During the past century, increases in technology have produced evidence that the universe
came into being in a fraction of a second.  It's called, "The Big Bang Theory".  The evidence
includes the fact that the universe is expanding constantly.  Bodies are getting farther apart.
Some calculations indicate this happened about 13.7 billion years ago.   For more of the story,
Google: "Big Bang Theory".  Scientists generally accept this theory as the explanation of the
origin of the universe - though they have no theory as to why it happened.  (google "Big
Bang"  to get a more complete story.

The bible supplies the answer in Genesis 1:1  "In the beginning, God created the heavens
and the earth".  The bible goes on  (in Genesis 1:2) to describe the earth as being "without
form and darkness was on the face of the deep".  Many generations of preachers have
assumed that the description in verse 2 was the earth immediately after creation.  But, there
is no real reason to assume that.  In fact, God does not do things in a half-way manner, so
logic says verse two is describing an earth that had become desolate some time after it's
original creation.  That description is more likely the earth, scientists claim was overcome
by ice and cold - some say several times.   Hairy Mammoths (Huge, elephant-like beasts)
uncovered in Siberia were found to have been  frozen so quickly they still had undigested
grass in their stomachs.  That discovery, along with many others show the earth has not
remained always as it is now, but has gone through dramatic changes.

God is creative and it is not hard to imagine that after creating a world of dinosaurs and other
massive flora and fauna, he wiped the slate clean and started over - very possibly several times.

Subsequent verses in Genesis describe a six-day period when God created the flora and fauna
we see on the earth today, including man himself.  Subsequent times, if added together indicate
this six-day period must have occurred around 7000 years ago.  This enormous difference in
time has caused many to say that the bible and science are at odds and one cannot believe both.
The problem really lies in human "assumptions".  Not in biblical words or scientific truths.

The biblical account assigns human life spans up to nearly a millennium for Adam to Noah, a
great world-wide flood and gradually decreasing life spans thereafter.  Those who believe the
world has remained in pretty much in the same steady state, hoot at the biblical account of a
world-wide flood, but cannot account for fossils of sea life found even on the tops of our
highest mountains.

Most likely, the pre-flood earth was more flat than the present one.  But, the enormous
pressure of all that water caused mountains to be pushed up as the sea bottoms were
pushed down.  Some years ago, the National Geographic  (hardly an advocate of Christian
beliefs) published a map of the ocean bottoms which revealed beds of most of the earth's
major rivers extending far out into the present ocean bottoms.  Those river beds had to have
been created when the oceans were much smaller. Examples are the Hudson on the Atlantic
coast, the Columbia on the Pacific Coast and the Ganges of India (extending well over a
thousand miles into the Indian ocean).   There's just no way a river would continue to make
it's channel once joined with (heavier) salt water .  So, clearly, the flood of Noah's time is
mostly still with us.

So, where did all that water come from?  Genesis 1:6-7 indicates that there was water above the
sky as well as below it.  Apparently a cloud/vapor layer above the visible sky.  This poured down
out of the sky for 40 days and 40 nights, while "The fountains of the great deep were broken up".
So, tectonic activity also contributed to the flood. (and modern science tells us that the primary
output of volcanos is water.  So clearly, the earth contains plenty of it).  When it ended, Noah saw
the rainbow for the first time.  Now we know that rainbows are caused by the sun shining through
water with different colors of light traveling at different rates of speed.  That's natural physics, so
doubters ask  "how come that wasn't seen before the flood?"  Well, the layer of water
(clouds/vapor) apparently shielded the earth from direct rays of the sun which didn't strike the
earth until after the flood.  Modern science has taught us that too much sun can be deadly to the
human body.  Possibly, the direct rays of the sun have damaged our DNA to cause the much
shorter life span?

Ah but the real rub comes with 'evolution'.  Scientific truth that disagrees with the bible - right?
Well, no.  Darwin's theory is only a theory.  It is tremendously satisfying to the human ego - - We
created ourselves - - no need for God, Right?  Although fed to most of our students in public
schools and colleges as "scientific truth", it is a theory lacking legs.  It says that all life, including
human came from a single critter, formed by an accident in some primordial swamp.  But, simple
observation of the world shows that complex, interdependent systems do not come about by
accident - - they have to have a designer. Darwin was not a scientist.  He was a philosopher.  He
studied the bible, but wanted a substitute for God.

    See:  evolution

He observed that when a certain species was isolated (on a remote island) inherited characteristics
that tended to help survival became dominant, whereas those that tended to hinder survival became
recessive.  Based on this observation (and no experimentation), he made a great leap of faith and
concluded that over eons of time,  one species would actually morph into another by virtue of many,
many small changes. He wrote a book about it.  But even in the middle of the 19th century, he knew
enough about Paleontology to realize this would require literally millions of minute changes for even
one species to be created this way and the then known fossils did not show that.  He admitted that
unless such fossils were found, he theory wouldn't hold.  Well, guess what?  150 years later, the
fossil record is no better in that regard than it was in Darwin's day.  The billions of intermediate
specimens have not been found, even though many more fossils have. And paleontologists say
most creatures appeared at about the same time in what they call the cambrian period.

 Darwin's theory does not answer any real questions, but creates a whole lot more unanswered
ones - - such as "how did it all start?" and "Why does it not still function today?" and "Why does
each species have a sort of genetic fence that prevents selective breeding from going beyond a
certain point?"

Francis Crick, who knew a bit about biology and construction of the cell ( he was awarded the
nobel prize for the discovery of DNA) was an atheist (no religious belief to interfere with his
logical conclusions).  He said that the probability of life originating  "at random" (by accident)
was too minuscule for serious consideration.  He thought life had come to earth from
somewhere in outer space.  Pretty close to the truth.  DNA - - a formula for the construction of
each creature is found in every cell of that creature.  The more science learns about life
structures, the more obvious is becomes that it took an intelligence far, far superior to that of
lowly humans to design life and it's creatures.

Once again, the conflict is in human theory - - not scientifically tested fact -  - and the bible's words!

But, then we are told all real scientists agree on evolution.  Not at all true - hundreds don't.  Of
course, just as the Romans persecuted Christians, scientists who don't adhere to the "company
line" on evolution are persecuted by today's Romans.  If you don't believe me, see Ben Stein's
movie, "EXPELLED".  Also see:  How Non-Believing Scientists are persecuted

Recently, Sir Antony Flew,  the famous philosopher and one of the world's leading proponents
of atheism, renounced his former views and accepted creationism.  Why?  He said it was largely
because of the implications of DNA information.  Flew explained that the clincher  was the
complexity and quantity of information found in the DNA molecule.  This is something evolutionists
are not honestly addressing.  They continue deceiving the masses by saying that all the intricate
DNA information can be explained by evolutionary forces acting on the cell.  Note: see Wikipedia
for details

QUOTES:
Richard Lewantin, biologist:  (Google wikipedia for his bio)
"We take the side of science in spite of the Patent absurdity of some of it's constructs, in spite of
the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a
prior commitment, a commitment to materialism  . . .  We cannot allow a devine foot in the door"

ref: "Billions and Billions of Demons", New York Review of Books, Jan. 9, 1997, p 31

Dr. Scott Todd, immunologist:
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science
because it is not naturalistic"

ref: Nature Sept 30, 1999, p 423

See:   CHECK out ENVIRONMENT for more details

Ed Note:   I simply read and observe and call it like I see it. . . JMC