MarketAnswers Research Journal
Company Profile

Answers Research Journal

Answers Research Journal (ARJ) is an open-access creation science journal published by Answers in Genesis (AiG), a fundamentalist, Christian apologetics organization. Founded in 2008, the online journal devotes itself to research on "recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework". ARJ's research is not scientifically sound and encourages readers to doubt mainstream scientific evidence. The journal, in its embrace of young Earth creationism (YEC), supports the unscientific idea of a 6,000-year-old Earth, among other claims. The journal refuses to publish research contradicting its belief system. While ARJ undergoes a peer-review process, the journal's reviewers are selected from a pool of people who only support the stances of the journal. Therefore, members of the scientific community are excluded from the review process.

History and overview
Background and beliefs Answers in Genesis (AiG) is the largest young Earth creationist (YEC) organization in the world. Publications aimed at YEC scholars have existed since the mid-1960s, though these publications typically relied upon organizational membership and fee-based subscriptions. The launch of ARJ in 2008 marked the first free, open-access YEC peer-reviewed journal. ARJ was created because creationists argued biology journals would not publish their research because such journals were biased "against God in favor of Darwin". Most of the journal's articles are written by a small group of authors, many without academic credentials. AiG founder Ken Ham foresees both Christians and non-Christians to read the journal. According to Snelling, the journal strives to "publish the best research possible from a creationist perspective in the sciences, humanities and theology." The journal's objective is not scientific inquiry. Rather, it aims to align their scholars' findings with a literal reading of the Bible. Such research is not scientifically sound. ARJ frequently uses scientific language in an attempt to discredit scientific studies. Primarily, the journal exists to encourage readers to doubt mainstream scientific evidence. Editorial policies ARJ editorial board is not disclosed and authors are not identified in the table of contents. and the editor-in-chief may reject a paper for any reason (including for violations of AiG’s "statement of faith"). While the journal undergoes a peer-review process, it is subject to extreme publication bias since the journal's reviewers are selected from a pool of individuals who "support the positions taken by the journal". As a result, members of the scientific community are excluded from the review process. The concept of "faith-checking" is also included in the review process. Notable articles The inaugural article of the journal, written by Liberty University professor Alan Gillen, was titled "Microbes and the days of creation". (The topic of microbiology is not mentioned anywhere within biblical scripture.) Additionally, Gillen argued the origins of HIV goes back to the biblical Fall (i.e., when Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden). According to Martin, climate change is essentially a hoax invented by "atheistic evolutionists". His thesis, incorrectly, states: "There is no reason either biblically or scientifically to fear the exaggerated and misguided claims of catastrophe as a result of increasing levels of man-made carbon dioxide (CO2)." A 2009 article proposes that God made oil shortly after creating the Earth and cites the biblical story of Noah's Ark as "evidence for his theory." In an attempt to disprove evolution, a 2013 article argued that humans and chimpanzees only shared 70% of DNA. While there is no objective method to determine the percent DNA similarities of two species, scientists have come up with a range of 95–98% similarity between humans and chimps (with 96% being the consensus). The study compares whole chromosomes to see how they match up instead of comparing point mutations in specific parts of the chromosomes. The author of the study revised his estimate in 2015 to 88% after discovering a software bug in his genome sequence algorithm. == Reception ==
Reception
Since inception, the journal has faced criticism from scientific skeptics. Biologist Paul Z. Myers refers to the journal as a "dishonest enterprise" and suggests "everything published in [ARJ] will be a crank paper". Novella regards the journal as an "insidious attack on science" and should be used as "a tool for exposing creationists for what they are." While applauding the journal's use of a double-blind peer review system, an article in Discover lamented that "there won't be any actual science to evaluate." == See also ==
tickerdossier.comtickerdossier.substack.com