Refutations of Evolution, Supporting Evidences
For Creation and References
Biases to the Issue
Every individual who approaches the
subject of origins has a bias because of the teaching he has had. When writing on the
subject, authors have recognized these biases as having an influence on the interpretation
of the factual (or physical) data. This will ultimately influence the results or
conclusions that an individual may come to regarding the issue of origins. L. Harrison
Matthews, in his introduction to the 1971 issue of Darwins Origin of
Species recognized that both evolutionists and creationists beliefs are
accepted by faith. He stated, "Belief in evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief
in special creation both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither,
up to the present, has been capable of proof" (1). Numerous authors continue to state
"the fact of evolution" (2,3). And yet in spite of this insistence and the
teaching of evolution in the scientific community for the last one hundred and thirty
years, large percentages of the population continue to insist that man was created by
divine origin within the last 10,000 years, as revealed in a Gallup Poll survey taken in
1982 (4). Evolutionary scientists were predictably shocked by the results, as they assumed
that the vast majority had come to accept the evolutionary position. Incidentally, the
poll cited included nearly a quarter that were college graduates. The evolutionary
educational and scientific establishment has effectively controlled the scientific press,
particularly journals and the news media. It is a sad indictment that in order to publish
good scientific literature, authors have had to publish under pseudonyms, as under their
common names, they were censored from the reviewed literature. Many have demanded to know
why creationists have not been published in the literature, and it seems that this
unwritten exclusion policy has been the biggest factor in keeping scientific creationist
writings out of the scientific journals. As a result, creationists have been forced to
publish in popular magazines, exclusively creationist journals (5) or have published under
pseudonyms (6). Those who have been able to publish in the scientific journals often have
their jobs jeopardized by views held to be unpopular by the general scientific community
(7). One is led to believe that the thinking prevalent in Galileos time is still
The Origin of the Universe
A number of theories have been postulated
to explain the origin of the universe, however, general agreement among the evolutionary
community puts forward the idea that all that we observe originally was created by an
explosion of enormous magnitude. This idea is known as the Big Bang Theory. Advocates of
this theory suggest that all the matter that exists at one time was in the form of a
single entity or singularity. The size of this singularity was from nothing,
to something the size of an electron, to something perhaps the size of an apple (8). (How
and why that single entity came to be and why it did what it did at some point in time
remains a mystery to those who hold this idea.) Some have suggested that there is no known
physical law which prevents the Big Bang from having been produced out of nothing (9). In
any event, what has been described as a "hiccup" (10) in space and time is
attributed with the beginning of the entire process. The universe then began expanding,
and eventually began accreting into a system of gas clouds which collapsed to form the
galaxies, stars and planets that we observe today. An inflationary universe is
said to be proved by the red-shift or the Doppler effect on the
light travelling to us. Two individuals who have been opposed to these views
are Sir Fred Hoyle, a chief proponent of the Steady-State theory, and astronomer Halton C.
