Creation Research Society Creation…

Creation Research So ciety

Q u a rt e r ly VolumeQ 51 Summer 2014 Number 1

D. Cover: Clementine Observes the Moon and Solar Corona

Above: Full Color Composite Moon

A: Ina ‘D-calera’ B: Impact Melt in Anaxagoras Crater C: Mare Smythii D: Van De Graaf Crater E: Lunar Farside, As Seen By Apollo 8 F: Apollo 17 Rover G: Sample Gathering

Credits: NASA • Extraterrestrial Search for the Origin of E. F. G. Homochirality • Beyond Origin and Operation Science — Part II • The Little Ice Age — Part VII Q • Anomalous Impressions in Tapeats Sandstone 2 Creation Research Society Quarterly Volume 51 Creation Research Number 1 Society Quarterly Summer 2014

Articles Departments

The Extraterrestrial Search Editorial: The Recent Meeting for the Origin of Homochirality ...... 5 of the Creation Research Society...... 4 Charles McCombs CRS Conference Abstracts...... 52 Anomalous Impressions in Tapeats Sandstone (Cambrian), Letters to the Editor...... 64 Grand Canyon...... 14 W.R. Barnhart Media Reviews...... 65

Beyond “Origin & Operation” Science, Part II: An Alternative...... 31 Instructions to Authors...... 75 John K. Reed and Peter Klevberg Membership/Subscription Application and Renewal Form...... 77 The Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic Region Part VII: The Little Ice Age and Climatology...... 40 Order Blank for Past Issues...... 78 Peter Klevberg and Michael J. Oard

Haec Credimus For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh.—Exodus 20:11 Volume 51, Summer 2014 3 Volume 51 Creation Research Number 1 Society Quarterly Summer 2014

Cover design by Michael Erkel: Michael Erkel and Associates, 1171 Carter Street, Crozet, Virginia 22932

Design services by Cindy Blandon, [email protected] CRSQ Editorial Staff Danny R. Faulkner, Editor The Creation Research Society Quarterly is published Bill Barrick, Biblical Studies Editor by the Creation Research Society, 6801 N. Highway Jerry Bergman, Biology Editor 89, Chino Valley, AZ 86323, and it is indexed in the Don B. DeYoung, Book Review Editor Christian Periodical Index and the Zoological Record. Eugene F. Chaffin, Physics Editor George F. Howe, Assistant Biology Editor Send papers on all subjects to the Editor: Jean K. Lightner, Biology Editor [email protected] or to Robert Mullin, Assistant Managing Editor Danny R. Faulkner, 1414 Bur Oak Ct, John K. Reed, Geology Editor Hebron, KY 41048. Ronald G. Samec, Astronomy Editor Theodore Siek, Biochemistry Editor Send book reviews to the Book Review Editor: Jarl Waggoner, Managing Editor Don B. DeYoung, 200 Seminary Dr., Winona Lake, IN 46590, [email protected].

All authors’ opinions expressed in the Quarterly are not CRS Board of Directors necessarily the opinions of the journal’s editorial staff Don B. DeYoung, President or the members of the Creation Research Society. Eugene F. Chaffin,Vice-President Glen W. Wolfrom, Membership Secretary Copyright © 2014 by Creation Research Society. All Danny Faulkner, Treasurer rights to the articles published in the Creation Research Mark Armitage, Financial Secretary Society Quarterly are reserved to the Creation Research Gary H. Locklair, Recording Secretary Society. Permission to reprint material in any form, in- Robert Hill cluding the Internet, must be obtained from the Editor. D. Russell Humphreys Jean K. Lightner ISSN 0092-9166 Michael J. Oard John K. Reed Printed in the United States of America Ronald G. Samec 4 Creation Research Society Quarterly

The Recent Meeting of the Creation Research Society

I recently took over as editor of the Quar- a great start when Answers in Genesis’ the Flood. We capped off a near-perfect terly from Kevin Anderson. Kevin had an Georgia Purdom gave the first plenary day with dinner and ice cream at Young’s editorial in most issues, and some have session on “Design in DNA.” Not only Jersey Dairy near Yellow Springs. asked if I plan to continue this practice. was it a wonderful talk, but several people This year’s conference also had a Perhaps, but until now, I did not think also told me that it laid a good foundation different feel to it. It seemed more like a I had anything to say. For my first edito- for presentations given later in the paral- science meeting than the previous confer- rial, I would like to share news about the lel sessions. That evening, Frank Sherwin ences did. That may have had something Creation Research Society Conference of ICR delivered the Henry M. Morris to do with the improved quality of the this summer. The Society had its fourth Memorial Lecture. Frank was entertain- presentations this year, due in large part conference August 8–9, 2014, at the ing, informative, and engaging. The next to the increased participation of the staff Creation Museum in northern Kentucky morning, Russ Humphreys gave an excel- from the Institute for Creation Research (suburban Cincinnati). The purpose of our lent update on his plenary session entitled, (ICR). Eight people from ICR spoke at the conferences is to allow members to share “New Views of Gravity Advances Creation Society conference. In addition to Frank new ideas and present works in progress. Cosmology.” I learned some things from Sherwin’s Friday evening lecture, ICR For instance, at our conference this year, Russ’s talk, and even people with limited staff accounted for 13 of the presentations. Creation Research Society board member understanding of cosmology were able to We could have had a parallel session just Mark Armitage gave presentations on in- follow most of the talk. for them. tact dinosaur soft tissue. The interaction We had 120 people in attendance, far ICR, in fact, will host next year’s con- at our conferences is valuable, for it per- more than at any of our previous three ference in Dallas. That meeting promises mits evaluation and criticism of research conferences. We had 42 presentations. At to be even better than this year’s. It will prior to formal submission for publication. previous conferences we had 28 presenta- provide a good opportunity for those who Since the presentations are not intended tions spread over two parallel sessions. To have not attended one of our confer- to be finished projects, we do not record accommodate the 42 presentations this ences to combine it with a visit to ICR. them, nor do we publish proceedings. year, we went to three parallel sessions. If To encourage more social interaction, However, we do publish the abstracts of our conferences continue to grow, we ei- we’re planning a few small changes to the the presentations, and you will find the ther must go to four parallel sessions, or we format of the conference. We want to have abstracts from this summer’s conference will have to extend the meeting to a third a reception dinner at ICR the evening in this issue of the Quarterly. day. The day after the conference, some before the conference gets underway, and Another benefit of attending Society of those who remained took a field trip up we hope to have a closing reception right conferences is the social interaction. I have into Ohio. We ate lunch at Maplewood after the sessions end the second day. That enjoyed putting faces with many of the Park in Fairborn. When I was in fourth reception will feature light refreshments, people whose articles I’ve read in the Quar- grade 50 years ago, I played in this park and we hope people will choose to go out terly or with whom I’ve interacted on the nearly every day. Other than lunch, the to dinner together afterward. Attendance CRSnet discussion group. At the confer- purpose of visiting the park was to examine at our conferences is just one way you can ences, we can eat together, and we usually two glacial erratic boulders in the middle show support for the Society. I hope to see try to arrange a field trip the day following of the park. After lunch, we hiked through many of you there. the meeting, and these opportunities for Clifton Gorge, on which creationists and socializing have been pleasurable too. evolutionists agree—the stream is there Danny R. Faulkner, Ph.D. This year’s conferene undoubtedly because the canyon is there. The canyon Editor was the best yet. The meeting got off to was scoured out by glacial melt shortly after Creation Research Society Quarterly Creation Research Society Quarterly 2014. 51:5–13.

Volume 51, Summer 2014 5 The Extraterrestrial Search for the Origin of Homochirality

Charles McCombs*

Abstract or many years, naturalistic scientists have assumed that chemical Fevolution is the pathway by which life first originated. However, chemical evolution has not been able to explain how chemical reactions could have produced homochiral biomolecules outside a laboratory setting using only natural processes. The search for the origin of homochirality has presented itself as a mystery to the evolutionists because in chemistry there is no known chemical procedure or natural process that can generate new homochirality without preexisting homochirality already present. The need for preexisting homochirality to produce new homochirality and the inability of natural processes to explain the formation of new homochirality has caused evolutionists to take their search for the origin of homochirality into outer space. Some evolutionists now propose that amino acids of deep-space origin were deposited on the surface of rock fragments, irradiated, and enantiomerically enriched with circularly polarized ultraviolet light from starlight and that these newly enriched left-handed amino acids were brought to earth on meteorites. However, the evolutionary explanation for the origin of homochirality is not supported by the current scientific literature, and a critique of their proposed explanation is presented. Ultimately, the mystery of the origin of homochirality vanishes when we accept God’s creative design on life.

Introduction a living soul. The phrase “dust of the are made of chemicals, but the disagree- In Genesis 2:7, the Bible tells us that ground” perhaps refers to the chemical ment is on how life originated from God made man from the dust of the elements created on Day 1 of Creation those original chemicals. Genesis 2:7 ground. God then blew into man’s nos- Week. Creationists and evolutionists clearly states that God brought man trils the breath of life, and man became alike recognize that living organisms to life from the dust of the ground, but evolutionists claim that life originated from those original chemicals by natural processes. If evolutionists are correct, * Dr. Charles McCombs, President, Genesis Ministries, Inc., Englewood, Florida, the formation of every aspect of living [email protected] organisms should be explainable by Accepted for publication May 27, 2014 chemical (natural) processes; but if 6 Creation Research Society Quarterly creationists are correct about a super- have carbons with the “S” configura- better technology and equipment, and natural creation, then we should see tion while other carbons have the “R” newer research techniques than did evidence for unnatural happenings or configuration, or why only one unique Cairns-Smith, Bonner, and Cohen, occurrences not explainable by chemi- configuration of chirality (out of many) but the origin of homochirality is still cal or natural processes. The presence is present in these chiral molecules. a mystery, and the gap acknowledged of homochirality in living organisms is For these reasons, the “origin” of ho- by Bonner is as wide and deep as ever. such an example in favor of supernatural mochirality in living organisms has Although some skeptics wish to creation. Chirality is a term meaning been a mystery to scientists searching equate the chance formation of left- handedness. When a carbon has four dif- for a naturalistic (atheistic) explanation. handed amino acids from a chemical ferent attached groups (a chiral carbon), Cairns-Smith (1982) pointed out that reaction with the chance occurrence the molecule containing that chiral the origin of homochirality was what of heads from a coin toss, the presence carbon has two (or more) possible mirror he called the “nub question” because or lack of homochirality in a molecule image configurations in which it can ex- until that date, “there was no generally is not a chance happening. All chemi- ist. The term homochirality refers to that accepted answer to this question.” Co- cal reactions creating a chiral carbon, molecule, which, when found in living hen (1995) quotes W. A. Bonner, who, regardless of mechanism, force the organisms, exists only in one of those at the February 1995 “Physical Origin chiral carbon to exist as a symmetrical mirror image configurations (e.g., DNA, of Homochirality in Life” conference intermediate or to go through a planar proteins, amino acids, etc.). For a review at Santa Monica, California, argued transition state as it forms the fourth of homochirality, see Coppedge (1971), that there is a “gap between the origin bond to carbon. Before the fourth bond Helmick (1976), and Murphy (2013). of homochirality and the origin of life,” is formed, the carbon’s molecular struc- Amino acids, proteins, DNA, RNA, and after 25 years of searching, he ture is deficient in electrons, causing the and polysaccharides are the major could not find any evidence to bridge molecular orbitals to change hybridiza- biochemical molecules responsible that gap. Cohen has remarked that “the tion, creating a plane of symmetry. Once for maintaining life in plants, animals, origin of this handedness is a complete symmetry is formed, the capability for and humans. All of these biomolecules mystery to evolutionists” (Cohen, 1995, generating new homochirality at that (and others) possess unique homochiral- pp. 1265–1266). Even recent articles carbon atom is immediately and per- ity. Living organisms cannot exist with citing Pizzarello (Arizona State Univer- manently lost. If life’s biochemical mol- mixed or random chirality (Breslow, sity, 2008; Astrobio, 2008) and Fukue ecules were formed by natural chemical 2012). The homochirality observed in and Tamura (2010) still acknowledge processes, each chiral carbon would be a each of these biomolecules is 100% spe- the presence of homochirality in bio- 50/50 mixture of chiral isomers (Figure cific for that molecule without any evi- chemical molecules as a mystery. Today 1), but that is not seen. dence of racemization or mixed chirality. scientists have a better understanding Equally troubling for the evolutionist Although some mutations are known to of molecular biology and biochemistry, is that there is no known chemical reac- change the amino acid sequence of a protein or the nucleotide sequence of a DNA strand, these mutations never form chiral mistakes; and even the mutated portion of the protein or the DNA strand maintains the correct homochirality for that protein or DNA sequence. The fact that chirality is different in every chiral biochemical molecule makes it impossible for evolutionists to establish an origin, because the word “origin” implies a single initial source, cause, or event responsible for all subsequent occurrences. For the evolutionist, there cannot be a single source, cause, or event that explains why these biochemical molecules have Figure 1. Planar transition state forming racemic mixture. Note that the mirror different chirality, why some molecules image products (top and bottom) cannot be superimposed onto each other. Volume 51, Summer 2014 7 tion capable of forming new homochi- The Extraterrestrial Search enriched in its left-handed isomer in rality without preexisting homochirality. Daniel Glavin of NASA’s Goddard some meteorites supports (according to In all living systems, chiral molecules Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, evolutionists) the claim that some kind are formed by specific enzymatic reac- Maryland has reported, “We found more of enantiomeric enrichment occurred tions, but enzymes are also molecules support for the idea that biological mol- in outer space. These findings, in addi- containing chirality. Enzymes, like ecules, like amino acids, created in space tion to a report that circularly polarized proteins, are polymeric chains of left- and brought to Earth by meteorite im- light destroyed right-handed amino acids handed amino acids, and in all living pacts help explain why life is left-handed” (McKee, 2005), provided the evidence systems, left-handed amino acids are (Astrobio, 2009). Ronald Breslow stated evolutionists wanted for a naturalistic made from other chiral enzymes. In the that “meteorites delivered the seeds of explanation for the existence of the laboratory, organic chemists can prepare Earth’s left-handed life” (Peplow, 2008). chirality found in all living organisms. homochiral organic molecules, but in At the 235th National Meeting of the Breslow (cited in Peplow, 2008) and these processes, the starting materials, American Chemical Society, Breslow Glavin (cited in Astrobio, 2009) were the catalyst, or the environment of the proposed that circularly polarized light eager to suggest that amino acids have an chemical reaction must contain preex- is a type of energy that could be found extraterrestrial origin, but their explana- isting homochirality. When preexisting in the radiation emitting from a neutron tion only shows how some amino acids homochirality is present, the carbon star; and as this circularly polarized light could have come to earth. In addition, atom never has a plane of symmetry, struck amino acids on the surface of a Glavin showed only that a “landed me- new homochirality can be generated, passing rock fragment, the right-handed teorite” contained amino acids; it is just and existing homochirality will not be amino acids on that rock were partially as possible that those observed amino lost at that carbon. destroyed, leaving an enantiomerically acids could have been transferred to Here is the dilemma for evolutionists: enriched sample of left-handed amino the meteorite after the meteorite landed because chirality is a physical property, acids on that rock fragment. According on earth. Many scientists are quick to the factors responsible for a chemical to these claims, the left-handed amino accept Breslow’s and Glavin’s explana- reaction to occur are different than the acids present on earth today exist because tion for the origin of left-handed amino factors responsible for generating new the right-handed amino acids present on acids, even though the extraterrestrial chirality. In the laboratory, the formation those rock fragments were destroyed origin of amino acids has not been of new chirality in a molecule would by space radiation (McKee, 2005), by fully established or even accepted by require a chemical controller to direct circularly polarized light formed from all evolutionists (Peplow, 2008). If we and control the chemical reaction, select Rydberg matter (Holmlid, 2009), or by assume that the extraterrestrial origin reactants that contain preexisting ho- a neutron star as they traveled through and enrichment are valid explanations, mochirality, and perform the reaction so outer space (Peplow, 2008). Since it is then the scientific literature should be that the creation of a plane of symmetry claimed that left-handed amino acids able to validate the following four points is avoided. In a natural setting (the evolu- are found in the carbonaceous material of their extraterrestrial hypothesis: (1) tionary hypothesis), there is no chemist, of some meteorites, some evolutionists Circularly polarized ultraviolet light of and there is no preexisting homochiral- claim that meteorites transported left- the correct wavelength must be present ity, meaning that life with homochirality handed amino acids to earth. in outer space. (2) This circularly polar- cannot ever form by natural processes. These claims were based on a report ized ultraviolet light must be able to By their explanation, first life allegedly that the amino acid isovaline was found destroy or remove right-handed amino came into existence by chemical reac- to be enriched in its left-handed isomer acids. (3) The enantiomeric enrichment tions, but we also know that even the in the carbonaceous material of the of meteoritic amino acids is real and simplest one-celled organisms possess Murchison meteorite. Pizzarello (2006) extraterrestrial. (4) Meteorites must be unique homochirality. Being unable and Pizzarello and Cronin (1997) have a valid mechanism of transport for extra- to find a naturalistic explanation for looked for enantiomerically enriched terrestrial amino acids to arrive on earth. the origin of homochirality on earth amino acids in the carbonaceous ma- These four points will now be examined. and unwilling to accept that life was terial of other meteorites, and similar supernaturally created, some scientists findings were observed in the Orgueil have taken their search for the origin meteorite. The finding of amino acids on Point 1: Presence of of chirality into outer space, apparently a meteorite has led many evolutionists Circularly Polarized Light hoping that the laws of chemistry are to believe in an extraterrestrial origin of Circular polarized light (CPL) has been different there. amino acids, and the finding of isovaline detected in starlight, and is thought to 8 Creation Research Society Quarterly be formed in outer space as starlight enantiomeric enrichment) should be even present in the measured CPL of is scattered from elongated interstellar zero, a conclusion also reached by Bailey starlight. dust grains whose long axes tend to be et al. (1998). Since the existence of “nar- oriented perpendicular to the galactic rowband” circularly polarized ultraviolet magnetic field (Fosalba et al., 2002). light has not been observed outside the Point 2: Destruction of Right- From this scattering of starlight as a laboratory or in outer space, the require- Handed Chirality by UV-CPL source of CPL, these authors believe ment for an appropriate source of UV- Meierhenrich (2005) reported that that in a star-forming region such as that CPL has not been established when a solid film of racemic leucine found in the Orion Molecular Cloud, There is another problem. In the was irradiated with circularly polarized low-mass young stars could experience laboratory, circularly polarized light is light at a wavelength of 180 nm, the strong CPL of a single handedness used to measure the optical rotation of product had a meager 2.6% excess of the when externally irradiated by light a chemical molecule, a measurement left-handed leucine. Meierhenrich then from a massive star. Since our sun is a accomplished in a polarimeter using concluded that the circularly polarized low-mass star and the Orion molecular a monochromatic sodium vapor lamp ultraviolet light selectively destroyed the cloud is the closest star-forming cluster (589 nm). The light source in a labora- right-handed leucine, leaving an excess with both low-mass and high-mass stars, tory polarimeter must be in very close of left-handed leucine. Chemically, it it is assumed that amino acids on a me- proximity to the sample, but any UV- is interesting that a 2.6% enantiomeric teor passing through Orion or a similar CPL possibly present and shining on an excess of the leucine amino acid exists, nebulae brought amino acids with en- extraterrestrial rock fragment would not but there was no evidence provided to antiomeric excesses to Earth. However, be in close proximity. If CPL is created support that (1) right-handed amino not just any circularly polarized light by scattered light from dust particles acids were physically destroyed or (2) will provide the necessary enantiomeric in space, and these same dust particles that a chemical reaction created the enrichment in amino acids. prevent the long distance detection of slight excess of left-handed leucine. In the laboratory, enantiomerically UV-CPL, how close does a passing rock Whether any amino acids were physi- enriched amino acids have been iso- fragment have to be to the UV-CPL cally lost or destroyed in this experiment lated after irradiation with circularly source in order to receive enantiomeric could have been determined. Labeling polarized ultraviolet light (UV-CPL) enrichment? The inverse square law of studies could have been performed to (Meierhenrich, 2005). However, UV- physics would tell us that the intensity determine if a portion of the original CPL has never been detected in outer and effectiveness of a light source irradi- right-handed amino acids were no longer space. Although Bailey et al. (1998) have ating a passing rock fragment would be present. These experiments were not discovered circularly polarized infrared inversely proportional to the square of done. When we take into consideration radiation in a nebula, they admit that the distance of the rock fragment from the inverse square law, the anticipated they have not discovered the required the source of irradiation. If there is such enrichment for amino acids on a rock circularly polarized ultraviolet light a light source capable of irradiating a fragment passing a few million miles or any evidence that amino acids are passing rock fragment and providing en- from a weak CPL source would be sig- produced in nebulae. It is important antiomeric enrichment to amino acids, nificantly less than the 2.6% enrichment to understand that the only existing that CPL light source would have to be observed in a polarimeter with a strong, UV-CPL light is a man-made “narrow extremely intense to overcome the large monochromatic and proximal CPL band” UV light used in the laboratory distance separation. However, there is light source. Although many scientists (wavelength < 200 nm). Scientists have no evidence of such a strong CPL light have accepted Meierhenrich’s work as looked for UV-CPL at wavelengths source. Serkowski, Mathewson and Ford a general explanation for the origin of less than 200 nm in outer space, but (1975) measured the circular polariza- homochirality in amino acids, there is UV-CPL has never been detected at tion of 180 stars. The maximum fraction another possible explanation. these wavelengths due to light scatter- of CPL (all wavelengths) found in the Circular dichroism can explain the ing off of the dust particles (Fosalba et light from those 180 stars was 6 x 10–4 small enantiomeric excess observed in al., 2002). Furthermore, Chown (1999) (0.0006), and the fraction of CPL from Meierhenrich’s experiment (Cerf and has reported that light from stars covers our sun is on the order of 10–6 (Kemp et Jorisson, 2000). In circular dichroism a wide range of wavelengths (meaning al., 1987). Based on this data, the CPL experiments, it is known that left-handed broadband irradiation), and the overall that is present is weak, and there is no and right-handed chemical molecules effect of “broadband” irradiation on the proof that circularly polarized ultraviolet absorb circularly polarized light differ- handedness of amino acids (meaning light (UV-CPL) of sufficient intensity is ently. The claimed 2.6% enrichment in Volume 51, Summer 2014 9

Meierhenrich’s experiment may only peared to be enriched over d-isovaline by findings confirmed their assumption that represent a 2.6% difference in the ability about 18% in the Murchison meteorite, amino acids originated in outer space, of the different chiral isomers of leucine and about 15% in the Orgueil meteorite. as, for the first time, there appeared to to absorb circularly polarized light. If the All other analyzed meteorites landed in be evidence for the extraterrestrial gen- different chiral isomers of leucine are Antarctica where d- and l-isovaline were eration of new homochirality in those absorbing CPL differently, the observed found with equal ratios. Although there amino acids. However, proposing a 2.6% difference is not from extraterres- could be several reasons for the unequal universal explanation for the origin of trial enantiomeric enrichment but from ratios, the authors propose that some homochirality on questionable results how the chiral isomers of leucine react kind of extraterrestrial enrichment such from only two studied meteorites is risky. to CPL light in the polarimeter. This as described by Meierhenrich is respon- The evidence for alleged enrichment makes the 2.6% difference a false posi- sible for the observed unequal ratios of in these meteorites is based on a GC- tive result, putting it in the category of d- and l-isovaline on those meteorites, MS chromatogram, where the peaks experimental error. even though l-isovaline is not a naturally for d- and l-isovaline (peaks 9 and 11 in Even if Meierhenrich’s conclusion is occurring amino acid. The authors did Figure 2, after derivatization and fluo- correct, this is but a small enantiomeric not address the nonuniversal occur- rescence detection) appear to be present enrichment of one amino acid out of 20 rence of unequal ratios of isovaline but in unequal amounts, unlike the peaks of naturally occurring amino acids. How- instead suggested that enriched isovaline racemic amino acids that would appear ever, not all amino acids will respond to had implications for understanding the as two peaks of equal ratio. Although the wavelength 180 nm CPL in the same origin of life. To evolutionists, these GC-MS peaks for d- and l-isovaline are manner. Cerf and Jorissen (2000) have shown that the amino acids tryptophan and proline do not show any enantiomeric enrichment when irradiated with right-handed or left-handed CPL. Tryp- tophan contains an additional aromatic group, and proline contains an extra carbonyl group. Chown (1999) has also reported that some wavelengths of UV- CPL preferentially destroy right-handed amino acids, while other wavelengths destroy left-handed amino acids. Since all naturally occurring left-handed amino acids could not have been formed by the same process or with the same origin, Meierhenrich’s work is only an isolated example that works minimally for leucine. Based on all available evidence, the ability of UV-CPL to effectively destroy right-handed amino acids has not been established or proven.

Point 3: Enantiomeric Enrichment of Amino Acids The evidential basis for the evolutionary origin of homochirality rests on the observation that unequal ratios of d- and l-isovaline were found in the Murchison and Orgueil meteorites. Glavin and Dworkin (2009) analyzed several meteorites and reported that l-isovaline ap- Figure 2. GC-MS Chromatogram of meteoritic C-5 amino acids 10 Creation Research Society Quarterly

