Pros/Cons of Proposals 1 The conventional liberal arts college feeding into an associated graduate school may not have a unified focus to sustain this unique graduate school. 2 This model has promise if a core of industry sponsors are dedicated to support the basic creation research simultaneously benefiting from the sponsored applied research, student internships and future employees. 3 This model has proven to be successful but may need to consider a political arm to engage the government and public opinion that this form of science education is also protected by the 1st amendment. 4 The last option may increase favorable support and funding by a larger portion of the Christian community, but maintaining an atmosphere of productive engagement and balance between the spectrum of creationists (i.e. recent vs. progressive creationist views) on the faculty could prove to be difficult. It is vital to have a healthy and productive environment for Biblical creation research through an institution of higher learning for the advancement of the creation model and to invest in the next generation of creation scientists. Even if as Biblical creationists our theoretical details of the model of creation differ, we should be willing to open them up for constructive criticism, debate and investigation. An advance degree institution is the best venue to do this. 10 1 Conventional Liberal Arts Undergraduate/Graduate System − Funding by tuition, endowments, sponsors − Accountable to a governing board influenced by the above list 2 Graduate Research School with Applied/Basic Research tracts − Funding by tuition, other Christian colleges and industry Christian sponsors − Accountable to a governing board influenced by the above list 3 Graduate School with Creation Outreach Organization (i.e., original ICR structure) − Funding by tuition and the activities and publications of the organization − Accountable to a governing board 4 Creation Graduate School supported and participated by more than just Recent Creationists − Funding by tuition and the greater community of creationism − Accountable to a governing board of representatives of each creation viewpoint Proposals for Creation Origin based Graduate School 9 ICRGS Graduates Today ⚫ Some graduates also completed PhDs and hold/held teaching positions at the university level ⚫ PhD candidate (Physical Science) at a big ten university ⚫ Lead CAE and DV testing engineer at an automotive lighting supplier ⚫ Licensed geologist working as field engineering geologist ⚫ Several graduates participate in creation ministries ⚫ Primary/secondary/home school science teachers ⚫ Naturopathic practice and clinic ⚫ Occupational therapist ⚫ Software engineer ⚫ Electron microscope technician/expert and microscope sales ⚫ A county agricultural commissioner 8 Is there a need for a Creation Based Graduate School anymore? Author: Joseph W. Bielecki, MSE, MS, MS, BSE Poster for ICC 9 7/16/2023 Is there a need for a Creation based Graduate School anymore? The Institute for Creation Research was established in 1970 founded by Henry Morris when Tim LaHaye invited him out to southern California to develop a Christian/creation based higher education institution. In 1981, the Institute for Creation Research as a Graduate School was officially independent from Christian Heritage College. The institute granted graduate degrees in Biology, Astro/Geophysics, Geology and Science Education almost 30 years. By curriculum, the master’s degrees are Biology 36, Astro/Geophysics 11, Geology 11, and Science Education 24 (as of September 2003). Notable faculty and department chair over the 30 years of service will be highlighted by curriculum. The 30 years for the starling institute graduate school can be characterized as the founding first decade, the developing second decade, and the third decade of expansion years. Anyone that knows the history of ICRGS knows that its existence has been threaten from the beginning to the end except maybe for a hiatus in the middle with the help Dr. Morris TRACS Christian school accreditation form obtained standing nationally. It met its demise because of planned and expected advantageous move from a political left leaning state California to one considered more conversative leaning, namely, Texas. Unfortunately, and ironically, that move for political reasons led to the cancelling of the graduate school’s ability to issue accredited Master of Science degrees. Thus, since 2010, no science degree granting graduate school exists with at least as one of the goals to study and promote a recent creation and biblical origins worldview. Is there no one in the Christian/creationist community like Henry Morris or Duane Gish today that believes this endeavor is attainable or warranted no matter what the cost? Is the political pressure and governmental overreach too great to overcome? What are some practical steps that can be taken to revive this vision? As a community, even