Arp. Sir Fred Hoyles reported position with respect to the Big Bang theory is that
it has had a "good run for its money." He has lost patience with it for two
reasons. First, he contends that the time since the postulated beginning of the universe
is insufficient to explain the degree of complexity in the higher life forms. He states
that the amount of information in higher life forms is in the order of 10 to the 40,000
bits. (This is the number 1 followed by 40,000 zeroes.) Hoyle claims that the accumulation
of that amount of information would take a far longer period of time and that the chances
of higher life forms emerging in that way is comparable with a chance that "a tornado
sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the material therein"
(11). Second, he says that any theory, such as the Big Bang theory, should accumulate
supporting data very quickly. Instead the opposite seems to be true (11). Halton C. Arp
described as "The Most Feared Astronomer on Earth" (12) continues to plaque the
astronomical community with his interpretation of objects that he has observed in the
universe. "Arps interpretation of what he sees through the telescope has also
sparked one of the bitterest conflicts in memory within the small group of scientists who
deal with the nature of the universe on a cosmic scale. If Arp is correct, if his
observations are confirmed, he will have single-handedly shaken all modern astronomy to
its very foundations. If he is right, one of the pillars of modern astronomy and cosmology
will come crashing down in a turmoil unparalleled since Copernicus dared to suggest that
the sun, not the earth, was at the center of the solar system" (12). Arps work
on the observation of quasars (quasar-stellar sources) has been problematic to many in his
discipline. Arps "impossible" observations include NGC1073 (New General
Catalogue, 1073rd object) and three quasars associated with it. The problem is, galaxy
NGC1073 appears to be relatively nearby, while the three quasars, due to their red-shift
(44%, 70%, 79% of the speed of light), seem to be very far away. Because they appear to be
in close association with each other, from an observational point of view, the
light from them must behave differently or the objects must not be as old as
they are claimed to be. "Indeed if Arp is right, we must admit to gaping holes in our
understanding of the universe" (12). Arps discovery of some 22 galaxy-quasar
associations, and his interpretation of their significance has infuriated a number of his
colleagues. And what is their answer to this? John Gribbin reports, "Arp
enough evidence that he ought to be worrying more people that actually acknowledge the
significance of his findings. Indeed, over the years he has aroused open hostility to his
claims, culminating in the scandalous decision to deny him further access to the large
telescopes in California and South America" (13,14). (Arp now researches at the Max
Planck Institute for Physics and Astrophysics located in Munich, West Germany) If one
carefully digests the data that Arp has discovered, it becomes apparent that what he has
found provides supporting evidence for radically different interpretations of red-shift or
a recently created Universe. The obvious relationship between his discoveries, and the
logical conclusions that they lead to, are what likely led to his being banned from
telescopes of the Americas. Other objects in the Universe seem to demand shorts periods of
time since their formation. Objects such as barred spirals and plain spiral galaxies
indicate that not enough time has transpired to have allowed the arms of the spirals to
wind up and become a single mass of stars. Other evidences can be cited, such as the
concept that the sun is shrinking. Eddy and Boornazian suggested that the sun is shrinking
at a rate of some five feet per hour based on observed solar diameters measured between
1836 and 1953 (15). At this shrinkage rate, the solar diameter would have been two times
its current value only 100,000 years ago. The solar diameter would have been two times its
current value only 100,000 years ago. In addition, at this rate, the earths orbit
would have been inside the suns photosphere, or observed surface, only 20 million
years ago. The conclusion to be drawn, using valid chronometric principles, is that the
sun cannot be very old (less than 100,000 years since a sun twice its diameter would have
provided enough radiant energy to burn up what life on earth might have existed). Some
have contested the data that Eddy and Boornazian used, stating that the contraction rate
has been one quarter of that reported (16). This does not remove the problem, but only
buys a small amount of additional time for the evolutionist. Comets and solar system dust
particles provide further evidence of a young Universe. Comets, made of rock, ice and
other materials, as they orbit the sun, have material removed from them and consequently
have limited lifespans. The short period (small orbits) comets lifespan is estimated
at approx. 10,000 years and since there are still comets of this type, various ideas have
been postulated to explain why we still have these types of comets (17). The
"hard" evidence for these ideas is non-existent with the evidence being in favor
of a solar system younger than 10,000 years.
Radiometric Dating and Earth
Because Earth history and radiometric
dating are so closely linked, these two subjects will be dealt with together. This topic
is the most contentious issue in the debate of creation vs. evolution in spite of the fact
that many have attempted to reconcile the controversy. The reason for the variance is
two-fold. First, each side has its own philosophical or religious bias toward the issue.
Second, there is a great deal of variance in the data that is used to support each side of
the issue. From an evolutionary perspective, an old earth is an absolute requirement, as
the evolution of biological life forms requires vast amounts of time in order to provide
for the gradualism suggested by evolutionists. Old ages were required, as the
"fathers" of geology imposed the concept of uniformitarianism (slow, gradual
uniform change) into earth history. The concept of catastrophism was largely, but not
entirely, replaced due to a philosophical change in the late 1700s. New ideas
regarding the earth and its age came into consideration and played a large part in the
thinking of Darwin. The geologic timetable was assigned dates which were based on
hypothetical rates of evolution of biological forms and the assumed rates of accumulation
of sediments. Unfortunately, much assumption is built into the time scales derived from
sedimentation (18) and it must be remembered that radiometric techniques were not
discovered until the turn of the 20th century (19).