natural amino acids. Natural amino acids racemize at the alpha carbon by enolization of the carbonyl group, starting at temperatures of about 100oC (Figure 3). Isovaline cannot racemize without breaking a bond at the chiral carbon; and once that bond is broken, Figure 3. Racemization of amino acids via enolization. the chiral carbon atom of isovaline be- comes a free radical. These free radicals can only form racemic isovaline, if it reforms at all (Figure 4). Therefore, the discovery of unequal ratios of isovaline does not support the theory that isovaline was racemized from an originally enriched form, which leaves open the possibility that isovaline was racemic and contaminated. Glavin and Dworkin (2009) tried to dismiss earthly contamination because the d- and l-isovaline in the Murchison meteorite did not display any significant difference in their 12C /13C isotopic ratios (see also Pizzarello, Zolensky, and Turk, 2003). The claim of no earthly contamination is based on the assumption that Figure 4. Racemization of isovaline with a planar intermediate indicated. isovaline was originally extraterrestrial and any earthly contamination would have changed the 12C/13C ratio of the enantiomers. The claim that d- and l-isovaline have the same isotopic ratio clearly separated from each other and an amino acid that has a methyl group only confirms that both enantiomers the GC-MS peaks are identified, the bonded at the alpha carbon, where all have the same source, which does not authors could not rule out the possibil- natural amino acids have one C-H bond. disprove earthly contamination. In order ity of amino acid contamination during The authors acknowledge that isovaline to validate the authors claim, scientists collection, storage, or handling of the is difficult to racemize, but then they would have to acquire isovaline of prov- samples. Since isovaline is present only use this difficulty to racemize to sug- able extraterrestrial origin, and that has in parts per billion concentrations (or gest that the other natural amino acids not been done! These authors also try less), potential contamination of the were enantiomerically enriched prior to to show that very little terrestrial con- sample is a major concern. Even if there entering earth’s atmosphere. To claim tamination could have occurred because is an unequal ratio of peaks 9 and 11 in that isovaline’s difficulty to racemize is valine, a natural amino acid, is found the GC portion of the chromatogram, the rationale for the presence of other in many meteorites to be racemic. The the presence of unequal ratios for isova- enantiomerically enriched amino acids presence of racemic valine in a mete- line does not prove an extraterrestrial en- in meteorites is just plain wrong for three orite does not automatically mean that richment of isovaline or for any naturally reasons: First, extraterrestrial enrich- valine had an extraterrestrial origin. The occurring amino acid. The presence of ment has not yet been proved. Second, presence of racemic valine could have unequal ratios of isovaline isomers may isovaline is not an amino acid found in resulted from earthly contamination if sound like it supports the evolutionary natural proteins, and its inability to race- the earth-based l-valine was racemized assumption of extraterrestrial enrich- mize does not automatically mean that by the residual heat from the mete- ment, but isovaline has a very different enantiomeric enrichment was present orite. Meteorites have been reported structure than all of the other naturally in natural amino acids. Third, isovaline to be hot, warm, or cold to the touch occurring amino acids; l-isovaline is does not racemize the same way as other after landing. Carter (2002) mentions Volume 51, Summer 2014 11 that meteorites have singed grass and Earth’s atmosphere. Although the mete- and other chemicals are present in outer burned people upon contact, but it is orite may start out very cold (being from space (certain comets, the rings of Sat- not known whether the Murchison and outer space) and requires only seconds urn, planet atmospheres, etc.), and there Orgueil meteorites were hot, warm, or to enter earth’s atmosphere and land, is no debate on this point. However, the cold upon landing. Furthermore, the we know that the surface of meteorites presence of chemicals in space and the heat resulting from the kinetic energy is burned away during entry. The tem- formation of life from those chemicals of a meteorite impacting earth should perature of meteorites at the time of are two totally different statements; only cause some racemization of the natural atmospheric entry has been estimated the former is fact. Since the origin of source amino acids hit by the meteorite. to be about 1650º C, which is much homochirality is directly tied to the ori- These authors may want to believe in an higher than the temperatures needed gin of life, one origin cannot be known extraterrestrial enrichment of l-isovaline to burn amino acids. Whether enriched without knowing the other. Evolutionists based on this discovery, but all they or not, or whether burned or not, any may claim that amino acids are the pre- found were two peaks of unequal ratio. amino acid present on the surface of an cursors to life, but scientists have never Whether these two peaks were unequally extraterrestrial rock fragment would be scientifically proven that life could have formed by enantiomeric enrichment or stripped away, along with the surface of originated from any amino acid from by some other process has not yet been the meteorite, during its entry into our any source! Although the presence of established. Even if the claim of enan- atmosphere. This fact creates a prob- homochirality in chiral biochemical tiomeric enrichment is valid, this only lem for extraterrestrial thinkers. Amino molecules is difficult for evolutionists shows that isovaline became enriched, acids found in a meteorite (assuming to explain, homochirality is not the only not where or how it became enriched. no earthly contamination) could have evidence that rejects the evolutionary Until we understand the true rea- been present only inside the original hypothesis. There are other laws and son for why unequal ratios of isovaline extraterrestrial rock fragment, not on facts of chemistry that literally prevent exist, we cannot assume that racemic the surface of the rock fragment, while the formation of proteins from l-amino isovaline was extraterrestrially enriched it was in outer space. If amino acids were acids (even if they were present on by any process. Unfortunately, Glavin inside the rock fragment while travel- earth) because the chemical reactions and Dworkin have assumed the en- ing through outer space, the question needed to accomplish the formation richment of l-isovaline to be a fact and remains how those extraterrestrial amino of proteins do not work as evolution- have proposed that this extraterrestrial acids got to the inside of a rock fragment ists propose. Amino acids do not exist l-isovaline was the source of the original and how circularly polarized ultraviolet in solution in a form where they can homochirality that sparked life on earth. light could have irradiated the inside of react to form proteins, and the physical Because of such claims, there are now a rock fragment while it was traveling properties of proteins do not allow their publications showing how l-isovaline through outer space. More importantly, formation in a primordial watery soup can induce chirality into left-handed how could enriched isovaline have any (McCombs, 2014). Evolutionists may amino acids (Breslow, Levine, and impact on the origin of life on earth if it propose gradual changes over millions Cheng, 2010) and how left-handed is only present inside a meteorite? The of years as a mechanism to form life, amino acids can induce chirality to known information about meteorites but these hypothetical changes cannot make right-handed sugars (Pizzarello makes it difficult to believe that mete- change the laws and facts of chemistry and Weber, 2006). Since the extrater- orites are a mode of transportation to or allow otherwise impossible chemical restrial enrichment has not been estab- bring life to earth. reactions to occur. Since the evolutionist lished, further research is clearly needed explanation cannot satisfactorily explain to understand the reason for the unequal the presence of homochirality in living ratio of isovaline enantiomers in those Biblical Creation Is Affirmed organisms, the best explanation for the meteorites. Although the extraterrestrial existence of origin of homochirality and the origin racemic isovaline cannot be ruled out of life is creation ex nihilo by the word from the data in these articles, this infor- of our almighty God. Point 4: Meteoritic Transport mation only suggests that racemic (not In order for extraterrestrial amino acids enriched) isovaline might be present (including isovaline) to come to earth in outer space. However, the presence Conclusion on meteorites, those amino acids must of amino acids in outer space does not Four points were presented that would have survived the very high temperature necessarily validate the theory of evolu- have to be true for the evolutionary ex- of those rock fragments as they entered tion. It is well known that certain gases planation to be validated, but not one of 12 Creation Research Society Quarterly the discussed four points has any prec- was God who made the man living, all-powerful Creator. I hope it will do the edent in the chemical literature, and the not the dust of the ground. Everything same for you. validity of these four points was never about living organisms—how they are demonstrated or scientifically proved. If designed and how they function—is space radiation and circularly polarized truly a miracle of God-sized propor- References light can destroy right-handed amino tion; and to believe that the creation of Arizona State University. 2008. Key to acids—if circularly polarized ultraviolet all life, along with the homochirality life before its origin on Earth may light is even present in outer space—and life possesses, could have originated have been discovered. Science Daily, if meteorites brought these left-handed by “natural processes,” as suggested by February 29. www.sciencedaily.com/ amino acids to earth, these articles have these authors, is only wishful thinking. releases/2008/02/080228174823.htm done nothing to prove their claims. The If life’s chiral biochemical molecules Astrobio. 2008. Giving life a hand. Astrobi- authors of these articles have extrapo- truly originated by natural processes as ology Magazine, March 5. http://www. lated well beyond the observed evidence suggested by evolutionists, then every astrobio.net/topic/origins/origin-and- to establish their conclusions, and for aspect of life, including homochirality, evolution-of-life/giving-life-a-hand/ this reason, the origin of homochirality must be explainable by those natural Astrobio. 2009. The Secret Life of Amino has not been shown to be extraterrestrial. processes; but the scientific evidence Acids. Astrobiology Magazine, March The key point to explain the different does not show that to be true. If natural 17. http://www.astrobio.net/topic/solar- ratios of isovaline as being the result of processes actually formed the chiral system/meteoritescomets-and-asteroids/ extraterrestrial enrichment was never carbons of the biomolecules, then every the-secret-life-of-amino-acids/ established. The one point that could chiral carbon would be a 50/50 mixture Bailey, J., A. Chrysostomou, J.H. Hough, add validity to the evolutionary model of the two possible diastereomers, but T.M. Gledhill, A. McCall, S. Clark, F. was never proven, only accepted as fact the scientific evidence does not show Menard, M.Tamura. 1998. Circular by the authors. that either. Biblical Creation is the only polarization in star-formation regions: As evidenced by these articles, there model of origins that can explain why implications for bio-molecular homochi- is a growing and alarming trend by every chiral biochemical molecule in rality. Science. 281(5377): 672–674. some scientists to believe that symmetry- every living organism contains only one Breslow, R. 2012. Evidence for the likely breaking processes are permitted and unique configuration of homochirality, origin of homochirality in amino acids, possible concerning the generation of even though there are many other pos- sugars, and nucleosides on prebiotic new homochirality. Symmetry is part of sible configurations. Indeed, 100% ho- Earth. Journal of the American Chemical the laws of math, chemistry, and physics, mochirality is a required property of all Society 134 (16): 6887–6892. and as a law of science, there cannot be living organisms, and life would not exist Breslow, R., M. Levine, and Z.-L. Cheng. exceptions to these laws. Nothing in the if these chiral biochemical molecules 2010. Imitating prebiotic homochirality scientific literature would suggest that were formed by purely natural processes. on earth. Origins of Life and Evolution the laws of chemistry and science are When all of the facts are considered of Biospheres 40(1): 11–26. different in outer space, and nothing and the evidence is properly interpreted, Cairns-Smith, A.G. 1982. Genetic Takeover in the scientific literature supports the there is no mystery concerning the ori- and the Mineral Origins of Life. Cam- claim that a symmetry-breaking process gin of homochirality. The only possible bridge University Press, London, UK. is even possible. The need for symmetry- way for unique homochirality to exist in Carter, L. September 2002. Are meteorites breaking exceptions in order to explain the chiral biochemical molecules found hot or cold when they hit Earth? Curious the origin of homochirality should never in living organisms is for those biomol- about Astronomy? http://curious.astro. be part of a “natural process,” and any ex- ecules to have been created with unique cornell.edu/question.php?number=215. planation incorporating such exceptions homochirality when that organism was Cerf, C., and A. Jorissen. 2000. Is amino-acid cannot be considered as validated or first created. Just as a fingerprint identi- homochirality due to asymmetric pho- proven! It is only intellectual stubborn- fies its creator, God created all plant, tolysis in space? Space Science Reviews ness that prevents evolutionary scientists animal, and human life with His finger- 92: pp. 603–612. from evaluating a creation hypothesis (or print of homochirality. God intended Chown, M. 1999. Left guessing. New Scien- even any other hypothesis) for the form- for His creation to be clearly seen, not tist 164(2214), p. 20. ing of the unequal ratios of isovaline by explained by natural processes! More Cohen, J. 1995. Getting all turned around processes that do not break symmetry. than any other evidence, the presence over the origins of life on earth. Science The Bible tells us that God made of homochirality in living organisms did 267:1265–1266. man from the dust of the ground. It more to convince me of the reality of an Coppedge, J. 1971. Probability of left-handed Volume 51, Summer 2014 13

molecules. Creation Research Society light from Rydberg Matter. Astrobiology Peplow, M. 2008. Meteorite source for life’s Quarterly 8:163–174. 9(6): 535–542. handedness. Chemistry World, April 8. Fosalba, P.; A. Lazarian, S. Prunet, and J.A. Kemp, J.C., G.D. Henson, C.T. Steiner, and Pizzarello S. 2006. The chemistry of life’s Tauber. 2002. Statistical properties of E.R. Powell. 1987. The optical polariza- origin: A carbonaceous meteorite per- galactic starlight polarization. Astrophysi- tion of the sun measured at a sensitivity of spective. Accounts of Chemical Research cal Journal 564:762–772. parts in ten million. Nature 326 (6110): 39:231–237. Fukue, T., and M. Tamura. 2010. Extended 270–273. Pizzarello S., and J.R. Cronin. 1997. Enan- high circular polarization in the Orion McCombs, C. 2014. Evolution Hopes You tiomeric excesses in meteoritic amino Massive Star Forming Region: implica- Don’t Know Chemistry (forthcoming acids. Science 275:951–55. tions for the origin of homochirality in book). Pizzarello, S., M. Zolensky, and K. Turk. the solar system. Origins of Life and McKee, M. 2005. Space radiation may se- 2003. Nonracemic isovaline in the Mur- Evolution of Biospheres 40(3): 335–346. lect amino acids for life. New Scientist, chison meteorite: chiral distribution and Glavin, D., and J. Dworkin. 2009. Enrich- August 24. http://www.newscientist. mineral association. Geochimic Cosmo- ment of the amino acid L-isovaline by com/article/dn7895-space-radiation- chimica Acta 67:1589–1595. aqueous alteration on CI and CM me- may-select-amino-acids-for-life.html#. Pizzarello, S., and A. Weber. 2006. The pep- teorite parent bodies. Proceedings of the U5s8rCgVdcZ tide-catalyzed stereospecific synthesis of National Academy of Sciences 106(14): Meierhenrich, U. 2005. Asymmetric VUV tetroses: a possible model for prebiotic 5487–5492. photolysis of the amino acid leucine molecular evolution. Proceedings of the Helmick, L. 1976. Amino acid racemization in the solid state. Angewandte Chemie National Academy of Sciences 103(34): in marine sediments. Creation Research International Edition 44:5630–5634. 12713–12717. Society Quarterly 13:14–22. Murphy, P. 2013. Understanding the origin Serkowski, K., D.S. Mathewson, and V.L. Holmlid, L. 2009. Light in condensed matter of homochirality in amino acides and Ford. 1975. Wavelength dependence in the upper atmosphere as the origin polypeptides. Creation Research Society of interstellar polarization and ratio of of homochirality, circularly polarized Quarterly 50:78–88. total to selective extinction. Astrophysical Journal 196:261–290. Creation Research Society Quarterly 2014. 51:14–30.

14 Creation Research Society Quarterly Anomalous Impressions in Tapeats Sandstone (Cambrian), Grand Canyon

W. R. Barnhart*

Abstract group of 32 impressions is documented in the top of the Tapeats ASandstone at Plateau Point, Grand Canyon. These may be biological in origin, and a brief history of relevant local research is reviewed. This analysis assumes the rapid deposition shown in earlier work, and the implications of that model are explored. One is that thixotropic mobility in the sand when the impressions were formed adversely affected their clarity. Evidence of an original, thin, clay-sheet substrate is explored, as are its implications for preservation. This clay diminished the details of the impressions but served as a mold to faithfully preserve forms in the more mobile sand. Organic and inorganic explanations are considered, and the recognition of regular, linear groups suggests a possible biogenic origin.

Introduction of tourism. Decades ago, loose rubble as percussion marks, erosional marks, or Plateau Point is a common destination was removed from the northwestern tool marks. Unique sedimentary condi- along the Bright Angel Trail in Grand section of the promontory to provide a tions add to difficulties in identification. Canyon National Park and a popular safe path to a section of pipe railing. The However, the location is public and side trip from Indian Gardens (Figure lesser eroded sandstone exposed in this accessible, and the author encourages 1). Situated on the Tonto Platform of the pathway (Figure 1 insert and Figure 3) others to examine the evidence and add South Rim, it provides majestic views of contains trackways left by a multitude to the conversation. the geological succession to both rims of invertebrates on many layers, and (Figure 2). This detached promontory one sandstone layer contains 32 larger of upper Tapeats Sandstone (Figure impressions this paper will explore. Tapeats Sandstone 3) has been a popular overlook of the The impressions may be biogenic, Barnhart (2012b) described the Tapeats Colorado River below since the arrival or they may be inorganic features such as a vast sand plain of rapidly depositing sediment. From Plateau Point on the Tonto Platform, isolated outcroppings of the Tapeats can be examined for tens of km in all directions and show little change in the depositional structure. * W. R. Barnhart, Birmingham, AL, [email protected] Outside of the canyon, exposures of the Accepted for publication September 3, 2014 Tapeats in central, western, and eastern Volume 51, Summer 2014 15

Monadnocks are isolated, rounded hillocks, remnants of the erosional surface of the Great Unconformity. Known examples in the area form a roughly linear arrangement that crosses the area around Plateau Point. Rather than representing ancient receding highlands, they are simply erosional remnants of a massive sheet erosion event (Barnhart 2012a, 2012b). Rubble from these mounds is found in the Tapeats, primarily at its base. Ninety-One Mile Canyon is 2 to 3 km northwest of Plateau Point. At the time the impressions were formed, the top of the Tapeats was a relatively flat sheet of rapidly accumulating sand, broken only by the 34-m-tall hill about 2 to 3 km away. The layer containing the impressions is just over a meter below the contact between the Tapeats and overlying Bright Angel Shale. Both are dated by trilobites (McKee and Resser, 1945) as “late Early Cambrian age for the upper parts of the Tapeats Sandstone in the Grand Wash Cliffs in the western part of the canyon and an early Middle Cambrian age for the formation in the eastern canyon” (Middleton et al., 2003, p. 94). Thus, the top of the Tapeats is considered progres- sively younger from west to east; Plateau Point is midway between in location, and presumably in age, about the transition from early to middle Cambrian. The base of the middle Cambrian is placed Figure 1. Bright Angel Trail from Grand Canyon village to the Colorado River. at about 500 Ma by Beuss and Morales Plateau Point is on the southern edge of the Tonto Platform (the relatively flat (2003) and 509 Ma by Gradstein et al. eroded top of the Tapeats) between Indian Garden’s campground and the river. (2012). Insert shows the location of Layer 21 on Plateau Point, giving its approximate orientation NE to SW. (U.S. Geological Survey, 1964). History of the Find The impressions were first reported by Mackay (1985). He described five Arizona (Barnhart 2012a) extend the above the Tapeats northwest of Plateau impressions (numbers 2, 3, 4, 6 [or 8], same depositional model several hun- Point. Chadwick and Kennedy (2001) and 9 in this paper). While he did not dred km. documented one in Ninety-One Mile recognize their groupings, he did pro- Monadnocks would have provided Canyon (Figure 1) that rises 250 m pose a biogenic origin based on their the only high ground during deposition. above the contact with the Precambrian size and association with invertebrate They served as sources for loose rubble basement and 34 m (112 ft) above the ichnofossils. At least one—number 9— and potential refuges for animals. But top of the Tapeats into the Bright Angel he suggested was produced by a three- they are sparse; there are few protruding Shale. toed foot. This author visited the site 16 Creation Research Society Quarterly

on numerous occasions, spending more than three days there on at least three occasions between 1986 and 1995. Field photos were taken using a 12-in-square string grid for scale. In addition, latex molds were made of impressions 2, 3, 4, 5, and 9, which were used to produce plaster casts.

Local Trace Fossils Ichnofossils are common throughout Grand Canyon, both vertebrate footprints and invertebrate traces. Gilm- ore (1926, 1927, 1928) documented tetrapodal trackways in the Coconino Sandstone, Hermit Formation, and Supai Group (Figure 4). McKee (1982, p. 100, as cited in Blakely, 2003, p.150) noted that vertebrate trackways and ac- Figure 2. Plateau Point seen from the Kaibab Trail as a detached promontory of rock situated in the center of the Canyon.

Figure 3. Trail across Plateau Point as seen from the approach. Surface of Layer 21 is indicated by the arrow. Volume 51, Summer 2014 17

were walking on the substrate” (Brand and Tang, 1991, p. 1201). Invertebrate traces are common in many local formations, especially the Bright Angel Shale. In Layers 21 to 28 of the Tapeats (terminology of this study), invertebrate traces are ubiquitous and varied (Figure 5) but appear to form a pattern. Invertebrate traces occur both within the sand and at the sand-clay interface. Some trails that appear to begin and end abruptly may simply represent vertical migration between clay and sand. Some appear to be escape structures, burrowing down into the already-deposited sand. There is a shallow depression in the middle of the study area that may have been a small channel. This is supported by the decreasing number of traces approaching it, suggesting the creatures may have reacted to differences in hydrostatic pressure or moving water. Careful observation in Layer 21 shows that invertebrate traces are not found in the channel, possibly due to increased thixotropy there. Invertebrate traces are found in association with the other impressions, sometimes overprinting them (#9 and #10) or sometimes being overprinted by them (#24). In short, the invertebrate traces and larger impressions were produced at the same time, both in the clay portion of a sand-clay couplet. This helps us reconstruct a sequence of deposition Figure 4. Comparison of the Layers of the Grand Canyon and the geological and trace making. timescale modified from Beuss and Morales (2003, p. 7). Dates from Gradstein The varying distribution of inverte- et al. (2012). Placement of tetrapodal prints (TP), oldest tetrapodal prints (OTP), brate traces, relative to both the chan- and the impressions described in this paper (I) are shown in the margins. nel and impressions, suggests a rapid response to changing conditions, and effort to cope with a hostile environment. Similar patterns found in Layers companying plant debris “suggest the once extended north into Montana” 22 to 28, suggest a single population of presence of broad floodplains developed (Middleton et al., 2003, p. 163). Brand these invertebrates were restricted to during times of regressing seas and and Tang (1991), however, attributed single couplets. If the couplets represent semiarid-to-arid climates” in the Supai. these tracks to aquatic vertebrates be- individual waves of a wave train, then In the Coconino, segments of trackways cause the trackways “exhibited several each one would bring a new population generally move up lee faces of dunes and features that imply that these trackways reacting to a harsh environment, rather are ascribed to heat-tolerant vertebrates were not made in subaerial conditions. than representing multigenerational moving over “Sahara-like dunes [that] The animals were swimming in the communities that developed and grew were part of an enormous desert that water part of the time and at other times in situ. 18 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 5. Layers above Layer 21, showing typical invertebrate traces for each layer. Traces are not uniform over entire layer. Layer 26 shows some of the differences that can be seen over short distances. Small white squares for scale are one inch square.

The Impressions from the photos, are considered more are trackways, then a reason for the size All identified impressions were mea- closely associated with the original size discrepancies must be feasible in the sured in the field along their greatest of impressions and will be used as the sedimentary context. diameter. As no lines of impressions standards for further analysis of these had been established at that time, no lines. A conversion factor of 185 pixels Sedimentary Setting standardized pattern was used. That per inch was used. Significant size dif- The layer containing the impressions is was corrected by using the photographs ferences exist in lines of impressions. If named Layer 21 for this study and is one as surrogates and remeasuring the im- this represents initial conditions, then of a series of alternating shale and sand pressions, using the string grid for scale it would be an argument against the couplets. Layer 21 is 18 to 25 cm (7–10 (Table I). These measurements, taken groupings representing trackways. If they in) thick in the study area. The pattern Volume 51, Summer 2014 19

Figure 6. Composite view of Tapeats layers described here. Camera angle in the far right photo was shifted to show above layers more distinctly. Numbering of layers and location of thalweg (V) in each layer is indicated. Lee slope depositional direction is visible in several locations in photo and indicated in diagram.

of bedding planes suggests relatively narrow tongues of sediment were deposited from the east (Barnhart, 2012b), center- ing on a continuing shallow channel, or thalweg. The presence of the thalweg up into the overlying layers suggests the continuing presence of a channel, which emphasizes the rapidity of sedimentation. Figure 6 is a view of the lee slope depositional surface retained in the lithified stone in both the far right of the photograph, where fracture and spalling have exposed it, and in Layer 21 of the sketch. The alternating sand and shale continues at a finer level, seen in the details of Impression 22 (Figure 7). The impression is only partly visible, with overburden still covering the remaining portion. Figure 7. Impression 22, showing the thin layers between Layer 21 and Layer 22, Alternating layers of sand and clay as well as the consistent association of (A) push-up and (B) depression with most is often called flaser bedding and is at- impressions. tributed to fluvial or tidal deposition. But 20 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 8. Cross section of small lamina between Layer 21 and Layer 22 through Impression 22, showing (A) the overhanging push-up and (B) distortion of shale layers in the impression and around the push-up. Thin lamina of sandstone, 21.3 and 21.5, 5–7 mm and 3.5 mm thick, respectively, show impressions were made prior to the smaller follow-on waves.

this style of bedding, even with clay, also flaser bedding that accounts for grain larger wave (cf. Barnhart, 2012a) but can be formed at higher flow velocities, size, flow velocity, depth, bed thickness, before the passage of the following wave a weakness of facies models. Barnhart wave height, and current direction and train that deposited thinning couplets (2012a) suggested that deposition in continuity. of sand and clay (Figure 8). In other the Tapeats occurred in a succession The timing of the impressions is words, given the depositional model of waves. Each wave deposited a layer constrained by the irregular fracturing of Barnhart (2012a), the impression of sand in its more turbulent front and and displacement of the shale of Layer was formed, buried, and preserved in a clay in the rheologically smoother train. 22.1 (Figure 8) relative to the continu- matter of seconds. Schieber et al. (2007), in the lab, and ous sheets above it (Layer 22.2). This Based on that model, Layer 21 would Barnhart (2011), in the field, showed suggests that sheets of flocculated clay have been deposited by a single wave 1.6 that clay can be laid down in higher were broken up by whatever made the to 2.0 m (5–6 ft) high, based on a ratio of flow velocities because of its tendency impressions after deposition by the deposition-to-flow depth of 1:6 to 1:8 (Al- to clump together into sheets. A sedi- front part of the wave. The impression len, 1976; Rubin and McCulloch, 1980). mentary approach is needed to explain was made after the passage of the initial The thickness of Layers 22 through 26 Volume 51, Summer 2014 21 indicates a succeeding, shallower wave train. Then the next sequence of a larger wave and follow-on train deposited Layer 27, 1.0 to 1.4 m (3–4 ft) high (Figure 6). The lesser thickness of couplet 21.3 and 21.4, but with the same ratios of sand to shale laminae, suggest the smaller waves were a few cm to tens of cm high (Figure 8). The shale layers are lenticular, not continuous. Layers 22 and 23, while separated by shale in the study area, merge to a single layer to the east (Figure 6). This is consistent with deposition upward continuing in lenses by merging patterns of smaller waves. The impressions in Layer 21 are unique to Plateau Point to date. Layer 20 contains abundant oxidized iron nod- ules and can be traced west as far as Horn Creek and as far east as the South Kaibab Trail (Figure 1). No similar impressions have been found in Layer 21 outside the study area. Nor were any observed north of the Colorado River in the Phantom Creek Drainage area of Utah Flats at the same approximate level.

Inferred Conditions at the Time of Deposition Impressions 1 through 22 were best identified in the field by an associated push-up. Figure 8 shows how the clay layers were fractured and displaced by the push-up (A) but continued above it unbroken. This suggests that the clay layer, approximately 0.25 to 0.5 cm (0.125–0.25 in) thick, had already covered the sand when the impression was made, creating a space between the Figure 9. Impression 9 in an orthographic view showing relative depth of impres- sand layer and the source of the impression and height of push-up. Rollover edge of push-up is visible as shadow around sions that was originally occupied by clay outer right hand edge. Push-up is about 0.8 cm high, and impression is measured (Figures 8 and 9). This sedimentological as 19.5 cm in width, upper left to lower right (dime for scale). Note sloughing inference explains the poor detail of the along the edge of Layer 21 to the upper right is at the angle of deposition of strata, impressions in the sand—that detail showing tangential contacts at both top and bottom of strata. was lost when the thin clay layer was removed (Figure 10). While the absence of the clay ob- scures some details, much information generated by impact and trapped in the as a mold for the impressions, which is preserved in the sand. Small round clay. Afterwards, the more mobile sand the relatively mobile sand filled and marks in the sandstone of Impression migrated into the bubbles. This suggests then lithified. If so, this sand mobility 9 appear to be air bubbles, perhaps that the clay was sufficiently rigid to act indicates thixotropy. 22 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 11. Impression 2 with cross section, showing (A) original push-up produced by shear action, (B) secondary push-up, (C) push-up relocated by moving water, and (D) the multiple layers affected.

how the clay could have blurred details when the impression formed. Impression 2 (Figure 11) shows similar features, yet in this impression, the Figure 10. Cross section of Impression 9, showing (A) original push-ups produced two internal push-ups (B) are aligned to by shear, (B) secondary push-ups, and (C) push-up suspended and relocated by the left of the deepest point. This sug- moving water. gests pressure from two points in a line. Impression 2 consists of the impression, a primary push-up, a secondary push- up, and slumping sand back into the depression. The slumped area increased the diameter at the top of the track; the Most impressions show a sand push- sion 9 contains two distinct interior deeper part probably reflects the original up to one or more sides (Figure 10A). push-ups. They are not aligned and size. Slumping may help explain the These border push-ups were likely pro- may therefore represent separate impact variation in impression diameters shown duced by the original downward impact events. Both are to the left of crescent in Table I. on the clay-covered sand. Additional impressions (Figure 10, 1 and 3), which push-ups inside the impressions (Figure are the deepest part of the impression. 10B) lack the overhangs and may show The push-up shown by Figure 10C ap- Thixotropy and Clarity the effect of shear forces originating pears to have been realigned by water The facies-model style of interpretation from the impressions’ centers. Impres- flow. The sketch under Figure 10 shows can often mask uniformitarian bias, Volume 51, Summer 2014 23

Measured in field Measured from photos and sedimentary rocks are often better understood by a hydraulic interpretation Max Dimension Max Dimension (Barnhart, 2011). When rapidly deposit- Impression cm in pixels cm in ed sediments of a rare event are assumed to have formed slowly, comparison to a 1 12.0 4.7 135.0 11.3 4.4 modern depositional environment will 2 10.5 4.1 93.3 7.8 3.1 probably miss the point. This is true of the Tapeats, which is often interpreted 3 9.5 3.7 84.2 7.0 2.8 by uniformitarian geologists as a shore or 4 7.8 3.1 87.5 7.3 2.9 nearshore environment, when sedimentary features suggest rapid, catastrophic 5 7.5 3.0 76.2 6.4 2.5 deposition (Barnhart 2012a, 2012b). 6 7.5 3.0 84.4 7.0 2.8 Understanding the actual depositional situation points to implications of the 7 17.8 7.0 178.2 14.9 5.9 event. For the Tapeats, deposition by 8 5.0 2.0 62.8 5.2 2.1 large waves, depositing sand at a rate 9 19.5 7.7 193.0 16.1 6.3 of as much as 15 m per hour (Barnhart 2012b), implies several consequences. 10 9.0 3.5 113.0 9.4 3.7 One pertinent to this study would be 11 8.5 3.3 105.2 8.8 3.5 the presence of thixotropic conditions. Thixotropy occurs when an imper- 12 7.5 3.0 76.0 6.3 2.5 meable layer is deposited over sand 13 4.5 1.8 50.2 4.2 1.7 with a high volume of interstitial water. Increasing overburden pressure causes 14 5.0 2.0 50.0 4.2 1.6 the hydrostatic pressure of the water in 15 11.5 4.5 100.8 8.4 3.3 the sand to also increase and migrate toward low-pressure zones. Under the 16 6.3 2.5 77.2 6.4 2.5 right conditions, sand grains will be 17 11.8 4.6 177.0 14.8 5.8 suspended in the water, not supporting 18 13.5 5.3 136.1 11.4 4.5 each other. A break in the overlying layer will cause the release of water and the 19 9.3 3.7 96.0 8.0 3.2 compaction of the sand. If that were the 20 8.5 3.3 99.5 8.3 3.3 case where the impressions were made, water moving up into the fractured clay 21 7.0 2.8 88.5 7.4 2.9 would further diminish details, and the 22 7.0 2.8 sand would be forced into the overlying mold of the fractured clay. 23 7.0 2.8 83.7 7.0 2.8 The rapid deposition of Layer 21.1 24 5.8 2.3 71.1 5.9 2.3 atop Layer 21 (Figure 8) could have created this condition. When the im- 25 6.5 2.6 58.9 4.9 1.9 pressions were made, excess water could 26 88.2 7.4 2.9 have moved laterally and then upward 27 62.2 5.2 2.0 to relieve the increasing pressure in the sand. Hydrostatic pressure would 28 46.7 3.9 1.5 have been high, allowing the shock of 29 50.0 4.2 1.6 impact that made each impression to also break the clay, resulting in localized 30 70.3 5.9 2.3 liquefaction. This laterally moving water flowed Table I. Maximum width of prints taken in the field and from photographs using across the top of the sand and eroded 12 in. string grid as a standard. some shallow invertebrate traces. Im- 24 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 12. The Plateau Point impressions associated into 6 lines of similar shape and size.

