This could very well be the single most useful tool for the new initiate in the Creation vs. Evolutionism Debate. I was surprised to find that this was actually a relatively compact paperback, for it is indeed jam-packed with scientific and historical facts and authoritative quotes, categorically organized for quick and easy reference. The many quotes cited herein are the usual kind one finds in these books: A large minority of astute quotes from leading Creationists, and a larger majority of embarrassingly revealing quotes from leading Darwinists. But the categorical organization of the quotes–and facts–makes this book a very valuable resource indeed.
I was introduced to this book through a Kent Hovind DVD; Hovind had lauded it a time or two; I can now attest that Hovind was right to have done so. This book is highly commendable.
True, there are a few minor flaws; namely, two or three possible evidences, among the litany of evidences given in favor of Creation, are presented as factual instead of as possible or even probable. For example, the well known “rotting plesiosaur carcass” that a Japanese fishing trawler dredged up a few decades back and famously photographed before it was thrown back into the ocean. This book presents as fact the “discovery” of a “plesiosaur” in modern times. Of course, Darwinists insist that the carcass was a decomposing basking shark; and, of course again, Darwinists present their account as factual also. But the FACT of the matter is that nobody can know for sure what it was: All we can know for certain is that some Japanese fishermen caught and photographed the extremely odd-looking thing, then disposed of it, and then the Japanese government later officially commemorated the event with a postage stamp indicating that it had been a plesiosaur. That is all we can know of this incident for a FACT. So at times, this author, and other creationists, do occasionally present theories and possibilities as fact. What should be needless to write is that the Darwinists do this even more, but there, I went ahead and wrote it out anyway for those not paying attention to the materialist cultural indoctrination posing as “science” that is all around us today.
Another flaw with this book is that the one or two most nettlesome areas for Creationists to explain are not even addressed at all. For example, the peculiar predominance and isolation of marsupials in Australia. But exponents of any agenda whatsoever tend to do the same: Go with their “strong stuff” and leave out their “weak stuff.” And I am now convinced that for every apparently weak link in the argumentative chain in favor of Creation, there are literally dozens of such apparently weak links in the “Evolution” story.
Bottom line: This book is so perceptive, so well organized, and so well documented overall that I can easily forgive its minor flaws, and if I had to debate a Darwinist and could only arm myself with one book, I would probably go with this one. It is that comprehensive; it is that easy to find scientific and historical authoritative citations in this book.
Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ Δ