Many other chronometric techniques exist, and the majority of them
yield ages far too young for the evolutionist (20). As an example, the rate of
accumulation of silica in the ocean yields an age for the ocean of 12,000 years (21).
Other methodologies, such as the measurements of decay of the earths magnetic
moment, yield maximum ages for the earth of 10,000 years (22). With the discovery of
radiometric clocks, evolutionists felt they finally had the proof for the old ages they
had already believed in.
Unfortunately, these radiometric clocks are not the foolproof systems
that proponents would say they are. In order for any process to be used as a clock,
certain requirements must be met.
1. The process must have a physical, measurable change over time.
2. The clock must have sensitivity and accuracy for the interval of
time to be measured
3. The clock must operate at a constant rate.
4. Initial starting conditions must be known not speculated.
5. The clock conditions must not have been altered in any manner during
the operation of the clock.
If all these conditions are met, then a high degree of certainty can be
exercised in believing the time indicated by the clock. Radiometric techniques depend on
the natural decay processes of particular isotopes of naturally occurring elements. The
rates at which these isotopes decay are known as half-lives because it is a measure of how
long it takes for half of the atoms of the parent element to decay into some other form.
At any point in time, measurements can be made on the ratios of the elements that are
present, and then determinations can be made regarding how long the process has been going
on in the rock or other object. The best known of the radiometric techniques is the
radiocarbon method. In this process, Carbon 14, which is produced in the upper atmosphere
by neutron bombardment of Nitrogen 14, decays back to N14. The time it takes for half a
given number of C14 atoms to decay back to N14 is 5,760 years. C14 is ingested by all
living organisms, and as long as it is alive, the ratio of C14 to C12 (the most common
isotope of carbon) remains constant. As soon as an organism dies, however, the ratio
begins changing due to the fact that the C14 decays to N14. C14 is known as the parent
element, and N14 is known as the daughter element. Measurement of these ratios can then
provide data in order that we may determine how long the organism has been dead.
Assumptions are made regarding past cosmic ray bombardment, the earths magnetic
field effects, as well as rates of radiometric decay (23).
In addition, the other radiometric techniques suffer from a variety of
other problems, which make them suspect (24). For example, lava flows in Hawaii known to
be only 200 years old gave dates of 22 million years using the Potassium-Argon method
(25). Discordant (non-agreeing) ages of rocks are often obtained using different methods
on the same rocks. Only those ages that are in agreement with the original premise are
published or the ages are not published at all (26). In the base of the Grand Canyon is a
lava flow which, when dated using the rubidium/strontium method, gives an age of 1,090
million years. When using the potassium/argon method and age of 760 million to 860 million
years is calculated. These two dates are discordant. Interestingly, a younger lava flow,
at the top of the Grand Canyon, gives a rubidium/strontium age of 1,500 million years
(27). When radiometric dating fails, evolutionists turn back to the paleontological data
(fossils in the sediments) to support the ages they desire (28). Perhaps some of the
strongest evidence for the young ages of geological strata comes from work done by Dr.
Robert V. Gentry, a physicist formerly with the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. His work on
"pleochroic haloes" demonstrates that strata, apparently 195 million years apart
in age, had to have been only 20 years different in age (29). His work on radiohaloes
(rings produced around radioactive particles in rocks) also indicates that the basement
granites (the rock upon which sedimentary rocks are formed) were created virtually
instantaneously (within a matter of minutes, not millions or billions of years) (30).