pressions 4 and 5 also appear to have impressions to these causes? Thixotropy an alternation of right and left feet and been affected; they are shallower and would preserve detail, but the depth this should be reflected in the impres- less distinct than others. Impression would be shallow. A firm substrate would sion pattern. Loope (1986), in discussing 26, on the other hand, is surrounded capture less detail. Impression 26 is a Holocene hoof impressions from the by invertebrate traces. But it was nearly good example of a very shallow but de- Nebraska Sand Hills, confirmed them as obliterated before the invertebrate traces, tailed impression. This, along with the biogenic based on a linear arrangement although after the deposition of the evidence from the loss of invertebrate of 3 to 5 prints that showed an alignment original clay sheet. It is so shallow that traces, supports a thixotropic explana- indicating alternation between front and it was identified in photos only because tion for loss of details. back or left and right. of its position relative to a line of other With the Plateau Point impressions, impressions. However, Impressions 6, one indication of a biogenic origin is the 7, and 8 have few invertebrate traces Possible Causes of the ability to group them into linear series, around them, suggesting the impression Impressions: Arguments based on similarities in size and shape disturbed the sand after the tracemakers for a Biogenic Origin (Figure 12). While there is consider- and that water released from the sand There are several possible causes for able size variation between impressions actively obliterated them. impressions in sedimentary rock, both (5–19.5 cm), none of them are too Another reason the impressions are organic (tracks) and inorganic (e.g., small or too large to fit within the size shallow and unclear could have been tool marks, erosion marks). To confirm range of known taxa, especially if some the firmness of the sand substrate, like biogenic trackways, Sarjeant (1975) felt a impressions reflect multiple impacts. walking on wet versus dry sand. Might minimum of at least three sequential im- The grouping in Figure 12 and Table it be possible to distinguish the relative pressions should be found. Frey (1975) II combines impressions of similar, but contribution to the lack of clarity of the noted that quadrupeds regularly show not exact, sizes. Disparities in size are Volume 51, Summer 2014 25

Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Line F Imp. cm in Imp. cm in Imp. cm in Imp. cm in Imp. cm in Imp. cm in all 2 7.8 3.1 12 6.3 2.5 10.0 3.9 29 4.2 1.7 24 5.9 2.3 13 4.2 1.7 avg. 3 7.0 2.8 15 8.4 3.3 28 3.9 1.5 30 5.9 2.3 14 4.2 1.7 4 7.3 2.9 16 6.4 2.5 25 4.9 1.9 5 6.4 2.5 19 8.0 3.1 27 5.2 2.0 avg. 5.9 2.3 avg. 4.2 1.7 21 7.4 2.9 20 8.3 3.3 22 7.0 2.8 23 7.0 2.8 avg. 4.6 1.8 26 7.4 2.9 avg. 7.2 2.8 avg. 7.4 2.9

Table II. Maximum width of prints grouped by lines as taken from photo measurements. 26 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 13. Montage of impressions found in Layer 21 in the study area. String grid was laid out at 12 in (30.5 cm) intervals in both directions, and images were processed to remove keystone affect prior to assembly. Picture of loose rock (Figure 14) with impressions 16–19 was moved and rotated to likely original position.

attributed to multiple impacts and post- erosional remnants, their origin should the entire surface probably would show impression slumping of the perimeter. be visible in the three-dimensional evidence of erosion, including the re- Another indication is the internal framework shown at the outcrop. Figure moval of the invertebrate traces. More geometry, particularly the sediment 9 shows erosion of the outer edge of the important, the “push-ups” could not be push-up associated with many impres- layer to the upper right. This is a fracture erosional features because they then sions. Although percussion marks would surface aligned with the depositional would belong to the overlying layers, also involve the downward pressure of an lee-slope surface that fractured across the not Layer 21. object on the sediment substrate, that surface toward the viewer. The transition Another possibility is that they are would not be expected for tool marks or between layers is easily recognized. In- random percussion marks, caused by erosional features. vertebrate traces are common over much larger cobbles or boulders bouncing off of the top of Layer 21 and in overlying the sand substrate during catastrophic Possible Inorganic Causes layers but are largely absent on surfaces deposition or dropped from rafts of ice There are several possible inorganic of the lee slopes. The ability to see this or vegetation in lower energy condi- causes, including erosional remnants, level of detail of later erosion suggests tions. Neither seems likely. There is no percussion marks, currents marks, tool that if the impressions were erosional, evidence of cobbles or boulders in the marks, and overburden compaction. their nature would be visible in the surrounding sediment above the Lower If the Plateau Point impressions were field. If they were erosional remnants, Tapeats (100+ m below). There are no Volume 51, Summer 2014 27

other percussion marks in the surround- ried in currents or eddies that impact the ential compaction would be expected ing sediments. substrate and leave marks. But there is to leave more widespread evidence. Finally, Barnhart’s (2012b) model no evidence of tools or tool marks in the Furthermore, the layers of overburden of the Tapeats would preclude the pres- surrounding sediments. Furthermore, shown in Figure 6 show it to be just as ence of such cobbles. the entire area the depositional model proposed and flat as Layer 21, just as the underlying shown in Figure 1 was a broad sand continued singular location of the small layer, Layer 20, is also. plain, except for a single monadnock channel indicates sediments deposited Although McKey et al. (1971) were several km to the northwest. Given this by currents and waves moving west able to produce pseudomorph con- model, we would not expect percussion without currents or eddies in this area. cavities at the bottom of the lee slopes marks to be associated with smaller Several of the lines of impressions are of prograding sediments that appear waves but only with the larger waves at aligned in other directions. to mimic a biogenic origin, Sarjeant the front of the wave train. Evidence Another inorganic cause might be (1975) recognized that those occurring around Impression 22 (Figures 7 and diagenetic changes after deposition, on bedding planes are more likely to be 8) indicates deposition by smaller waves including differential compaction. This biogenic. Since Layer 21 is a bedding carrying sand and clay. would require localized pressure points. plane, not the base of a lee slope, McKey Another possibility is tool marks. Again, the impressions are extremely et al.’s (1971) pseudomorphs are not a These are typically caused by debris car- rare for this area; a process like differ- likely explanation either. 28 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Implications of a Biogenic Origin Tracks and trackways in the Tapeats Sandstone would be of significant interest. Footprints and trackways are defini- tive time stamps in a rock and are useful in discerning animal behavior and geographic range (Lockley and Hunt, 1995), even in the absence of corresponding body fossils (Brand and Florence, 1982). Some have questioned how tracks and trackways could have been left during the Flood (e.g., Aufdemberge, 2004; Whitmore, 2009). Others have used footprints to help define its progress (Froede, 2010; Oard, 2001, 2011; Snelling, 2010). The main reason prints would be of interest is that the oldest documented tetrapod footprints occur in Devonian strata in Poland (Niedzwiedzki et al., Figure 14. The loose rock in Figure 13B as it now lies. Gap is approximately 0.5 2010), dated between 391.8 and 397.5 m (about 18 in) and 2 m (6 ft) west of its original position. million years ago (Ma). Other Devonian tetrapod prints have been documented in Australia, Brazil, Greenland, Scot- land, and Ireland (Murphy, 2006). Prints in the Cambrian Tapeats would call for a relocation of a single rock slab to its posi- makes more sense in a catastrophic fundamental reassessment of our under- tion prior to its breaking off and sliding model; invertebrate trace makers would standing of evolutionary history. For that a short way downhill when the trail was have begun creating traces wherever same reason, great caution must be used constructed (Figure 14). The shape and they were carried by waves. in the further study and conclusions position of the slab make the relocation Associated body fossils would also be from these impressions at Plateau Point. relatively simple. Figure 13 shows 30 helpful in confirming a biogenic origin, identified impressions. Another two but tracks and trackways are commonly were found just outside the study area accepted as viable fossil evidence by Extent and Characteristics of and are shown in Figure 15. paleontologists. Woolfe (1990) recog- the Plateau Point Impressions The ability to group these impres- nized that traces alone were enough Their occurrence in “Cambrian” strata sions into the aligned segments (Figure evidence to redefine an entire facies at- argues against a biogenic origin within 12) suggests a biogenic origin. Further tribution, and Froede and Cowart (1996) the standard uniformitarian/evolution- work is needed. Will the patterns stand used trace fossils to evaluate differing ary history. But that limitation is not up to mathematical analysis and com- depositional environments between as severe in a biblical history. It seems pare with recognized biogenic causes? uniformitarian and young-earth Flood unlikely, as noted above, that inanimate These are questions for further research. interpretations of the Dougherty Gap. In objects or physical processes could the case of these impressions at Plateau have produced six lines of such similar Point, further research is encouraged. but diverse impressions at such regular Discussion intervals. To better assess their origin, Invertebrate traces and body fossils in we must understand the nature of these the lower Paleozoic sequence at Grand Conclusions impressions carefully. Canyon show better preservation in the Based on fieldwork done between 1986 A montage of Layer 21 (Figure 13) clays rather than in the sands like the and 1990 and subsequent examination provides a photographic replication of Tapeats. The overlying Bright Angel of field photographs, the 32 impressions Plateau Point at the time the fieldwork Shale has abundant Cruziana trackways, at Plateau Point can be logically grouped was originally done in the late 1980s. although their body fossils are found into six tentative trackways, A to F (Fig- The only change was the photographic only on separate parting surfaces. This ure 12 and Table II). Inorganic causes Volume 51, Summer 2014 29

and response illustrated by common one-way types. Earth Surface Processes 1:361–374. Aufdemberge, T.P. 2004. Regarding the “Fo- rum on dinosaur eggs, nest, and tracks.” CRSQ 41:80–81. Barnhart, W.R. 2011. Hurricane Katrina splay deposits: hydrodynamic constraints on hyperconcentrated sedimentation and implications for the rock record. CRSQ 48:123–146. Barnhart, W.R. 2012a. A hydrodynamic interpretation of the Tapeats Sandstone, part I: basal Tapeats. CRSQ 48:288–311. Barnhart, W.R. 2012b. A hydrodynamic interpretation of the Tapeats Sandstone, part II: middle and upper Tapeats. CRSQ 49:19–42. Beuss, S.S., and M. Morales. 2003. Introduc- ing the Grand Canyon. In Beuss, S.S., and M. Morales (editors), Grand Canyon Geology, second edition, pp. 1–8. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Blakely, R.C. 2003. Supai Group and Hermit Formation. In Beus, S.S., and M. Mo- rales (editors), Grand Canyon Geology, second edition, pp. 136–162. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Brand, L.R., and J. Florence. 1982. Strati- graphic distribution of vertebrate fossil footprints compared with body fossils. Origins 9(2):67–74. Figure 15. Impressions 31 and 32 are approximately 30 feet west from Figure 13. Brand, L.R., and T. Tang. 1991. Fossil verte- Block diagram (below) shows sedimentary layers and direction of current (paral- brate footprints in the Coconino Sand- lel to thalweg, Figure 13). These are the only two impressions not found in Layer stone (Permian) of Northern Arizona: 21 but in the overlying layer. However, they appear associated with one of the evidence for underwater origin. Geology potential lines, C, indicating a high rate of deposition. 19:1201–1204. Chadwick, A.V., and M.E. Kennedy. 2001. Depositional Environment of the Ta- peats Sandstone in the Region of Grand Canyon, Arizona. http://geology.swau. for these features do not appear to fit the The impressions are quite anomalous, edu/faculty/tapeats.html (accessed May existing evidence, given the depositional in any case, simply because of their rar- 15, 2014). model of Barnhart (2012b). Further ity in the region and their stratigraphic Frey, R.W. 1975. The Study of Trace Fossils: fieldwork should be carried out at Pla- location and deserve further study. A Synthesis of Principles, Problems and teau Point, especially if the Park Service Procedures in Ichnology. Springer-Verlag, ever excavates additional overburden to New York, NY. improve the trail. However, sufficient References Froede, C.R. Jr. 2010. Fossilized animal data exist here for more detailed quan- CRSQ: Creation Research Society Quarterly tracks and trackways date uplift of the titative analyses that may strengthen or Allen, J.R.L. 1976. Bedforms and unsteady Appalachian Mountains. Creation Mat- weaken hypotheses regarding origin. processes: some concepts of classification ters 15(4):1,6–7. 30 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Froede, C.R. Jr., and J.H. Cowart. 1996. gion. Carnegie Institute of Washington CRSQ 38:3–17. Dougherty Gap: evidence for a turbid- Publication 563, Washington, DC. Oard, M.J. 2011. Dinosaur tracks, eggs, and ity current paleoenvironment. CRSQ. McKee, E.D., J.R. Douglass, and S. Ritten- bonebeds explained early in the Flood. 32:202. house. 1971. Deformation of lee-side CRSQ 47:235. Gilmore, C.W. 1926. Fossil footprints from laminae in eolian dunes. Geological Rubin, D.M., and D.S. McCulloch. 1980. the Grand Canyon. Smithsonian Miscel- Society of America Bulletin 82:359–378. Single and superimposed bedforms: laneous Collection 77(9):1–41. Middleton, T.L., and D.K. Elliott. 2003. a synthesis of San Francisco Bay and Gilmore, C.W. 1927. Fossil footprints from Tonto Group. In Beuss, S.S., and M. flume observations. Sedimentary Geology the Grand Canyon. Smithsonian Miscel- Morales (editors), Grand Canyon Geol- 26:207–231. laneous Collection 80(3):1–78. ogy, second edition, pp. 90–106. Oxford Schieber, J., J. Southard, and K. Thaisen. Gilmore, C.W. 1928. Fossil footprints from University Press, New York, NY. 2007. Accretion of mudstone beds from the Grand Canyon. Smithsonian Miscel- Middleton, T.L., D.K. Elliott, and M. Mo- migrating floccule ripples. Science laneous Collection 80(8):1–16. rales. 2003. Coconino Sandstone. In 318:1760–1763. Gradstein, F.M., J.G. Ogg, M.D. Schmitz, Beuss, S.S., and M. Morales (editors), Sarjeant, W.A.S. 1975. Fossil tracks and im- and G.M. Ogg (editors). 2012. The Grand Canyon Geology, second edition, pressions of invertebrates. In Frey, R.W. Geologic Time Scale 2012. Elsevier Press, pp. 163–179. Oxford University Press, (editor), The Study of Trace Fossils, pp. New York, NY. New York, NY. 283–324. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY. Lockley, M.G., and A.P. Hunt. 1995. Dino- Mudge, B.F. 1873. Recent discoveries of Snelling A.A. 2010. Fossilized footprints—a saur Tracks and Other Fossil Footprints fossil footprints in Kansas. Transac- dinosaur dilemma. http://www.answers- of the Western United States. Columbia tions of the Kansas Academy of Science ingenesis.org/articles/am/v5/n4/fossil- University Press, New York, NY. (1872–1880) 2:71–74. dino-prints (accessed December, 2013). Loope, D.B. 1986. Recognizing and utilizing Murphy, D.C. 2006. Devonian tetrapod U.S. Geological Survey. 1964. Grand Can- vertebrate tracks in cross section: Ceno- trackways. http://www.devoniantimes. yon National Park and Vicinity [map]. zoic hoofprints from Nebraska. Palaios org/Order/trackways.html (accessed 1:62,500. U.S. Department of the Inte- 1:141–151. July 2013). rior, USGS, Reston, VA. Mackay, J.B. 1985. Cambrian fossil foot- Niedzwiedzki, G., P. Szrek, K. Narkiewicz, Whitmore, J.H. 2009. How did the dinosaurs prints. Ex Nihilo 7(3):13–14. M. Narkiewicz, and P.E. Ahlberg. 2010. survive the Flood to make tracks and McKee, E.D. 1982. The Supai Group of Tetrapod trackways from the early Mid- nests? Creation Matters 14(5):6. Grand Canyon. U.S. Geological Survey dle Devonian period of Poland. Nature Woolfe, K.J. 1990. Trace fossils as paleoenvi- Professional Paper 1173, Washington, 463:43–48. ronmental indicators in the Taylor group DC. Oard, M.J. 2001. Vertical tectonics and the (Devonian) of Antarctica. Palaeogeogra- McKee, E.D., and C.E. Resser. 1945. Cam- drainage of floodwater: a model for the phy, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. brian History of the Grand Canyon Re- middle and late diluvian period, part I, 80(3–4):301–310. Creation Research Society Quarterly 2014. 51:31–39.

Volume 51, Summer 2014 31 Beyond “Origin & Operation” Science,

Part II: An Alternative

John K. Reed and Peter Klevberg*

Abstract ecause the concepts behind the terms “origin science” and “opera- Btion science” are deficient in defending a Christian view of science and history from secular positivism, an alternative scheme is suggested that accommodates a traditional Christian view of truth. In contrast to origin and operation science, we suggest that: (1) origins (properly defined) is a question of metaphysics, (2) the study of the past is the domain of history, and (3) science addresses present phenomena and timeless rules of nature. Interdisciplinary investigations like natural history or historical science are best addressed as “mixed questions.”

Introduction use only two of the proposed types of to some extent. This leads to a number Trials in Arkansas (MacLean vs. Arkan- science—origin science and operation of other problems. These include the sas, 1982) and Louisiana (Edwards vs. science (OS2). In Part I of this series weakness of the criteria that support Aguillard, 1987) about teaching creation (Reed and Klevberg, 2014), we critiqued origin science, the inferiority of the in the public schools were decided in this scheme and found it deficient in dual dichotomies (past vs. present and favor of secularists primarily based on several areas. At its foundation, propo- regularities vs. singularities) that define claims that evolution was “science” and nents of OS2 looked for an answer within the four sciences, the mistaken belief creationism was “religion.” In response, science, rather than using theology and that science can address primary cause several Christian thinkers (Geisler, 1983; philosophy to define the proper sphere (God’s creative acts) or singularities in Geisler and Anderson, 1987; Thaxton of science as well as its relationship to the past, an insufficient understanding of et al., 1984) proposed different kinds truth and to other relevant disciplines. uniformity and uniformitarianism, and of science, including origin, operation, If the main problem between Chris- a mistaken support of methodological historical, and supranormal (Figure 1) tian and secular worldviews concerns naturalism and the “god-of-the-gaps” and that evolution and creation both fall the nature of truth and knowledge, par- fallacy. Finally, while the authors em- within the bounds of origin science. This ticularly the secular epistemology of pos- phasized the history of science, they did approach has become popular among itivism, then looking for an answer inside not adequately reflect recent work (e.g., creationists, although they typically science implicitly grants that positivism Stark, 2003, 2005) that has shown that many of the secular accounts of the history of science consist of anti-Christian myths centered on a narrative of a “war” * John K. Reed, PhD, Birmingham, Alabama, [email protected]; between “science and religion.” In real- Peter Klevberg, Great Falls, Montana ity, Christianity gave birth to science, not Accepted for publication September 16, 2014 in a seventeenth-century “revolution,” 32 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 1. Geisler and Anderson (1987) derived four kinds of science basted on their classification criteria of past vs. present and regularity vs. singularity. Modified from Geisler and Anderson (1987, their figures 1 and 2).

but in the medieval university system of the water, and the part that remained First, truth must be guaranteed. the church (Glover, 1984; Stark, 2005). was due only to the unconscious reten- Christianity does so by revelation from If OS2 is not the best answer to one tion of Christian presuppositions, such an omniscient God who cannot lie. If of the most enduring secular strategies as the intelligibility of nature to man naturalism and postmodernism are self- in the origins debates, then another is (Reed, 2001). That was why there was refuting (Lisle, 2009, 2010; Reed, 2001, needed. It must look beneath the history common ground between creationists 2012), revelation is the only alternative. and philosophy of science to the com- and evolutionists during the twentieth The Bible was the foundation that built peting worldviews that supply essential century. Though they could not agree the West and its science (Mangalwadi, axioms of truth and reality. Because on origins, they could agree that science 2012). Debates over methods, bound- Christianity and naturalism are contrary was a means of discovering objective aries, and practical uses appear less in their metaphysics, epistemology, and truth about nature. But recent decades daunting if truth is the focus. Second, philosophy of history (Reed, 2001), then have seen the rise of postmodern rela- Christians must restate the foundational we must dig deeper to define science tivism and nihilism. Those variations links between science and theology (e.g., (and other disciplines) in a way that of secularism will complete the task of Reed and Williams, 2011, 2012), despite is consistent with Christian worldview destroying science as it has been known. secular dismissals of theology and faith. axioms, acknowledging, in particular, They present a window of opportunity Only theology can justify the axioms and the primary source of truth as being for Christians to demonstrate that truth ethics necessary for science. Secularists revelation rather than science. is possible and can be known in part have always wanted the benefit without by science. But that involves putting it the intellectual or ethical costs, but that back in its rightful place—undergirded happy inconsistency will not survive An Alternate View by revelation and surrounded by other postmodernism. of Science and History disciplines that can know truth inside Since science is not the autonomous Because science is the child of Christi- their own boundaries. Science thus benchmark of truth, it must recede to its anity, it is like a fish swimming in those faces the options of humbling itself or rightful role. It is an amazing branch of life-giving waters. Remove the water, being destroyed. We propose a means knowledge—no more and no less—a and the fish dies. Enlightenment secu- to achieve the former, consistent with discipline with its own distinct methods, larism dragged science part way out of Christianity. questions, and objects of inquiry. Many Volume 51, Summer 2014 33

There is no objective ground for science apart from Christianity. This was the crucial point missed by Geisler and Anderson (1987). In the three decades since OS2 was proposed, continued secular attacks (often irrational) against biblical truth in any form (YEC or ID) Figure 2. Adler’s (1965) definition of the disciplines provides better demarcation have demonstrated the need for a more criteria than OS2. He distinguished history, science, mathematics, first-order phi- robust Christian response. losophy, and second-order philosophy. When combined with the assertion that all true human knowledge rests on revelation, this scheme provides a workable How Science Fits alternative to positivism. With this added explicit foundation of revelation, Adler’s (1965) division of knowledge (Figure 2) is superior to OS2. It provides better criteria for defining disciplinary boundaries, it notes crucial clever schemes to define science as Adler (1965) and modified to explain distinctions missed by Popper and other something more have come and gone. its implicit Christian presuppositions. It traditional secular philosophers of sci- They all fail at the point of rejecting avoids many unnecessary quandaries of ence, and it proposes a simple way to ad- revelation as the basis for truth. Further- positivists and relativists. Better options dress exceptions and avoid the tendency more, most were unnecessary; it seems may exist, and we welcome that discus- to rebuild the house at the first sign of a to have been a characteristic of modern sion. But no solution can work that does leak. Finally, its more modest definition thought that every generation wishes to not recognize (1) God is the source of of science begins solving the demarca- jettison the past and build a new system truth; (2) man, created in God’s im- tion problem and other “intractable” from the ground up. age, can find truth; (3) the world, cre- issues of secularism. We propose a tentative alternative ated by God, can be comprehended by Adler (1965) wrote about philosophy, that fits the Christian worldview and man; (4) fallen man has an innate bias but his criteria for successful philosophy avoids the pitfalls of secular philosophy against truth; and (5) truth is grounded can be applied to science. He said that of science. It is based on the work of in revelation. philosophy (or science) should: 1. Be an “autonomous branch of knowledge in the form of testable, falsifiable doxa” (p. 79). Both doxa and espistēmē are valid knowledge (Figure 3). The latter is “certitude beyond the challenge of skeptical doubts … finality beyond the possibility of revision … necessary truths” (pp. 23–24), while doxa is a more moderate knowledge. It is “testable by reference to evidence … subject to rational criticism, and either … corrigible and rectifiable or …falsifiable” (p. 28). 2. Propose “theories or conclusions [that] should be capable of being judged by a standard of truth, to which appeal can be made in adju- Figure 3. Knowledge and opinion are not mutually exclusive, true and false ca- dicating disagreements” (p. 79). pacities of the mind (A) but can be seen as a spectrum of public increasing truth, 3. Conduct inquiries as a “public en- distinct from both private opinion and sure and certain knowledge (B). See Adler terprise” (p. 79) with ground rules to (1965) for an extended discussion. From Reed and Klevberg (2014). guide debate toward truth. 34 Creation Research Society Quarterly

first-order philosophy are synthetic. Empirical knowledge is further divided by special experience vs. common experience. The former is “experience we have as the result of investigative efforts on our part, and only as the results of such efforts” (Adler, 1965, p. 102, emphasis his). Common experience includes “all the experiences we have without any effort of investigation on our part. These are the experiences we have simply by virtue of being awake—with our senses alive and functioning, with an awareness of our inner feelings or states, but without asking any questions, without trying to test any conjectures, theories, or conclusions, without making a single deliberate effort to observe anything” (pp. 102–103). The second primary dichotomy is that between investigative knowledge— based on special experience—and non-investigative knowledge—based on common experience (Figure 4B). Investigative knowledge leads to science or history, depending on whether the questions answered are specific or general, and non-investigative knowledge includes philosophy and mathematics. This is quite different from OS2, which uses the dichotomies of past/present, and regularities/singularities. These do not explicitly distinguish science from history but only “operation science” from “origin science” and “historical science” (Figure 5). History and science are both delib- Figure 4. Adler (1965) subdivided human knowledge based on two sets of criteria: erate investigative knowledge, but sci- synthetic vs. analytic (A) and investigative vs. non-investigative (B) to emphasize ence is the present-day investigation of the crucial distinction between common experience and special experience. “natural law,” while history investigates Though primarily concerned with the role of philosophy, his division of human singular past events. Recent develop- knowledge is superior to that of OS2. ments of geohistory, biohistory, and cos- mohistory challenge this arrangement. Positivism claims all are “sciences,” with no distinction between past and present 4. Be a branch of knowledge with Adler (1965) uses two primary di- (e.g., Cleland, 2013). OS2 answered this “questions of its own (on which its chotomies to differentiate disciplines challenge by subdividing science. Adler autonomy is based)” (p. 79). These (Figure 4). The first is synthetic (em- (1965) assigned science per se to the “questions” are conjoined with its pirical) vs. analytic (formal) knowledge. present but recognized that there were own “objects of inquiry” and “meth- Math and second-order philosophy are questions that required a cooperative ods.” analytic, while science, history, and effort of two or more disciplines. Instead Volume 51, Summer 2014 35

Figure 5. Comparison of Adler’s (1965) criteria for defining disciplines (A) and Geisler and Anderson’s (1987) divisions into four types of science based on “past vs. present” and “regularity vs. singularity.” Note that Adler rejects the possibility that science can be defined as investigation of particulars.

