VOLUME I                                                                   NUMBER VII


From The Nebulous Hypothesis:
A Study of the Philosophical and
Historical Implications of Darwinian Theory

© 1996 by James M. Foard
Editor and Publisher James M. Foard.


The Darwin Papers may be freely
copied and distributed for non profit use
provided acknowledgement is made
for material written by the author.
The Darwin Papers © 2000 James Foard 
© 2004 James Foard



Click to read summary below

Every schoolchild knows about dinosaurs, the largest land animals that ever existed, and their fellow reptiles the pterosaurs and plesiosaurs. These great beasts once roamed the earth, flew through the air and swam in the seas. We know that these huge reptiles are now extinct, however extinction, which is the very opposite of the origin of a species, throws no light on the origin of the dinosaurs, which we are no closer to solving in evolutionary terms than we were in Darwin’s day.
Although this is rarely if ever mentioned by evolutionists, the "evolutionary trees" that are drawn to demonstrate how dinosaurs supposedly evolved that are shown in exibits, museums and websites dealing with the subject are 99.9% conjecture; the "branches" show almost none of the actual details of what is supposedly millions of transitional forms that should have led up to the different dinosaur species; they all appear abruptly in the branches of the trees at specific spots with little or no explanation as to how they evolved, or what they evolved from (generally dinosaurs got "larger" or grew "longer necks" and that is the extent of the explanation given) yet the process is supposed to have taken many millions of years. Among the many extinct dinosaur species there should be enormous amounts of transitional forms leading up to each of them, yet there are none (again, except for "smaller" dinosaurs with "smaller teeth" or ones with "shorter necks", variations that are common within a species such as dogs but do not connotate evolution or something changing into a different species). Recent analysis has also demonstrated that many of the "long necked" dinosaurs did not acquire their long necks for the purpose of browsing in the higher branches of trees, thus shattering another cherished tradition held for years by evolutionists.

Thus the fact that dinosaurs indeed once existed, along with various other species that are now extinct, does not prove that they evolved-it merely shows that they died off and no longer exist today. This is a point that should not be lost with the current popularity of dinosaur documentaries produced by evolutionists attempting to lend validation to their ideas. Recent scientific discoveries have also shown that dinosaurs could not possibly have lived millions of years ago either; the millions of years ago date for dinosaurs is all an evolutionist fantasy, as will be shown later on in this chapter as well.

In fact the demise of the dinosaurs has been an enigma to evolutionists, with recent explanations for the "Great Extinction" contradicting one of the bulwarks of Darwinian ideology, known as the doctrine of uniformitarianism.

Until the theory of evolution began making it's rounds in the universities among the skeptics in the early part of the nineteenth century, catastrophism had been the explanation for the presence and preservation of fossils and for the vari­ous layers of the rock strata found in the upper por­tions of the crust of the earth. Basically, catastrophism stated that much of the history of the surface of the earth could be explained by great, cataclysmic disasters that involved tremendous changes in the climate of the world, and along with these disasters large numbers of living creatures became extinct.

Cuvier, the father of paleontology, comparative anatomy and stratigraphy was an advocate of catastrophism. One of the main causes of the largest disaster was considered to be the Biblical Flood of Noah. This story, found support first not only in the Biblical record, but also in the legends of almost every ancient tribe and culture on the face of the earth, from the ancient Babylonians with their legend of Gilgamesh, and the ancient Greeks and Chinese, to the legends of the Indians of North and South America, and it was believed in by two of the major founders of the sciences of geology and stratigraphy, Nicholas Steno and Baron Cuvier, as well as by many other distinguished scientists at Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard.
In 1830, however, Charles Lyell published his Principles of Geology,which directly contradicted the theory of catastrophism. He developed the Uniformitarian Theory,which stated that there had been occasional periods of local floods and earthquakes in the past, but that they were no different than what we see occurring around us today. His motto was “the present is the key to the past” i.e., present processes could explain everything that had occurred in earths history, and that nothing had ever occurred on the extent of a worldwide disaster such as the flood of Noah.

Darwin took a copy of Lyell’s book with him during his trip on the Beagle, and this profoundly shaped his thinking of the supposed descent of species from a common ancestor, since the theory of evolution required extremely long time periods, thus as evolution gained popularity uniformitarianism became the accepted explanation for the history of the earth. Catastrophism conflicted with the theory of evolution, since if the extinction of a species could be explained by a universal catastrophe (say, for instance, a comet striking the earth), then the theory of a species becoming extinct as a result of a struggle for survival with other species would be cast into doubt. So the theory of catastrophism was gradually shelved as evolutionary minded men ascended to prestige in the higher halls of learning of our Universities, and the books that were eventually written by these men heaped scorn upon the idea that something like a disaster of Biblical proportions had ever occurred on the face of the earth.