Pleochroic haloes are formed by damage caused by radioactive decay processes in small
inclusions within rock minerals. During the radioactive decay process, particles are given
off, having energies associated with a particular type of radioactive element. Because of
the specific energy of the particles, they are only able to travel a given distance
through the rock itself, and in the process, create a ring or halo around the radioactive
inclusion. If we identify the distance the particles travel, we can determine what element
was originally responsible for the ring created. One of the radioactive processes involves
the decay of uranium 238 to lead 206. Polonium 210 is one of the intermediate radioactive
elements involved in the decay chain formed between uranium 238 and lead 206. The real
problem arises in that there are polonium radiohaloes that have no uranium associated with
them. Polonium half-lives are extremely short (minutes, seconds and microseconds) and thus
become "spent" in a matter of minutes. This means that the rocks in which the
haloes formed have to be solidified in a matter of seconds or minutes, not the millions of
years postulated by evolutionists. It is comparable to finding a "BB" or small
ball bearing frozen in the center of a ice cube without having had any outside
interference imposed on the system and that this occurred in a single short lived event.
In this scenario, the ice must freeze instantly in order to maintain the "BB"
shot in the middle of the cube. The same holds true for the polonium haloes in the rocks
in that the time for solidification of the rock must have been very short, in the area of
minutes or less.
Geologically, 1980 was a year which presented creationists with an
opportunity to study catastrophism firsthand. The eruption of Mount St. Helens
provided a natural working environment in which rapid depositional and erosional processes
could be studied. Geologist Dr. Steve Austin discovered that stratification or layering of
sediments can occur rapidly in massive deposits. These deposits resemble many found in
other geologic formations. He also discovered that erosional features, which produced 30
meter cliffs, resembling the Grand Canyon were produced in a one day period by mudflows.
The log mat, which floated on the new Spirit Lake, began to settle to the bottom with the
tree trunks upright on the bottom of the lake. Sidescan sonar has revealed that thousands
of logs are found this way. The implications are that vertically standing fossil trees are
not necessarily in growth positions. Dendrochronology studies, (studies of tree rings) by
Dr. Harold Coffin, of fossil trees from Specimen Ridge in Yellowstone Park, demonstrates
that trees from different layers did not come from successively grown forests, but rather
came from the same forest and were floated in and deposited in the strata by water, thus
supporting Austins model. Creationist flood geology provides a better explanation
for this process.
Origin of Life
The two models for the origin of life are
diametrically opposite in their positions. Both suffer from the fact that neither view is
truly scientific, since neither position can provide an observer to either model. The
spontaneous generation of life proposed by the evolutionist demands great periods of time,
in order that the raw materials of living organisms would have the opportunity to interact
and create the first replicating life form. Early proposals included Millars model
which postulated that electrical discharges acting on a mixture of primordial gases
produced amino acids, or the building blocks of life. The model suffers from a variety of
major obstacles. First, the fact that in an early atmosphere, no trap existed in order to
isolate the amino acids produced, to prevent their destruction by the very cause that
produced them. Second, amino acids produced in this fashion have specific structure. Each
amino acid, like a pair of gloves, can be left or right handed. The problem lies in the
fact that living organisms are very specific in that they require left handed amino acids
for virtually all their molecules, and if a right handed acid is substituted, the
molecule, of which it is a part, becomes ineffective. Third, the amino acids which are
produced must be linked and must be maintained in a linked state, without hydrolyzing
(decomposing in the primordial waters), in order that further amino acids could be joined
to the short molecules initially produced. Fourth, this all had to be done in a reducing
atmosphere (absence of oxygen) in order that the molecules produced would not oxidize.
