Rating: 
Summary: A less-than-inspiring format for a compelling topic
Review: "In Six Days", for those wishing to understand "young earth" creation theories, provides thought-provoking questions and answers. As with any book that looks at a highly charged issue, it is important to come to it with an open mind. That many reviewers here on both sides of the issue cannot keep from vehemently pointing fingers at each other says nothing about the actual content of "In Six Days", unfortunately, so I hope this review can find some middle ground. Rather than making this review simply another in a line of rabid apologetics for one side or the other, I hope to relate whether the book succeeds in accomplishing what it intends.To create this book, many Christian scientists (of various disciplines) from around the world were asked "Why do you believe in a literal six-day biblical creation as the origin of life on earth?" The fifty best responses ultimately were included. Sadly, this format makes "In Six Days" less than useful - on any level. The answers provided resemble testimonies rather than useful scientific analyses. Respondents tended to repeat each other, answer too generally, or (conversely) too technically on a single point. Further compounding the problems of the book, the great majority of the scientists refer to points outside their own discipline. If I were looking for serious answers to important questions about a six-day creation, would I want to read a mechanical engineer's musings on organic chemistry? Probably not. This book would be infinitely more helpful if the question had been posed as "What are five discoveries within your field of expertise that point specifically to a six-day creation?" But as phrased here, the original question automatically leads to unfocused answers. In truth, only about twenty of the respondents provide compelling arguments. Of those twenty, half spoke about ideas outside their disciplines. That doesn't leave the reader with much unimpeachable "ammunition" to counter evolutionists. This is not to say that nothing here satisfies. Twenty percent of the respondents had compelling information that either casts doubt on treasured pro-evolution precepts or supports a God-inspired young earth. Unfortunately, for those that have some passing knowledge of the Creation vs. Evolution hysteria, few of those ten scientists had anything new to contribute to the body of work out there already in the pro-creation community. For this reason, it must be assumed that this book is intended for people who have never explored the claims of creationists. Given some of the issues already mentioned, the result is less than stellar. And this is a shame since there are many excellent books that make strong arguments for the creation viewpoint. Several of the scientists quoted in "In Six Days" refer to these books. My question is then: "Why not skip 'In Six Days' and just read those more scholarly and better-constructed books?" One book, "Darwin's Black Box", was mentioned repeatedly - it's probably a good bet. If you have some knowledge of the debate, pass on this book. If you know someone who is asking questions and doesn't have a tremendously technical bent, "In Six Days" might work for them in spots. Otherwise, there are increasingly more pro-creation, young earth, and intelligent design books out there that offer the reader a better use of their time.
Rating: 
Summary: A scientist's review
Review: All the authors are, apparently, rigid creationists with a religious fever. They believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, in this case combining verses in Genesis that concern the creation of earth and Noah's flood to come up with 'proof' that man, earth and universe were created in six days several thousand years ago. For them to believe in God they must believe in every word written in the Bible, even if it goes against logic and generally accepted scientific theories. They begin with a 6-day belief and try substantiating it by 'proofs', corrupting science along the way. No one knows for sure what in reality happened all those many millenniums ago, for all are theories and hypotheses, but to me present day published scientific theories fit real world observations more closely than the young universe creation theory put forward in the book. The authors make amazing leaps of logic without any leading substantiation. They introduce the science of the own field, which is valid and all very well, and then they submit their own un-reviewed thoughts that they present as proof. The problem is that innocent and gullible people accept this as the truth and science as wrong and sinful. To me God and Science can co-exist. The authors also reference material from other creationists, in order to boost their own 'proofs'. I once went to a talk by one of the authors. I am a scientist myself and was curious to see what he had to say, but I could not believe the falsehoods, miss-interpretations and jumps in logic this speaker made in order to prove his view of reality; a disgrace to science and religion. On a positive note, the book is interesting in that it briefly explains some general peer-reviewed theories in the different scientific fields and introduces some VERY interesting questions that haven't yet been answered by science. However, the arguments leading to the conclusion that the universe, and all within, was created over a few thousand years ago are a load of rubbish. But then again, I could be wrong.
Rating: 
Summary: Is evolution fact or faith?