So catastrophism was laughed out of the intellectual and literary circles for quite a few years, but in this case Darwin couldn’t conveniently dispose of the corpse - it just kept reappearing all over the place, like that bothersome body in Arsenic and Old Lace.

Massive fossil graveyards of dinosaurs still exist all over the world. The Morrison beds in North America, the dinosaur beds in Montana, in the Rocky Mountains, in Alberta, the Dakotas, China, Colorado, Utah, Africa, etc., etc., contain literally millions of dinosaur fossils piled together in tremendous heaps. Ten thousand Hadrosaurs were found on Egg Mountain alone, jumbled together in what appears to have been a mass death.

Would this happen under normal, uniformitarian conditions? Think about it. Millions of buffalo were slaughtered on the North American plains during the nineteenth century, so this should be an ideal reason why multiplied thousands of fossil buffalo should be scattered all over the place. Are there any great buffalo fossil graveyards to be found?
Most assuredly, there are not- their remains were disposed of by the normal ravages of the weather, scavengers, and decomposition. So why are there great fossil graveyards of dinosaurs, where the bones of millions of these beasts lie entombed in vast heaps, sometimes buried together with the piles of fossilized mammals, fish, insects, plants etc., testifying that they all perished together in a great mass death?

Let us find out what Stein and Rowe have to say about the process of fossilization.
They state: “Effective fossilization usually depends on having hard parts, such as bones or shells, and being buried immediately after death. The work of predators and scavengers and the weathering effects of rain, heat, cold, and wind often serve to destroy most or all of an organism before burial takes place.”[1]
They further state: “Once an organism dies, it is seldom buried immediately . . .The point of ultimate burial and fossilization may be hundreds of miles from the place of death.”[2]
They then give us four conditions necessary for the preservation of fossils.
First, an organism must have hard parts like teeth, bones and shells that are preserved, but that is not all that is necessary, (else we would find numerous buffalo fossils in North America). They further state: "Second, the organism must not be destroyed immediately by other organisms or by the action of climatic or geologic forces. Third, the organism must be protected immediately from decaying. This usually takes the form of rapid burial, which also protects the organism from being totally destroyed."­ [3]

What natural occurrence then could account for the great fossil dinosaur graveyards under these conditions, simultaneously killing and burying multitudes of dinosaurs, mammals, birds, fish, etc. in huge numbers, many of them apparently dying in the prime of life, some of them caught in the very act of eating smaller animals that became preserved as fossils too?

It had to be something sudden, to kill them in what appears in many cases to be an unnatural, violent death; it was something universal that destroyed them in every part of the earth at roughly the same period in history; it was something that swiftly covered them up to "mummify" their remains so that the normal exposure to water or air and other predations wouldn't obliterate their remains, and it did this on a massive scale to create such numerous and extensive fossil graveyards.

Only one possible event could simultaneously meet all of these conditions: the onrush of swift moving sediment from a tremendous, worldwide Flood.

The last of the dinosaurs were supposed to have died off about 65-100 million evolutionary years ago. One of the greatest dinosaur collections in the world is at China’s Zigong Dinosaur Museum. Scientist Rick Gore, when visiting this Museum wrote: “This site of mass death, probably from flooding, records the surge of giantism in the middle Jurassic. Dong and I carefully descend to the mudstone floor and walk amid a petrified forest of bones.”­ [4]

Here is some interesting food for thought. When most evolutionists discuss how fossils were preserved, they will almost universally state that the great beasts were browsing near some river bed, by a large lake, in a swamp, or that they were simply enjoying a Jurassic vacation at the beach, when they all sank into a marsh together and perished or else suddenly a mighty rush of water and sediment overwhelmed them and pre­served them for us to come along and sniff out some (supposedly) millions of years later. But as Stein and Rowe said earlier, the burial would have to be instant, and their tombs sealed instantly to keep them from total decay.

One recent A&E television program (Voyages, December 23, 1995) discussed a herd of fossilized Centrosaurus dinosaurs, which were similar to triceratops, found in the Gobi desert of Mongolia. The evolutionists could only come up with one reasonable explanation as to how all of these great beasts could possibly have died at one and the same time and place, and then been buried and preserved together. A flood. Of course it was not to be considered that this could have in any way been connected with the world-wide flood of Noah, which would explain everything very well, since mass graves of dinosaur remains are found in nearly every part of the globe, while even evolutionists acknowledge that it was a world-wide catastrophe that caused the demise of the dinosaurs.