of trying to rearrange the basic divisions, explains why there is the potential for, Andronicus and means literally “after he treated them as a separate category, but not the guarantee of, objective truth physics” or “beyond physics.” which he called “mixed questions.” But in science. The diminishing influence Aristotle himself described his sub- before we discuss them, we must show of Christianity on intellectuals parallels ject matter in a variety of ways: as where the topics included in OS2 fit the rising relativism of the postmodern ‘first philosophy’, or ‘the study of within this proposed scheme. age. being qua being’, or ‘wisdom’, or It is worth noting an important An ability to define science is es- ‘theology.’ (Cohen, 2012) difference between the objective and sential to a correct understanding of Over time, the term acquired shades subjective definitions of science. Start- how it interacts with history, philosophy, of meaning from different schools of ing with Kuhn (1962), a number of theology, and revelation. These, in turn, philosophy, and finally, following Hume, philosophers of science have advocated correct the misunderstandings inherent it was widely rejected as valid knowledge. eliminating objective, ideal definitions to secular positivism, as well as those But the claim that metaphysics was not of science and concentrating instead in OS2. Therefore, we will explore the valid knowledge did not magically make on defining science by the practice of place of origins and earth history rela- its questions disappear. Adler thought scientists. This has led some (e.g., Bauer, tive to science. While OS2 would have that metaphysics included 1992) to assert that there is no scientific us think that these areas are amenable philosophical questions about that method or that it is impossible to deter- to their individual arenas of science, we which is and happens in the world mine demarcation criteria (e.g., Laudan, suggest that they are not. … the nature of being and existence; 1983). This is a problem for secular the properties of anything which is; thinkers, who have no absolute basis for Study of Origins the modes of being and the types normative truth or for normative stan- Is Theology/Metaphysics of existence; change and perma- dards of ethics. Christianity recognizes Metaphysics is “the study of being or nence in being or mutability and that mankind lives in the tension of reality” (Geisler and Feinberg, 1980, immutability; the existence of that existing both in the image of God and p. 432). The term is associated with which changes; change itself and as fallen creatures. It explains why we Aristotle—his metaphysics are the heart the types of change; causation and can have normative standards and yet of his work (McKeon, 1941). The word the types of causes; necessity and not live up to them. In a similar way, it originated in the first century BC with contingency; the material and the 36 Creation Research Society Quarterly

immaterial; the physical and the non-physical; freedom and indeter- minacy; the powers of the human mind; the nature and extent of human knowledge; the freedom of the will. (In addition to such purely philosophical questions, there is a host of mixed questions—questions about the nature of man, about society, and about history—the answer to which depend in part upon scientific and historical knowledge). (Adler, 1965, p. 43) Clearly, the topic of origins is included. The dead ends of modern philosophy have not eradicated metaphysics; they show only that man moving away from revelation loses confidence in the truth he does know. Since the Bible describes Figure 6. Sproul et al. (1984) presented four options for the origin of the universe. origins, it is at the heart of the issue. The first two are excluded by logic, leaving the views of naturalism and Christian- Contrary to atheists’ assertion that their ity competing for acceptance of explaining ultimate origins. view is pure science, denial of God as the Creator is also a metaphysical statement. What do we mean by origins? On one hand, it refers to the ultimate source of existence, whether through ex nihilo causes … the material and the immate- any “scientific” discussion of origins. divine creation or a materialistic big rial” (Adler, 1965, p. 43). One of the problems with “origin sci- bang. But it is commonly misused as Christians should be comfortable in ence” is that it (1) accepts the broader, shorthand for a whole range of ques- this mode of thinking. God’s completed equivocal use of the term and (2) vio- tions and debates about earth history, work of Creation and His ongoing work lates the spirit of Christian theology by human history, and cosmology. This of providence mean that the supraphysi- restricting basic questions about begin- equivocation is not helpful, and so we cal permeates reality, something taken nings to scientific specialists. God can propose to use origins in its most definite for granted in the early days of science. be known by everyone through creation. sense—ultimate beginnings. Origins Today, questions of origins have degener- Ultimately, there are a limited answers the famous question, “Why is ated into arguments for or against God’s number of logically valid explanations there something, instead of nothing?” existence, arguments Christians have for the origin of the cosmos. Sproul et In that sense, it is metaphysics, faced for millennia. Classical arguments al. (1984) presented four contemporary not “origin science.” It deals with the from Creation to Creator, justified by ideas but eliminated two as logically ultimate origin of matter, energy, space, Romans 1:20, include the cosmologi- invalid (Figure 6). Thus, the choices and time, as well as the rules that govern cal and teleological arguments for God, are special creation or the eternality of them and their axioms. Is matter eternal, often associated with Thomas Aquinas matter/energy. self-existing, or an artifact? Is there a (1225–1274), and the ontological argu- A few centuries ago, asserting that the universal mind? If so, is it intrinsic to ment of Anselm (1033–1109). These origin of the world was a metaphysical matter, or does it transcend the physical? were largely abandoned after Kant, question would have been met with a What rules govern the behavior of matter although Paley (1802) restated the teleo- yawn. Hume and Kant began a success- and energy in space and time? How do logical argument, and a few theologians ful war to eliminate theology and first- we justify them? These are all questions and philosophers have argued against order philosophy. Philosophical systems that have to do with “the nature of being Kant (e.g., Sproul et al., 1984). replaced theology, and then science and existence; the properties of anything These debates seem out of place in replaced philosophy. Now, postmodern which is … change and permanence “origin science.” But the question of ulti- nihilism scoffs at all three. Only Chris- in being … causation and the types of mate reality—God or matter—underlies tian revelation stands firm, even when Volume 51, Summer 2014 37

individual Christians do not. We reject low), parallel in time to human history a biblical history attacks the foundation both positivism and nihilism. Christian (Reed, 1999). Past singularities belong of secularism (Mortensen, 2004). revelation built Western culture, and to empirical history; although historians The line between science and history those who would condemn its faults often speculate about generalities, their has grown admittedly more difficult to never consider the actual (as opposed historical “regularities” remain less cer- draw. Recent decades have seen a rise in to fantastical) alternatives (Mangalwadi, tain than those of science. technology applied to forensic methods 2012; Stark, 2005). Adler’s (1965) pro- Significant differences exist be- in history. Eyewitness accounts are dis- posal sets metaphysics (his “first-order tween science and history. One is the missed, while forensic data are glorified philosophy”) as an empirical branch of method. Instead of things that can be (Reed, 2008). Although ephemeral suc- knowledge, distinct from science in its repetitively observed under controlled cess cannot mask axiomatic failures, how use of common experience rather than circumstances, knowledge of the past are Christians to view natural history? special experience. But in terms of its is indirect, based on eyewitness ac- First, and foremost, we must stand truth potential, it is every bit as valid counts (Deuteronomy 19:15) and firm on revelation. We reject the path as science. forensic evidence. Regular processes of OS2 for two reasons. The first is can be inferred assuming uniformity the distinction between the tools of Study of Past Events Is History but cannot be proven. Furthermore, the an investigation and its domain. For On the surface, secularists accept history eyewitness accounts of the Bible testify example, a statistical study of census as a distinct discipline but use a unique to miracles of creation and providence. data using a computer and spreadsheet definition to set it in a position inferior Thus uniformity is not absolute. Most is done. Is it computer science, statistics, to science. Until the late 1700s, it was historical knowledge is doxa (Figure or anthropology? It has elements of all. assumed that history was the study of 3B) and relies on logical and empirical But the object of inquiry was political man’s past, and since man was assumed evidence. Because scientific knowledge redistricting based on population gains to be coequal in age to Earth, little is based on repeated confirmation and or losses. Even though statistical and thought was given to “natural history.” the testing of variables, it often moves computing tools were used, the domain In the 1700s, Enlightenment secularists higher on this scale. The conclusions of of the investigation was politics. who rejected the Bible began assuming history are usually less certain (though In the same way, forensic tools are Earth was much older. This challenged not necessarily less true), and history often used to answer historical questions. the chronologies that were at the heart faces interpretive bias, especially when While the forensic work per se may be of history, and secularists resorted to the speculative templates built on bias (e.g., scientific, the domain of the investiga- inelegant, arbitrary, and imprecise solu- the “Dark Ages”) are unquestioned. tion is history. This is because the objects tion of dividing “history” from “natural However, Geisler’s (1983) four criteria of inquiry are physical phenomena in history” by the point in time at which of “origin science” causality, uniformity, the present, and the questions the data human civilization appeared. History consistency, and comprehensiveness, are being marshalled to address are was no longer defined by its distinct are all equally applicable to history questions about events in the past. This questions, methods, and objects of in- outside of OS2. raises the question of how to proceed quiry. The older, prehuman past became The issue of certainty should drive when questions of science and history the subject of science. Christians back to revelation. It imparts both seem involved. Positivism defaults OS2 retains this confusion; their truth to history through (1) meaning to “science.” OS2 agrees but calls it a creation of “historical science” (to inves- and purpose, (2) a framework, and (3) different kind of science. Both are awk- tigate past regularities) and “origin sci- sufficient accounts to provide a baseline ward, and we propose that Adler’s (1965) ence” (for past singularities) still assumes for empirical studies (Reed, 1999). Rec- commonsense suggestion of “mixed “scientific” prehistory, which is the basic ognizing the greater certainty of science, questions” can minimize the problems flaw. In contrast, we assert that history is secular intellectuals set the two in oppo- these questions raise. a separate branch of knowledge, defined sition to each other to attack the Bible. by its unique questions, methods, and They did so indirectly at first, advocating Mixed Questions objects of inquiry. History includes all a prehuman prehistory. Once deep time Secularism succeeded in capturing the of the past, not part. For creationists, was accepted, the challenges became West largely because its epistemology this is less of a problem because man is more direct, to the point of outright of positivism was able to define natural essentially coequal in age to the cosmos. dismissal of the Bible and its God in history as science. Most of the church Thus, natural history is merely a subset the twentieth century. Today’s secular has agreed; only biblical creationists of history or a mixed question (see be- venom toward Creation illustrates that fight for Genesis. Geology, evolutionary 38 Creation Research Society Quarterly biology, and cosmology are the bulwarks Clarifying the nature of science and of secular natural history. It seems odd, the distinct roles of history, philosophy, then, that creationists would promote a and theology is a start. From these, the scheme that leaves the basic positivist practical development of a better basis assertion in place. and method in all areas of knowledge If the primary concern is that of truth, can proceed. then apparent conflicts between revelation and science must be addressed, and not on the playing field of positivism. Conclusions That allows the quantity of data or some Although superior to the pure positivism initially compelling narrative to give sci- of the secular worldview of naturalism, ence the victory. But if science itself is the Christian alternative of OS2 advo- dependent on revelation for its very ex- cated by Geisler, Thaxton, and Anderson istence, a different perspective emerges. Figure 7. Allowing mixed questions is not a satisfactory alternative. It does While the cliché that “all truth is God’s (shaded areas) as distinct areas of point to a necessary emphasis on the truth” is based in fact, the corollary of the investigation allows investigations at history and philosophy of science, but priority of special revelation (the Bible) the boundaries of various disciplines it fails to follow to conclusions in both over general revelation (nature) is often without wasteful, confusing battles of areas that invalidate naturalism. Since lost. Creationists have shown that many demarcation criteria. Such questions science is the child of Christianity, its of the so-called conflicts between the are common and typically handled as axioms are justified only by a biblical Bible and science are easily resolved by a matter of course. However, the rise of worldview. This requires more funda- simply reexamining the evidence or the positivism usually resulted in science mental revision than OS2. Furthermore, logical chain of interpretation. taking over, rather than contributing the idea is flawed in several key areas. Its With these caveats in mind, we rec- to, such investigations. Origins (wide attempt to divide science into different ognize that natural history (among other sense) and natural history are both disciplines to study both primary and questions) is neither strictly historical mixed questions; origins in the narrow secondary causes is shortsighted because nor strictly scientific. It is one of Adler’s sense is metaphysical. Earth’s history science is methodologically capable of (1965) “mixed questions” in which his- overlaps all four of these disciplines, as investigating primary cause. Philosophy tory, science, philosophy, theology, and well as being addressed by revelation. and theology are better suited to answer revelation all play roles. Mixed questions metaphysical questions. may at first appear to blur the boundar- Furthermore, OS2 is built on dual di- ies of the disciplines, but they actually chotomies (past/present and regularities/ preserve them, by preventing unneces- complications at disciplinary boundar- singularities) that do not provide a suf- sary and complicated redefinitions of ies without scrapping everything and ficient foundation for science. Geisler’s the boundaries: starting over. Positivism rejects mixed (1983) criteria for “origin science” fail to Just as philosophy has pure and questions because if everything worth distinguish that proposed science from mixed questions, so do history and knowing is some kind of science, then any other investigative branch of human science. The solution of a problem there are no boundaries to worry about. knowledge. Finally, OS2 fails to address that is a mixed question for science Drawing boundaries also raises the ques- the problem of positivism in aggres- and history may involve a combi- tion of the basis for doing so, allowing sively biblical categories, especially the nation of scientific and historical revelation to reenter the picture. relevant doctrines of creation and provi- knowledge and a combination of Creationism is the practical ap- dence. For these reasons, we: (1) affirm the methods of both disciplines. This plication of mixed questions to natural that ultimate origins of the universe and would hold true for most of the prob- history. It admits knowledge from the life is a metaphysical question, and we lems in “natural history” which oc- Bible, theology, philosophy, science, and believe, (2) that questions about unique cur in such sciences as geology and history. Positivism is a simplistic attempt past events are the domain of history and paleontology. (Adler, 1965, p. 107) to displace truth with science. OS2 fails (3) that science is essentially what OS2 Human knowledge is as complex to address this anti-Christian aspect advocates would call “operation science.” as human beings. It does not always fit of positivism and is thus not suitable Therefore, we recommend that creation- into simple templates. Mixed questions as a creationist explanation of science. ists avoid that terminology and work to (Figure 7) provide a way to address Christian foundations must be restored. reconstruct valid, biblical criteria for Volume 51, Summer 2014 39

science and history. We also commend Perspective. Baker Book House, Grand Christian Worldview. Creation Research Adler’s (1965) mixed question concept Rapids, MI. Society books, Chino Valley, AZ. as a fruitful way to conduct and justify Glover, W. 1984. Biblical Origins of Modern Reed, J.K. 2008. Cuvier’s Analogy and its natural history research. Secular Culture. Mercer University Press, consequences: forensics vs. testimony as Macon, GA. historical evidence. Journal of Creation Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific 22(3): 115–120. References Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Reed, J.K. 2012. Soft secularism is no solu- CRSQ: Creation Research Society Quarterly Chicago, IL. tion: a critique of Rudwick’s postscript in Adler, M.J. 1965. The Conditions of Philoso- Laudan, L. 1983. The demise of the demar- Worlds Before Adam. Journal of Creation phy. Athenaeum Press, New York, NY. cation problem. In Cohen, R.S., and L. 26(2): 25–29. Bauer, H.H., 1992. Scientific Literacy and the Laudan (editors), Physics, Philosophy, Reed, J.K., and P. Klevberg. 2014. Beyond Myth of the Scientific Method. University and Psychoanalysis, pp. 111–128. Reidel, origin and operation science, part I: cri- of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, IL. Dordrecht, Holland. [Reprinted 2009 in tique of OS2. CRSQ 50:237–251. Cleland, C.E. 2013. Common cause expla- Ruse, M., and R. Pennock (editors), But Reed, J.K., and E.L. Williams. 2011. Battle- nation and the search for the “smoking Is It Science? pp. 312–330. Prometheus grounds of natural history, part I: natural- gun.” In Baker, V.R. (editor), Rethinking Books, New York, NY. ism. CRSQ 48:147–167. the Fabric of Geology, pp. 1–10, Geologi- Lisle, J. 2009. Ultimate Proof of Creation. Reed, J.K., and E.L. Williams. 2012. Battle- cal Society of America Special Paper 502, Master Books, Green Forest, AR. grounds of natural history, part II: actual- Boulder, CO. Lisle, J. 2010. Discerning Truth. Master ism. CRSQ 49:135–152. Cohen, S.M. 2012. Aristotle’s metaphysics. Books, Green Forest, AR. Sproul, R.C., J. Gertsner, and A. Lindley. In Zalta, E.N. (editor), The Stanford Mangalwadi, V. 2012. The Book that Made 1984. Classical Apologetics: A Rational Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer Your World: How the Bible Created the Defense of the Christian Faith and a 2012 Edition), http://plato.stanford. Soul of Western Civilization. Thomas Critique of Presuppositional Apologetics. edu/archives/sum2012/entries/aristotle- Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN. Academie Books, Grand Rapids, MI. metaphysics/ (accessed October, 2013). McKeon, R. (editor). 1941. The Basic Works Stark, R. 2003. For the Glory of God. Prince- Geisler, N.L. 1983. Is Man the Measure: An of Aristotle. Random House Publishers, ton University Press, Princeton, NJ. Evaluation of Contemporary Humanism. New York, NY. Stark, R. 2005. The Victory of Reason: How Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI. Mortenson, T. 2004. The Great Turning Christianity led to Freedom, Capitalism, Geisler, N.L., and J.K. Anderson. 1987. Point. Master Books, Green Forest, AR. and Western Success. Random House, Origin Science: A Proposal for the Paley, W. 1802. Natural Theology. R. Faulder, New York, NY. Creation-Evolution Controversy. Baker London, England. Thaxton, C.B., Bradley, W.L., and R.L. Ol- Book House, Grand Rapids, MI. Reed, J.K. 1999. Historiography and Natural sen. 1984. The Mystery of Life’s Origin: Geisler, N.L. and P.D. Feinberg. 1980. History. CRSQ 37:160–175. Reassessing Current Theories. Philosophi- Introduction to Philosophy: A Christian Reed, J.K. 2001. Natural history in the cal Library, New York, NY. Creation Research Society Quarterly 2014. 51:40–51.

40 Creation Research Society Quarterly The Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic Region

Part VII: Constraints on the Great Ice Age

Peter Klevberg and Michael J. Oard*

Abstract arlier papers in this series introduced methods of studying past Eclimate change, the historicity of the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, importance of the Little Ice Age in understanding climate change and constraining climatic models, and the importance of the North Atlantic region in understanding and applying constraints on climatic and glacial models. Earlier papers included summaries of the effects of the Little Ice Age in Iceland, Norway, and Greenland, and how the data obtained from the Little Ice Age should constrain our study of climate change. This paper presents an application of Little Ice Age data to our understanding of the inferred postdiluvial Great Ice Age.

The Great Ice Age— cal hypothesis of the ice age, also known Modern glaciers produce a variety A Major Geologic Inference as the Milankovitch mechanism. of deposits and landforms. These were Much attention in the past thirty years The Great Ice Age is a major geo- produced in even larger scale and greater has been paid to the “Great Ice Age,” as logic inference of the relatively recent abundance during the Little Ice Age. we refer to it. Uniformitarian scientists (postdiluvial) past based on similar Similar deposits and landforms that ap- believe in multiple ice ages, over 50 in features observed around glaciers today, pear subdued by age are found in these the past 2.6 million years (Pillans and but found over large areas of the middle same areas, but also across wide parts Gibbard, 2012) and four major ancient and high latitudes. These features of the Northern Hemisphere and some ice age periods, lasting tens to hundreds from the past show the likelihood that parts of the Southern Hemisphere. It is of millions of years, from 250 million to there was a recent ice age (Oard, 1990; only natural to surmise that at least one 2.2 billion years ago (Oard, 1997). The 2004)—very recent in comparison with ice age of even greater extent than the former ice ages are called the “Pleisto- traditional beliefs about earth history. Little Ice Age occurred during postdilu- cene ice ages,” although they supposedly Can we learn anything about the Great vian time (Figure 1). started in the late “Pliocene,” and are Ice Age from the characteristics of the believed to be caused by the astronomi- Little Ice Age? The Little Ice Age as a Model for the Great Ice Age For a model to be useful, it needs to mimic the properties of interest in the * Peter Klevberg, B.S., P.E., Great Falls, Montana, [email protected] prototype. At the same time, the model Michael J. Oard, M.S., Bozeman, Montana needs to differ significantly from the Accepted for publication May 27, 2014 prototype in the properties that cause Volume 51, Summer 2014 41

difficulties in research, such as scale or time. So, for example, a scale model of a ship or airplane or other vehicle can be made and placed in a flume or wind tunnel where the current speed is proportionately higher than for the prototype; as long as the Reynolds number (which relates key physical proportions) stays the same, the model provides very useful data in evaluating the prototype. The usefulness of the Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic region (Figure 2) as a model for the Great Ice Age is shown in Table I. While we lack specific climatic data for the Great Ice Age, we have such data for the Little Ice Age (Table II). As a model, it is imperfect: other than the Greenland ice sheet, nothing resembling a continental ice sheet of the type imagined during the early postdiluvian period (or by unifor- mitarians during the “Pleistocene”) is available. Another defect of the model is that it requires extrapolation rather than interpolation, with the changes in temperature, precipitation, and result- Figure 1. Estimated extent of ice during the Great Ice Age. Dashed white line is ing equilibrium line altitude (ELA—see approximate extent of continental glaciation. During the Little Ice Age, mountain glossary) being greater for the inferred glaciers (cordilleran ice) increased, but the continental glaciers have never recurred Great Ice Age than for the observed and are therefore inferred from field evidence. Maximum extent indicated in some Little Ice Age. The scale of the glacia- areas is dubious. Base image from Wikipedia Commons.

Measurements Relative to Late 1900’s Little Ice Age Great Ice Age Change in Equilibrium Line 0 to 400 m lower than today Approximately 500 to 2,000 m lower than today Altitude Drop in Average Summer Approximately 4°C to possibly 30°C lower than 0 to 4°C lower than today Temperature today greater (probably much greater) than today’s Precipitation similar to today values initially greater (probably much greater) than Sea Surface Temperatures similar to today to slightly colder today’s values, cooling with time greater than today with notable eruptions Volcanic Activity likely significantly greater than present levels at several times similar to today except for volcanism and solar output unknown, but there was much less Insolation several notable periods of low solar activity reaching earth’s surface due to volcanic activity

Table I. Comparison of Little Ice Age and Great Ice Age characteristics. The Little Ice Age provides a very useful but imperfect model for the Great Ice Age. 42 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 2. Map of study area. The focus of this series has been Iceland, Norway, and Greenland.

tion and resulting geologic processes is Constraints Provided sula washed by relatively warm currents, much less for the events of recent by the Little Ice Age saw proportionately intermediate glacial centuries, too. However, those data Effects of the Little Ice Age in the North growth which was more closely linked accumulated from paleoclimatology Atlantic region were most pronounced to winter precipitation than summer and glaciology do lie between present in Iceland, a relatively small landmass temperature. These differences indicate conditions and the postdiluvial climate surrounded by the North Atlantic Ocean, the importance of elevated sea surface we are trying to evaluate. Also, as shown and proportionately least in Greenland, temperatures to the creation of vast ice in Table III, observations from the study a very large and nearly completely ice- sheets during the Great Ice Age (Oard, region have great relevance for evaluat- covered arctic landmass surrounded by 1990). ing the role of scale and further refining colder water (Table III). Norway, the One of the key variables in studies glacial models. coastal side of the Scandinavian Penin- of glaciation is ELA. Changes in ELA, Volume 51, Summer 2014 43

Little Ice Age Inferences References Temperature E.L.A. Base Glacier/Region Year Difference Difference Year(s)* Author Sólheimajökull ca. 1800 -1.6°C 1960–90 McKinzey et al., 2005 Eiríksjökull ca. 1875 -1.5°C -250 m ca. 1990’s Guðmundsson, 1998 Caseldine, 1987; Tröllaskagi pre-1925 -200 m? post 1925 Björnsson, 1980 Tröllaskagi-Hörgárdalur -5 m Häberle, 1991 Tröllaskagi – observed 1800’s -50 m -2°C 1925–1960 Caseldine & Stötter, 1993 Tröllaskagi – theoretical -300 m ca. 200 m/°C clima optima Björnsson, 1980 Iceland in general 1600–1920 -3 to -4°C -400 m 1960–90 Grove, 2001 clima optima +2°C 1980–2005 Bjune et al., 2005 Western Norway 1886 -0.4°C 1940 Grove, 1988 1886 0 0 1950 Grove, 1988 1600 ca. -150 m 1300 Grove, 1988, p. 414 Northern Norway 1886 -1°C 1940 Grove, 1988 1910 - 100 to 250 m 1960–90 Bakke et al., 2005 Spitsbergen 1886 -2°C -110 m 1940 Grove, 1988

* Little Ice Age values in columns to left are compared with indicated base years.

Table II. Summary of some changes in temperature and ELA estimated from Little Ice Age data.

Feature Iceland Norway Greenland Climate Temperate/Polar Temperate Polar Setting Maritime Maritime and Interior Maritime and Interior Landmass Islands Large Peninsula Subcontinent Glaciers Europe’s largest ice cap, Small ice caps, mountain glaciers Second largest ice sheet, outlet glaciers, small ice voluminous outlet glaciers, caps, mountain glaciers limited mountain glaciers Forcings and Sea ice provided very Sea ice not important. Precipitation more Sea ice cover important to Feedback important feedback to en- important than temperature to mass balance. temperature drop. Mechanisms hance lower temperature. Temperature drop, but response complex. Little Significant: most glaciers Moderate: glaciers advanced but did not over- Moderate: ice sheet thick- Ice Age approached maximum run previous maximum extent ened, outlet glaciers ad- Advances extent of Great Ice Age. vanced but did not overrun previous maximum extent

Table III. Comparison of features of the land areas emphasized in this study relative to glaciation. 44 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 3. Section through the great ice cap Vatnajökull. Note that the modern firn line is well above the ground surface, indicating that it must have been at least several hundred meters lower during the onset of the Great Ice Age than it is now.

during and since the Little Ice Age, have conditions did not need to be drastically of an ice age. Both northern Iceland been estimated for Iceland and Norway colder to bring on the Great Ice Age and western Norway show how glaciers (Klevberg and Oard, 2012a; 2012b), as in Iceland. If relatively warm oceans may be more sensitive to precipitation well as other places. Estimating changes existed (Oard, 1990), then melting near changes than temperature changes, and in ELA from any unrecorded Great Ice the coast would have been enhanced. Appendix A in Part II of this series shows Age(s) is not as simple, as these must be The result would tend to be fairly distinct how various climatic variables–average estimated from features inferred to result termini and a great deal of glaciofluvial summer temperatures, average winter from “prehistoric” (i.e. unrecorded) activity. The cold, dry climate of today’s temperatures, cloudiness, winter pre- glaciation(s). Some key ELA estimates Arctic does not promote this kind of ag- cipitation, ELA, etc.–impact glaciers. are shown in Table II. gressive glaciation, either. The Little Ice Age did not result from As shown in Figure 3, the firn line Inferences for changes in ELA pro- a simple reduction in global average (and by extension, the ELA) must have vide the basis for inferring temperature temperature, nor can global average been significantly lower in the Great changes. Some believe the Great Ice temperature be accurately inferred from Ice Age for Vatnajökull to have formed. Age (“Pleistocene ice ages” in unifor- a simplistic approach to that glacial While the Little Ice Age produced a mitarian reckoning) resulted from a event. Likewise, mere cooling cannot marked drop in ELA and growth of Vat- 2 to 3°C (3½ to 5°F) drop in average produce large-scale ice ages, as will be najökull, the topography beneath the ice global temperature (Mann, 2002). If shown in the next section. is too low for ice to have formed initially the Little Ice Age represents a drop of under similar climatic circumstances. only 0.5°C (1°F) relative to the past The firn line (or at least the ELA) must century (Luterbacher et al., 2004), then A Multiplicity of have been at least 500 m (1,500 ft.) lower its applicability to any previous ice age Milankovitch Mistakes than at present to initiate the glaciation is less than if it represents a drop of 1 or The Milankovitch mechanism or Astro- that would come to form Vatnajökull. 2°C (2 to 3½°F)–or if the Great Ice Age nomical Theory of the ice ages is based That Icelandic outlet glaciers typi- temperature drop were less. on slight cyclical changes in sunlight cally reached their terminal moraines Climate change, not merely reduced caused by differences in the Earth’s during the Little Ice Age suggests that temperature, is necessary for the onset orbital geometry. Summer temperature Volume 51, Summer 2014 45 changes at high latitudes of the North- with time. Estimating the postdiluvial Ice Age. A comparison of the Little Ice ern hemisphere are believed to drive change in ocean temperatures from the Age with the inferred Great Ice Age is ice ages. Because of the Milankovitch Genesis Flood to glacial maximum and provided in Table I. mechanism, secular scientists believe in solving for time resulted in 500 years to Temperature difference at sea level multiple ice ages with a supposed cycle reach maximum (Oard, 1990). Based in Iceland between the Little Ice Age every 100,000 years for the past 900,000 on the energy balance over a snow or minimum and 20th Century maximum years and every 40,000 years between ice cover, the melting of the ice sheets is about 3°C (Eiríksson et al., 2000). The 900,000 and 2.6 million years ago. How- in places other than Greenland and difference in Scandinavia was at least ever, the changes in summer sunshine Antarctica would have taken less than half that in Iceland (Hass and Kaminski, are too weak to cause ice ages (Klevberg 200 years. Thus, the total time for the 1995; Klevberg and Oard, 2012b). A dif- and Oard, 2014b), and the 100,000-year postdiluvial Ice Age was probably only ference of 1°C is roughly equal to about eccentricity cycle hardly changes the about 700 years. a 25% change in annual precipitation sunlight intensity at all (Oard, 1984a; Although secular scientists believe for a given mass balance (Oerlemans, 1984b; 1985; 2004; 2006a)! The Little in multiple ice ages, based mostly on 2005). This means the same ELA could Ice Age was much too short to have the Milankovitch mechanism, there be maintained with a slight warming if been influenced by the Milankovitch are many evidences of only one ice age precipitation increased, and likewise, mechanism, which operates on scales (Oard, 1990; 2004). First, it is meteoro- if precipitation and temperature both of tens of thousands of years. logically difficult for even one great ice decreased, little or no change in the As has been described previously age to occur under uniformitarian con- ELA might result. A rise in winter pre- (Klevberg and Oard, 2012a; 2012b), ditions, so the idea of multiple ice ages cipitation concurrent with increasing multiple glacial movements have been stretches credulity. Second, most glacial temperature resulted in only about 50 documented during relatively brief pe- debris is from the “last” ice age. Third, m changes in ELA for northern Iceland riods during the Little Ice Age in both practically all the wind-blown silt (löess) mountain glaciers from their Little Ice Iceland and Norway. Many of these associated with the ice sheets is from the Age minima to levels observed in the advances and retreats occurred on an “last” ice age. Fourth, glacial debris is 1980s (Stötter et al., 1999; Caseldine annual or decadal basis, sometimes thin and coarse-grained in interior areas and Stötter, 1993). over significant distances; these clearly of past ice sheets. Fifth, two driftless We believe the Great Ice Age was resulted from climatic variability with areas, one in southwestern Wisconsin much greater than the Little Ice Age no connection with the Milankovitch and one in northeastern Montana and because much warmer sea surface Mechanism whatsoever. adjacent Saskatchewan, make more temperatures occurred after the Deluge sense interpreted in terms of one ice of Genesis 7–8 than occurred during age that missed a few peripheral areas the Little Ice Age. This would have A Single, Relatively Short, rather than multiple glaciations that produced far more evaporation in early Postdiluvial Ice Age consistently missed these areas. Sixth, postdiluvian time, at the same time that The causes of the postdiluvial Great Ice most of the animal extinctions were at volcanism would have been greater Age were warm ocean temperatures and the end of the “last” ice age. Multiple (Oard, 1990; 2004). The volcanism abundant volcanic aerosols in the strato- ice ages should have produced multiple would have resulted in greater summer sphere left over from the Noahic Deluge extinctions, not just the last. These rea- cooling worldwide, especially at high and reinforced by copious postdilu- sons for rejecting the multiple ice age latitudes and continental interiors in vial volcanism (Oard, 1990; 2004). The idea in favor of a single, relatively short, middle latitudes. warmer the sea surface temperatures, postdiluvial ice age have been provided The belief that extreme weather the greater the evaporation. Evaporation in greater depth elsewhere (Oard, 1990; events have increased over the past would be especially strong above the mid 2004; see also references in Appendix A). few thousand years (NORPAST, 2001, and high latitude oceans and be avail- Appendix 1) may well represent the able for strong storms to rapidly dump “stretching” effect of uniformitarian snow on the adjacent land masses. The Comparing the Little Ice Age assumptions, attributing greater and time for the Ice Age would depend on and Great Ice Age greater periods of time to earth history how fast the ocean water cooled, which While imperfect as a model for an ice with increasing age. Transfer functions can be roughly estimated by adding up age of the scale that most geologists may require revision to meet the con- all the heating terms and cooling terms envision, the Little Ice Age is probably straints of diluvial models based on the that result in a change in temperature the best model available for such a Great accurate historiography of the Bible and 46 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Figure 4. Uniformitarian assumptions may provide a false sense of increasing frequency of extreme weather due to the “stretching effect.” Inflation by the assumption of “deep time” tends to get worse the further from the constraints of known history it is, with the result that extreme weather events in the distant past tend to be interpreted as having occurred with more time between them than was actually the case.