Review: An earlier reviewer correctly pointed out that creationists have a starting bias with which they use to interpret all data, but he mistakenly seemed to think that evolutionists are somehow more objective in their approach to science. This is a common picture presented to the general public, but is it true? As a previous reviewer documented, the idea of "objective" science exists only in the mind of young (naive and inexperienced) scientists and laymen. But don’t simply take my word for it. Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is a renowned champion of neo-Darwinism, and certainly one of the world's leaders in evolutionary biology. He recently wrote this very revealing comment. It illustrates the implicit philosophical bias against Genesis creation - regardless of whether or not the facts support it... So here we have one of the world’s leading evolutionists admitting what the general public was never told - that evolutionists have universally accepted a materialistic interpretation scheme as truth. All evidence stands or falls based upon it’s fit with the dogma of evolution. Any data that does not fit within this hypothetical framework is discarded or explained away...
Rating: 
Summary: A Wonderful Book
Review: As a serious student of this topic over the past years, I welcomed this book as the newest entrant in the debate. I've studied Dawkins, Lewontin, et al., and even read evolution textbooks. The only convincing and enduring themes I find among the evolutionist crowd is their vociferous belittling of anyone who claims to believe otherwise. If one needs immediate proof of this concept, just read some of the reviews on this book. Evolution is a theory. That is a fact. Darwin himself repeatedly referred to it as a theory, and in fact spoke often of problems with his theory. (read his book if you don't beleive me) In the 150 or so years since he wrote "origin of the species" the very problems Darwin himself alluded to have become overwhelming obstacles. Just because a group of prolific scientists now call evolution a "fact" does not make it so. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is controversial and far more complex than I will ever be able to understand. But there are many, many realities of our universe that are far better explained by the creation model than by the evolution model. This book does an excellent job of introducing some of those concerns to the reader. Both creation and evolution are belief systems. That fact is well supported by some of the quotes presented by another reviewer. The honest seeker of fact will do themselves justice by approaching this subject with that understanding in mind.
Rating: 
Summary: 50 versus over 50 million worldwide hmmmm...bad odds
Review: Awful trite boring repetitive. Insults the intelligence of the reader. A bright torch burning the way toward ignorance. Brings new meaning to the word dishonest.
Most people with a college level education should be able to see right through this...unless of course you majored in communications or religious studies.
Rating:
Summary: in six seconds?
Review: Creationism as put forth in this book is, quite frankly, a slippery slope of beliefs that challenge science on largely emotional grounds. This is a dangerous path, particularly for younger students of science who are still unaware of why light bulbs aren't the work of witches. The "50 scientists" profiled are all Evangelical Christians. They have an agenda. Evolutionists are of innumerable faiths and denominations and base their theories on hard science as we know it, and, as we've been able to demonstrate it. This book should have been titled, "Why Evolutionary theory preclude the existence of God." Creationists think that anyone who embraces the notion of evolution is an athiest. This is absurd, one does not preclude the other. Frankly, using creationism theory as a model, I have to wonder why the Earth couldn't have been created in, say, six seconds rather than six days? Time, and everything else, it seems, is relative. As one of God's children I plan to stick with hard science and leave the Middle Ages and Salem Witch Hunts to another place in time.
Rating:
Summary: Could Have Been Better!
Review: First off, I am a believer in Divine Creation and I applaud publishing houses like Master Books for making quality books about Creationism available. All books promoting the truth about Creationism, if they are sincere and scholary written, have their place and their value. This book has its place and its value also. The strength of this book is that one is able to read the viewpoints of fifty credible scientists in one easy to read book and discover why it is that they have chosen to believe in a Divine Creation over secular belief systems like evolution. The viewpoints are condensed so that one is able to get right to the "meat and potatoes" of their arguments. By the time one is finished reading this book, they will have been exposed to almost every pro Creation argument existing. The arguments are presented from fifty different points of view giving the reader a wonderful overview as to why a belief in Creation is rational. The fact that so much material is covered from so many perspectives makes this book an excellent introduction to Creation Science. Many books like Duane Gish's excellent "The Fossils Still Say No" focus usually on just one or two arguments in the Creation versus Evolution debate, while this book touches, although not in great depth, on almost every argument, which is why I highly recommend this book as a great introduction to the subject. One of the drawbacks to this book is that much overlap of material occurs between the 50 different essays, although sometimes it is beneficial to hear the same argument presented in a different fashion from a different angle to really appreciate the force of the argument. Another drawback is the glaring ommission of such notable Creation scientists such as Duane Gish from among the fifty scientists selected to write essays for this book. The final drawback is that some of the authors admit in their essays that their main reason for believing in Creation are their deeply held religious beliefs. This is very sad because a belief in Creation rests on firm, solid, scientific evidence, making it a viable choice over any competing secular belief system. Religious faith is great, but Creationism has much positive, objective scientific evidence in its favor. To cite faith as the main reason for your belief in Creationism undermines all of the physical evidence, of which there is plenty. This then gives ammunition to the evolutionists by allowing them to state things like "see, the only reason people believe in that stuff is because of their religion. There is no "real" evidence!" The whole point of Creation Science is to establish evidence, in the laboratory, not just the church, that Divine Creation is an actual fact and that the theory of evolution is false. The ultimate goal, I suppose, is if it can be proved that Creation actually occurred, then it would be possible to convince many non-believers (atheists) that belief in a Creator is no longer a fairy tale or wishful thinking but, in fact, that belief in a Creator is intelligently superior to non-belief. That is, after all, the purpose of this book: to convince non-believers. This is a book of apologetics on the topic of Creation. I, thus, feel that the inclusion of the material discussed above should have been left out, not because of "censorship", but because it only serves to reinforce the beliefs already held by the same non-believers that this book is trying to convince to believe otherwise, hence, the book undermines its own purpose. It is for the preceding reason that I subtracted one star from the books rating, otherwise the book is great.