Could any of this be explained by uniformitarianism? With normal sedimentary processes, even fish don’t normally form fossils when they die; they float to the surface and are devoured by other fish, bacteria, and by the action of the elements. Yet we find great numbers of fossil fish buried together in many parts of the world, in quite a few cases buried with the dinosaurs, right along with the bones of mammals, birds, and the remains of insects.

Voyages also dealt with a huge number of dinosaur eggs that were found in the Gobi desert, yet the shells had not been damaged, simply buried and fossilized. In attempting to fathom what force of nature could have killed the mothers and preserved the eggs at the same time, perhaps not wishing to waver too close to the Biblical account, they suggested that a sudden sandstorm or a sand dune falling on these beasts caused their death and preservation. [5]­ (Recently new evidence has turned up that has contradicted this view, and it has now been presumed that they were suddenly buried by the action of water and sediment.)

The huge sedimentary action necessary for the death and burial of such large numbers of giant beasts would not occur in normal hydraulic action in river currents in sufficient intensity and scope to preserve the vast fossil graveyards that exist. Rivers don’t generally bury such large numbers of animals together; their carcasses are carried downstream where they are eventually deposited along the shoreline somewhere. The process that created the vast dinosaur fossil graveyards would require a flood of truly monumental proportions.

Even Darwin had to admit that large formations of fossils could only be formed and preserved underwater: “But we have seen that a thick formation, fossiliferous throughout its entire thickness, can accumulate only during a period of subsidence . . .” (Origin, Chapter 10: On the Absence of Numerous varieties in any Single Formation)

Even though it might be argued that he could be referring solely to marine life in this section, we find that Darwin also stated that under gradual, uniformitarian conditions, neither marine life norterrestrial life would normally leave fossils: “We probably take a quite erroneous view, when we assume that sediment is being deposited over nearly the whole bed of the sea, at a rate sufficiently quick to embed and preserve fossil remains. . . .The remains which do become embedded, if in sand or gravel, will, when the beds are upraised [by geologic processes above the level of the ocean onto comparatively dry, terrestrial, strata] generally be dissolved by the percolation of rain water charged with carbolic acid.” (Origin, pp. 155, On the Poorness of Palaeontological Collections)

It is also known now that it does not take millions, or even many thousands of years for fossils to form. This process can take place over a few centuries in some cases, so fossils in themselves do not mean that the species died out millions of years ago either.
Evolutionists will go to any extreme to ignore the evidence of creatures dying in a massive global flood, even when that evidence is nearly incontrovertible. They will insist that it was only a local flood, and this always has it's difficulties, as is evident from the following article.

It was reported in National Geographic, January, 1993 that paleontologists had excavated about 80 Centrosaurus fossils at Dinosaur Provincial Park in Alberta Canada. Here is the description of the find, given by Philip Currie: "‘It looks like a catastrophe,' says Currie. 'We think a herd was trying to cross a river in flood. These animals weren't too bright.'"

Well, we have a herd of animals running into a flood.

The authors continue their reconstruction of the event: "'All that meat drew carnivores. We've found a lot of shed teeth and bones with tooth marks. Also, a lot of the bones were broken. Others were pushed-probably trampled-into the mud.'" [6]

So now we have another herd of animals that arrives at the scene and they rush headlong into the same flood to have dinner, subsequently drowning along with their intended victims! Not just a few, but "a catastrophe." Many of them were trampled and their bones were broken! Evidently, at least according to the evolutionists, they really couldn’t have been too bright, and they must have been ravenously hungry.

In the explanation that the evolutionists give do you see something seriously wrong with the picture?
If you do, then consider this explanation. How about a massive herd of animals trying to escape a flood, until they had reached the last bit of dry land, and as the waters rose up to eventually engulf them they became desperate and panicked, trampling one another and turning on each other in a feeding frenzy.

Here is another mass death by flooding that shows the utter blindness of evolutionary minded paleontologists when trying to explain the presence of massive fossil dinosaur graves apart from the Biblical version of the flood.