the Little Ice Age. This stretching effect and interglacial periods since, the most Important Climatic is illustrated by Figure 4. In reality, their recent being the Little Ice Age (Björns- Differences between position makes previous ice ages even son, 1980). At least 13 glaciations have the Ice Ages less likely when they refer to conditions been inferred from the Esja sediments As has been shown, the Little Ice Age during the Little Ice Age as “extreme.” in Iceland (Sæmundsson, 1980). “Strati- climate in Iceland was only a few de- Thus, while the traditional multiple ice graphical studies in Iceland indicate at grees colder than at present, but glaciers age view is beyond the rescue of Mila- least 10 glaciations during the Upper generally advanced to near their Great nkovitch, the case for a single, relatively Pliocene and about as many during Ice Age limits in our study area. Yet pale- short, postdiluvial ice age with less ex- the Pleistocene” (Símonarson, 1980, p. ontological data, at least some of which treme conditions is robust. 174). A similar scenario is proposed for are possibly postdiluvial, indicate signifi- the Scandinavian Peninsula (Lilleham- cantly warmer ocean temperatures (and mer, 1994). thus sea surface temperatures) than at Early Postdiluvial Climate Post 1920s climate in northern present. This would produce consider- in the North Atlantic Region Iceland has been about 2°C (3½°F) ably more atmospheric moisture and Was Significantly Warmer warmer, principally in winter, and pre- resulting precipitation, which is in keep- Fossil and pollen paleoclimatic evidence cipitation has increased with increasing ing with the prevailing model for the in Iceland for at least one period earlier temperature, especially in winter; the postdiluvial Great Ice Age (Oard, 1990; and warmer than the Medieval Warm presence of sea ice particularly reduces 2004). Some have estimated that Little Period is strong. Just when and how this precipitation (Stötter et al., 1999). This Ice Age sea surface temperatures were 3 occurred is not certain (see Appendix illustrates the crucial role of moisture to 5°C (5 to 9°F) cooler than at present B), but the idea of warmer periods is supply in maintaining glaciers in Ice- (Balling, 2005). However, it should be widely accepted. Evidence for warmer land. Similar conditions exist for Norwe- noted that modern studies have found periods in Norway and Greenland has gian maritime glaciers, though with less that meltwater input to the adjoining been presented previously (Klevberg and dramatic differences in sea conditions ocean did not reduce precipitation, Oard, 2012b; 2014a). and resulting precipitation (Klevberg though sea ice, of course, did (Bakke et The traditional uniformitarian sce- and Oard, 2012b). An increase in pre- al., 2005). Thus, it would be reasonable nario for Icelandic glacial history in- cipitation along with temperature is to suppose that significant precipitation cludes virtually complete coverage of often (though not always) inferred for would have continued until sea ice cover the island group by ice during the “Pleis- paleoclimates in the study area (Klev- became adequate to greatly reduce the tocene” and several glacial advances berg and Oard, 2012b). source of moisture (Klevberg and Oard, Volume 51, Summer 2014 47

to be roughly a 25% increase in annual precipitation to overcome a 1°C (2°F) increase in average temperature (Oer- lemans, 2005). As has been documented (Klevberg and Oard, 2012b), precipitation has been shown to be very important and sometimes dominant in Norwegian glacier mass balance. Precipitation must also have been the key variable in the growth of the ice sheet on Greenland during the Little Ice Age; based on isostatic measurements, most of this recent ice has yet to melt (Klevberg and Oard, 2014a). Enhanced precipitation is a key ele- ment in the postdiluvial Ice Age model (Oard, 1990; 2004). If this model is correct, then the relatively dry continental interiors should have been least affected by the Little Ice Age, with its limited supply of moisture. This has Figure 5. Estimated maximum extent of snow and ice in study area during the been observed to some degree in the Great Ice Age indicated by dashed white line. Relatively warm sea surface tem- North Atlantic study area (Klevberg and peratures and low albedo from snow and ice over a large area would provide a Oard, 2012a; 2012b; 2014a). As shown powerful combination for rapid ice accumulation. in Table III, Iceland was proportionately most affected by Little Ice Age, and an important difference from Norway and Greenland is the relatively small 2014b). Inferred sea ice extent at glacial some point before Iceland’s settlement land mass surrounded by ocean. This maximum is shown in Figure 5. Fea- for ice to begin accumulating and thus difference has also been observed in tures that appear to be glacial in origin generate Vatnajökull. As shown in Fig- other parts of the world. For example, are even found on the sea bottom and ure 3, Vatnajökull today is largely above while ice advances were observed in suggest that at least a portion of the area the firn line, but the land surface is well the Northern Rocky Mountains, Little we have indicated was completely frozen below the firn line–as much as 1,000 m. Ice Age advances apparently fell short and not just surface ice (Mattingsdal et To generate the ice cap would require of previous glacier positions, more so al., 2007). lowering the firn line hundreds of me- north than south (Grove, 1988). Tem- “In the maritime Icelandic climate ters until ice could build up to today’s perature, while important to both the glacier mass balance is very sensitive elevation. A similar situation on a much Little Ice Age and Great Ice Age, is not to variations in air temperature,” states larger scale exists for Greenland and the only variable. Increased precipita- Björnsson (1980, p. 206); “a drop in Antarctica as well (Oard, 1990; 2006). tion is essential for an ice age to form, the annual air temperature by 1°C may Large areas of these land masses are something the diluvial model predicts lower the firn line by as much as 200 low topographically, some even below and the Milankovitch mechanism is m. Any lowering of the firn line will sea level, and only the thickness of the powerless to provide. greatly increase the accumulation areas ice raises the modern surface to high of the ice caps in Iceland.” The average elevations. air temperature during the period 1600 Mass balance is primarily a function Model Results to 1920 (during the Little Ice Age) was of winter precipitation and summer Table IV presents a comparison of the probably 3 to 4°C lower than during temperature. To some extent, warmer Little Ice Age as an analogue for evalu- the warmest period in postdiluvian time, summer temperatures can be compen- ation of the Great Ice Age. Temperature based on data from Björnsson (1980). sated for by increased winter precipita- is an important variable, though not ade- It must have been significantly lower at tion. This relationship has been found quate in itself to explain an ice age. Tem- 48 Creation Research Society Quarterly perature is a dynamic variable and often while there is no way of knowing solar ible with the idea (e.g. Job 38:29–30). differs greatly across regional boundaries. irradiance during early postdiluvian Thus, the Great Ice Age is largely in- Summer temperature has a greater effect time, much greater volcanism would ferred from geologic features that appear than winter (since melting versus freez- have provided ash and aerosols over a to be glacial in origin, as first popular- ing is the deciding factor for ice volume), large area to reflect much of the solar ized by the famous creationist Louis and averages are more important than radiation back to space. If these factors Agassiz (Imbrie and Imbrie, 1979). The extremes. The Great Ice Age estimate in differed from modern values by merely Little Ice Age provides a documented Table IV is largely a guess based on the two to three times as much as during the analog that demonstrates the reasonable- proportional change in ELA and would Little Ice Age, the observed difference ness of the postdiluvial model for the apply to the glaciated areas, not global in ELA between these two ice advance Great Ice Age (Oard, 1990). The Little average temperatures. The ELA is also periods could be explained. A large area Ice Age and modern glaciers have also not a single number: in arctic regions, of ice and snow cover would provide a provided a wealth of data for evaluation where the ELA began nearly at sea powerful positive feedback mechanism of these features, and this will be the level, it would hardly change, but at the to increase the extent, severity, and du- topic of Part VIII of this series. southern extent of glaciation, a dramatic ration of the Great Ice Age. This leaves drop in ELA would occur during the no role whatsoever for the Milankovitch glacial period. As described above, pre- mechanism, and there is neither need Summary cipitation at the onset of the Great Ice nor evidence for “deep time.” Paleoclimatology is a complex field Age was likely significantly higher than with significant limitations resulting it is today across our study area due to from limisted historiography and the the warmer sea surface temperature that Physical Evidence vicissitudes of proxy data. One of the could be expected following the great for a Great Ice Age applications for paleoclimatology is cataclysm of the Deluge. Insolation No written record of a Great Ice Age has speculation regarding past continental would likely have been reduced much been discovered, though there may be glaciation. The best model available more so than during the Little Ice Age; hints of notable climate change compat- for evaluating such large-scale glacia-

Variable Great Ice Age (Inferred) Little Ice Age (Observed) Current (Observed) Land Surface Air Tempera- 0 to roughly 12°C * 0 to 3°C (0 to 5°F) ture Compared to Today cooler than current cooler than current Based on 1960 to 1990 Precipitation enhanced near current average Insolation reduced reduced Sea Surface Temperature elevated ** near current Volcanisim significant occasional low Difference in ELA 0 to -1,000 m? Based on 1960 to 1990 0 to -300 m (0 to -1,000 ft.) Compared With Today (-0 to -3,000 ft.)? average Continental Ice Sheets significant absent absent Ice Caps significantly enlarged slightly enlarged reduced Outlet Glaciers advanced advanced receding Mountain Glaciers significant advanced receding

* Many variables affect temperature, including regional and dynamic ones, and this is therefore a rough, or order-of-magnitude, estimate only. ** Elevated temperature would be expected immediately after the Deluge with cooling occurring throughout the ice age.

Table IV. Comparison of degree or extent of important variables between Great Ice Age, Little Ice Age, and present conditions. Volume 51, Summer 2014 49 tion is the Little Ice Age. As shown in temperature (greater volcanism than References this series: during the Little Ice Age) and greater CRSQ: Creation Research Society Quarterly • The Great Ice Age is not docu- precipitation (initially warmer sea Bakke, J., S.O. Dahl, Ø. Paasche, R. Løvlie, mented historic fact but reasonable surface temperatures than during and A. Nesje. 2005. Glacier fluctuations, inference, one for which there is the Little Ice Age). Whereas the equilibrium-line altitudes and paleocli- a wealth of evidence. Thus, nearly traditional, Milankovitch-based mate in Lyngen, northern Norway, dur- all geologists, both creationist and models are incapable of explaining ing the Lateglacial and Holocene. The evolutionist, believe that at least continental glaciation, the Great Holocene 15(4): 518–540. one large-scale glaciation occurred Ice Age is readily explained by the Balling, R.C. Jr. 2005. Observational surface in the past. postdiluvial ice age model. temperature records versus model pre- • The Little Ice Age, being document- dictions. In Michaels, P.J. (editor), Shat- ed historic fact, is the best model tered Consensus, pp. 50–71. Rowman available for use in evaluating a Acknowledgments & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, MD. Great Ice Age, though it is imperfect, We thank David Sunwall and Arve Björnsson, H. 1980. Glaciers in Iceland. In particularly in scale. Misund for help in acquiring scientific Comité National Français de Géologie, • Both energy balance calculations papers and graphics. We are grateful for Geology of the European Countries: Den- and the Little Ice Age indicate that the assistance of Al Gore and the Nobel mark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Milankovitch mechanism is Peace Prize committee in generating pp. 136–157. Graham and Trotman, woefully inadequate to explain con- widespread interest in our research. This London, UK. tinental glaciation. research benefitted from a grant from Bjune, A.E., J. Bakke, A. Nesje, and H.J.B. • Evidence does not support the idea the Creation Research Society. Deum Birks. 2005. Holocene mean July temper- of multiple great ice ages. Observa- laudamus (Psalm 147:16, 17). ature and winter precipitation in western tions of modern glacial fluctuations Norway inferred from palynological and show features traditionally attributed glaciological lake‑sediment proxies. The to multiple glaciations (as will be Glossary Holocene 15:177‑189. shown in Part VIII of this series). Deluge – a common deluge is intense Caseldine, C.J. 1987. Neoglacial glacier • Evidence strongly supports a single, rainfall (and typically flooding) over variations in northern Iceland: examples relatively recent, postdiluvial Great a short period of time. When capital- from the Eyjafjörður area. Arctic and Ice Age. ized, it normally refers to what the Alpine Research 19:296–304. • Data from the Little Ice Age indicate Hebrew Bible calls the mabbul, the Caseldine, C., and J. Stötter. 1993. “Little Ice that moderately greater cooling and unique, global flood of Noah’s time. Age” glaciation of Tröllaskagi Peninsula, enhanced precipitation could gener- Diluvial – pertaining to the Deluge. northern Iceland: climatic implications ate an ice age much larger in scale Equilibrium line altitude (ELA) – the for reconstructed equilibrium line than the Little Ice Age. altitude above which more snow altitudes (ELAs). The Holocene 3(4): • Topography, particularly in Iceland accumulates than melts during the 357–366. and Greenland, indicates that cool- year, and below which more ice (or Eiríksson, J., K.L. Knudsen, H. Haflíðason, ing in the past was several times snow) melts than accumulates. and J. Heinemeier. 2000. Chronology greater than the drop in temperature Firn line – the altitude above which of late Holocene climatic events in the observed between the Medieval precipitation falls as snow and northern North Atlantic based on AMS Warm Period and Little Ice Age in beneath which it falls as rain. It is 14C dates and tephra markers from the order to lower the ELA enough for usually close to the ELA but often volcano Hekla, Iceland. Journal of Qua- glaciation to begin. differs from it (ELA is based on mass ternary Science 15(6): 573–580. • In general, glacier mass balance in balance). Grove, J.M. 1988. The Little Ice Age. the study area appears to respond Mass balance – the balance between Methuen, New York, NY. more to increases in precipitation the amount of ice that forms and Grove, J.M. 2001. The initiation of the than reductions in temperature, ice that is lost from a glacier in the “Little Ice Age” in regions round the though both would be needed to course of a year. A positive mass bal- North Atlantic. In Ogilvie, A.E.J., and T. generate the Great Ice Age. ance results in growth of the glacier; Jónsson (editors), The Iceberg in the Mist: • The postdiluvial ice age model a negative mass balance results in Northern Research in Pursuit of a “Little provides mechanisms for both lower retreat. Ice Age,” pp. 53–82. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA. 50 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Guðmundsson, H.J. 1998. Holocene glacier 1500. Science 303:1499–1503. Oard, M.J. 2006. The Frozen Record: Examin- fluctuations of the Eiríksjökull ice cap, Mann, M.E. 2002. Little Ice Age. In Mac- ing the Ice Core History of the Greenland west central Iceland. Jökull 46:17–28. Cracken, M.C., and J.S. Perry (editors), and Antarctic Ice Sheets. Institute for Haberle, T. 1991. Holocene glacial his- The Earth System: Physical and Chemi- Creation Research, Dallas, TX. tory of the Hörgárdalur area, Tröllaskagi, cal Dimensions of Global Environmen- Oerlemans, J. 2005. Extracting a climate northern Iceland. In Maizels, J.K., and tal Change, volume I, pp. 505–509, signal from 169 glacier records. Science C. Caseldine (editors), Environmental Encyclopedia of Global Environmental 308:675‑677. Change in Iceland: Past and Present, pp. Change. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Pillans, B., and P. Gibbard. 2012. The 193–202. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Chichester, UK. Quaternary Period. In Gradstein, F.M., Boston, MA. Mattingly, R., K. Andreassen, and J.S. Laberg. J.G. Ogg, M.D. Schmitz, and G.M. Ogg Hass, H.C., and M.A. Kaminski. 1995. 2007. Low-frequency 3D seismic data (editors), The Geologic Time Scale 2012, Change in atmospheric and oceanic reveal detailed high-resolution images volume 2, pp. 979–1,010. Elsevier, New circulation reflected in North Sea of glacial geomorphic features. In Ives, York, NY. sediments during the late Holocene. Zbl. J. (editor), 37th International Arctic Símonarson, Leifur A. 1980. On climate Geol. Paläont. Teil I 1:51–65. Workship Abstracts, p. 165. University changes in Iceland. In Comité National Imbrie, J., and K.P. Imbrie. 1979. Ice Ages: of Iceland: Reykjavík, Iceland. Français de Géologie, Geology of the Solving the Mystery. Enslow Publishers: McKinzey, K.M., J.F. Orwin, and T. Bradwell. European countries: Denmark, Finland, Short Hills, NJ. 2005. A revised chronology of key Vatna- Iceland, Norway, Sweden, pp. 136–157. Klevberg, 2007. Lava extrusion and the age jökull (Iceland) outlet glaciers during Graham and Trotman, London, UK. of Iceland. CRSQ 44:119–146. the Little Ice Age. Annals of Glaciology Stötter, J., M. Wastl, C. Caseldine, and T. Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2011a. The 42:171–179. Häberle. 1999. Holocene paleoclimatic Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic NORPAST. 2001. Third report, NORPAST– reconstruction in northern Iceland: ap- region–part I: introduction to paleocli- past climates of the Norwegian region. proaches and results. Quaternary Science matology. CRSQ 47:213–227. Norges Geologiske Undersøkelse (the Reviews 18:457–474. Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2011b. The geological survey of Norway, with the Sæmundsson, K. 1980. Outline of the ge- Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic Norwegian research council, envi- ology of Iceland. In Comité National region–part II: magnitude, extent, and ronment and development, research Français de Géologie, Geology of the importance of the Little Ice Age. CRSQ program on climate and ozone layer European countries: Denmark, Finland, 48:49–58. change, the national meteorological Iceland, Norway, Sweden, pp. 136–157. Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2012a. The Lit- institute, and the universities in Bergen, Graham and Trotman, London, UK. tle Ice Age in the North Atlantic region– Tromsø, and Ås). part III: Iceland. CRSQ 48:224–238. Oard, M.J. 1984a. Ice ages: the mystery Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2012b. The solved? part I: the inadequacy of a uni- Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic re- formitarian ice age. CRSQ 21:66–76. gion–part IV: Norway. CRSQ 49:43–55. Oard, M.J. 1984b. Ice ages: the mystery Appendix A: Bibliography Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2014a. The solved? part II: the manipulation of deep- of Ice Age Research Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic sea cores. CRSQ 21:66–76. region–part V: Greenland. CRSQ Oard, M.J. 1985. Ice ages: the mystery This appendix lists some important writ- 50:172–190. solved? part III: paleomagnetic stratig- ings on glaciation and the postdiluvial Klevberg, P., and M.J. Oard. 2014b. The raphy and data manipulation. CRSQ ice age. Little Ice Age in the North Atlantic 21:66–76. Gollmer, S.M. 2013. Initial conditions for a region–part VI: the Little Ice Age and Oard, M.J. 1990. An Ice Age Caused by the rapid post-flood ice age. In Horstemeyer, climatology. CRSQ 50:252–269. Genesis Flood. Institute for Creation M. (editor), Proceedings of the Seventh Lillehammer, A. 1994. Fra jeger til bonde– Research, Dallas, TX. International Conference on Creationism, inntil 800 e.Kr. (Volume 1 of Aschehougs Oard, M.J. 1997. Ancient Ice Ages or Gi- pdf file. Creation Science Fellowship: norges historie) [in Norwegian]. Asche- gantic Submarine Landslides? Creation Pittsburgh, PA. houg & Co. (W. Nygaard), Oslo, Norway. Research Society Monograph No. 6, Molén, M. 2008. The ice age–it really was Luterbacher, J., D. Dietrich, E. Xoplaki, M. Chino Valley, AZ. short. In Snelling, A.A. (editor), Proceed- Grosjean, and H. Wanner. 2004. Euro- Oard, M.J. 2004. Frozen in Time: The Woolly ings of the Sixth International Conference pean seasonal and annual temperature Mammoth, the Ice Age, and the Bible. on Creationism, pp. 339–355. Creation variability, trends, and extremes since Master Books, Green Forest, AR. Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, Volume 51, Summer 2014 51

and Institute for Creation Research, Appendix B: Glycimeris glycimeris (Linné), Abra alba Dallas, TX. Icelandic Paleoflora (Wood) and other warmth-loving mol- Oard, M.J. 1986. An ice age within the bibli- lusc species”(Símonarson, 1980, p.174). cal time frame. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), Fossil and pollen paleoclimatic evi- Skammidalur fauna (“Upper Pliocene” Proceedings of the First International dence in Iceland for at least one period molluscs) indicate 2–4°C warmer water Conference on Creationism, Volume II, warmer than the Medieval Warm Period temperatures than at present (Símonar- pp. 157–166. Creation Science Fellow- is strong. “The global cooling that has son, 1980). “A general cooling through- ship, Pittsburgh, PA. occurred on the earth since the Mio- out the whole period [4,500 years of Oard, M.J. 1990. The evidence for only cene [“oldest” Icelandic fossils] is well their tephrochronologically- calibrated, one ice age. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), documented in the record of fossil floras, radiocarbon-dated sediment core], is Proceedings of the Second International owing to the regular spacing apart of indicated by both the benthic and Conference on Creationism, Volume II, plant bearing horizons within the lava planktonic foraminifers” (Eiríksson et al., pp. 191–200. Creation Science Fellow- pile”(Símonarson, 1980, p. 173). He 2000, p. 579). All of these evidences are, ship: Pittsburgh, PA. continues, “Icelandic Tertiary floras of course, referenced to the evolutionist See additional Oard references cited in this older than 8 m.y. are warm-temperate natural history scenario; we generally paper. and show close affinity with the recent interpret most of them to be of either Springstead, W.A. 1971. Monoglaciology flora in the Eastern Deciduous forests of diluvial origin or of early postdiluvian and the global flood. CRSQ 8:175–182. North America.” “The water tempera- age (Klevberg, 2007). If the latter, they Springstead, W.A. 1973. The creationist and ture (annual mean temperature) in the would be evidence of a warm climate in continental glaciation. CRSQ 10:47–53. Tjörnes area during the Lower Pliocene, early postdiluvian time. More detailed Tkachuck, R.D. 1983. The Little Ice Age. when the marine Tapes and Mactra investigation of Icelandic paleoflora and Origins 10:51–65. Zones were deposited, was at least 10°C, its geologic context is warranted but Vardiman, L. 1993. Ice Cores and the Age or about 5°C higher than the present beyond the scope of this paper. of the Earth. Institute for Creation Re- one, as indicated by the presence of search: Dallas, TX. Vardiman, L. 2001. Climates Before and After the Genesis Flood. Institute for Creation Research: Dallas, TX. 52 Creation Research Society Quarterly

CRS Conference Abstracts August 8–9, 2014 • Creation Museum • Petersburg, KY

On August 8–9, 2014, the Creation Research Society held its fourth conference at the Creation Museum in Northern Kentucky (suburban Cincinnati). Below are abstracts of the presentations given during this two-day conference. Voting members of the CRS were allowed to author or coauthor abstracts and sponsor submitted abstracts from non-voting members. The purpose of these conferences is to provide a forum for the free discussion of a wide variety of cutting-edge ideas pertaining to the creation model of origins.

Coordinating Committee: Danny Faulkner and Kevin Anderson

Plenary Presentations: disorder but of the creative processes of might not mean a manifold extension the Creator God. (expansion) of the membrane but rather an increase of the tension within it. A Design in DNA stepwise increase of the tension on the New View of Gravity Advances second day of Creation would make the Georgia Purdom Creation Cosmology gravitational potential of the cosmos DNA bears the stamp of being designed D. Russell Humphreys slowly increase even until now, without and created by God. In human DNA significant expansion. This results in a these designs include hidden codes, Here I give a new picture of how gravity new redshift-versus-distance relation. regulatory information that used to be works, depicting space as a membrane It is slightly nonlinear, providing an considered “junk” DNA, and epigenetic being greatly accelerated in a fourth spa- alternative explanation for an “acceler- information that is outside the sequence tial direction. The Unruh effect, which ating universe” without need for “dark of the DNA. The complexity of DNA connects acceleration with a black-body energy.” The new redshift result also greatly constrains the ability of evolu- temperature, could then explain the gives a more satisfying expression for the tion to make the changes necessary for cosmic microwave background radia- anomalous deceleration of the Pioneer molecules-to-man evolution. DNA is not tion. The scriptural phrase “stretching 10 and 11 spacecrafts, as I hope to show the result of evolutionary processes and out the heavens like a tent curtain” in a later paper. Volume 51, Summer 2014 53

