As my patrons know, I have been dealing with the subject of creationism v. evolution for the last 40 years. Although I have not written a book specifically on evolution, I have included critiques of it in my books, Scientific Heresies and A Commentary on Genesis 1-11, in addition to numerous treatments in published and unpublished articles. After reading Salkeld’s paper, I was amazed at the total misrepresentation of the creation side of the story and the modern science that backs it up. I was also alarmed by Bishop Robert Barron, who Salkeld cites for support, with his cavalier attitude of Scripture; and how Jimmy Akin, who Salkeld also cites, takes sides against the traditional requirement concerning the unanimous consent of the Fathers. The straw that broke the camel’s back was when I read Salkeld had the audacity to accuse creationists of being part of a “conspiracy theory,” yet, by his own admission, he had refused to answer any of their challenges. It was then I decided to write a thorough critique of his paper. When someone says he gives himself the right to spout his own beliefs but will not answer any challenges, this puts a whole different light on who and what we are dealing with. With that said, I will answer Salkeld’s paper line-by-line, including an analysis of Bishop Robert Barron views and Jimmy Akin when Salkeld makes reference to them. Before we start, look at this 7:00 minute video in which a staunch Ph.D. educated evolutionist converted to creationism based on the science brought to him by a young girl in his classroom.
Read Full Article (PDF)