Rick Gore states: “As a scientific journalist, I have covered the on going debate over why dinosaurs became extinct about 65 million years ago. Were they chilled to death in the catastrophic aftermath of a comet or asteroid striking earth? Were they done in by a virus or by gradual climate change? The arguments have been heated-and unresolved . . . All we can say is that near the end of the Triassic period, about 210 million years ago (these time frames are entirely subjective, as a quote from a noted scientist will show)something extraordinary happened on planet earth: a global mass extinction. Many species were hard hit . . . Did the last of the dinosaurs die after an asteroid struck earth 65 million years ago, or were they already extinct? We may never know.”[7]

To try and explain how thousands of dinosaurs and literally millions of other animals of all sizes and species were thrown together in gigantic fossil graveyards in Montana and Alberta, at Dinosaur National Park in Utah, in the Gobi desert in China, in Africa and in South America, in fact in nearly all parts of the world, by any event other than an enormous flood and massive tidal action, combined with great volcanic and tectonic upheavals, is almost unimaginable, however evolutionists, in attempting to avoid the Biblical account, can construct quite elaborate stories with their imaginations.

The most available evidence that exists for dinosaurs are their footprints, [8]­often embedded in soft clay and mud, then preserved for (supposedly) millions of years by some unexplained (by evolutionists) method. But how could anything besides a Flood of truly Biblical proportions explain the 300,000 square mile Entrata formation running across the central part of the United States, where hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of dinosaur footprints are preserved over the coast of an ancient seashore. These footprints were all created in roughly the same layer of strata, showing that they were all formed at nearly the same time. But unless they were swiftly covered up by a massive amount of sediment, the footprints would have been erased by normal tidal action, wind, and erosion. That they were not erased shows that something unusual on a massive scale occurred to create the conditions to preserve these prints.

One other notable characteristic concerning these footprints is that they are nearly all going in the same direction! There is no indication that these beasts were simply milling around browsing or peacefully gathering together at their favorite watering spot. Instead there is clear evidence of a sudden mass migration in one direction. What could have caused all of these beasts to suddenly travel in the same direction all at once? Clearly they were motivated by survival instinct to avoid something quite deleterious to their existence, something on such a grand scale that hundreds of thousands of dinosaurs all headed off together to avoid it.

Indeed, massive deposits of dinosaur tracks are found all over the world. Stretching along the coast of Samchonpo, South Korea, the writers of National Geographic reported that “embeddedin petrified mud lies one of the world’s richest concentrations of dinosaur footprints . . .”­ [9]
Paleontologist Martin Lockley of the University of Colorado described the scene, as related by Rick Gore: “ Nearby we find the three-toed tracks of an unknown therapod in a run. Then we reach a chaotic patch of ancient mud. It looks like a trampled circus ground, pocked with footprints of sauropods . . .”

On February 24, 1996 The Discovery Channel aired the program Paleoworld, where they discussed Larks Quarry Trackway in Central Queensland, Australia, where hundreds of tracks of a herd of small dinosaurs were preserved next to the tracks of a much larger carnivorous dinosaur near an ancient watering hole by a creek. The writers suggested that the smaller dinosaurs had supposedly been hunted as prey by the carnivorous dinosaur.

There is one very serious problem with this explanation. The tracks of the two types of smaller dinosaurs run straight toward the much larger dinosaur, in fact they run right over the tracks of the larger dinosaur, as though they were all trying to escape a much larger and more impending danger from the opposite direction, with the larger dinosaur in the way! This did not in any way sway the evolutionists from surmising that the 160 smaller Ornithopods and Celeosaurs “charged toward the gaping jaws of the predator and certain death”.

It makes no sense that the small dinosaurs did not wish to cross the stream or run along it, even at an angle, to escape their enemy unless they were running in terror from something much worse coming from the opposite direction, something that swept them away butpreserved their footprints by rapid sedimentation. ­[10]

The previously mentioned article in National Geographic has an extraordinary picture of dinosaur tracks high up on a nearly vertical, flat rock face in Argentina!
The authors state: “. . . dinosaurs walked here along the wave-rippled shore of an inland sea. Several agile, bipedal creatures-perhaps hadrosaurs feeding on aquatic plants-left trails that crisscross. A claw-toed carnivore passed nearby, possibly coming to the water to drink or to stalk the hadrosaurs.” [11]­

It is not to be reasonably supposed that large, heavy dinosaurs walked straight up smooth, vertical cliff faces high up in the mountains. These impressions had to have been raised into place afterward, but with the normal, slow processes of mountain building that evolutionists subscribe to the prints would have all but been obliterated into broken and ground stubble during the ages-long period of uplift: even soft impressions along lakeshores do not normally last long enoughfor somebody millions of years later, or even a few hours, days, or weeks later, to come by and discover, however a sudden hydraulic cataclysm that covered the footprints with other sedimentary strata and preserved them almost immediately after they were formed, followed by the uplifting of the strata into a vertical position by a massive tectonic upheaval within a few months or yearswouldmake more sense, and this is exactly what thefloodmodel of geological formations postulates!
Dinosaur Ridge near the foothills of the Rocky Mountains of Colorado is covered with hundreds of dinosaur tracks on an almost vertical cliff-face! This is part of the great “Dinosaur Highway” running through the region, with millions of dinosaur prints preserved.