Presentation Abstracts: logs of the Milky Way shows that this God of the Bible, as seen in the number pattern has been maintained despite of anthropologists who embrace shaman- the increasing sensitivity of surveys. Us- ism and occultic practices. The Flood/Post-Flood ing published values for relevant SNR Boundary Is in expansion parameters, it is shown that a the Late Cenozoic break of 60 parsecs is expected for any iDINO—Investigation Michael J. Oard SNR population whose development is of Dinosaur Intact limited to 6,000 years. Natural Osteo-Tissue Based on the geological column for sake Mark Armitage of discussion, 32 criteria demonstrate that the Flood/post-Flood boundary is Evolution of Religion? This presentation focuses on the re- in the Late Cenozoic, defined as the Mary Beth De Repentigny cently launched CRS initiative to col- Miocene, Pliocene, and Quaternary. lect and quantify soft tissues in dinosaur The reason why the time is so vague is Charles Darwin believed that religion bones. During excavation of a fossil site because we cannot rely on evolutionary/ evolved mentally as biological forms at the Hell Creek Formation, Glendive, uniformitarian dating schemes, includ- evolved physically. In fact, this founding Montana, in May 2012, the largest Tric- ing biostratigraphy and radiometric father of evolutionary theory believed eratops horridus supraorbital horn ever dating, but must examine each location that human “mental faculties ... led recovered from Glendive was jacketed on its own merits. The 32 criteria come man to believe in unseen spiritual agen- and transported to CA for microscopic from a wide variety of earth sciences, cies, then to fetishism, polytheism, and analysis. The horn was discovered to be including evidence from sedimentary ultimately to monotheism.” Edward highly vascular, filled with moist matrix rocks, organic remains, tectonics, geo- Tylor, known as the father of anthropol- and featured both permineralized and morphology, climatology, and miscel- ogy, extended Darwin’s progression of unfossilized material. Subsequent to laneous. religion. He reasoned that the idea of decalcification with EDTA, soft and Examining many areas on their own one supreme God is as far as religion hard remains were thin-sectioned and merits, I have discovered that the bound- can evolve. Once man reaches the level examined by light and electron micros- ary is in the early to late Pleistocene at of intellect that can study history to see copy. Permineralized vascular vessels most areas, especially in the western how religion came about, science then that remained after decalcification United States. The Pleistocene is the replaces religion as a way to explain exhibited internal spherical structures general Ice Age timeframe, but many physical phenomena. According to consistent with size and shape of blood areas show no connection to the Ice Age researchers, including Andrew Lang cells. Soft tissues collected from deep in the early to middle Pleistocene. and John Mbiti, the fieldwork data from within the horn yielded heavy popula- cultures around the world do not support tions of layers of osteocytes. Osteocytes this evolutionary progression of religion. featured delicate filopodia and internal The 60-Parsec Break in the That religiosity has evolved along with structures consistent with nuclei and Cumulative Distribution of our brains is not based on sound scien- other organelles. Soft sheets of fibrillar Sizes of Supernova Remnants tific research, as can be established by bone examined under scanning elec- in the Milky Way and analyzing the claims made by Dean tron microscopy were characterized by Several Nearby Galaxies Hamer on the god gene or by Michael groupings of tightly aligned osteocytes, Is the Expected Signature Persinger with his god helmet. Despite widely connected via filipodia with of a Recent Creation this, contemporary anthropologists such widths approaching 500nm. Results of 6000 Years Ago as Lionel Tiger and Steven Pinker assert this study conform to previous soft tissue Keith Davies it in their evolutionary narratives. Instead studies in ancient materials and strongly of corroborating evolution, a study of re- suggest that this is endogenous dinosaur Each well-surveyed supernova remnant ligion through time and across cultures tissue. Reaction to this discovery has population in the local group of galaxies points to a devolution from monothe- been mixed. reveals a break of about 60 parsecs in the ism to polytheistic belief systems. This See http://www.sciencedirect.com/ cumulative distribution of supernova is recognized even among many of the science/article/pii/S0065128113000020 remnant sizes. A study of archival cata- academics who vehemently oppose the 54 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Defying the Ancient W UMa Alleged Human Chromosome The Grand Canyon Binary Scenario: 2 Fusion Site Definitively Was Carved by The Strange Story of the Encodes a Transcription Late Flood Channelizes Runoff Short-period Binary, HR Boo Factor Binding Site in the First Michael J. Oard Ronald G. Samec and Travis Shebs Intron of the DDX11L2 Gene Jeffrey P. Tomkins The origin of the Grand Canyon is a HR Boo is an extreme mass ratio binary major mystery of uniformitarian earth (EMRB) with a mass ratio of only q= A major argument for humans evolv- science, mainly because Grand Canyon 0.25. However, the binary has an un- ing from a common ancestor with is carved at an intermediate altitude usually low Roche-lobe fill-out. This chimpanzees is the proposition that ape on the East Kaibab Plateau. There are is contrary to the idea that EMRB’s are chromosomes 2A and 2B fused end to two creationist theories on the origin of thought to be the final stage of solar end, forming human chromosome 2. Grand Canyon: the dam-breach theory type binary-star evolution—they are Allegedly supporting this idea is the ap- and the late-Flood channelized erosion considered among the oldest objects in parent presence of a 798-base degraded theory. Evidence will be presented that the universe. These stars are thought to “fusion site” on human chromosome 2. there are numerous problems with the have been in contact for billions of years, However, in 2002, an analysis of 614,000 dam-breach theory—three that seem undergoing continuous magnetic brak- bases encompassing the site discovered fatal. The origin of Grand Canyon is ing, steadily coalescing and increasing in that it was located in a gene-rich region a problem in geomorphology, namely fill-out. The result of their age is a high bearing no synteny to chimpanzee, and having to do with the origin of water fill-out combined with an extreme mass the fusion sequence was positioned gaps, of which there are thousands across ratio. However, this light-curve solution inside a putative pseudogene. In 2013, the earth that can easily be shown to defies the common scenario. The fill-out I expanded upon this data and pub- originate during channelized late Flood is shallow—much like the young W-type lished a report showing that the alleged runoff. Based on geomorphology and us- W UMa systems that have freshly come fusion site is not a genomic fossil at ing Walker’s biblical geological model, into contact. And its component tem- all but a functional domain inside an the Grand Canyon was first eroded by peratures, however, do not fit this idea active and highly expressed gene (ARJ sheet flow moving toward the east and since they are virtually identical. This 6:367–375). In fact, the sequence en- northeast. Erosion of 6 to 10,000 feet of is what you would expect in old A-types codes a transcription-factor binding site widespread sedimentary rocks from the W UMa’s. The high inclination of 83° in the first intron of the DDX11L2 long whole Grand Canyon area occurred results in a total secondary eclipse, some noncoding RNA gene. The gene con- before Grand Canyon was eroded. 34 minutes. This allows us to give an tains three exons, and its transcripts are This is called the Great Denudation by unambiguous, final model that cannot alternatively transcribed and/or spliced secular geologists. Then Grand Canyon be contested. The spot, whose existence to create two classes of transcripts—one was carved by channelized flow from further supports the idea of magnetic set contains two exons and the other currents generally moving toward the breaking, has settled on the L1 point three. Based on the two-exon transcript west. A view of each segment of Grand of the primary component. In addition, variants, some evolutionists have errantly Canyon will be presented on how Grand the period study of 13-year time dura- attempted to debunk the data, claiming Canyon was carved. tion indicates that the period is steadily that the fusion site is not actually inside decreasing. This further affirms that the the DDX11L2 gene—disregarding the system is coming into deeper contact first exon and the three-exon transcripts. Further Studies of the due to magnetic braking. We conclude I will review the research and present Oscillations of the that the binary was evidently created in additional data further bolstering the Earth’s Magnetic Field this state. This research was supported already-clear evidence negating fusion. Bob Hill by the Creation Research Society. Gaussian coefficients of the earth’s magnetic field were obtained from the Inter- national Geomagnetic Reference Field website. Hill (2013) and Humphreys (2011) found that some of the harmonic components of the earth’s magnetic field have sinusoidal oscillations. These Volume 51, Summer 2014 55 were the dipole, quadrupole, octupole, based, intrinsically regulated, and our solar system were surrounded by fifth, and sixth harmonics. This paper is interdependent components) produce a series of concentric shells of high a preliminary investigation of how the self-adjustment in organisms; and (2) galaxy density, with lower densities of individual Gaussian coefficients contrib- sensors comprise the essential system galaxies in between these shells. Does ute to the oscillations of those harmonics component at organism-environment such a pattern exist, and if so, is it real of the earth’s magnetic field. It was found interfaces—the principle trigger within and statistically significant? Analysis of that some of the Gaussian coefficients an organism’s self-adjusting systems. the problem is made more difficult by contribute to the sinusoidal oscillations, Examples across taxa reveal that resilient selection effects inherent in the biases but others did not. Preliminary studies systems regulate variable expression of of galaxy surveys. Using data from the of the periods of the oscillations of the DNA, facilitating limited multigenera- Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), we components will be presented. This tional self-adjustments in offspring that describe and investigate possible selec- paper will contribute to the continuing can fill changed environments. Design tion effects, including Malmquist Bias development of a creationary model of analysis clarifies that an organism’s (the preferential detection of brighter the earth’s magnetic field. innate information that prescribes the galaxies with increasing distance). Other sum total of their physical being, i.e., selection effects stem from the filters their “nature,” produces the capability used in the SDSS, the criteria used for On the Overdue Course to accumulate results of self-adjustments selection of spectroscopic targets, the Correction in Intelligent to their exposures, i.e., their “nurture.” k-correction, and galactic extinction. Design Science: Sole causality belongs to a creature’s We describe methods of compensat- Engineered Adaptability designed nature conferring the capacity ing for these effects, in particular the Randy J. Guliuzza to be nurtured—environmental chal- Malmquist Bias, including a proposed lenges are not designing creatures; rather new method of de-convolving the lumi- If organisms reproduced clones of designed creatures solve environmental nosity function from a target selection themselves across generations, then challenges. function. We discuss some preliminary theories of evolution may never get go- results and describe some directions for ing. However, populations do change future research. over time. A key question about this Report of Soft Tissues from origin of life’s diversity is, when organ- a Triceratops Horridus Frill isms change (the effect), what is the Mark Armitage Incomplete Lineage Sorting proximate cause of that change? Answers for Diverse Protein-coding include: design-based, organism-driven Newly conducted research on samples Genes Among Humans, ones; naturalistic, environment-driven of Triceratops horridus frill collected at Chimpanzees, Gorillas, ones; or some combination. A follow- the Hell Creek Formation in Montana Orangutans and Macaques on question is, what cause explains any have yielded interesting and previously Jeffrey P. Tomkins environmental condition becoming unreported findings of the presence a stimulus to an organism? Accurate of soft tissue. A review of previous Tri In 2013, I published a research paper identifications of causality undergird ceratops soft tissue discoveries will be with Jerry Bergman on the evolution- true explanations. Reverse engineering discussed and new findings performed negating concept of incomplete lineage analysis of organisms demonstrates that by Creation Research Society scientists sorting (ILS) in metazoans (JOC 27:84– engineering principles underlying how will be presented. 92). In brief, numerous reports show that human-designed things self-adjust to depending on the type of gene or DNA changing environments is the most ac- sequence being used to construct a phy- curate way to explain causality of how Are Redshifts Quantized? logenetic tree, the topology of the tree organisms adapt. Engineering analysis Analysis of varies widely. In essence, the inferred shows environmental conditions facing Selection Effects in (predicted) evolutionary phylogeny is organisms as only nonsentient exposures Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data often discordant with the experimentally that organisms detect and possess 100% Jake Hebert and Jason Lisle derived tree obtained from using DNA innate designs to potentially solve. Seven sequence. Evolutionists explain this as design principles explain an organism’s Creation scientists have long suspected ILS, which is a rescuing device to ex- self-adjustment, particularly, (1) sys- that galaxies may exist at preferred plain away the discordant data. While a tems (innate, integrated, information- distances from our solar system, as if variety of studies have demonstrated the 56 Creation Research Society Quarterly ubiquitous occurrence of discordance A Creation View of Comets processes with steps tied to tangible in- in alignments of DNA sequence among Wayne Spencer nate systems observed to cause organisms humans and great apes, all reported to self-adjust to different environments. efforts have involved extensive cherry- This presentation will report on research Regarding natural selection, engineering picking of data and sequence manipula- on comets with the aim of coming to an analysis exposes that essential process tion prior to the application of multiple understanding of all comets in a young- elements are outside the realm of human alignments. Thus, the true levels of age creation view and to critique the detection or understanding—mystical. discordance are essentially obfuscated Oort comet theory. Though young-age Specifically, no one has detected a in these efforts despite the fact that creationists have addressed short-period real environmental “selection event,” their outcomes still frequently negate comets for years, there is a need for a quantified an environmental “selection common ancestry—violating the evo- creationist approach that explains all the pressure,” or identified correspond- lutionary paradigm. I will be presenting comets and brings in up-to-date informa- ing selective elements legitimizing data from a research project aimed at de- tion from the scientific literature. Wayne natural selection’s equivalence to a real termining more accurate and unbiased Spencer will address the various types of “artificial” selection process. Design levels of discordance among humans, comets to critique the Oort comet theory analysis reveals a misleading mental chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and as today’s scientists understand it. Wayne construct fueled by mystical projections macaques using protein-coding genes will suggest some basic ideas on how of causal credit into scenarios invoking in various categories, along with other young-age creationists can understand “favored” dog fur, “selected” cavemen, important genomic features of interest. how comets relate to God’s creation of or false analogies of natural selection the solar system and God’s judgment in to conscious human agency. Thus, the Noahic Flood. Several conclusions two mystical features have been true of The Genesis Flood and are drawn from this study. First, the “life- selectionism regardless of definition: (1) Floating Log Mats time” of both Jupiter-family comets and invalidly ascribing selective/volitional at- Solving Geological Riddles Halley-type comets are consistent with tributes to inanimate environments and Michael J. Oard a young-age timescale. Second, secular (2) affirming idolatrous positions that science has experienced difficulty ex- environments can exercise agency—the Although Flood geology has answers to plaining the origin of the Halley-type materialist’s substitute for God’s agency. many challenges on the global Genesis comets. Third, long-period comets could Mystical ascriptions empower “natural Flood, there still are numerous challeng- be on their first trip toward the sun, and selection” used as materialism’s credit- es left to go. Some of these challenges they may have been simply created along stealing label for results actually caused will take many years of research, and their current orbits. Fourth, secular sci- by an organism’s God-designed innate because there are many unknowns still entists have expressed some puzzlement processes, i.e., “selection processes” are in earth science, some challenges will over the question of why no extrasolar claimed to “work on” shaping organ- not have answers for a long time or on interstellar comets have been observed. isms as external environmental agents. this side of eternity. Reasonable answers Design analysis results force precise, to seven challenges will be presented by descriptive, scientific language of bio- employing the creationist log-mat model Atheistic or Theistic logical processes that bring clarity to developed by other creationists. The Selectionism: Rigorous apologetics discussions. They expose fal- specific problems that the log mat model Design Analysis Shows That lacious “selection”-based origins talk and addresses are: (1) the origin of vertical, Both Are Mystical Beliefs are the most powerful argument against polystrate trees found at many locations Randy J. Guliuzza death-and-survival-driven naturalistic around the world; (2) the so-called fossil evolution and for the Bible’s beneficent forests at numerous levels in Yellowstone Even though natural selection has con- intelligent Designer. National Park; (3) paleoflora sites that flicting definitions, many atheistic natu- show several mysterious features assum- ralists and theistic creationists believe ing the uniformitarian paradigm; (4) in one nuanced “process” connotation Triangles as Evidence of amber and insects in amber; (5) fresh- as a cause of organisms’ evolution or Intelligent Design in Nature looking insect fossils; (6) coal; and (7) adaptation. Accurate identifications of Mark Armitage some aspects of post-Flood biogeography causality undergird true explanations. that are now very contradictory to the Rigorous reverse engineering of organ- A general survey of plant and animal uniformitarian model. isms does identify measurable internal morphology illustrates the paucity of tri- Volume 51, Summer 2014 57 angular shapes as morphological norms “unoccupied and empty”). But the KJV will be presented. These results will also in biology. In this study, the microscopic and its many derivatives are widespread be discussed within the context of other shapes of diatom frustules, which ex- and influential, dominating English data I have recently published compar- hibit stunning equilateral triangles and translations and, to some degree, non- ing the transcribed intergenic regions complex geometric forms are explored English as well. of the human genome to chimpanzee and elucidated. Three-dimensional LOCATE forces and proves (strong (CRSQ, in press). triangular diatom shapes are shown to words) that Wycliffe and Tyndale had it be somewhat governed by the two-di- right, whereas the KJV translators erred. mensional mathematical superformula The “big four” critical renditions can all Why the Spanish Flu popularized by Gielis in the Journal of be determined by using this powerful Went Extinct Botany in 2003, yet no mathematical ba- tool. The result makes Genesis chapter Robert Carter and John Sanford sis has been proposed to account for the 1 into a beautiful, supernatural-wonder three-dimensional geometry of diatoms. chapter, even superior to the breathtak- Despite claims from evolutionists, it is A case for the presence of diatoms based ing wonder and beauty of microbiology very difficult to analyze evolutionary tra- on intelligent design will be tendered. and astronomy. jectories due to a simple lack of data. We have abundant genetic data for extant species and only sparse data for extinct A New Hermeneutic Systematic Comparison of species or ancient individuals from living Methodology Human Chromosomes and species. Most available diversity data is Gorman Gray Their Known Gene Space for humans, for obvious reasons. Thus, to the Chimpanzee Genome any claim about chimpanzee-human Every expositor knows that context is Jeffrey P. Tomkins ancestry, for example, is by necessity critical for Bible interpretation and based on the assumption of common translation. I have expanded that truth In 2013, I published a report asym- ancestry. As a model for the evolution- into a tool by including multiple con- metrically comparing the chimpanzee ary mutation/selection paradigm, we textual constraints, sometimes involving genome chromosome by chromosome chose to examine changes in the human additional analysis of the structure of an to the human genome, using the tech- H1N1 influenza A lineage over time entire thought division before determin- nique of optimized sequence slicing and obtained over 4,000 viral genomes, ing translation choices. LOCATE is an and the BLASTN algorithm to ascertain representing both human and swine acronym for “Literal Overview Corrects overall DNA sequence similarity (ARJ H1N1 strains. After accumulating over Assumptions and Tests Everything.” It 6:63–69). On average, the chimpanzee 1,400 point mutations (>10% of the is a new interpretive method that limits genome was 70% similar to human with genome), the human H1N1 virus disap- the options and mandates the proper individual autosomal similarities varying peared from genetic databases in 2009. renditions. between 66 and 78%. I will be discuss- Thus, we were the first to document its The big four of critical Creation ing a new research project in which the apparent extinction. Despite extensive scriptures are: Genesis 1:2, Exodus human genome is asymmetrically com- evidence for natural selection, we were 20:11, Genesis 1:16, and Mark 10:6. pared to chimpanzee using the same able to document that selection was un- LOCATE clearly determines translation bioinformatic techniques. In addition, able to remove most mutations from the options for the “big four.” In this paper, I have downloaded all known human population of viruses over time and was I demonstrate this method of Bible genes (including 1000 bases of promoter unable to prevent a drift from optimal interpretation as a positive means of de- sequence) from the UCSC genome codon usage. When we analyzed the termining word choices. It is especially browser for each chromosome. Since rate of change in the various nucleotides, new as applied to the origins texts. It is many known genes also contain regions we realized that each mutation type simple, not requiring extensive expertise of high dissimilarity with chimpanzee accumulated in a linear manner, as if in Hebrew, and makes the text under- in promoters and introns, all protein- mutation accumulation followed the standable even to children. coding exons for each chromosome were laws of thermodynamics and was im- The King James 1611 version de- also downloaded for comparison. Thus, mune to selection pressures. This would scribed the earth as “without form comprehensive levels of overall human mean that genetic change is predictable. and void.” Wycliffe and Tyndale chose chromosome similarity, known gene- The accumulation of slightly deleterious “idel and voide” or “voyde and emptie” space similarity, and protein-coding exon mutations over time in this virus should (which in pre-Elizabethan days meant similarity to the chimpanzee genome be a direct challenge to the Darwinian 58 Creation Research Society Quarterly mutation/selection paradigm if applied ergy loss, high quality factor Q, reactive before Christ or postapostolic church to higher organisms. power, and resonance—aka isin(ωt) [i = leaders accepted precreated matter will √-1 or j in electrical engineering]—at be discussed. 1.85x1015 m/s space fabric speed, with Local Engineering no wavelength stretching, aka by time Applications from Large-Scale dilation. The Molecular Clock Fails Cosmology Parameters, Jerry Bergman Part 2— Standard Cosmology’s Answering Objections to The molecular clock, also called the Date for the Flood Creation Ex Nihilo in Six Days gene or evolutionary clock, has influ- Chuck Glatt Suzanne Vincent enced all areas of evolutionary biology. The technique uses genetic comparisons The following math gives standard Childlike faith in God’s goodness allows to estimate the number of mutational cosmology’s date for the Flood, when a straightforward understanding of Scrip- differences to determine when the pos- defining standard cosmology as Ein- ture with no confusion. The beginning is tulated evolutionary divergence of two stein’s General Relativity (GR) space when God begins to count. The heavens different life-forms occurred. An analy- fabric with Hubble’s observed space God created [literally from the Hebrew sis of the data has determined that this expansion. Distance measurements that “at the start”] were heavenly heavens, approach is seriously flawed on several are based on current light being received the realm of angels, spiritual powers, and counts. One major problem is many se- (1) assuming the Hubble constant’s principalities (Nehemiah 9:6). Angels, quences are highly conserved. A highly calculation for the universe’s radius, of who teach man how to worship, were conserved sequence is one that has a 1.30x1026 m (more commonly stated as created before man. Psalm 104 tells us very similar sequence in very different 13.77 billion light-years) and (2) assum- God lays His chambers above the wa- species. Some well-known examples of ing space expansion rate as 1.85x1015m/s ters and makes His angels spirits. God genes that are highly conserved include result in the conclusion that light left created earth—a space of unformed the histone genes, the monosaccha- the edge of the universe 2,200 years substance from whence God removed ride sequence of glycosaminoglycan, ago. Space began expanding at twice his “shekinah” glory. The six days and and heparin genes; all are conserved that age, from the pre-Flood universe’s Sabbath were created for man. Jesus across a wide range of species. Among 1020-meter radius. That is, the Deluge created all things in heaven and earth, the most highly conserved sequences occurred 4,400 years ago, or 400 years visible, invisible, powers and thrones. He are the active sites of many enzymes before Abraham. 1.85x1015m/s expan- is Alpha and Omega. and the binding sites of protein recep- sion rate also gives a universe of today’s Two major objections to Creation ex tors. Also existing are what are called 1026-meters radius in 6,000 years. At nihilo in six days concern (1) whether ultra-conserved elements or sequences the time of the Flood, the universe was the nothing (“nihilo”) was actually noth- (UCEs or UCRs) that share 100 percent unleashed to expand a million times in ing or chaos, and (2) whether creation or very close identity. The results support radius, creating 1,000 times less Edding- of heavenly realms and/or heavens of in- the Creation model. ton equivalent-1000-stars contribution tergalactic space occurred before the six to our planet’s ambient environment. days. The second objection is given by Our bodies heat matches entropy less ruin-restitution theory or by undefined- Mt. St. Helens, than before the Flood. Space expansion age biblical literalists. Disproof of these the Forgotten Miracle? rate is unlimited (except GR’s gravity various theories will be given. Richard Overman content pulls the universe back into Chaos, or unorganized “unoriginate a big crunch). Gravitational potential matter,” is that hypothesized by precre- The May 18, 1980, eruption of Mt. St. energy can exceed the strength of physi- ation chaos theory, Greek philosophers, Helens provided a natural laboratory cal interaction, also known as (aka) GR or heretical Gnostic sects like the Nico- for catastrophism. This laboratory was gravitational time dilation; between laitans. Early apostles did not hold to expertly studied by Dr. Steve Austin galaxies speeds exceed the speed, c, of precreated matter. Paul, who was taught to show the effects of the worldwide any physical interaction, aka velocity by Gamaliel, grandson of Hillel, stated Flood described in Genesis 6–9. Upon time dilation. Light carries information, that God called things that are not as completion of his analysis, Dr. Austin to the viewer about its source. Informa- though they were. The argument that produced a slide presentation that used tion travels intergalactically by low en- orthodox Hebrew rabbis of the time the Mt. St. Helens data to demonstrate Volume 51, Summer 2014 59 how the geologic features we see today identification and bring the young-earth Locating Sodom and the are best explained by a the global Flood. biology model closer to a scientifically Other Cities of the Plain The author has used the presentation to robust, testable explanation for species’ Anne Habermehl enhance the faith of many. Whenever ancestry. this information is presented, people Various geographical locations have comment that the Mt. St. Helens infor- been claimed for the cities of Sodom, mation convinced them that the old- Thinking within a Biblical Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, which earth paradigm is not valid. However, it Creation Model in Biology were destroyed by God because of their seems that over the years the use of this Jean K. Lightner wickedness. An especially widespread information by young-earth creationists belief has been that the four cities lay at has waned. It does not get the attention The evolutionary model is certainly the south end of the Dead Sea. However, that it used to get. This paper will pres- at odds with the historical account of some place them along the west side of ent the Mt. St. Helens information as a origins presented in the Bible. Many the Sea, some along the southeast side, reminder to those who are familiar with arguments have been used to “refute” and others on the northeast shore. Argu- it and to enlighten those who have not evolutionary ideas, some with more ments will be provided from Scripture, heard of it. The paper will also explore correspondence to reality than others. history, archaeology, geography, geol- how to effectively use this information A serious problem arises when we just ogy, and chronology to show that these and what needs to be done to keep it contradict what evolutionists say without places claimed by others are probably fresh. Mt. St. Helens is a powerful tool investigation of the scientific literature or not correct. in our box that needs to be used to Scripture. Both are needed if we are to Examination of pertinent Scriptures glorify God. truly have a biblical view of natural his- puts the four cities in a line from south tory and an understanding of biological to north along the west side of the Jordan changes that do occur. River, starting with Sodom and Gomor- The Genetics of Common Two biblical notions are fairly well rah near Jericho at the north end of the Ancestry: New Tools for incorporated into creationist arguments: Dead Sea. The stated borders of the Identifying Created “Kinds” creatures were created according to their territory of Canaan, and the Promised Nathaniel T. Jeanson kinds, and the Curse brought death and Land as shown to Moses, are especially suffering. However, other key portions of important. The question of species’ ancestry is at the biblical doctrine and history have been The land allotments of the tribes core of the creation/evolution debate. less well incorporated: God continu- of Benjamin and Ephraim support the Though the Bible clearly rejects Dar- ally provides for His creatures, and the western Jordan location of these cities. win’s hypothesis of universal common genetic bottleneck at the Flood gives us It is shown that Admah and Zeboiim ancestry and, instead, traces species’ a means to identify variability that has had to have been on the eastern edge ancestry back to the created “kinds” of arisen within some kinds. of Ephraim’s territory, leaving Sodom, Genesis 1, the scriptural text does not From a scientific standpoint, cre- Gomorrah, and Zoar at the eastern end provide an exhaustive listing of each ationists often find themselves acquir- of Benjamin’s territory. Bela, the alterna- “kind” that God created. Within the ing the assumptions of the naturalistic tive name of Zoar, provides a significant young-earth creation community, “kind” model. For example, all genetic change piece of this puzzle, because Bela was membership has been traditionally may be assumed to arise by chance, or the name of the oldest son of Benjamin. identified by hybridization, but hybrid different versions of a gene may be as- Zoar would have been renamed Bela studies are few in comparison to the total sumed to be fixed primarily by natural when the children of Benjamin took number of extant species. Furthermore, selection. Given the scientific and bibli- possession of their territory. the inability to hybridize does not neces- cal data, both of these assumptions need sarily exclude a species from kind mem- to be seriously questioned. bership. Hence, additional methods are This presentation will review vari- Unique Dinosaur Trackway in needed to resolve the species’ ancestry ous creationist arguments to see if they Middle Jurassic Rocks Poses question. The recent explosion of DNA are merely antievolutionary or if they Problems for Evolution sequence information for thousands of truly build the creation model. Future Terry P. Beh species provides a wealth of potential in- direction of creation research will also sights to this question. I demonstrate how be covered. While most, if not all, known dinosaur these data yield new methods for kind footprints are found in a single layer of 60 Creation Research Society Quarterly sediment, an extraordinary inchnofos- applications. Family history, if forensic to further explore accelerated nuclear sil trackway at Slick Rock, Colorado, science qualified and authoritatively decay theories. vertically traverses four bedding planes informed by Scripture, can serve not of rock, the lower two horizontal and only as a valuable source of biogenetic the upper two crossbedded. Currently history data, but also can serve as a prac- Animal Extinction on the the host rock is identified as eolian or tical introduction for studying personal Young-Earth Timescale: Fossil “a combination of tidal flat and sand origins from a biblical YEC worldview. Occurrence Data Uncover a dune layers” created over a roughly Also, biogenetic family history, as a New, Testable Explanation 150,000-year timespan. However, the multigenerational (and detailed-facts- Nathaniel T. Jeanson track’s preservation clearly indicates sensitive) origins science, provides a rapid deposition of all four rock layers, learning opportunity for clarifying and Why do species go extinct? Extinction as well as quick lithification. Toe/finger contrasting complementary method- is an essential component of the evolu- imprints in the footprints, along with ologies of the empirical and forensic tionary process, and evolutionists have mud “up-push” and deformation of the sciences. capitalized on the fact of extinction to surrounding sediment strongly suggest Conventional forensic evidence communicate a persuasive-sounding, a marine depositional environment. standards for assessing family history data survival-of-the-fittest natural history The vast areal extent of the host rock are discussed. Illustrations involve bio- narrative to the lay public. By contrast, further indicates a massive flood. Not genetic data and genealogical lineages the young-earth creation model lacks a insignificantly, the site also marks the of George Washington, King James (of comprehensive explanation for the post- first known occurrence of bipedal dino- KJV fame), Bill Cooper, and others. Flood disappearance of various kinds saur footprints in Middle Jurassic rocks. Research and findings (discussed in and therefore lacks a compelling nar- this paper) acknowledge and often rely rative to combat the evolutionary story. upon data reported by Brian Tompsett’s Several creationist extinction hypotheses Biogenetic Family History, research team (at England’s University have been proposed for isolated animal an Underappreciated of Hull) and others. groups, but a general mechanism for all Creation Science animal groups has yet to be formulated. James Johnson To address this problem, I quantified Comparison of Different the scope of animal extinction using the Since the creation revival began gen- Radiometric DatingTechniques Paleobiology Database, and I used these erations ago, the Creation science com- Richard Overman data in combination with the data from munity has rightly emphasized origins the Committee on Recently Extinct Or- science in general. This paper evaluates different radiomet- ganisms to plot a timeline of post-Flood Lamentably, however, for at least 200 ric dating techniques as published in extinction. Mathematical modeling years, due largely to deism-instigated/ secular literature. The articles are from revealed a new, time-dependent expla- influenced secularization of origins sci- the same collection the author used nation for kind extinction over the last ence, creation scientists have virtually ig- for his paper at the 2013 International ~4500 years. nored forensic science-qualified study of Conference on Creationism. Published biogenetic family history (a specialized dates from K-Ar, Ar-Ar, Rb-Sr, and U-Pb origins science applying forensic science dating for the same rock samples and the The Extraterrestrial Search methodology principles). Yet biogenetic same rock formation are compared. The for the Origin of Homochirality family history can and should be a prop- RATE team showed, based on a small Charles McCombs er subject of scientific investigation and sample size, that various radiometric analysis, assuming proper assessment dating techniques gave older or younger For many years, naturalistic scientists of biogenetic data by forensic evidence dates based on their atomic weight. This have assumed that chemical evolution standards, within a biblical framework of paper explores that relationship further is the pathway by which life first origi- Genesis-informed family history. with a large sample size of hundreds of nated. However, chemical evolution The doxological and educational published dates. A statistical analysis is has not been able to explain the pres- importance of family history is shown performed on the published dates as a ence of homochirality in these living from relevant Scriptures (e.g., Psalm total group and then statistical analyses organisms by natural processes. The 102:18 and Psalm 139), buttressed by of selected individual rock formation search for the origin of homochirality illustrative apologetics/outreach ministry is performed. The results can be used has presented itself as a mystery to the Volume 51, Summer 2014 61 evolutionists because in chemistry, there assist in the evaluation of accelerated Taken together, these indicate that, is no known chemical procedure or nuclear decay. at least from the middle Mesozoic to natural process that can generate new the present, the putative millions of homochirality without preexisting ho- years were never there. This renders mochirality already present. The need Applying Eliminative Induction the evolution of much of the biosphere for preexisting homochirality to produce to Biosphere Origin Theories impossible, eliminating evolution theory new homochirality and the inability of Hugh Miller and J. Michael Fischer as a solution to the question of origins. natural processes to explain the formation of new homochirality has caused The origin of all living things has two evolutionists to take their search for the basic possibilities: creation by natural Weaving Programming origin of homochirality into outer space. causes alone without involving intel- Language Theory, Fixed-point Evolutionists now propose that the ini- ligence or by design involving intel- Computations, Fractals, and tial source of amino acids was in deep ligence. While it may not be possible Quantum Mechanics into a space, later deposited on the surface of to conclusively prove which produced Case for a Created Universe rock fragments, irradiated with circularly the biosphere, it may be possible to Robin Snyder polarized ultraviolet light from starlight, determine which did not, leaving the and brought to earth on meteorites. other standing by the process of elimi- Fractals are self-similar objects that Unfortunately, their explanation for the nation (eliminative induction). Origin allow simple rules to create seemingly origin of homochirality is not supported by natural causes alone is advanced by complex natural objects. A deep result by the current scientific literature. A evolution theory, and origin involving of programming language theory used critique of the evolutionist dilemma is intelligence is advanced by intelligent to model the mathematics of program provided to show why homochirality design theory. correctness and semantics involves fixed- is a clear indication of creative design Intelligent design theory finds design point computations and continuation se- by God. in biological creatures, notably from mantics. Together with the quantization specified complexity and irreducible of the time and space of the universe, the complexity that could not have come apparent implication is consistent with Ar Dating Statistics from natural causes alone. While time the claims of some secular scientists that Richard Overman is not a factor in intelligent design, we are living in a quantum simulation enormous amounts of it are required running on a quantum computer. But This paper expands on previous work by the theory of evolution. Complexity what is running this simulation? This presented by the author at the 2013 has made long ages even more neces- talk/session will cover some background International Conference on Creation- sary; without many millions of years, on each of these topics with emphasis on ism. The previous work evaluated over evolution of the biosphere would not the implications for a created universe 700 K-Ar and Ar-Ar dates published in be possible. and stimulate further discussion on the secular literature. The initial evaluation K-Ar, U-Pb, and other long half-life topic. discussed in the previous work identified radiometric dating methods have been interesting patterns in the data but did crucial evidence for the geologic time- not include a more formal statistical scale. We present several independent Man as Message analysis. This paper provides the more lines of evidence that contradict long Diane Kingsley Powell formal statistical analysis. In addition, half-life radiometric dates and severely the information from the previous work shorten the geologic time scale: (1) Car- The perspective of creative design as is updated in response to comments as bon-14 dating of Cretaceous and Jurassic represented in the Judeo-Christian Bible well as a better understanding of the dinosaur bones to ~31,000 years before and in the model “message theory” data. The statistical analysis looks at present, (2) the survival of soft, flexible [ReMine] will be applied to the study the data both without consideration of tissue and collagen in dinosaur bones, of human nature. Both the biblical the standard geologic column and then and (3) the simultaneous formation of text and message theory are consistent with respect to the standard geologic col- multiple sedimentary strata by deposi- in that they reflect these three key fac- umn. The analysis shows that Ar dating tion in moving water. These have all tors: explicit agency, testability, and does not support the standard geologic been confirmed by other researchers. an awareness of man’s propensity for column in its present form but does Our radiocarbon dates for dinosaur self-deception. As a result, naturalistic indicate different groupings that could bones are original data. accounts of human behavior often fail 62 Creation Research Society Quarterly to acknowledge the uniqueness of man methodological naturalism (MN), an Post-Flood Biogeography: or to appreciate its significance. Various arbitrary doctrine that restricts science Mitochondrial DNA Patterns topics regarding man’s essential charac- to materialistic explanations. While MN Define the Timing ter, rational, religious, social, and moral, has utility in experimental (operational) and Units of Migration will be addressed and relevant research science, it should not be used in histori- Nathaniel T. Jeanson from fields such as anthropology, sociol- cal origins science. ogy, and psychology will be consulted. U.S. courts have ruled in numerous Why do modern marsupials exist only in We will find that those features that are cases that “religion” includes theistic, Australia and the Americas? Evolution- the most unique and universal to the atheistic, and pantheistic beliefs. The ists use the geographic distribution of human species are also those that are First Amendment requires government current and fossil species to argue for the the most troublesome for naturalistic ac- neutrality on issues touching on reli- validity of evolutionary common ances- counts. In his review of the evidence for gion. Thus current science standards try. By contrast, young-earth creationists biological design, ReMine concluded (including NGSS) are arguably un- know from Scripture that the geographic that life was designed in such a way as constitutional since they present only a distribution of nonaquatic vertebrates is to convey a message from its Designer. single (materialistic/atheistic) viewpoint a result of post-Flood migration from When the data regarding human nature on origins. Ararat, but the young-earth model has has been reviewed using this process, it When teaching subjects that touch yet to formulate a comprehensive, test- will become clear that man himself was on religion, public schools should able explanation for why species exist designed to convey a message. disclose the religious issue and present in their current locations. To better the subject in an objective manner so understand the dynamics and tempo of that the effect of the teaching will be this process, I analyzed the mitochon- State Education Standards religiously neutral. Efforts to inject drial DNA differences among several in Science: The Need for objectivity and neutrality into science well-represented mammalian kinds. In Objectivity and Neutrality education will be discussed. contrast to previous proposals in the Robert P. Lattimer creationist literature, I found evidence suggestive of a continuous, slow process All states have adopted standards (learn- Simplifying Information of post-Flood speciation and a dynamic, ing objectives) in K-12 science educa- Theory into a Classical kind-dependent process of migration. tion. All state standards, to varying Statistical Argument for These data refine the taxonomic identity degrees, present solely a materialistic/ a Created Universe of the units of post-Flood migration, and naturalistic view of origins science (the Robin Snyder they constrain potential explanations for study of the origin and development of young-earth biogeography. the universe and life on earth). Teleology As Stephen Hawking has stated in jus- (the study of the evidences for design or tifying the acceptance of some of his purpose in nature) is not considered a own work, moving a problem from the Use of Geologic Columns viable alternative to unguided evolution- science domain to the mathematics do- to Develop a ary processes, despite the fact that much main (in his case, work involving black Comprehensive Flood Model evidence exists that infers teleological holes) makes the work and conclusions Timothy L. Clarey, Davis J. Werner, causation. hard to refute. In the same manner, a and Nathaniel T. Jeanson The Next Generation Science Stan- creation debate moved to the realm of dards is the latest attempt by science and classical statistics (e.g., coin flipping) A new, four-stage Flood model is education authorities to indoctrinate makes the work and conclusions hard proposed based on a study of mega students into accepting a materialistic/ to refute. This talk/session will review sequences across the continental USA. atheistic worldview. NGSS was released some secular and nonsecular work in Geologic columns from 322 locations, in April, 2013, and the goal is for these information theory and then provide using COSUNA and oil well data were standards to replace those developed some simple rules of thumb for making analyzed. Lithologic information and by states. and explaining the case that for coded boundaries for six Phanerozoic mega- The primary tool in this indoc- information, there is not enough time sequences and one Late Proterozoic trination is the undisclosed use of or space for any plausible evolution megasequence were recorded. argument. Results indicate the Flood was initi- ated by thermal uplift, volcanism, and Volume 51, Summer 2014 63 hydrothermal activity associated with the earth’s core moving perpendicular to evidence controversies in adjudicative rifting in the midcontinent and along the magnetic field. This dynamic-decay contexts, such as the recent-fabrication the Eastern Seaboard, prior to deposition model has movement of fluid parcels rule (used for causation analysis), of the Sauk Megasequence. A second producing an electromotive force (emf) the evidence-of-nothing rule (used stage began with rapid subsidence of and an increase in magnetic flux leading for hypothesis falsification), and the continental crust near the rift zones due to a new field of opposite polarity. This disproportionality-relevance rule (used to magma and water withdrawal, creat- talk uses the physical mechanism to for disqualifying evidence and misleading intracratonic basins. Deposition of model a system of ordinary differential ing terminology). the Sauk, Tippecanoe, and Kaskaskia equations representing the westward and As creation apologetics illustrations, megaseq uences kept pace with episodic eastward motion of the currents in the these conventional standards apply to crustal collapse, with the thickest sedi- earth’s interior, generating the magnetic origins controversies, including unifor- mentation in the eastern US and in the field and reversals during a catastrophic mitarian assumptions (applying deist subsiding basins. Dominant current flood. The system represents the emf epistemology), the distant starlight directions were from northeast to west- as a series of step functions giving an controversy (in a young universe), southwest, subparallel to the rift zones. exact solution using Laplace transforms. cosmology (vs. cosmogony), natural A third stage began with the initia- The exact solution with corresponding selection theory (applied to biodiversity, tion of subduction along the West Coast, energy estimates are used to provide population dynamics, and ecosystem and the formation of new oceanic crust boundaries for parameters such as fluid dynamics), and the geologic formation off the East Coast. Thickest deposition in speed and the magnetic decay rate. of Earth’s major river systems (after the the Absaroka and Zuni megasequences Flood). shifted to the south and west, likely as a consequence of rapid crustal draw- Forensic Science Insights down into the subduction zone. The for Creation Controversies Post-Flood Speciation: Which final stage, the Tejas megasequence, James Johnson Mechanism Is Most Probable? was dominated by deposition between Nathaniel T. Jeanson basement-involved uplifts as the crust Many creation controversies, especially rebounded, forming the Rocky Moun- controversial events of the no-longer- How did modern species arise from the tains, during the waning of subduction observable past, are often erroneously kinds on board the ark? To date, the and plate motion. Rapid erosion created analyzed according to deism-grounded creationist literature contains a host of extensive strata across the Great Plains uniformitarian assumptions. Even hypotheses on the mechanism of specia- and in the Gulf of Mexico, as Floodwa- creation scientists frequently do this, tion, but evaluation of these proposals ters drained off the continent. unintentionally, when analyzing such has been hampered by limited data and Implications for fossil and lithologic controversies by empirical-science by a lack of tests that distinguish among distribution patterns will also be ad- methodology, rather than by forensic- these hypotheses. Consequently, little dressed. science methods informed by relevant consensus exists among young-earth scriptural data. biologists, a fact exploited in the old- This “scientific method” misapplica- earth creationist literature. To address Energy Estimates of a tion of empirical-science methods (to this dilemma, I review the current Geomagnetic Field forensic-science questions) routinely young-earth hypotheses, and I reevalu- Dynamic-decay Model confuses the issues, invalidates data ate them in light of the most recent data during the Genesis Flood analysis, impedes creation-science prog- on the timing, extent, and molecular Tim Clayton ress, and short-circuits biblical creation nature of speciation. I also reevaluate apologetics. the heterozygous-fractionation model in The free-decay model of the earth’s This methodology misapplication light of the relevant population genetic magnetic field provides a straightforward problem can be remedied, but the parameters that existed post-Flood—a mathematical solution but does not problem must be (1) recognized, as set of parameters that has been largely account for evidence of pole reversals. the problem it is and (2) addressed and overlooked in prior young-earth discus- A physical mechanism proposed by a resolved by applying relevant forensic- sions. Finally, I propose a new set of creationist places the reversals during the science analysis practices, including criteria by which the various young-earth Genesis Flood due to parcels of fluid in conventional standards for evaluating hypotheses can be falsified or verified. 64 Creation Research Society Quarterly

