Answers in Genesis
From EvoWiki
AiG, Answers in Genesis, started as an Australia-based creationist group which was considered by scientists as 'the best of a bad bunch'; while their a priori commitment to Biblical inerrancy and authority would always prevent them from doing real science, they did make more of an effort than most other YECs to identify and eliminate scientific errors in Creationist dogma. They used to have pages Arguments we think creationists should NOT use and Maintaining Creationist Integrity.
Recently, the US part of AIG, led by Ken Ham, split up with the rest, keeping the name "AIG" while the non-US AIG parts were renamed Creation Ministries International.
In the process, AIG eliminated the Maintaining Creationist Integrity page while CMI still has it [1]. Details about the split here [2].
Contents |
Example of AIG Self-Contradictions
For example, to answer that popular question, "Where did Cain's wife come from", AiG gives a very round-about answer that basically comes down to, "Humans were perfect at the beginning and have only seen genetic deterioration from the curse". To quote the site, "Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse)". In other words, they say it was perfectly OK for Cain to marry a sister as the genome was not corrupted at that point. There would have been no genetic defects, they say. [3]
Now let's consider this answer in light of some other answers on their site. For instance, on their own list of "Arguments we think Creationists should not use" [4] They suggest no Creationists argue that "There are no beneficial mutations."
In their own words:
- "There are no beneficial mutations."
- This is not true, since some changes do confer an advantage in some situations. Rather, we should say, “We have yet to find a mutation that increases genetic information, even in those rare instances where the mutation confers an advantage.” For examples of information loss being advantageous, see Beetle bloopers, New eyes for blind cave fish? and Is antibiotic resistance really due to increase in information?
So AiG admits that mutations can be both beneficial and harmful. From this then, we could possibly conclude that there are parts of our DNA that are in fact better than what Adam and Eve had. And if we can conclude that we have better DNA in some spots, then we can come full circle and realize that Adam and Eve never had "perfect" DNA to begin with. Therefore, looking at a broader picture, it is completely illegitimate for AiG to, in one breath claim Adam's DNA was perfect and then admit that beneficial mutations exist. Unless, of course, they think that the beneficial mutations were not possible until after the "curse."
AIG creationists
- Adrian Bates
- Bill Jack
- Buddy Davis
- Carl Kerby
- Carl Wieland
- David Catchpoole
- David Menton
- Don Batten
- Emil Silvestru
- Gary Parker
- Johan Kruger
- John Baumgardner
- Jonathan Sarfati
- Monty White
- Tas Walker
- Ted Driggers
- Terry Mortenson
- Gary Bates
- Geoff Stevens
- Henry de Roos
- Howard Schwartzman
- Ken Ham
- Mark Robertson
- Michael Oard
- Peter Sparrow
- Philip Bell
- Richard Fangrad
- Rubén Berra
- Skip Tilton
- Stacia McKeever
- Warwick Armstrong