On May 1, 1996 The Discovery Channel aired Guide to T Rex where we find another example of the preservation of thousands of dinosaur tracks that defies the evolutionists explanations. Beginning with the unsolved mystery of the origin of Tyrannosaurus Rex, they reported:
“Anatomical detective work can usually identify dinosaurs to whom T-Rex is not related. But tracing its family tree back through time is more difficult. A huge gap in the fossil record precedes the sudden appearance of T-Rex’s first large[and unknown]predecessor. . . But recently some of the missing clues have been found 4,000 feet up in the mountains of Alberta, Canada, on a prehistoric beach frozen in time, thrust on it’s side over millions of years.”

The evolutionists want you to believe that over the period of millions of years a prehistoric beach was gradually subjected to the pressures of uplift, erosion, and compression, along with the fracturing, weathering, tidal action and distortion that this would involve, and turned completely on it’s side, yet with the footprints relatively undisturbed, in fact scientists have been able to measure the very stride of the animals that made them!

Why would a swift, sudden uplift be more credible?  If you have ever watched a pizza cook toss a pizza skin up in the air and twirl it, he has to do it with enough thrust and speed so that it keeps it's size and shape. If he raised his arm slowly the pizza skin would flop down over his hand and lose all of it's shape and contour. This is a fairly simple demonstration in physics, but the principle still applies with the dinosaur footprints; it makes much more sense that they were raised with a sudden uplift over a short period of time rather than over millions of years.

Paleontologist Philip Currie reported on these tracks as he was scaling down the huge vertical cliff face on which they were preserved: “The richest dinosaur footprint sight in all of Canada is in a coal mine in Grand Cash, Alberta. In these hundred million year old rocks, we have evidence of armored dinosaurs, meat-eating dinosaurs of different kinds, and large plant eating dinosaurs [All of them traveling in roughly the same direction and preserved intact at the same time! ]. The footprints are all in trackways and they go across this enormous cliff face which at one time must have been a mud flat at the edge of a sea. What’s important about this sight is that, because of the age, one hundred million years ago, we don’t have equivalent bone sights in this part of the world, and so we have to do a little bit of guesswork in terms of identifying the dinosaurs.”­[12]

Notice the repeated emphasize on the many millions of years ago that these beasts supposedly lived-one hundred million years is repeated twice in one paragraph by Currie. The phrase “millions of years ago,” is constantly woven into dinosaur lore, not because there is any credible evidence for dinosaurs having lived that long ago, but because this is necessary to perpetuate the evolutionists myth: these time periods are necessary for the evolutionary stories to stay afloat, since the closer we get to present time (and more reliable data for or against evolution), the less we find of any evidence that supports it. Using the phrase “millions of years ago” comfortably removes this problem from present time and puts it in the far distant past, where they assume an imaginary process existed long ago by which these creatures evolved.

Most people have heard of the carbon 14 method for determining the age of a fossil and are led to believe that somehow through this technique we can determine the age of any fossil, but this is not the case at all. Dinosaurs are believed by evolutionists to have lived millions of years ago, while carbon 14 is useless for determining the age of any fossil older than one hundred thousand years old, which is a mere one tenth of one million years!
The other method for dating that most people have heard of is potassium argon, however potassium argon is used to date volcanic rocks, which are rocks produced from the hot magma of the earth through volcanic processes, but these rocks do not contain any dinosaur fossils.

Dinosaur fossils are found almost universally in sedimentary rocks, which are produced primarily through swift and powerful hydraulic action. There are other methods for the formation of sedimentary rocks besides hydraulic action, however these methods would have generally been too slow and too localised to have led to the sudden, catastrophic events that produced the huge dinosaur graveyards that are found around the world.
Most rocks dated using the potassium argon method are supposedly billions of years older than when the dinosaurs lived on the earth, according to evolutionists.