There is strong evidence that now shows that the earths early atmosphere was
oxidizing (31). It is interesting to note that Millars apparatus and experiment were
carefully designed in order to accomplish his objective of producing amino
acids. The fact that this experiment is now viewed to be totally inadequate to explain the
origin of life or even complex molecules. Some now think that clays acted as templates for
the complex structures of early molecules. This clay model (like Millars) is
inadequate in the sense that it would have produced racemic mixtures of molecules (were it
capable at all) or right and left hand mixtures of molecular components. Sidney Foxs
method of producing "proteinoids" by heating certain concentrates of amino acids
together is unrealistic in its approach to the question of the origin of life as he did
not produce highly ordered life as it first appears in the fossil record. So-called
simple alga life forms are not simple at all, and bear no resemblance to the
proteinoid spheres that Fox produced in the lab (32). The facts, from the fossil record,
indicate that life appeared abruptly in a variety of forms. A reasonable conclusion from
the combined evidence is that some intelligence imposed order or information (genetic
programs) on non-living matter in order to produce living matter. Some have concluded that
life was seeded on earth from outer space (33) due to the lack of evidence of life having
started on earth. The creationists position, that life was carefully designed, is
supported by investigations into the structures found on the most simple forms
that we know of. Paleys analogy, even though somewhat simplistic, still stands as a
comparison of the design of a watch to the design found in the complexity of life. The
logical conclusion to be reached is that design requires a designer. The challenge for man
is not so much as to how the structure came into being but rather to find out how that
structure functions. Contrary to evolutionists beliefs, creationism would not end
the study of science, but would provide new, exciting directions of investigation such as
those by chemist, Dr. Donald Chittick, in the area of renewable fuels, and the
reinterpretation of geological facts by geologist Dr. Steve Austin which has led to new
approaches in the study of geologic catastrophism and the exploration for fossil fuels.
Darwins gaps in the fossil record
have been claimed by many to be filled, but have they? Objective investigation into this
issue reveals many flaws in the so-called proofs presented. Perhaps the most popular
example used as proof of an organism in transition is the Peppered Moth. It is
claimed that the light colored moth, predominant in England prior to the Industrial
Revolution, evolved and changed color in order to be more compatible with the darkened
bark of the trees that they sat on. Does this represent evolution though? The fact is that
it does not.Before the Industrial Revolution, both light and dark peppered moths existed,
with the light variety dominating due to favorable camouflage. When the tree bark
darkened, the camouflage of the dark moths provided better protection for them and they
came to dominate the peppered moth population. Now that the environment is being cleaned
up, the light moth populations are beginning to increase again. This clearly demonstrates
the shifts in populations due to external influences, and the peppered moth is still the
peppered moth (34)! The same principle is true when dealing with drug induced shifts in
bacterial populations and shifts in insect populations (35) induced by pesticide
application. Evolution has not occurred!
Other proposed transitional forms include the bird Archaeopteryx. It
was once thought that this bird was a transition between reptiles and birds, due to the
number of characteristics it possessed such as claws on its wings, reptile-like bones etc.
The fact is that it is not unlike some modern birds, such as the South American Hoatzin
and the Touraco bird of Africa. In addition, fully developed birds have been found in
strata dated by evolutionists to be 75 million years older than Archaeopteryx (36). The
horse series has also undergone criticism and has been dismissed by many due to the fact
that it does not have a neat, evolutionary progression (37). In the Rattlesnake formation
of Northeast Oregon, Neophipparion, a three toed horse is found with Pliohippus, a one
toed horse, which demonstrates that the two types lived at the same time (38). While the
foot of the horse was neatly evolving, the number of ribs went from 18 pairs
in Eohippus to 15 pairs in Orohippus to 19 pairs in Pliohippus to 18 pairs in Equus
Scotti! The quest for transitional forms includes a search for the link between land
mammals and whales. Pictorial representations are made based on speculation and a minimum
of actual physical proof. Paleontologist Phillip Gingerichs intermediate creature (a
whale with legs) is only based on "a skull and several teeth"(39). Living
fossils present another problem for the evolutionist. For example, the coelacanth
was supposed to have become extinct 60 million years ago, according to evolutionists, yet
in 1938 the fish was brought up in a trawlers catch. It was an embarrassment at the
time, since the coelacanth was supposed to have been ancestral to amphibians. Evolution
has not taken place in this animal and it is reported that the fossil fish and living
specimens are "LIKE CARBON COPIES", and yet they continue to state, "They
are the closest living relatives of that earliest, though still unknown,
amphibian"(40). But what about human evolution? The evidence is even more sketchy
here. The best attempts at providing missing links have totally failed in this area. The
primary evidence for the Scopes Trial, a single tooth, proved to belong, not to an
ancestor of man, but to an extinct pig! The bones for Peking Man have completely
disappeared without trace. Lucy, the discovery of Dr. Donald C. Johanson, is
pushed as being an ancestor of man, yet the evidence shows that this specimen was
certainly a monkey. Johansons, and others, contention that this
Australopithecine was an upright walker, has been hotly contested by Charles Oxnard (41).