The policy of the editorial staff of CRSQ is to allow letters to the editor to express a variety of views. As such, the content of all letters is solely the opinion of the author, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of theCRSQ editorial staff or the Creation Research Society.

The Moon and Cratering

Solar system craters and when they oc- the night, and to separate the light lunar surface. We suggest that if craters curred has been a recent topic of interest from the darkness. And God saw that are a means by which the moon fulfills in creationist literature and conferences. it was good. (Genesis 1:14–18 ESV) its God-given purpose, then they may The Seventh International Conference This passage gives a clear indication also be referred to as “very good,” just on Creationism in Pittsburgh, Pennsyl- of several purposes of the moon: It was as decaying plant material forms an in- vania, in 2013 held a panel discussion to be a night light, a timekeeper, and a tegral component of healthy soil. Solar that debated the timing of meteoritic im- “sign” in the skies (DeYoung and Whit- System craters may have been created pacts in the solar system. There have also comb, 2010, pp. 47–58). Certainly the in place by God as part of a mature cre- been a number of recent articles on the purpose of providing light is a major part ation, or they may have formed as part topic (e.g., Faulkner, 2014; Oard, 2013; of the role of the moon, as well as the of the creation process. Either way, the Spencer, 2013). Two major positions are sun. It is this purpose that has implica- purpose of providing light, we suggest, (1) that the biblical record and scientific tions for the time of cratering. is best met with a cratered surface on data are best explained by most craters To understand the importance of the Moon. Thus we submit that many originating during the Creation Week, craters for the moon’s reflected light, craters most likely were present since the and (2) that most cratering events took consider what the implications of a Creation week. place during the Flood and are related perfectly smooth lunar surface would to God’s judgment. be. The moon is nearly perfectly spheri- Jeremy Maurer We would like to add to the discus- cal, but with its cratered surface, the [email protected] sion by looking at the original scriptural full moon looks “flat” to the observer Don B. DeYoung role of the moon and how a cratered (DeYoung and Whitcomb, 2010, p. [email protected] surface might impact this intended 49). This effect is due to the rough, role. The moon was created by God on cratered surface that reflects incoming the fourth day of the Creation Week as sunlight in many different directions. If References recorded in Genesis 1: the moon were smooth, light reflecting DeYoung, D., and J& WhitcomJ. 2010. And God said, “Let there be lights in to earth from the sun would be focused Our Created Moon: Earth’s Fascinating the expanse of the heavens to separate to only the very center of the moon. The Neighbor. Master Books, Green Forest, the day from the night. And let them overall effect for the full moon would AR. be for signs and for seasons, and for be a much brighter central part of the Faulkner, D. 2014. Interpreting Craters days and years, and let them be lights moon and darker edges. The waxing and in Terms of the Day Four Cratering in the expanse of the heavens to give waning crescent moon would similarly Hypothesis. Answers Research Journal, light upon the earth.” And it was so. resemble a bright spot, not the even light 7 11–25. And God made the two great lights— it does now. Oard, M. 2013. What do impacts accomplish the greater light to rule the day and A possible objection to creation- in the first hour? Journal of Creation, the lesser light to rule the night—and related cratering would be that the 27(1): 90–98. the stars. And God set them in the original “very good” creation would Spencer, W. 2013. Impacts and Noah’s expanse of the heavens to give light on exclude “destructive” events that would Flood—how many and other issues. the earth, to rule over the day and over have destroyed the originally smooth Journal of Creation, 27(1): 85–89. Volume 51, Summer 2014 65

How Mathematics by Peter Rudman Happened: Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 2007, 314 pages, The First 50,000 Years $27.00

able to count. Mathematics, as Rudman Sprinkled throughout the book are sees it, has evolved along with humans “Fun Questions” that relate to the top- and finally reached “maturity” (meaning ics at hand. Of course, how fun these the use of rigorous mathematical proof) questions are might be proportional during the time of the famous Greek to how much one enjoys solving math mathematicians, including Pythagoras, problems! But most of the questions are Peter Rudman is a Euclid, and Eratosthenes. (2) We share very well explained and can be solved retired professor of solid-state in common with the Greeks, Babylo- with minimal effort based on the discus- physics at Technion-Israel Institute of nians, Hindus, Mayans, and Egyptians sion in the main text, and answers to all Technology in Haifa, Israel. Professor a common way of thinking about math- questions are provided at the end of the Rudman’s self-professed purpose for his ematics that is natural and “evolved” book. Some examples are: “Prove that ab book is not primarily to tell what the an- into our brains. Unfortunately, Rudman = ba,” and “Convert 456 and 567 into hi- cient people did but rather why they did fails to acknowledge the possibility that eroglyphics and add them.” Many of the it. His book addresses questions such as people were created intelligent beings, questions illustrate important concepts the following: Why did the Babylonians and so his assumptions take him in from the book and can aid the reader use a base-60 number system? Why did wrong directions at several places in the in understanding some of the problems the ancient Egyptians use series of unit book. If he would allow only the avail- mathematicians faced in days gone by. fractions to express a single number? able information to guide his thinking, The book is a relatively easy read, al- Why are many mathematical discover- he might see the clear picture of intel- though some problems and material are ies, such as the Pythagorean theorem, lectually capable humans extending as more advanced. One should be prepared attributed to Greek mathematicians far back in human history as we have to “eat the meat and toss the bones,” as instead of Babylonian? The answers evidence. the author is most certainly not writing are possible and sometimes speculative Some of the more interesting aspects from any kind of religious perspective. but always interesting and reasoned. of the book show how the Babylonians However, the evidence presented is very This book is not written from a creation knew about the Pythagorean theorem consistent with a young-earth biblical perspective, but the picture presented a millennium before Pythagoras, the viewpoint, and the information about is consistent with and supports the Egyptians knew how to compute the ancient human mathematics is both notion that humans have always had volume of a “frustum”–a pyramid with interesting and entertaining. mathematical ability. the top cut off–and how knowledge of The book contains a very helpful list There are two important prem- mathematics may have diffused back of references with annotations, answers ises upon which all Rudman’s ideas are and forth between Egypt, Babylon, and to the “Fun Questions,” and an index. based: (1) Man has evolved from other India, all 2000 years before Christ. Such animals, and in about the last 50,000 a picture is what we might expect from Jeremy Maurer years has developed to the point of being a biblical worldview! [email protected] 66 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Dark Matter, by Sean Carroll Dark Energy: 4 DVDs with 24 lectures, The Dark Side The Great Courses, of the Universe Chantilly, VA, 2007, $69.95

most astronomers and physicists believe entire universe. In my opinion some of in them. This statement makes it plain these facts are based on unproven as- that this course is about a belief system. sumptions. The bases of this belief system are found Carroll presents observations that in the standard model of particle physics support several basic facts. For example, and the lambda-cold dark matter pa- he notes the universe looks the same in rameterization of the big bang theory of all directions; space is growing between Sean Carroll has a Ph.D. in Astrophysics cosmology. Dark matter and dark energy galaxies at the Hubble constant rate; from Harvard and is a senior research have been proposed to make this model stars are still forming from dust within associate in physics at the California consistent with observations scientists galaxies; the relative age of stars can be Institute of Technology. His research have made of the universe. In my opin- determined from their color and lumi- involves theoretical physics and astro- ion, the majority of the material covered nosity; there is no center or boundary physics with a focus on issues in cosmol- only explains what is not dark matter or to the known universe; the speed of ogy, field theory, and gravitation. He is dark energy rather than what they are. light is a universal constant; the laws of well versed in all topics related to dark The basic facts the author presents quantum mechanics hold for atoms and matter and dark energy and how they in support of this belief system are: the subatomic particles; gravity is the curva- theoretically fit into the concordance big bang took place 13.7 billion years ture of four dimensional space-time; and model for the evolution of the universe. ago; the universe is composed of 5% or- space-time is presently expanding at an His lecture style presents the material in dinary matter, 25% dark matter, and 70% increasing rate. In my opinion, it is the an interesting and understandable way dark energy; ordinary matter is made interpretation of these observations that to a science-minded audience. This lec- of atoms formed by electrons, protons, lead to the concordance model. ture series is several years old, but little and neutrons that are held together by Carroll explains that in general has changed in its contents. photons; neutrons and protons are made relativity three numbers characterize A Course Guidebook is provided with of quarks held together by gluons; energy the simple, smooth universe at any the DVD set, which includes a table is proportional to particle mass times moment in time, and the model also of contents, introduction, 24 lecture the speed of light squared; dark mat- tells us how they change with time. guides, and 56 pages of supplemental ter is detected only through the use of The Friedmann equation is used to material. The supplement contains gravitational force; the standard model relate these three numbers, including explanations of exponential notation, of particle physics explains only known the universe expansion rate, energy measuring the universe, the standard ordinary matter particles; the big bang density, and the curvature of space at model of particle physics, and big bang nucleosynthesis formed only hydrogen, any moment in time. This equation timeline, along with a glossary, bio- helium, and lithium atoms, and other allows cosmologists to determine how a graphical notes of major contributors elements were formed in first generation scale factor of the universe evolves with to the theories, and a bibliography. The stars; cosmic microwave background time. For example, immediately after lecture guides summarize the major radiation was released with recombina- the big bang, radiation and matter were points Carroll makes in each lecture. tion at 370 million years after the Big extremely dense and space was greatly Dr. Carroll states that the purpose Bang; dark energy and inflation are not curved. Now matter and radiation are of the course is to explain what dark affected by gravity; and Einstein’s theory diluted and space has been found to be matter and dark energy are and why of general relativity holds throughout the flat within present measuring capabil- Volume 51, Summer 2014 67 ity. The assumption is that the equation detected, but its energy only supports the the universe is extremely successful in can be used to determine where specific standard model and reduces the possibil- explaining all the observations that have events occurred along the evolutionary ity for super-symmetry particles. Such been made of our universe. But that timeline by applying the scale factor. particles are required by all the models model includes these three unidentified However, there is no recorded history based on string theory. The search for features: dark matter, dark energy, and that can be used to verify the equation dark matter particles called WIMPs the cause of inflation. or the sequence of events. (weakly interacting massive particles) A creation model may not require Modifications to some of the lectures from outer space passing through earth these features, since God’s actions dur- need to include recent discoveries from have come up empty with the most sensi- ing the first four days of this universe both astronomical observations and par- tive detectors available. Those searches could be manifested in these observa- ticle physics experiments. High-energy will continue, but their direction and the tions. collision experiments have not been theories supporting them are presently able to detect dark matter particles in a in turmoil. Del Dobberpuhl large range of energies where they were In the final lecture, Dr. Carroll [email protected] expected. The Higgs boson has been emphasizes that the current model of

The Flood by Bodie Hodge of Noah: and Laura Welch Legends & Lore Master Books, Green forest, AR, of Survival 2014, 24 pages, $18.99

is made of the writings of the interior of the Ark, 22 inches wide anthropologist James George and complete with the animals. It is Frazer (1854–1941), who sum- suggested that there may have been as This book marized worldwide folklore stories a few as 2000 individual animals on board is short and color- century ago. during the yearlong Flood. ful with two dozen heavy stock pages. I have collected many 3-D and pop- The book includes an ancient map, Brief flood legends are described from up books, and this volume qualifies for American Indian legends, and discus- 18 cultures worldwide. Although con- the set. There are several page inserts to sion of an assumed major flood on taminated by legend and exaggeration, pull down and tabs to slide out. Such Mars by those who deny the same on these legends have common features novel features are typically of interest earth. A clear gospel presentation also with the inspired biblical account of to children; however, the writing in this is provided. Noah’s day. The extrabiblical accounts book is on an adult level. At the same include 19 distinct names for Noah time, the color artwork is simple and Don DeYoung and 12 names for his wife. Major use captivating. This includes a diagram of [email protected] 68 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Guidebook to by J.D. Mitchell North American Council for Exceptional Dinosaurs Children (CEC) Publications, According to Gresham, OR, 2014, 241 pages, Created Kinds $23.00

the best places to see dinosaur bones and Armor-Backed (Edmontonia) skeletal reconstructions throughout the Bipedal Browser (Camptosaurus) United States and Canada—most, or all, Club-Tailed (Ankylosaurus) of which the author visited personally Duck-Billed (Edmontosaurus) over a period of 10 years in preparation Horned Faced (Triceratops) With his new book, for writing this book. Horned-Nosed (Ceratosaurus) J. D. Mitchell, executive director of Another section, “Dinosaur Data Killer-Clawed (Deinonychus) the Institute for Creation Science in by Created Kind,” comprises the entire Lithe, Fast Running (Coelophysis) Gresham, Oregon, seeks to establish second half of the book. It is here that Long-Necked Big-Clawed (Anchis- a new—and more biblical—way of Mitchell introduces his new, biblical aurus) identifying dinosaurs. As its title states, categories for these creatures, reducing Long-Necked Boxy-Headed (Bra- Mitchell’s Guidebook to North American over 100 North American dinosaur ge- chiosaurus) Dinosaurs endeavors to categorize dino- nus names to 15 “kinds.” The criterion Long-Necked Slender-Headed (Di- saurs according to created kinds. he uses for combining these genera into plodocus) While Mitchell doesn’t discuss ba- created kinds is the quality and quan- Ostrich-Like (Orinthomimus) raminology, the study of biblical kinds tity of reported fossil material available. Plate-Backed (Stegosaurus) (Frair, 2000), his book is really an at- While Mitchell admits that his method Thick-Headed (Pachycephalosaurus) tempt to apply baraminology to dinosaur is rather subjective, his groupings loosely Tyrant Bipedal Dinosaur (Tyran- evidence from the fossil record. While resemble what Lightner et al. (2011) nosaurus rex) other creationists have estimated that refer to as cognitum, a group of organ- Of course, while most readers of there could have been as few as 55–60 isms that are naturally grouped together this book will enjoy Mitchell’s dinosaur dinosaur “kinds” worldwide (Thomas, through human cognitive senses. information and skeleton photographs, 2009), as far as I know, Mitchell is cor- In this manner Mitchell merges the subjective nature of his “kinds” rect in claiming to be the first to specify similar dinosaur genera under a broad, will just as surely lend itself to ques- what they may have been, at least for all-encompassing label and picks what tions/criticisms about their validity. For those found in North America. Like he believes is the most appropriate genus instance, based on the observation of most young-earth creationists, Mitchell to represent each “kind.” For example, their bone structure or skeletal morphol- views species as mere variations of the he combines all the North American ogy alone, is there sufficient difference original created kinds of Genesis. By genera of allosaurids and tyrannosaurids between Mitchell’s Armor-Backed and combing similar genera, he establishes into the Tyrant Bipedal Dinosaur Kind Club-Tailed dinosaurs to justify dividing his dinosaur kinds at the family level of represented by Tyrannosaurus rex. Each them into separate kinds? The same taxonomy, as is a common consensus in new kind is accompanied by photos of might also be said for his Lithe, Fast creation science (Lightner, 2009). skeletal reconstructions of the various Running and Ostrich-Like kinds. Per- Mitchell’s Guidebook is roughly di- dinosaur genera it includes from Mitch- sonally, I would take issue with making vided in half with the first part devoted ell’s travels to fossil museums throughout Ceratosaurus its own kind (Horned- to information about dinosaurs and America and Canada. Nosed Dinosaurs), when the only major dinosaur fossils, which should be of The 15 dinosaur kinds and their skeletal difference between it and the general interest to creationist readers. representative genus in the Guidebook other Tyrant Bipedal Dinosaurs is the One section, “Dinosaur Museums,” lists are as follows: horn on its nose. Volume 51, Summer 2014 69

All in all, the Guidebook to North those who seek to answer the seemingly ark kinds. Answers Research Journal American Dinosaurs is a quick and undying question: “So, how could all 4:195–201. enjoyable read based on an intriguing those dinosaurs fit on Noah’s Ark?” Thomas, B. 2009. Dinosaur ranks shrink as premise. While many will likely disagree species numbers dwindle. Institute for with Mitchell’s criteria and conclusions, References Creation Research. www.icr.org/article/ this book is a good first attempt to iden- Frair, W. 2000. Baraminology—classification dinosaur-ranks-shrink-species-numbers, tify the “terrible lizards” according to of created organisms, Creation Research posted October 13, 2009 (accessed their biblical kinds. And with the field of Society Quarterly 37:82–91. March 15, 2014). baraminology still in its early stages—es- Lightner, J.K. 2009. What are species? Cre- pecially when it comes to dinosaurs—it ation Matters 14(6):6–7. Terry P. Beh will hopefully serve to generate further Lightner, J.K., T. Hennigan, G. Purdom, [email protected] discussion on this topic, especially for and B. Hodge. 2011. Determining the

Guidebook to by J.D. Mitchell North American Council for Exceptional Dinosaurs Children (CEC) Publications, According to Gresham, OR, 2014, 241 pages, Created Kinds $23.00

the recent dinosaur soft-tissue research This reviewer is not aware of any other that has produced major problems for dinosaur guidebook written from a Darwin’s theory. creationist perspective. Furthermore, The text highlights various museums very few secular guidebooks contain the that contain significant collections of information included here. The Guidebook to dinosaurs. Most of these Mitchell has The author summarizes and applies North American Dinosaurs is a visited, enabling him to provide in- his system based on creationist presup- well-illustrated, often-in-color, ency- formed recommendations about their positions, using both the traditional and clopedic handbook. The guidebook strong points. The museums are listed by the creation taxonomy. He summarizes is an invaluable resource for dinosaur states. Another section includes a brief both the creation and secular paleon- aficionados, both amateur and pro- biography of the major historical dino- tology presuppositions. The traditional fessional, with at least a high school saur paleontologists and their significant secular system is based on the following education. The general public also achievements. conclusions: There is no God, or God is will find the book of much interest. It The most important section is on a irrelevant. Everything came from noth- covers in detail, not only the topic of new theory of dinosaur classification. ing. All life-forms evolved from common dinosaurs, but also dinosaur footprints, This major contribution is a system of ancestors over billions of years. Homol- their eggs, theories of their extinction, taxonomy based on a modified Lin- ogy (the fact of similarities in life-forms) and dinosaur terminology. The manual naean system (p. xx). Mitchell applies is sufficient proof for the evolution of all even includes a guide to exploring for the system using the presupposition of extinct and living life-forms (p. xx). dinosaur fossils, including discussions the created kinds to a wide variety of Biblical paleontology operates under of the tools of the trade and the laws dinosaurs (pp. 79–220). This section an entirely different set of presupposi- that govern fossil collecting (pp. 68–69). is illustrated in color to highlight the tions, including the presupposition that One section includes a discussion of application of the Mitchell system. all life-forms were created in groups 70 Creation Research Society Quarterly called kinds or baramins. Mitchell uses tive exercise. For this reason changes dog breeds based on morphology alone, the creation worldview to develop a new and deletions are common as new fos- he would classify them into “at least a taxonomy using the same data used by sil materials are discovered, errors are score of ... well defined species” (Jones, evolutionists. found, and different interpretations gain 2000, p. 25). Mitchell’s excellent guide Because scientists cannot carry out acceptance” (p. xx). The same problem to dinosaur research is highly recom- interbreeding studies with dinosaur fos- exists with creation taxonomy. mended. sils, they are forced to rely on the study Only very rarely does evidence of and measurements of bones and teeth internal morphology exist to aid in mak- Reference (and, occasionally, external morphology) ing adequate comparisons required for Jones, Steve. 2000. Darwin’s Ghost. The Ori- to produce species evaluations to de- taxonomic comparisons. The problem gin of Species Updated. Random House, velop the taxonomy. As Mitchell notes, in using morphology for this purpose New York, NY. the “assignment of family categories and was illustrated by a London University genus/species names to dinosaurs by biologist who noted that, if a modern Jerry Bergman secular taxonomists is a highly subjec- mammalogist were to evaluate modern [email protected]

