CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY Q U A RT E R LY VolumeQ 46 Fall 2009 Number 2 THE EVOLUTION OF DINOSAURS: MUCH CONJECTURE, LITTLE EVIDENCE THE REGION OF EDEN STELLAR RADIATION ENTROPY PROVENANCE STUDIES OF CLASTIC SEDIMENTS ARE THE ASHFALL SEDIMENTS Q AND FOSSILS POST-FLOOD? Creation Research Society Quarterly Volume 46 Fall 2009 Number 2 Articles Departments Are the Ashfall Site Sediments Editorial: Shakespeare or Bonzo ................................. 77 and Fossils Post-Flood? ........................................ 81 Book Reviews Michael J. Oard The Global Phenomenon of Human Fossil The Region of Eden: Analysis and Debate ................. 93 Footprints in Rock by Aaron Judkins ............... 92 Joel D. Klenck A Boy Out of Time: A Time Twins Adventure by D. B. Macks ..............................108 Provenance Studies of Clastic Sediments The New Creationism by Paul Garner ..................118 and Their Role in a Hydrodynamic The Evolution Controversy: A Survey of Interpretation of the Genesis Flood ...................109 Competing Schools by Thomas S. Fowler John K. Reed and Carl R. Froede Jr. and Daniel Kuebler ...................................... 125 The Evolution of Dinosaurs: God of Wonders DVD ........................................... 132 Much Conjecture, Little Evidence ....................119 Extinction of Evolution by Darek Isaacs ............... 147 Jerry Bergman Notes from the Panorama of Science Stellar Radiation Entropy as Evidence Lessons from Twentieth-Century Geology ........... 133 of Supernatural Order and Creation ................. 127 Letters to the Editor ...................................................138 James R. Powell Author and Title Index for Volume 45 ...................... 143 Instructions to Authors ...............................................149 Cover design by Michael Erkel: Michael Erkel and Associates, 1171 Carter Street, Membership/Subscription Application Crozet, Virginia 22932 and Renewal Form ............................................... 151 Design services by Cindy Blandon, [email protected]. Order Blank for Past Issues ........................................ 152 The Creation Research Society Quarterly is published by the Creation Research Society, 6801 N. Highway 89, Editorial Staff Chino Valley, AZ 86323, and it is indexed in the Christian Kevin L. Anderson, Editor Periodical Index and the Zoological Record. Jerry Bergman, Biology Editor Send papers on all subjects to the Editor: George F. Howe, Assistant Biology Editor [email protected] or to Kevin L. Anderson, John K. Reed, Geology Editor Van Andel Creation Research Center, 6801 N. Highway 89, Eugene F. Chaffin, Physics Editor Chino Valley, AZ 86323. Ronald G. Samec, Astronomy Editor Send book reviews to the Book Review Editor: Don B. Don B. DeYoung, Book Review Editor DeYoung, 200 Seminary Dr., Winona Lake, IN 46590. Jarl Waggoner, Managing Editor Robert Mullin, Assistant Managing Editor Authors’ opinions expressed in the Quarterly are not neces- sarily those of anyone else associated with the Creation Board of Directors Research Society. Don B. DeYoung, President Copyright © 2009 by Creation Research Society. All rights Eugene F. Chaffin,Vice-President to the articles published in the Creation Research Society Glen W. Wolfrom, Membership Secretary Quarterly are reserved to the Creation Research Society. Danny Faulkner, Treasurer Permission to reprint material in any form, including the Mark Armitage, Financial Secretary Internet, must be obtained from the Editor. Gary H. Locklair, Recording Secretary Theodore Aufdemberge D. Russell Humphreys ISSN 0092-9166 David A. Kaufmann Jean K. Lightner Printed in the United States of America Michael J. Oard John K. Reed David Rodabaugh Ronald G. Samec 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 46, Fall 2009 77 Shakespeare or Bonzo There’s an infinite number of Samuel Wilberforce (son of famed Brit- of typewriters would inevitably type a monkeys outside who want to ish abolitionist, William Wilberforce). great literary work such as Shakespeare’s talk to us about this script for To digress for a moment, during this Hamlet (e.g., see Dembski, 1996). Ac- debate Wilberforce chided Huxley with cordingly, some have later claimed that Hamlet they’ve worked out. the question of whether Huxley’s ape an- in offering this analogy, Huxley scored —The Hitchhikers’ cestry was on his mother’s side or father’s a smashing victory in the debate and side. Huxley is said to have responded cast Darwin’s claims as acceptable to Guide to the Galaxy that he would rather be descended from the British scientific community—very an ape than from a man who misused impressive for such a silly analogy. Again, his intelligence to hinder