Alan Charig, former head of the British Museum of Natural History’s Paleontology department, wrote:
"As yet we have no radiometric method (that is, one based on radioactivity) for the direct absolute dating of dinosaurs." ­[13]

Hotton reported: “The bones of mice and lizards deposited in caves no more than a few hundred years ago may be more heavily mineralized than those of dinosaurs deposited in sandstones a hundred million years ago.” (Hotton, pp. 49, The Evidence of Evolution)

It is uncommon but not unknown to find fossils of mammals buried along with the fossils of dinosaurs, and so evolutionists claim that this proves that dinosaurs and mammals did not live at the same time, nor did they both perish in large numbers at the same time by some great catastrophe.
There are some problems with this type of reasoning though. According to evolutionists themselves, the creatures that they claim mammals descended from- the so-called "mammal-like" reptiles, the therapsids - lived millions of evolutionary years before many of the dinosaurs were supposed to have even existed in the first place. Then, by some mysterious process, the therapsids, along with practically any other trace of any mammals, disappeared from the fossil record for one hundred million years, until at about 65 million years ago, when the true mammals show up out of nowhere.

Probably one of the best sites on the internet to view depictions of dinosaurs and find out more about them would be T. Michael Keesey's Dinosauricon. Keesey is not a creationist by any means and the tilt towards evolutionary explanations for the origin of the dinosaurs is evident, nevertheless it is a beautifully designed masterpiece of artwork and scholarship, and one where a viewer can find a wealth of information on these grand beasts that once roamed the earth, providing one keeps a watchful eye out for evolutionist bias.

By the evolutionists own reasoning, mammals and dinosaurs must have lived together at the same time for millions of years. So the argument that since dinosaurs and mammals are not normally found buried together proves that they did not live at the same time is invalidated by the evolutionist's own scheme of things.

More bad news for the reptile-to-mammal transition: The "mammal-like" reptiles that evolutionists claim evolved from reptiles to mammals never actually existed as such. The therapsids were not reptiles at all; they were as different from reptiles as any class of animals are from another. And the fact that they supposedly went extinct millions of years before true mammals showed up on the scene should cause some to at least doubt the veracity of evolutionist speculations. The so-called time-lines for the transition from therapsid to mammal, along with all of the supposed transitional "links", are more from the imagination of over-zealous evolutionists stumping for their cause as much as anything else. They have been "splitting" varieties of what is probably the same species into numerous species, and they have been grouping what are probably different species, sometimes found on entirely different continents and in totally unrelated strata, into a supposed phylogenic lineage. (See Chapter 6)

It's quite a bit of smoke and mirrors, but it enthralls their audience and masks the truly deficient evidence for their speculations.

This kind of duplicitous nonsense is paraded on The Science Channel as fact to our children in their television series Living With Dinosaurs (SCIENCE May 16, 2005 09:00pm.) The information given out through the TV guide description states "Dinosaurs are ancestors of crocodiles, giant lizards and turtles." It is meant to show how these reptiles evolved from their dinosaur forebears. The unwary viewer will watch the entire program and believe that he now knows that crocodiles, giant lizards and turtles evolved from dinosaurs. After all, isn't that what the description and lead in to the program said?

There is one little problem with all of this: Nowhere throughout the entire program do they say just how and when and where crocodiles, giant monitor lizards and turtles evolved from dinosaurs! They don't state what kind of dinosaurs these reptiles were to have evolved from. They show no fossil evidence of their evolution from dinosaurs.
In fact, if you pay careful attention to the program, you will hear the moderator state that from the very first time they appear in the fossil record turtles, crocodiles and giant monitor lizards appear essentially identical to their modern counterparts, except for size differences! They haven't changed over the "millions of years" of their existence!
Evolutionists like to say that evolution is "change over time". Well, if that is the case, then the Science Channel program Living With Dinosaurs shows quite conclusive evidence that crocodiles, turtles and giant monitor lizards didn't evolve! They just suddenly showed up millions of years ago (according to evolutionist time) exactly like they appear to us today.
This is not evidence for evolution, however this does make a compelling case for creation, according to the very testimony of the evolutionists themselves!

Returning to the mythical "mammal - like" reptiles and the supposed gap between the time mammals lived and dinosaurs lived, although it is true that dinosaurs are not usually found buried with mammals, it is also true that dinosaurs of one species are not usually found buried along with dinosaurs of a different species either.

Dinosaur graveyards, in many cases, are species specific, even among dinosaurs.

Thus to make the argument that since mammals are not buried in the same places as dinosaurs are buried they did not live at the same time, one would also have to believe that for nearly all of the species of dinosaurs that we find buried, none of them lived contemporaneously either. As one person pointed out, there has never been a case of fossiled chicken tracks found alongside fossilised human tracks either, thus the case could be made that humans and chickens never co-existed, by evolutionist logic that is.

