has been written in Bible commentaries or in creation literature on the subject of when microbes were created.

What is Sanskrit for microbe?

[Sternwallow]

ubs wrote

What is Sanskrit for microbe?

"."

It's like watching a chimps' tea party. They try their hardest to mimic us, but will never understand why they draw our amusement rather than respect.

Also, when we have patronised and mocked them hard enough, they will revert to throwing shit, masturbating and eating each others' parasites.

[ubs]

I wonder what the market rate is for a Evangelical Microbiologist? I'm betting it's higher than a standard Microbiologist. The supply has got to be pretty slim.

[nkb]

My big question is, what "ongoing research"? Apart from the balls of calling reading the Bible over and over "research", what "research" can you possibly do if microbes aren't mentioned in your texts?

Were microbes not mentioned in the Bible, because the people who wrote it didn't have a fucking clue that they existed, perhaps?

nkb wrote

My big question is, what "ongoing research"? Apart from the balls of calling reading the Bible over and over "research", what "research" can you possibly do if microbes aren't mentioned in your texts?

Were microbes not mentioned in the Bible, because the people who wrote it didn't have a fucking clue that they existed, perhaps?

Right Jacob, Ezekial, Myron--you guys look up every word that could remotely be construed as being small...

The rest of us will find every reference to disease--demon possession and mucus!

Quick! To the Bible!

[nkb]

Yes, but so is the demand.

[ubs]

nkb wrote

Yes, but so is the demand.

I don't know. 85% in this country, and while we aren't the sharpest pencils in the box, we do have money.

[Sternwallow]

baconeatingatheistjew wrote

ANSWERS RESEARCH JOURNAL
Peer reviewed papers will be published, but non creationists are frowned upon to be the reviewers

Here is one of the papers from the site (gotta love this term: creation microbiologists):

p7–10Microbes and the Days of Creation

by Alan L. Gillen

This paper may also be downloaded in full as a PDF.

The world of germs and microbes has received much attention in recent years. But where do microbes fit into the creation account? Were they created along with the rest of the plants and animals in the first week of creation, or were they created later, after the Fall? These are some questions that creation microbiologists have been asking in recent years. Ongoing research, based on the creation paradigm, appears to provide some answers to these puzzling questions. The answers to these questions are not explicit in Scripture, so the answers cannot be dogmatic. However, a reasonable extrapolation from biological data and Scripture can be made about the nature of microbes in a fully mature creation. This article attempts to provide reasonable answers to when microbes were created and is meant to stimulate discussion and further research in this area.

Very little has been written in Bible commentaries or in creation literature on the subject of when microbes were created. Some have postulated that microbes were created on a single day of Creation, such as Day Three—when the plants were made. This is partially due to the “seed-like” characteristics that bacteria and fungi have—therefore classifying microbes as plants. In addition, we observe microbes (such as Escherichia coli) isolated in the lab and we tend to think of microbes as individual entities much like birds or fish or animals and, therefore, created on a single day. However, in nature, the vast majority of microbes live in biological partnerships, not in total isolation. The natural symbiosis of microbes with other creatures is the norm. Therefore, we postulate that microbes were created as “biological systems” with plants, animals, and humans on multiple days, as supporting systems in mature plants, animals, and humans. This idea is further supported by the work of Francis (2003). Francis calls microbial symbiotic systems a biomatrix, or organosubstrate. He proposes that microbes were created as a link between macroorganisms and a chemically rich but inert physical environment, providing a surface (i.e., substrate) upon which multicellular creatures can thrive and persist in intricately designed ecosystems. From the beginning, God made His creation fully mature, and complex forms fully formed. This would ensure continuity and stability for the times to come. Although we cannot be certain as to specifically when the Creator made microbes, it is within His character to make entire interwoven, “packaged” systems to sustain and maintain life.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/arj

It bothers these quacks not in the least that all plants and animals and people are composed of assemblies of microbes(cells). If Genesis is right, microbes were created to make the plants one "day" and created another "day" to make the animals and yet another "day" to make humans. God had not gotten around to inventing the microscope that early in history, so He shouldn't be expected to know anything about microbes (bacteria, fungi, virii or ordinary cells).

Hi BEAJ. How's the jew side of things?

skribb wrote

Hi BEAJ. How's the jew side of things?

I'll be a Jew from the day I was born to the day I die. Can't help it. It is like having 2 balls and a penis.

Oh, and it is proper to capitalize the word "Jew," otherwise I'll have to get the JDL after you

I never said you could help being a Jew. You're the one who implied it's detrimental.

And about capitalising the word; I'm not sure whether to ask you to fuck off or to embrace my grammarlovin side and actually abide by the rules. Leaning towards the latter

I didn't imply it was detrimental. I said it is like having a penis and 2 balls, I think it would be detrimental if I didn't have a penis and at least one ball.

baconeatingatheistjew wrote

I didn't imply it was detrimental. I said it is like having a penis and 2 balls, I think it would be detrimental if I didn't have a penis and at least one ball.

It would cut your rate of pay by 20% for one thing.