Answers Research Journal? from chemistry notes

First, I want to say I went to the Answers Research Journal website with a totally open mind. While I am not overly religious, I don't necessarily believe that science is at odds with religion. As an undergraduate I took a excellent class (I forget the name, it was something along the lines of "Great Issues in Science") and was first introduced to the writings of Paul Davies, Richard Dawkins, and Stephen Jay Gould. My favorite two "textbooks" from the class were "The Mind of God: The Scientific Basis for a Rational World," and "Origins: Cosmos, Earth and Mankind." If you are at all interested in science and/or religion and how the two subjects can come to terms with each other, I highly recommend these books as a place to start.

Anyways, when my husband sent me a link to ARJ last week, I was intrigued. It seems as if the journal is an offshoot of the website AnswersinGenesis.org. According to their website, "ARJ is a professional, peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework." At first I had high hopes (I mean, it is "peer-reviewed and everything, that must count for something, right?) and was really hoping for some cool science or interesting theories on how (Christian) religion and science can really go hand in hand. Andrew Snelling, the editor, certainly has the scientific credentials (a Ph.D. in geology from the University of Sydney) necessary for making informed scientific decisions.

So what did I find? Well, I only looked at the current issue, but I wasn't very impressed. Of the five articles, two were written by scientists from "Answers in Genesis" and one was written by a guy whose only credentials are his (home?) address. Two are also written in the first person (which in my opinion just doesn't work for scientific publications), and sound like sermons rather than peer-reviewed scientific research. I do have to admit, the article on Louis Pasteur is pretty interesting, and while I would classify this article on granite formation as opinion rather than research, it was entertaining (I hesitate to say informative) as well. Although I had high hopes and an open mind, I was really left a little disappointed at the end of it all.