NOTE: This is a copy of part of your site—Mark
Creation...The Science

By Carl Cantrell


The purpose of this site is to provide scientifically objective information and analyses of Creation Science and Evolution that you probably will not find else where, to analyze other scientists' ideas and theories, and propose my own hypotheses and scientific predictions. This site will cover molecular biology, medicine, physics, astronomy, geology, fossils, historic documentation, a general analysis of evolution, a scientific analysis of the Bible, a scientific analysis of the flood, and analyses of other hypotheses and theories. I will try to use common language as much as possible so that students of high school or lower who have had little science will be able to follow the text and concepts. History teaches us that intellectual growth comes from questioning common knowledge and accepted ideas. Failing to do so, causes intellectual stagnation.

My personal attitude concerning my 35 year search for the truth about the existence of a being like God was very practical. If he exists, I want to know it. If he does not exist, I want to know it. To convince myself of either his existence or non existence when it is not true simply because I want to believe such is not logical, rational, or scientific. I wanted to know the truth. The last thing I wanted was to find myself standing before such a being in judgment and facing my eternal destiny saying,"Oops!"


The biggest mistake we make in considering the existence of God is that we tend to transfer our abilities and inabilities to others. It only seems natural for man to believe that,"If I cannot do something, then neither can anyone else." Of course this is not true and the evidence against this rational is all around us. First, there are people who can do many things that anyone of us cannot do because none of us can do everything. Second, there are many animals which can do things that man cannot do. Birds flap their "arms" and fly, fish breath under water, and the cheetah can run at more than 60 miles per hour. And all of these animals are considered to be inferior to man. Shouldn't a superior being be able to do many more things that man cannot do? Of course.

Next, science has taught me that, scientifically and technologically, what we cannot do today does not have to be what we cannot do tomorrow. We take for granted what people could not even dream of just 40 to 50 years ago. Where will we be 40 to 50 years from now? And because we cannot do something now, does that mean that another being cannot do it now or could not do it in the past? Of course not.

We also tend to believe that God cannot exist because we cannot comprehend the totality of his existence. This is in spite of the fact that science has classified more unknowable to man than man knows. Because the earthworm cannot comprehend the totality of man's existence, does that mean that we don't exist? Of course not. Therefore, to find the truth, we must open our minds.


Objectivity is the first and most important requirement for science. We must be open minded to permit the scientific evidence to tell us what is true. This means that we must objectively consider all possibilities in relation to the evidence. To believe what we want to believe regardless or in spite of the evidence is not objective and cannot be science. It can only be religion. To refuse to objectively consider a concept in relation to the evidence because it is not what we want to believe is an act of religion, not science.

I believe so firmly in objectivity and questioning everything believed by myself and others, that I used to teach my high school science students to question everything and everyone, including me. In one class, I had four students take that as a challenge and they spent the full year trying to trip me up. This was great because they had to pay attention and study, we had really great discussions, they really learned to use science to analyze everything, and they kept me on my toes. The most important thing was that my students learned to think for themselves and not just let me spoon feed them.

I also regularly rewarded my classes with what I called free lectures where they could ask me anything about what THEY wanted to know and I would lecture on it. This was done to make science more personal and fun for my students. It really worked.

Now it is my turn. I plan to use this sight to question long standing and accepted theories and shake your tree in hopes that you will re think what you have been taught and believe. I hope you fall out of at least one of these trees. Who knows, maybe you'll realize something you have been looking at but not seeing. You might learn something. If nothing else, I hope we re learn to question existing ideas and think for ourselves.