The Reason for God: by Timothy Keller Belief in an Age Riverhead Books, New York, of Skepticism 2008, 310 pages, $16.00

philosophically deep where needed. The book is filled with thought- Over the 25 years of Pastor Keller’s provoking statements such as the fol- leadership, Redeemer Presbyterian has lowing: “Today most Christians in the grown to 6,000 regular attenders (mostly world live in Africa, Latin America, and young adults) and established a host Asia” (p. 41). “No matter who performs of daughter churches. The inner-city it, every act of goodness … is empowered ministry has become a model for urban by God” (p. 54). “I found no other reli- outreach worldwide. gious text outside of the Bible that said Some weakness is shown in Pastor God created the world out of love and Writer Timothy Keller’s position on Genesis and origins. delight” (p. 84). Keller is the founding pastor He states, “I think Genesis 1 has the Pastor Keller shows familiarity with of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in earmarks of poetry and is therefore a writers of the past and present. Key New York City. This New York Times ‘song’” (p. 97). Different positions on quotes and thoughts are given from bestseller is addressed to mature believ- the meaning of Genesis 1 are described Augustine, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Albert ers, seekers, and skeptics. Pastor Keller as an “intramural debate” that should Camus, G. K. Chesterton, Charles has heard many challenges to biblical be reserved for those well grounded in Darwin, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Victor faith, as shown by chapter titles such as true Christianity (p. 97). There is some Hugo, Soren Kierkegaard, C. S. Lewis, the following three: truth to this view since the idea of a Alister McGrath, Flannery O’Connor, • There Can’t Be Just One True recent supernatural creation is prepos- William Wilberforce, and a hundred Religion terous to many people outside the faith. others. There are 284 detailed footnotes • How Can a Loving God Send People Although not dogmatic, Pastor Keller provided. This book deserves study and to Hell? leaves the door open for theistic evolu- rereading. • Science Has Disproved Christianity tion through his promotion of Francis The discussion is thorough and Collins (p. 133). Don B. DeYoung [email protected] Volume 51, Summer 2014 71

by Ron Blakey and Ancient Wayne Ranney Landscapes of the Grand Canyon Association, Colorado Plateau Grand Canyon, AZ, 2008. 156 pages, $35.00

of the Colorado Plateau came to be. many of which are located in national For the creationist they have potential parks like Arches, Bryce Canyon, and as tools for thinking about the processes Grand Canyon. This means that the that took place before, during, and after creationist researcher has a good excuse the biblical Flood. This book contains to take his or her family on a working This numerous paleographic maps, as well vacation! Excellent descriptions of book on the ge- as cross sections and photographs of where and what geology is to be seen at ology of the Colorado Plateau is modern-day landscapes, outcrops, and each location are also given along with written by two experts on geology and fossils, that the authors put together cross sections. tectonics who are very familiar with to tell what they believe is a coherent The creationist reader will also be the Grand Canyon area. This is not story of the plateau. There are cross- able to note puzzles that the evolu- a creationist work; nevertheless it has correlated diagrams that show how rock tionist cannot explain or has difficulty value for the creationist as both a guide sequences at various locations are related understanding. The origin of the Grand to the geology of the region and as a tool and descriptions of where fossils such as Canyon and the preservation of many for the serious geology researcher. Ron dinosaur tracks and rock formations like different dinosaur species in “fossil Blakey is well known worldwide for his Shiprock in New Mexico can be located. graveyards” are two examples. The end “paleogeographic” maps—maps that try This work helpfully points out that of the book has a description of how the to convey a simplified picture of what many of the locations that are good for paleogeographic maps are made and the world looked like at some point in viewing the rock layers are also recre- also includes a glossary, list of references, the past. For the evolutionist these are ational and vacation spots. A map on and index. invaluable in understanding how a land- page 126 shows 20 different locations scape like the Grand Staircase region where good outcrops can be found, Jeremy Maurer [email protected] 72 Creation Research Society Quarterly

Did Adam and Eve by C. John Collins Really Exist? Who They Were and Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 2011, 192 pages, $16.00 Why You Should Care

somehow different from the rest of the real event in the Fall. Collins stops just created world. short of arguing that this must have taken Page 120 contains a helpful summa- place “at the beginning,” as Jesus said in ry of what is otherwise a rather verbose Mark 10:6. argument. He believes that the biblical The book is relatively short but a evidence is such that it requires a his- little wordy, and it is sometimes diffi- This book could torical figure like Adam, and he argues cult to follow Collins’s train of thought. be considered a “moderate” that the “origin of the human race goes He sometimes is more concerned perspective on Adam and Eve. Col- beyond a merely natural process.” This with clarifying what he is not saying lins defends the historicity of the first is true even within a perspective that than what is said. The book includes couple, their initial state of innocence would reject a literal view of Genesis. He several appendices, including a study with God, and an historical fall. He does does suggest that perhaps Adam and Eve of how Genesis compares with ancient not accept a young age for the earth or were the leaders of a tribe of humans, Near Eastern literature and the date of a global flood, but he argues that even but, he says, they must have been “at the its composition. It ends with a list of those who reject these must come to headwaters” of whatever other humans references and general and Scripture grips with the significance of the first existed. He also states that the Fall must indices. It is recommended for anyone human couple and their actions. The have been both historical and moral, who wishes to understand more fully reason for this is developed throughout and it must have occurred at the very the issues surrounding the historicity of the book and involves the text of Genesis beginning of the human race. Adam and Eve. itself, the perspective of the rest of the The book gives helpful arguments Bible, especially Jesus and Paul in the that show how Jesus and Paul both Jeremy Maurer New Testament, and also the collective understood Adam and Eve to be real, [email protected] experience of humanity that we are historical people who experienced a Volume 51, Summer 2014 73

Unlocking the DVD series Mysteries of Institute for Creation Research, Genesis Dallas, 2014, 12 DVDs, $129.99

the series; he appears com- secular worldview governed by evolution, fortable and articulate in all agnosticism, and atheism; and third, to the venues he appears. An impressive the young generation, which needs to be array of scientists also appear, includ- brought back into the church. This DVD series has 12 discs, ing over a dozen with doctoral degrees, Episode 12 provides an excellent each approximately 22 minutes in many of whom are familiar in creation summary of the preceding episodes and length. This format has plusses and mi- circles. The series should be effective ties the whole series together in the light nuses. I would have preferred 4 to 6 epi- in holding the attention of the younger, of the Scriptures. The evidences and the sodes per DVD (thus only 2–3 DVDs) action-oriented generations, one of evolutionary interpretation, including for easier sequential viewing (I viewed ICR’s purposes in producing the series. problems, are reviewed. The timeline them all in one afternoon). However The order of episodes is not ex- based on Genesis is clearly presented. the 12-disc format allows separating the actly what I would have chosen, but the The questions asked in the 11 episodes set so that individual discs can circulate. choice is reasonable and understand- are all clearly answered. The point is that The license for the series allows notable. The episodes are mostly modular Genesis explains it all with a little help for-admission public showing of entire and can be viewed in any order or indi- from the other 65 books! Viewers are left episodes and is suitable for church use vidually in a classroom. However there with a challenge to decide their future. (per a personal communication I have are some references to “in the previous The Episode 12 disc also contains a short had with ICR). It is not well known that video…” and “in the next video we’ll (3.5 minute) bonus feature showing a most secular DVDs and many Christian- see….” The episode titles follow: dynamic, visual timeline of the history of produced DVDs are licensed “For 1. Chaos or Cosmos? mankind from Creation to Jesus Christ. Home Use Only,” a succinct description 2. What Is Life? One minor criticism is that the text of their intended purpose and allowed 3. What Is Man? and titles shown on screen are sometimes use. Public showing often requires per- 4. Buried Clues a bit small to read, especially in a large mission and considerable expense. The 5. Flood or Fiction? classroom or auditorium environment. 12-DVD case is a bit unwieldy, and the 6. How Old Is the Earth The accompanying viewer guide electronic “DVD pages” inside do not 7. Dinosaurs! book (112 pages) is well illustrated with turn easily unless you realize the way to 8. The Ice Age colorful images. There is a chapter for “operate” the case is to pull each “DVD 9. Rise of Civilization each episode with material to summa- page” up before turning it. 10. Origin of the Universe rize the key points, questions for further The series is very well done from a 11. Uniqueness of Earth thought on the episode’s topic, a page of technical-production standpoint, rival- 12. Science and Scripture evolution/creation contrasts for the topic, ing the quality of National Geographic Each episode ends with direct refer- and resource websites and print media. and PBS nature videos. Colorful and ences to God and Scripture and chal- The guide lends itself to use as a discus- interesting sets and well-chosen loca- lenges the viewer to consider the concept sion leader’s resource. My suggestion, if tions enhance the viewer’s experience. of a Creator and a Savior. This makes the using the DVD series for a moderate to Attention-grabbing activities and action series a good choice for evangelistic use large Sunday school class or similar en- tend to hold the viewer’s interest. Graph- by churches. Churches could show this vironment, is to not provide copies of the ic simulations also are well done. The series to three audiences: first, to church guide to everyone. But for small groups script and video shots are fast-paced and members to edify their understanding (for example, a home Bible study), a copy yet are understandable to viewers with of the relationship of true science and for each participant would be helpful. limited scientific background. Marcus the Bible; second, to an unbelieving Lloyd is an excellent choice as host of audience, which is immersed in today’s David J. Oberpriller [email protected] 74 Creation Research Society Quarterly

by Andrew Sibley Cracking the Darwin Code Fastnet Publication, Devon, England, 2013, 180 pages, $9.00

The political situation of Darwin’s Scripture and the church. This was ac- time created fertile ground for rebellion complished gradually through the Royal against Christianity. For hundreds of Geological Society and more insistently years, a monarch’s power was rooted in by Thomas Henry Huxley and others. what the church believed was “divine The book details how church opposition The right.” Monarchs thought that because to this trend was crushed. author has of this they could do no wrong. This re- Cracking the Darwin Code has many done a careful and detailed study sulted in terrible abuses and contributed detailed references from the original of the philosophical, political, and reli- to some wanting to promote a system works of Darwin, Plato, and hundreds gious origins of evolution and “millions that discredited Genesis, realizing this of others. The picture Sibley paints is of years” and why the concepts are wide- would put into question the credibility far more complicated than this review ly accepted. He traces the notion of deep of all Scripture. indicates. The book is not an easy read time to eastern mysticism, Baal worship, Spiritually, many in Darwin’s time but well worth the effort for those who Hinduism, and early Greek thought (p. became interested in eastern mysticism want to understand why and how evolu- 5). We learn that the early church fathers and deism. With an uncomfortable tion and millions of years became the accepted the literal meaning of Genesis, political environment and spiritual “science” of the day and remains so. although many symbolically linked six decline, people were ready to accept an Andrew Sibley is an English meteo- days of creation with 6,000 years of earth alternative to Genesis, and naturalism rologist who has a penchant for research history, since they looked forward to was waiting. The author shows how it and detail. Cracking the Darwin Code the return of Christ (p. 19). Nearly all was not science that drove the push for has an extensive bibliography and a accepted six literal days of Creation and evolution and millions of years. At that helpful index. did not support evolution or millions of time many scientists disagreed with years, which were options even then, Darwin’s thesis. However, there was a Beverly Oard nearly two millennia ago (p. 27). desire by some to destroy confidence in [email protected] Volume 51, Summer 2014 75 Instructions to Authors

Submission Appearance Electronic submissions of all manuscripts and graphics are pre- Manuscripts shall be computer-printed or neatly typed. Lines ferred and should be sent to the editor of the Creation Research should be double-spaced, including figure legends, table Society Quarterly in Word, WordPerfect, or Star-Office/Open footnotes, and references. All pages should be sequentially Office (see the inside front cover for address). Printed copies numbered. Upon acceptance of the manuscript for publica- also are accepted. If submitting a printed copy, an original plus tion, an electronic version is requested (Word, WordPerfect, two copies of each manuscript should be sent to the editor. The or Star-Office/Open Office), with the graphics in separate manuscript and copies will not be returned to authors unless electronic files. However, if submission of an electronic final a stamped, self-addressed envelope accompanies submission. version is not possible for the author, then a cleanly printed If submitting a manuscript electronically, a printed copy is or typed copy is acceptable. not necessary unless specifically requested by the Quarterly Submitted manuscripts should have the following organi- editor. Manuscripts containing more than 35 pages (double- zational format: spaced and including references, tables, and figure legends) 1. Title page. This page should contain the title of the manu- are discouraged. An author who determines that the topic script, the author’s name, and all relevant contact information cannot be adequately covered within this number of pages is (including mailing address, telephone number, fax number, encouraged to submit separate papers that can be serialized. and e-mail address). If the manuscript is submitted by multiple All submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by two or authors, one author should serve as the corresponding author, more technical referees. However, each section editor of the and this should be noted on the title page. Quarterly has final authority regarding the acceptance of a 2. Abstract page. This is page 1 of the manuscript, and should manuscript for publication. While some manuscripts may be contain the article title at the top, followed by the abstract for accepted with little or no modification, typically editors will the article. Abstracts should be between 100 and 250 words seek specific revisions of the manuscript before acceptance. in length and present an overview of the material discussed in Authors will then be asked to submit revisions based upon the article, including all major conclusions. Use of abbrevia- comments made by the referees. In these instances, authors tions and references in the abstract should be avoided. This are encouraged to submit a detailed letter explaining changes page should also contain at least five key words appropriate made in the revision, and, if necessary, give reasons for not for identifying this article via a computer search. incorporating specific changes suggested by the editor or 3. Introduction. The introduction should provide sufficient reviewer. If an author believes the rejection of a manuscript background information to allow the reader to understand the was not justified, an appeal may be made to the Quarterly relevance and significance of the article for creation science. editor (details of appeal process at the Society’s web site, www. 4. Body of the text. Two types of headings are typically used creationresearch.org). by the CRSQ. A major heading consists of a large font bold Authors who are unsure of proper English usage should print that is centered in column, and is used for each major have their manuscripts checked by someone proficient in the change of focus or topic. A minor heading consists of a regular English language. Also, authors should endeavor to make font bold print that is flush to the left margin, and is used fol- certain the manuscript (particularly the references) conforms lowing a major heading and helps to organize points within to the style and format of the Quarterly. Manuscripts may be each major topic. Do not split words with hyphens, or use all rejected on the basis of poor English or lack of conformity to capital letters for any words. Also, do not use bold type, except the proper format. for headings (italics can be occasionally used to draw distinc- The Quarterly is a journal of original writings, and only tion to specific words). Italics should not be used for foreign under unusual circumstances will previously published mate- words in common usage, e.g., “et al.”, “ibid.”, “ca.” and “ad rial be reprinted. Questions regarding this should be submitted infinitum.” Previously published literature should be cited us- to the Editor ([email protected]) prior to ing the author’s last name(s) and the year of publication (ex. submitting any previously published material. In addition, Smith, 2003; Smith and Jones, 2003). If the citation has more manuscripts submitted to the Quarterly should not be concur- than two authors, only the first author’s name should appear rently submitted to another journal. Violation of this will result (ex. Smith et al., 2003). Contributing authors should examine in immediate rejection of the submitted manuscript. Also, if this issue of the CRSQ or consult the Society’s web site for an author uses copyrighted photographs or other material, a specific examples as well as a more detailed explanation of release from the copyright holder should be submitted. manuscript preparation. Frequently-used terms can be abbrevi- 76 Creation Research Society Quarterly ated by placing abbreviations in parentheses following the first a legend that provides sufficient description to enable the usage of the term in the text, for example, polyacrylamide gel reader to understand the basic concepts of the figure without electrophoresis (PAGE) or catastrophic plate tectonics (CPT). needing to refer to the text. Legends should be on a separate Only the abbreviation need be used afterward. If numerous page from the figure. All figures and drawings should be of abbreviations are used, authors should consider providing a high quality (hand-drawn illustrations and lettering should be list of abbreviations. Also, because of the variable usage of professionally done). Images are to be a minimum resolution of the terms “microevolution” and “macroevolution,” authors 300 dpi at 100% size. Patterns, not shading, should be used to should clearly define how they are specifically using these distinguish areas within graphs or other figures. Unacceptable terms. Use of the term “creationism” should be avoided. All illustrations will result in rejection of the manuscript. Authors figures and tables should be cited in the body of the text, and are also strongly encouraged to submit an electronic version be numbered in the sequential order that they appear in the (.cdr, .cpt, .gif, .jpg, and .tif formats) of all figures in individual text (figures and tables are numbered separately with Arabic files that are separate from the electronic file containing the and Roman numerals, respectively). text and tables. 5. Summary. A summary paragraph(s) is often useful for readers. The summary should provide the reader an overview Special Sections of the material just presented, and often helps the reader to Letters to the Editor: summarize the salient points and conclusions the author has Submission of letters regarding topics relevant to the Society made throughout the text. or creation science is encouraged. Submission of letters com- 6. References. Authors should take extra measures to be certain menting upon articles published in the Quarterly will be that all references cited within the text are documented in published two issues after the article’s original publication the reference section. These references should be formatted date. Authors will be given an opportunity for a concurrent in the current CRSQ style. (When the Quarterly appears in response. No further letters referring to a specific Quarterly the references multiple times, then an abbreviation to CRSQ article will be published. Following this period, individuals is acceptable.) The examples below cover the most common who desire to write additional responses/comments (particu- types of references: larly critical comments) regarding a specific Quarterly article Robinson, D.A., and D.P. Cavanaugh. 1998. A quantitative approach are encouraged to submit their own articles to the Quarterly to baraminology with examples from the catarrhine primates. CRSQ 34:196–208. for review and publication. Lipman, E.A., B. Schuler, O. Bakajin, and W.A. Eaton. 2003. Single-molecule measurement of protein folding kinetics. Sci- Editor’s Forum: ence 301:1233–1235. Occasionally, the editor will invite individuals to submit differ- Margulis, L. 1971a. The origin of plant and animal cells. American ing opinions on specific topics relevant to the Quarterly. Each Scientific 59:230–235. author will have opportunity to present a position paper (2000 Margulis, L. 1971b. Origin of Eukaryotic Cells. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. words), and one response (1000 words) to the differing position Hitchcock, A.S. 1971. Manual of Grasses of the United States. Dover paper. In all matters, the editor will have final and complete Publications, New York, NY. editorial control. Topics for these forums will be solely at the Walker, T.B. 1994. A biblical geologic model. In Walsh, R.E. (editor), editor’s discretion, but suggestions of topics are welcome. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism (technical symposium sessions), pp. 581–592. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA. Book Reviews: 7. Tables. All tables cited in the text should be individually All book reviews should be submitted to the book review edi- placed in numerical order following the reference section, and tor, who will determine the acceptability of each submitted not embedded in the text. Each table should have a header review. Book reviews should be limited to 1000 words. Follow- statement that serves as a title for that table (see a current issue ing the style of reviews printed in this issue, all book reviews of the Quarterly for specific examples). Use tabs, rather than should contain the following information: book title, author, multiple spaces, in aligning columns within a table. Tables publisher, publication date, number of pages, and retail cost. should be composed with 14-point type to insure proper ap- Reviews should endeavor to present the salient points of the pearance in the columns of the CRSQ. book that are relevant to the issues of creation/evolution. Typi- 8. Figures. All figures cited in the text should be individually cally, such points are accompanied by the reviewer’s analysis of placed in numerical order, and placed after the tables. Do the book’s content, clarity, and relevance to the creation issue. not embed figures in the text. Each figure should contain Volume 51, Summer 2014 77

Creation Research Society Membership/Subscription Application and Renewal Form The membership/subscription categories are defined below: 1. Voting Member ��Those having at least an earned master’s degree in a recognized area of science. 2. Sustaining Member ��Those without an advanced degree in science, but who are interested in and support the work of the Society. 3. Student Member ��Those who are enrolled full time in high schools, undergraduate colleges, or postgraduate science programs (e.g., MS, PhD, MD, and DVM). Those holding post-doctoral positions are not eligible. A graduate student with a MS degree may request voting member status while enrolled as a student member. 4. Senior Member ��Voting or sustaining members who are age 65 or older. 5. Life Member ��A special category for voting and sustaining members, entitling them to a lifetime membership in the Society. 6. Subscriber ��Libraries, churches, schools, etc., and individuals who do not subscribe to the Statement of Belief. All members (categories 1–5 above) must subscribe to the Statement of Belief as defined on the next page. Please complete the lower portion of this form and mail it with payment to CRS Membership Secretary, P.O. Box 8263, St. Joseph, MO 64508-8263, or fax for credit card payment to (816) 279-2312. Applications may also be completed online at creationresearch.org. ✁ This is a ❏ new ❏ renewal application for the subscription year beginning Summer ❏ 2014 ❏ ______. (Please type or print legibly.) Name______Address______City______State______Postal/Zip code ______Country______Phone (optional)______Email______Degree______Field______Year granted______Institution______Presently associated with______I have read and subscribe to the CRS Statement of Belief. Signature______For foreign orders, including Canadian, payment must be made in U.S. dollars by a check drawn on a U.S. bank, international money order, or credit card. Please do not send cash. Indicate applicable category Þ Indicate payment Þ ‡ PAPERLESS option: You may opt Paper** out of receiving paper copies of the CRS Canada Other Paper- periodicals (CRS Quarterly and Creation ❏ Voting ❏ Sustaining USA Mexico countries less‡ Matters). By choosing this option you ❏ Regular [per year] ❏ $38 ❏ $58 ❏ $75 ❏ $31 may register for access to the Premium ❏ Senior [per year] ❏ $33 ❏ $53 ❏ $70 ❏ $26 Area of the website, where you may view ❏ Life member ❏ $500 ❏ $500 ❏ $500 ❏ $500 or download electronic (PDF) versions ❏ Student* [per year] ❏ $33 ❏ $53 ❏ $70 ❏ $26 of these publications. Of course, regu- ❏ Subscriber [per year] ❏ $41 ❏ $61 ❏ $78 ❏ $34 lar members and subscribers may also * Student members are required to complete the bottom portion of this form. have access to the Premium Area. Only NOTE: Student members may qualify for the Future Leaders Sponsorship program. See the CRS website at www.creationresearch.org for details. members, however, will have access to the ** Rates for the paper option include postage for First Class Mail International Members Exclusive Area of the website. Member/Subscriber $______per year x _____ years Student Members are required to complete the following: SUBTOTAL $______School or institution now attending______Optional contribution + $______Life membership + $______TOTAL $______Your current student status: ❏ high school; ❏ undergraduate; ❏ Visa ❏ MasterCard ❏ Discover graduate program ❏ MS ❏ PhD; ❏ other ______❏ American Express ❏ Check/money order Year you expect to graduate or complete your degree______Card number______Expiration date (mo/yr)______Major, if college or graduate student______Phone number (______)______Signature______Signature______78 Creation Research Society Quarterly Order Blank for Past Issues Cost of complete volumes (per volume):...... members (all categories) – $18.00 + S/H nonmembers and subscribers (libraries, schools, churches, etc.) – $25.00 + S/H Cost of single issues (per issue):...... members (all categories) – $5.00 + S/H nonmembers and subscribers (libraries, schools, churches, etc.) – $7.00 + S/H

Number Number Volume 1 2 3 4 Volume 1 2 3 4 Creation…in a Flash 21     36     22     37     Regular price – $90 (upgrade $65) 23     38     24     39     Member price – $75 (upgrade $50) 25     40     26     41     27     42     28     43     29     44     30     45     31     46     Includes volumes 1–47 of the CRS 32     47     Quarterly and volumes 1–15 of 33     48     Creation Matters, fully searchable, 34     49     preloaded onto a USB flash drive. 35     50    

Add 20% for postage (for U.S. orders: min. $6, max. $18; for Canadian orders: min. $10, no max.; for other foreign orders: min. $15, no max.) Total enclosed: $______Make check or money order payable to Creation Research Society. Please do not send cash. For foreign orders, including Canadian, please use a check in U.S. funds drawn on a U.S. bank, an international money order, or a credit card. (Please type or print legibly) Name______Address______City______State______Zip______Country______❏ Visa ❏ MasterCard ❏ Discover ❏ American Express Card number______Expiration date (mo/yr)______Signature______Mail to: Creation Research Society, 6801 N. Highway 89, Chino Valley, AZ 86323, USA Creation Research Society History—The Creation Research Society was organized fund for these purposes are tax deductible. As part of its is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically in 1963, with Dr. Walter E. Lammerts as first president vigorous research and field study programs, the Society and scientifically true in all the original autographs. To and editor of a quarterly publication. Initially started operates The Van Andel Creation Research Center in the student of nature this means that the account of as an informal committee of 10 scientists, it has grown Chino Valley, Arizona. origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple rapidly, evidently filling a need for an association devoted Membership—Voting membership is limited to scien- historical truths. to research and publication in the field of scientific tists who have at least an earned graduate degree in a 2. All basic types of living things, including humans, creation, with a current membership of over 600 voting natural or applied science and subscribe to the State- were made by direct creative acts of God during members (graduate degrees in science) and about 1000 ment of Belief. Sustaining membership is available for the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever non-voting members. The Creation Research Society those who do not meet the academic criterion for voting biological changes have occurred since Creation Week Quarterly is a peer-reviewed technical journal. It has membership, but do subscribe to the Statement of Belief. have accomplished only changes within the original been gradually enlarged and modified, and is currently Statement of Belief—Members of the Creation created kinds. recognized as one of the outstanding publications in the Research Society, which include research scientists 3. The Great Flood described in Genesis, commonly field. In 1996 the CRSQ was joined by the newsletter representing various fields of scientific inquiry, are com- referred to as the Noachian Flood, was a historical event Creation Matters as a source of information of interest mitted to full belief in the biblical record of creation and worldwide in its extent and effect. to creationists. early history, and thus to a concept of dynamic special 4. We are an organization of Christian men and women Activities—The Society is a research and publication creation (as opposed to evolution) both of the universe of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Sav- society, and also engages in various meetings and and the earth with its complexity of living forms. We ior. The act of the special creation of Adam and Eve as promotional activities. There is no affiliation with any propose to re-evaluate science from this viewpoint, and one man and woman and their subsequent fall into sin other scientific or religious organizations. Its members since 1964 have published a quarterly of research articles is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for conduct research on problems related to its purposes, in this field. All members of the Society subscribe to the all people. Therefore, salvation can come only through and a research fund and research center are maintained following statement of belief: accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior. to assist in such projects. Contributions to the research 1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it iDINO Investigation of Dinosaur Intact Natural Osteo-tissue A CRS Research Initiative Scientists of the Creation Research Society are conducting a project to investigate the presence of intact tissue in dinosaur bones.

In the past several years, different studies have reported Figure 1. CRS excavation team at a site in Hell Creek evidence of non-fossilized tissue (e.g., compact bone cells) Formation, MT. Dinosaur specimens were obtained that and intact protein remaining inside fossilized dinosaur bones. have revealed the presence of intact tissue. Since these fossils traditionally have been dated at ages greater than 65 million years, the presence of this non-fossilized tissue is a direct challenge to the entire evolutionary “millions of years” time frame.

As part of the iDINO project, supraorbital horn of a Tric- eratops has been obtained and analyzed. This analysis revealed intact osteo-tissue containing osteocyte-like structures

with detailed filipodial-like interconnections and secondary Figure 2. CRS team members excavated a large branching. The intricate detail of these observed cells offers a Triceratops horn at a the Montana site. Analysis of this horn indicates the presence of intact compact bone strong challenge to claims that the tissue is bacterial biofilm cells that have not yet fossilized. or microscopic artifacts. Instead, these results give powerful evidence that dinosaur fossils are really only a few thousand years old.

The Society is seeking funding from interested groups, churches, and individuals. This funding for the iDINO project will enable a more extensive examination of this supraorbital horn as well as other dinosaur specimens.

For more information contact us at (928) 636-1153 or crsvarc@ Figure 3. Confocal microscope picture of a thin section of material from Triceratops horn. The arrow points to what appears to be an intact crsvarc.com. osteocyte cell (a common cell in mature bone). The fluorescence of the cell indicates that it has not yet fossilized. Also visit www.creationresearch.org for project updates and details.