with our diverse opinions in creation theory, steps, even if small, need to be taken to re-establish such an education and research institution. Abstract 2 Introduction The Institute for Creation Research Graduate School was the first of its kind and hopefully not the last. In the words of a former ICR president, the institute ‘exists to train students in scientific research and teaching skills, preparing effective warriors for the faith'. ICRGS functioned for more than 25 years from 1981 in southern California until 2007 when it met difficulty in a move to Texas. The Christian News Wire reported that: ‘In fall 2007, the THECB Site Evaluation Team and Advisory Committee recommended approval of the ICRGS application to grant degrees in the state of Texas. However, both agency recommendations were subsequently rejected by Commissioner Paredes after evolutiononly activists pressured the commissioner to deny ICRGS a degree-granting license in the state.’ Further, the Texas courts refused ICR's appeal in 2010. One science expert brought forward for the state claimed that science is the endeavor of pursuing the truth of unknowns from a neutral viewpoint by observation and experimentation. This is misleading because one must first believe or assume that the universe is logically ordered in such a way to be understandable and comprehensible. Creationists affirm that the world is rationally ordered because both creature and creation were created by a rational Creator. Atheistic evolution assumes no rational cause, but inconsistently assumes an intrinsic logical order to the universe. This is not the first time that the courts have utilized an insufficient definition of science to rule against creationism as a legitimate avenue of scientific inquiry. 3 The Founding Decade ⚫ Back to Genesis Seminars ⚫ Founding President Henry Morris ⚫ Founding VP Duane Gish ⚫ CA State Board of Education Denies ICRGS Approval ⚫ A Study of Selected Isotopic Ratios for 67 Elements in Grand Canyon Basalts The Developing Decade ⚫ 2nd President John Morris (1996-2014) ⚫ Court Victory over CA Board of Education Approval ⚫ National Accreditation (TRACS 1991) ⚫ Using NCAR Simulation to Validate Vapor Canopy Theory ⚫ Fruit Fly Longevity Experiments to Understand Pre-Flood Human Long Lifespan ⚫ The RATE project The Expanding Decade ⚫ Expanded into a newly built 2nd building (2001) ⚫ RATE project completed ⚫ The CLIMATE Project ⚫ The FAST Project ⚫ The COSMOS Project ⚫ The EPIPHANY Project ⚫ Move to Texas (2007) ⚫ Texas Board of Education Denies ICRGS license is to grant Master degrees ⚫ ICR Legal Court Appeal Fails in 2010 1981 1990 2000 2008 AD 4 ICRGS Faculty and Graduates Commonly critics of creationism, especially biblical creationism, argue that creationists do not have appropriate degrees from accredited institutions. This is verifiably shown to be untrue. All the ICRGS faculty of each department held terminal degrees from accredited state and private universities. Some of the more prestigious school names are Pennsylvania State, Harvard, UCLA, UC Berkeley, and Indiana University, University of Minnesota, University of Oklahoma, and Iowa State University. Likewise, the students/graduates of ICRGS have gone on to productive and successful careers in academia, research, and industry. 5 Astro/Geophysics ⚫ Chair − Larry Vardiman ⚫ Faculty − Russell D. Humphreys − Eugene F. Chaffin − Donald B. DeYoung − Danny R. Faulkner − Gerald E. Aardsma ⚫ Thesis Examples − Scale Time Versus Geologic Time in Radioisotope Age Determination, R. Mandock, 1982 − A Study of Spontaneous Fission Track Density in Resting Spring Range Obsidian (Miocene) Near Shoshone, California J. Bielecki, 1994 Biology • Chair ‾ Kenneth B. Cummings ‾ Richard D. Lumsden • Faculty ‾ Robert H. Franks ‾ Gary E. Parker ‾ Ross S. Anderson ‾ David A. DeWitt ‾ Joseph W. Francis ‾ Joseph A. Mastropaolo • Thesis Examples A reevaluation of the English peppered moth’s use as a model of evolution in action C. Osborne, 1985. Snake Hybridization: A Case for IntrabaraminicDiversity Glenn Fankhauser, 2000 A Rationale for the Christian College Biology Curriculum: A Case Study at Christian Heritage College M. Nutting, 1984. Geology ⚫ Chair − Steve Austin ⚫ Faculty − John D. Morris − John R. Baumgardner − Andrew A. Snelling − Kurt P. Wise ⚫ Thesis Examples − The Hartford Basin of Central Connecticut: An Evaluation of Uniformitarian and Catastrophic Models J. Whitmore,1988. − Origin of Bedded Salt Deposits: A Critique of Evaporative Models and Defense of a Hydrothermal Model D Nutting, 1984. Science Education ⚫ Chair − Richard B. Bliss ⚫ Faculty − Stephen W. Deckard − Patricia Nason − James G. Stark ⚫ This curriculum had a non-thesis option. No Science Education graduates replied with thesis title as surveyed before this publiication. 6 ICR Graduates by Discipline 12 40 13 39 Astro/Geophysics Biology Geology Science Education 7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=