Everything that you read or view is filtered through your worldview. But those items are not only seen through your worldview they are also produced from the worldview of the author or production company. Take some time to hone your critical reading and viewing skills.

Let me start with an example that is popular, Mars exploration. Most everyone knows in 2007 we landed another robot up there to study the surface in greater detail. Spirit and Opportunity were landed on the surface of Mars back in 2004 with the goal to observe soil or rock geology. They continue to operate far beyond their scheduled mission endeavors. The search continues for evidence of liquid water on the surface. Many scientists believe in the past that there were oceans covering some of the surface of Mars. They come up with this thought from certain mineral deposits and apparent geological formations. The rovers have now dug and drilled in many areas but have yet found liquid water. We study the rocks and soil of Mars with exacting instrumentation and they reveal all kinds of facts about their make-up. The problem lies in the interpretation of those studies. Just because salt or “sulphate-rich ‘evaporite’ deposits”[a] are found does not mean that there was an ocean present. And it definitely does not mean that there once was life on the planet.  The Bible demands that we research and discover the creation around us. There is not a problem going to Mars and studying it. The problem lies in the interpretation and actual reason we are there in the first place. You see, most evolutionary scientists have pushed for Mars because they believe that life could have arose on that planet, maybe before ours. So there interpretations are made from an evolutionary or naturalistic worldview. The exploration of Mars is not just about the science(knowledge) of Mars, but about the continued search for reasons not to take the Bible literally or to trust what it says.

Lets look at another great example of naturalistic “science” taking liberty with results, or lack of findings. Dark Matter, “this term refers to an unknown form of matter perhaps small particles or radiation.”[b] Evolutionary scientists have to push this idea because there is not enough mass in our universe to account for the huge amount of time thought to be present. To have the amount of time given for our universe we are missing about 90% of the needed matter to produce the amount of gravity that holds all things together. I know, don’t check out on me yet, this is a complicated “matter”, pun intended. This debate over dark matter continues to rage. We have never observed it anywhere in the universe, yet it is supposed to be there in great abundance. In a New Scientist article, “Dark matter hopefuls line up”[c] with seemingly new evidence on their side. You read the article critically with an eye for belief and speculation apart from science and you quickly understand that they have nothing, still, that points to dark matter. It continues to be speculation with phrases like this, “The bad news is that the dark particles in these hidden sectors are themselves beyond the reach of current experiments…” All of there “evidence” of dark matter, which really isn’t evidence, starts with the science of the big bang which itself is not a proven fact. They haven’t yet found the dark particles maybe because they haven’t found those hidden sectors. So we now have theories on theories that are pushed as scientific reality, which we are to line up for no less. See in a creation view of the universe we have not been here long enough for gravity to begin failing. We don’t have to explain why everything seems to be holding together just fine as gravity has not been around long enough to lose its hold. Therefore, we don’t have to rely on this dark matter out there to create the amount of gravity needed for great amounts of time.

So what, you may be asking yourself at this moment. Science is doing great things in the area of discovery. The problem comes when those discoveries are placed in the framework of evolutionary faith. Once again we must understand that science cannot prove or disprove origin or destiny issues. Practice your critical reading and viewing skills in areas that interest you. Watch Discovery Channel and read National Geographic while paying attention for the clue words: could, seems to have, should, believe or belief, predict, and hypothetical. These words are not science they are worldview. We must continue to do great science and discover new aspects of God’s creation. From here to Mars and into the outer reaches of the universe we will continue to see our Savior’s hand guiding and sustaining it all since the beginning.

By Matt Miles