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Book for both creationists and Evolutionists
Review: From my experience working in a laboratory with scientists I have learned that many scientists accept the world view of those around them, which is often called evolutionary naturalism. They see this world view as natural and valid partly because they are unfamiliar with the intelligent design world view, but also because of the tendency to accept the greatly distorted picture of creationists commonly presented by the media. Most scientists have little familiarity with the estimated 10,000 conservative creationists and the other 30,000 creationist scientists in America alone. This book consists of brief discussions to introduce the reader to the evidence behind the creation worldview, and as a result helps the reader to understand the thinking process of these estimated 40,000 creation scientists. The common response to ideas that we are unfamiliar with is to react emotionally, and reject as out of hand the unfamiliar views. This tendency is apparent in some reviews of this book (although to compare a theistic world view with the Nazi scientists that rejected Einstein's ideas is a cheap shot). This book is a must for all persons interested in this rapidly growing international movement. It helps the reader to understand why so many scientists now accept some form of intelligent design. The book contains a balance of scientists from a wide variety of backgrounds. In harmony with the trend towards pluralism, it would seem that more effort should be expended to understanding this often misunderstood and commonly maligned minority. This book will help remedy this gap.
Rating:
Summary: OOOOOOOOH Boy
Review: Hmmm. I dont mean to call creationists idiots, but when i see the same WRONG reasons why evolution is wrong, I can't hold my tongue. OK where should I start... oh yeah the 2nd law of thermodynamics. In a closed sytem all things will break down. So therefore, simple molecules could not make complex cells because that would violate the second law of thermodynamics. Oh ok that settles it. Oh wait the laws thermodymaics occurs in a closed system but energy is constantly being pumped into this sytem we call earth. Anyway. Thinking about this book makes my head hurt. If you are in for a good laugh, then buy this book. I do, howver, could suggest some other humorous books
Rating:
Summary: Only One Star, because "zero" wasn't an option
Review: I can't believe the majority of the other reviews. How badly are they lacking in science, logic and common sense? Unfortunately, this lack of information and education appears to follow throughout this book, as well. Sure, the authors of these essays are Ph.D. holding "scientists". But the very fact that they publicly state that their belief in Young Earth Creationism is a choice based on their personal religious tenets, and NOT on the actual evidence is very telling. I would guess that the majority of the reviewers of this are not educated even to the level of baccalaureate, let alone to the Ph.D. If that is the case, then how would they be able to honestly, fairly and completely understand and interpret the evidence and theories being discussed? Especially when those theories and evidences encompass such incredibly diverse and generally unrelated topics as genetics, cosmology or paleontology? Heck, I have a M.S. in Microbiology, and I can see that most of the arguements and commentary in this book are simply trotting out of many old and previously refuted ideas. At least from the first reading, I don't see ANY new or original ideas. Then again, perhaps one of the other reviewers, or even the participating authors, would be so kind as to present a novel idea on this topic? Anyway, I don't get why anyone who didn't already have their mind washed by the Young Earth Creationists would even consider most of the discussion in this book. It's a complete and utter waste of time. (and personally, I'm sorry I spent the money and time to acquire and read it)
|