humble seek- this alleged response may be more a re- “It was, I think, Huxley, who said that six ers of the truth (e.g., see Quimby, 1965, flection of people’s superficial logic than monkeys, set to strum unintelligently on for a retelling of Huxley’s response). on the rationale of the actual argument. typewriters for millions of millions of His response has been credited with However, it is unlikely that Huxley years, would be bound in time to write energizing the scientific community in presented the monkey analogy at this all the books in the British Museum” support of Darwinism. However, I would debate. Although the concept of the (Jeans, 1930, p. 4). Thus goes a version challenge anyone to demonstrate to me typewriter dates to the eighteenth cen- of one of the most popular analogies of that Huxley could ever be considered a tury, by 1860 typewriters still were not evolution. Other versions involve much “humble seeker of the truth.” I also find sufficiently functional for the purposes larger groups of monkeys typing differ- it interesting that such a superficial and of the analogy. There is also no docu- ent literary compositions, such as the rather flippant response would suppos- mentation that Huxley made such an encyclopedia Britannica or the works edly have had such a profound effect argument during the debate. In fact, he of Shakespeare. (or even be credited with having such is reported to have once said that “the As with the above quote, the monkey an effect). This claim actually may be scientific imagination always restrains analogy is often credited to T.H. Huxley. a reflection of the superficial thinking itself within the limits of probability.” A contemporary of Charles Darwin, that people often use when evaluating While I do not personally give Huxley his staunch defense of Darwin’s ideas evolutionary teaching. credit for seeing how this statement earned him the nickname “Darwin’s Also, by some accounts, during this contradicts the monkey analogy; in point Bulldog.” An outspoken nineteenth-cen- debate Huxley challenged that, given of fact, there is little evidence that he tury atheist (or agnostic, as he preferred enough time and enough opportunity, ever proposed this analogy during his to be identified), Huxley found Darwin’s random events could achieve the type entire career. ideas of evolution to be a great comfort of biological transformation required by The origin of a “random system” for his agnosticism. Surprise, surprise. Darwinism. To support this argument, analogy can be dated possibly to the More specifically, the origin of the he is alleged to have used the analogy (or Greek philosopher Aristotle. In his De monkey analogy is often linked with the one form of it) that an infinite number Generatione et Corruptione, Aristotle 1860 debate between Huxley and Bishop of monkeys typing on an infinite number attempts to describe how the world may 78 Creation Research Society Quarterly have arisen out of random combinations ries a distinct influence of extreme nine- well as rationality). And evolutionists of atoms. Some form of a “random sys- teenth-century materialism, including call this science? tem” analogy had become popularized the imagery of “the proverbial monkey Putting flesh and bone to the mon- enough by the first century BC that at the typewriter, hitting by pure chance key analogy, a 2002 study by researchers Roman philosopher Cicero attacked on the proper keys to produce a Shake- from the University of Plymouth (UK) the claim. speare sonnet.” In the early twentieth used six Macaques at a local zoo. For He who believes this may as well century, Jeans (1930) promoted the one month a computer keyboard was believe that if a great quantity of the analogy by claiming that placed in these primates’ pen, and their one-and-twenty letters, composed if we examine the last page which a resulting keystrokes were recorded. Over either of gold or any other matter, particular monkey had typed, and the course of this study, the Macaques were thrown upon the ground, they found that it had chanced, in its produced five pages of letters, mostly would fall into such order as legibly blind strumming, to type a Shake- repeats of single letters (esp. the letter to form the Annals of Ennius. I speare sonnet, we should rightly re- S), but they failed to type a single three- doubt whether fortune could make gard the occurrence as a remarkable letter word. (The entire transcript of the a single verse of them (Cicero, 1877 accident, but if we looked through primates’ “composition” can be found translation). all the millions of pages the monkeys at http://www.vivaria.net/experiments/ It is not known exactly when “typing had turned off in untold millions of notes/publication/NOTES_EN.pdf