His computer analyses indicate that it had walking habits resembling those of an
orangutan, not a human. Footprints, stated to be 3.6 million years in age, found by Dr.
Mary Leakey, conveniently are associated with an Australopithecus creature in spite of the
fact "that the form of his foot was exactly the same as ours" (42). It is clear
that the track was filled with what was "wanted", not what would be logical.
Neanderthal man, once thought to be very apelike, has now been promoted to the
classification Homo sapiens. It is interesting to note that if cranial
capacity is a measure of human evolution, then modern humans have regressed when compared
to Neanderthal man. Neanderthal mans cranial capacity, on the average, was greater
than modern mans was. From the evidence, it can logically be concluded that man has
always been man. One is, again, led to the conclusion that evolution has not occurred and
that the creation account is the most viable answer to the data that is found.
Fossilization Slow or Fast
One of the arguments against a young age
for the earth has been that it requires great amounts of time to form a fossil by any
means. Creationists have contended that it does not require long time periods, but rather,
that the right conditions be present. Short time periods for fossilization seem to be
supported by the fact that people and animals buried at Pompeii, Italy turned into a
particular type of fossil known as a moldic fossil. (Moldic types are common in the fossil
record.) These are fossils where the material in which the organism was buried solidified
quickly, and then the organic material was leached away. In Pompeii, this took a short
time, as it was buried by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Petrification of wood
is also said to take a long time. Museums remind us continually that millions of years are
required to replace the organic compounds in wood with silicate materials, but what are
the facts. It has now been determined that artificial petrification of wood can take place
in the matter of a few hours using solutions that are found in the natural environment
(43). In fact, fossilization requires that the process be very fast! If one considers what
normally happens when a fish dies, it becomes apparent that the remains are rapidly
eliminated. Either the natural rotting process destroys it, or scavengers destroy it. It
must be buried rapidly, in order to eliminate normal decay processes. It is clear that
catastrophic processes must be involved in order to rapidly bury these organisms in
natural states, then subsurface processes are free to fossilize the organism. One of the
geologic processes now recognized in the geologic record is the turbidite flow, a
submarine avalanche made of a mixture of gravel, sand, silt and clay, which can rapidly
kill and cover animals and plants. Several turbidite flows have happened in recent
historical times, covering thousands of square miles of the oceans floor such as the
one which occurred off the coast of Newfoundland on November 18, 1929. These processes are
more consistent with a creationist flood model and provide evidence for a young earth. One
can be led to conclude that there needs to be a re-evaluation of the study of origins, and
the dogma that pervades the majority of the scientific community. There is a clear need
for open dialogue among those who conduct research into this important question, and
contrary to the popular opinion of evolutionists, this dialogue would not eliminate
science since we well know that many of the major scientific discoveries were made by
creationists in the 18th and 19th centuries. Lets begin that dialogue, and let all
the facts lead where they will.
(1) Mathews, L. Harrison; "Introduction" to Darwins
Origin of Species (London, J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1971) p.x.
(2) Gould, S.J.; "Evolution as Fact and Theory", Discover /
May 1981, p.35
(3) Keir, Porter; "Reagan Evolution Stand Disputed", The
Calgary Herald, Wednesday, January 7,1981.
(4) Gallup Poll; San Diego Union, August 30,1982.
(5) Creation Research Society Quarterly, published by the Creation
Research Society, Box 14016, Terre Houte, Indiana 47803.
