Creation science is a Christian response to materialistic evolution. Over recent decades, creationists have been showing that evolution cannot explain scientific observations, and is therefore false. They also affirm the historical accounts found in the Bible as true, and provide evidence to support this.

One problem with creation science is that of communicating complex scientific research to people who may not have scientific education or training. Between the complexity of the details and their sheer volume, the arguments tend to lose most of the public. This problem arose in part because the initial success of the creation movement was rooted in what was called “scientific creationism,” which emphasized scientific responses to evolutionary assertions. This generated a vast amount of scientific information on both sides of the debate and it became harder and harder to understand or keep up with all of this information and ongoing arguments.

So both evolutionists and creationists are using science to promote their opposite belief systems. This has never given a definitive answer. Some people are convinced in evolution and use science as their reason, and others are convinced in creation and use the same science as their reason. How odd that people can look at the same things and be completely convinced in completely opposite interpretations!

There is a tremendous amount of well-researched and well-written information about creation science that spans a variety of topics. Answers to common questions exist in books and on the websites of creationist organizations. But these remain detailed, and people can easily get lost in the details. There is a need to provide a context—a ‘big picture’—that connects with the public and provides compelling reasons to choose between God and evolution. 

That is why I have framed this study in terms of logic and rationality. It provides a time-tested way to evaluate scientific claims outside of science, and uses principles that we all use every day, whether we have formally studied logic or not. Using this framework, we can evaluate the details and yet not get lost in them.

Each controversy discussed in Section Two contains plenty of scientific detail, yet all have this in common: that they are all each individually a necessary condition that provides for a logical test for evolution. If any are false, then evolution is false. This is because each one of the 50 controversies is a necessary condition for evolution to be true.

This book is specifically written for nonscientists and presents science in a way that the essential part of each topic can be easily understood. When people are able to think about these controversies for themselves, then they can make their own decision. Based on logic, they will not only know what they believe, but also why they believe it. Since we are going to use logic as the basis for understanding evolution, we will next consider some of the basics of logic.