The poll below is my first attempt within WordPress. I think you can only answer once, you will not be able to change your answers. If you want to look at the reading choices, use the links below the poll to go there, before voting.
These are articles from the Journal of Creation (see the Go There links in the right hand sidebar for the journal homepage).
Astronomical troubles for the astronomical hypothesis of ice ages (4 pages + references). Planetary wobble, kilo-year cyles, and north-south pole out-of-phase cooling cycles. How much change is there in how solar radiation affects the earth? How many ice ages have taken place? Can deep-sea cores be trusted, and what do their sediments show of ice age history?
Migrating planets and migrating theories (3 pages) If planets coalesce from proto-solar discs, then why are planets in our system significantly different than those around other stars? Did planets in our system form with different methods from each other? Do planets migrate in to collapse in the sun, or migrate outward to stable orbits? Or both?
Days 1–4 : Viewpoint on Genesis (7 pages + references) This article is the longest, but much less technical than the first two. Provides a stripped down outline of the first four days of creation Biblically, with some scientific perspective on the implications of the separate projects on each day. The viewpoint takes some radically different definitions than the ‘classical’ literal model, but still attempts a literal application.
4 responses so far ↓
Troy W // January 15, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Hey, I tried voting for “other” and it counted my first vote as Days 1-4: Viewpoint on Genesis!
I was hoping that we’d be able to do something on genetics, but if not, then days 1-4 would have been my second vote!
Have a great day and I just wanted you to know Krista that I really appreciate your time in getting this voting thingy polley going, I hope that the kinks get worked out!
Troy W // January 17, 2009 at 12:24 am
OK, my suggestion for “another specific reading in comments below,” to be specific, comes from:
Volume 21 Issue 3
Published December 2007
pp 111–117 – Astonishing DNA complexity demolishes neo-Darwinism – Paper by Alex William
Sorry, I couldn’t change the font to accept the proper formatting that I was wanting (as I’m sure you were too Krista!).
Dr. Troy
BTW, how can I change the PNG next to my comments?
kristalouise // January 23, 2009 at 4:20 pm
The issue from which these article came is:
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5416/
And the DNA article troy is looking at is:
http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_111-117.pdf
And I’ll vote for that one, too (I added another option).
Multiple voting, to reflect how strongly you feel, is encouraged.
Loen // January 25, 2009 at 1:26 pm
I was hoping to migrate to something more astronomical than DNA …