(6) Dr. Steve Austin was forced to publish under a pseudonym in order
to have his technical papers accepted in refereed journals, as he was known to be a
creationist. He published as "S. Nevins" in order to demonstrate the technical
merit of his works apart from the fact that he was a creationist.
(7) Dr. Robert Gentrys position was terminated, as a result of
his research into pleochroic haloes, in spite of having published numerous articles in the
prestigious journals Nature and Science. His published article list is found in his book
Creations Tiny Mystery, published by Earth Science Associates, Box 12067, Knoxville,
Tennessee. 37912-0067 (October, 1986)
(8) Hallihan, Paul; "Professors Debate Origin of Universe",
The Calgary Herald, Life Today, Thursday, May 30, 1985 p. F1.
(9) Guth, Alan H. and Steinhardt, Paul J.; "The Inflationary
Universe", Scientific American, May 1984, p. 128.
(10) Hallihan, Paul; ibid.
(11) "Hoyle on Evolution", Nature, Vol. 294, 12 November,
(12) Kaufmann III, William; "The Most Feared Astronomer on
Earth", Science Digest, July 1981, p. 76-81, p. 117.
(13) Heppenheimer, T.A.; "Star Shifty Quasars", Omni,
January 1990, pp. 22,94, Arp states: "Everyone is convinced their view is the way
the test is whether they will permit discussion of contradictory
evidence. If they say, "No, we wont permit it," then I think you have to
be suspicious that they dont have the right answers."
(14) Gordon, Peter; "News, Views and Reviews", Origins
Research, Volume 10, Number 2, Fall / Winter 1987, p. 5. This article was a review of
Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies (published by Interstellar Media, 2153
Russell Street, Berkley, California, 94705; 198 pp.) with comments by John Gribbin.
(15) Eddy, J.A. and Boornazian, A.A.; "Secular Decrease in the
Solar Diameter, 1836-1953", Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society 11
(1979):437. Abstract only.
(16) Van Till, H.J. & Young, D.A. & Menninga, C.; Science Held
Hostage. Intervarsity Press, P.O. Box 1400, Downers Grove, Illinois 60515 (1988).
(17) Oort proposed a mechanism whereby short period comets were
replaced from an undetected cloud of comets lying far outside of Plutos orbit. He
said that occasionally, a star would pass near the solar system and perturb the orbits of
these objects such that they would begin orbiting within the inner solar system.
(18) Shelton; Geology Illustrated, p. 304. "Unfortunately most
sediments do not contain reliable clues to how fast they were deposited or to the
duration of the intervals between layers."
(19) Shelton; ibid. p. 305. "Radioactivity has provided geology
with its first and only means of measuring the duration of long periods of geologic time
in years. The techniques were all originated in the present century and are being
continually refined, as new methods and instruments are developed in the Atomic Age."
(20) Morris, H.M.; The Scientific Case for Creation, pp. 55-59. 70
(21) Burton, J.D. and Liss, P.S.; "Processes of Supply and Removal
of Dissolved Silica in the Ocean", Geochemica and Cosmochemica Acta, Vol. 37.
(22) Barnes, T.G.; Origin and Destiny of the Earths Magnetic
Field, CL Publishers Inc., (San Diego, California)
(23) Anderson, J.L.; Abstract of Papers, 161st National Meeting,
American Chemical Society, Los Angeles, 1971.
(24) Slusher, H.S.; Critique of Radiometric Dating, CL Publishers, Inc.
(San Diego, California) June, 1973.
(25) Naughton, J.J. & Noble, C.S.; "Deep Ocean Basalts: Inert
Gas Content and Uncertainties in Age Dating", Science, Vol. 162, pp. 265-266, 1968.
(26) Personal communication with F. Crawford, formerly of Home Oil,
Calgary. He indicated that projects that he participated in used various radiometric labs
in the U.S. to determine the dates of rocks. The numbers reported on samples from the same
formations were so discordant that they could not be used.