It is true that evolutionists believe that some dinosaur species did live millions of years apart, but not all of them. Many dinosaurs of diverse species were supposed to have lived at the same time as well, however we find them buried in large numbers separated by species, according to their kind, and not all mixed together.

What might be the reason for this? Well, whenever there is a large scale catastrophe, such as a flood or a great fire, many animals out of fear will resort to their instinct for herding, where they will bunch up together for protection from danger, and even stampede together in a mad rush for safety. This would make sense, we see it in nature today, and could have and probably would have happened in the early days of the Flood.

Not only is the evidence that dinosaurs died out millions of years ago largely guesswork, there are a number of instances where evidence has been found that sharply contradicts this evolutionary scenario. Recently scientists have extracted bone marrow from dinosaurs that have supposedly been extinct for 65 million years![14]

Mary H. Schweitzer of Montana State University and co-workers extracted the proteins from remains of Tyrannosaurus rex near Bozeman, Montana. Complex molecular compounds in living systems begin to disintegrate soon after death, and even in fossilized form it has stretched the credibility of other scientists to suppose that any type of organic material could have survived intact for such an incredibly long period of time. Of course, the obvious implication is that dinosaurs did not live and die off millions of years ago

Because this has been such an embarassment to the evolutionists involved in this they have recently done a bit of desperate back peddling on their original claim, and even "Mr. Dinosaur" himself, Jack Horner has jumped into the fray in an attempt to defend the evolutionist position of dinosaurs living millions of years in the past.

Horner's reported response to a fellow evolutionist after the story broke was: "‘What we found was heme, a form of iron that has a biological origin, but of course, not any soft tissue or any other component of a cell. It’s preserved because it’s iron.’

This is a far cry from what was originally reported by his co-worker, Dr. Schweitzer: "‘The lab filled with murmurs of amazement, for I had focused on something inside the vessels that none of us had ever noticed before: tiny round objects, translucent red with a dark center. Then a colleague took one look at them and shouted, ‘You’ve got red blood cells. You’ve got red blood cells!’"
(M. Schweitzer and I. Staedter, ‘The Real Jurassic Park’, Earth, June 1997 pp. 55–57.)

Dinosaur Jack is obviously attempting to cover his tracks with this explanation, since Schweitzer originally challenged him as to how they could really be red blood cells after so many millions of years. Horner told her to prove that they weren't red blood cells, but she reported "So far, we haven’t been able to." (M. Schweitzer, Ibid)
(The Word of God says that the wisdom of this world is made foolishness before God. They can't see the truth, even when it is presented before their very eyes.")

The evidence that it was actually hemoglobin that was found in the dinosaur bones was documented by Dr. Carl Wieland as follows:

  • "The tissue was coloured reddish brown, the colour of hemoglobin, as was liquid extracted from the dinosaur tissue.
  • Hemoglobin contains heme units. Chemical signatures unique to heme were found in the specimens when certain wavelengths of laser light were applied.
  • Because it contains iron, heme reacts to magnetic fields differently from other proteins extracts from this specimen reacted in the same way as modem heme compounds.
  • To ensure that the samples had not been contaminated with certain bacteria which have heme (but never the protein hemoglobin), extracts of the dinosaur fossil were injected over several weeks into rats. If there was even a minute amount of hemoglobin present in the T. Rex sample, the rats’ immune system should build up detectable antibodies against this compound. This is exactly what happened in carefully controlled experiments."

Still, Dinosaur Jack and his following of evolutionists have steadfastly refused to acknowledge the evidence uncovered before their very eyes and have been busy revising their story as well as revising science, even going to the extreme of attempting to say that now amino acids and heme could survive over a period of 60 million years. What else could they say? They had no choice, otherwise they would have had to admit that the bones were not millions of years old, which would have thrown their entire evolutionary world view in chaos! They also claim that the immune response mentioned above was consistent with a few small amino acids attached to a heme molecule. This is impossible. The response was to hemoglobin, not heme, and that had to have been made up of many more amino acids than three or four, and for these to have survived for millions of years is more in the realm of science fiction than science fact. In fact, chemically, there is no way the proteins could have survived that long.

Moving on: In Discovery Magazine, August, 1995, Paleontologist Ken Stadtman of Brigham Young University had found forty square feet of dinosaur skin in perfect condition. This was the evolutionist explanation as to how the fossilized remains of dinosaur skin survived intact for 65 million years: “It seems to have escaped the scavengers by being rapidly buried in the bed of a slow moving river-in sediment so fine that the skin impression was preserved in detail. ‘The perfect preservation of the texture is really remarkable,’ said Stadtman.” ­[15]

Some people who have a hard time believing that a fish as large as a whale could swallow Jonah will swallow this kind of explanation from the evolutionists quite readily.