(27) Leeman, W.P.; "Late Cenozoic Alkali-Rich Basalt from the
Western Grand Canyon Area, Utah and Arizona: Iosotopic Composition of Strontium",
Geological Society of America Bulletin, 85, (Nov. 1974): pp. 1691-1696.
(28) Abstract of Papers, "Age of the Comfort Member of the Castle
Haynes Formation, North Carolina", Petroleum Abstracts, Vol. 24, No. 47, Nov. 24,
1984, Abstract No. 368,872. Rubidium-Strontium glauconite dating techniques gave ages
varying between 34.8 million years and 1.0 million years. Since these techniques failed,
fossils were used to determine the age of the formation.
(29) Gentry, R.V.; "Radiohaloes in Coalified Wood: New Evidence
Relating to the Time of Uranium Introduction and Coalification", Science 15 October
1976, Vol. 194, pp.315-318.
(30) Gentry, R.V.; "Radiohaloes in a Radiochronological and
Cosmological Perspective", Science 5 April 1974, Vol. 184, pp. 62-66, "Spectacle
array of 210 Po halo radiocentres in biotite: a nuclear geophysical enigma", Nature,
Vol. 252, No. 5484, pp. 564-566, December 13, 1974.
(31) Austin, Steve A.; "Did the Early Earth Have a Reducing
Atmosphere?", Impact, No. 109, July 1982, (Draws on a number of journal papers
including: Dimroth, E., & Kimberley, M.M.; "Precambrian Atmospheric Oxygen:
Evidence in Sedimentary Distributions of Carbon, Sulphur, Uranium, and Iron",
Canadian Journal of Earth Science, v. 13, 1976, pp. 1161-1185.)
(32) Rensburger, Boyce; "The Spark of Life", Science Digest,
March 1981, pp. 96-99,114. Sidney Foxs origin of life experiments.
(33) Crick, Sir Francis; "Seeding the Universe", Science
Digest, November, 1981, pp. 82-84, 115-116.
(34) Matthews, L. Harrison; ibid., p. xi.
(35) Struzik, Ed; "Ancient Bacteria Revived", The Calgary
Herald, Sunday, September 16, 1990, p. A1. This article reports research, done at the
University of Alberta, that found bacteria in the intestinal tracts of the corpses of
three of Sir John Franklins northern expedition of 1845. The findings showed that of
six strains of bacteria removed from the corpses, "three of them also happened to be
resistant to two of the most common antibiotics." This very clearly shows that
bacteria have not evolved nor have evolved due to environmental pressures put on them due
to "modern" development of antibiotics.
(36) Weisburd, S.; Science News, August 16, 1986, p. 103. Beardsley,
Tim; Nature, 322:677 (1986).
(37) Raup, David M.; Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Vol. 50,
p. 22, (1979). The horse exhibit has now been removed from the Pittsburgh Museum.
(38) Nevins, S.E.; Creation Research Society Quarterly, Vol. 10, p.
(39) Science Digest, Nov/Dec 1980, "Newscience", p. 25.
(40) Fricke, Hans; "Coelacanths: The Fish That Time Forgot",
National Geographic, Vol. 173, No. 6, June 1988, pp. 824-838.
(41) Oxnard, Charles; Nature, Vol. 258, 1975, p.389.
(42) Leakey, Mary D.; "Footprints in the Ashes of Time",
National Geographic, Vol. 155, No. 4, April 1979, pp. 446-457. Animal tracks were
identified, and were associated with fully modern animals, however, the fully modern human
tracks were identified as belonging to an apelike Australopithecine creature.
(43) Hicks, Hamilton; "Mineralized Sodium Silicate Solutions for
Artificial Petrification of Wood", U.S. Patent # 4,612,050.
(44) Stanley, D.J.; "Special Paper #106", in Klein, G.,
edition, Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic Continental Sedimentation of Northeastern North
America; Geological Society of America, pp. 211-239.
This article posted with the kind permission of Ray Strom and the
Science Association of Alberta, Canada.