Although we are told by evolutionists that men and dinosaurs did not live at the same time on the earth, it is probable that the flood of Noah was co-incident with the eventual extinction of the dinosaurs, and that men and dinosaurs lived together before the flood.

During the so-called "Age of Reptiles" mammals probably co-existed all along with dinosaurs. In fact the "mammal-like" reptiles that evolutionists theorise mammals evolved from existed long before the Jurassic period and long before most of the larger dinosaurs ever existed. A genuine transitional form between reptiles and mammals has never been found: Reptiles have scales while mammals have fur and hair; mammals have mammary glands while reptiles have none; the differences in the jaw, ear ossicles, etc. would have to be bridged over by a vast number of intermediate forms, none of which have ever been found.

Over the past few years good evidence that dinosaurs lived until comparatively recent geologic times has cropped up in at least two parts of the globe. Bones that were discovered in Alaska (1985) in association with mammoth bones had been thought to have been elephant bones because of evolutionary time scales, but have proven to be dinosaur bones. Some of these bones were subjected to carbon 14 testing, and the dinosaur bones which were supposedly many millions of years old and thus shouldn't have given any carbon 14 readings at all actually yielded dates of a mere 25,000 years old! ­[16]

The time scales that are thrown around to bolster the idea that the dinosaurs lived millions of years ago are merely conjecture, much like the situation that we saw with the coelacanth.­[17]

The expedition televised on Terra X was actually setting traps for these dinosaurs! I also have in my possession a picture from National Geographic of an ancient cave drawing in Central America of a creature that could only be described as something quite similar to a Tyrannosaurus, or one of the smaller dinosaurs of comparable anatomy. There is no other known creature on the face of the earth that would resemble it in any respect.

Among some of the various thesis evolutionary scientists have advanced for the causes of the dinosaurs extinction, the following are just a sample: Raids by flying saucers; exterminated by cave-men (even though evolutionists don’t believe that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time); the moon being formed out of the pacific ocean; mass suicide; world wide parasites; cosmic radiation; starvation; they became too large (should have gone on a diet); dwindling brain (sharks are still around and they are not known for their great mental capacities); egg-eating mammals; stress; and senility. ­[18]

British paleontologist Anthony Hallum has come up with the interesting suggestion that constipation might have done in the dinosaurs!

None of these reasons explain how the mammals that lived right alongside the dinosaurs through their extinction managed to survive these catastrophic events. Not all of the dinosaurs were large either, some were roughly the size of modern mammals, and many of the ancient mammals were much larger than their modern counterparts. Scientists really don’t have any good reason why they should have died apart from the Biblical flood.

With the latest data on dinosaurs confirming that their extinction was sudden, and that it was a world-wide catastrophe that killed them off, few scientists now are debating any more on whether there was a world-wide catastrophe, they are wondering what kind of catastrophe it was, a comet, a nearby solar flare, an asteroid, or volcanic eruptions. Recent studies have been done on the worldwide "iridium layer" left by the debris of an asteroid that is suspected of having smacked into earth and killed off the dinosaurs.

In the National Geographic article Dinosaurs, January 1993, paleontologist Rick Gore wrote of at least 10,000 fossil maiasaurs along with a nesting ground of fossilized hadrosaur eggs two miles long and a quarter of a mile wide that were found near Egg Mountain Montana. Many of the eggs were perfectly intact with the shells uncrushed and had partially developed embryos inside of them. What could have killed these vast herds of dinosaurs and yet preserved the eggs intact? They suggested “a tremendous volcanic explosion might have triggered their death.” ­[19]

In the debate on whether a gradual process or a sudden catastrophe caused the extinction of the dinosaurs, Steven Jay Gould of Harvard wrote: “Yet I think that few geologists would deem it inherently impossible, or even unlikely, that the earth might have suffered grievous cosmic insults at infrequent intervals during its vast history . . . The primary fact of dinosaur extinction is its timing as part of a global mass dying . . . In any case, geologic evidence constrains us to look for a contributing cause thatis worldwide in effect, able to exterminate groups in all major habitats, andgeologically sudden for at least some of its results.”­[20]

This all means one thing: Lyell's theory ofUniformitarianism hasn't worked, and scientists are being forced to admit, many of them against their will, that at least one great catastrophe has occurred on the face of the Earth causing the sudden deaths of multiplied millions of creatures along with an enormous climatic change, but they still won't dare mention the possibility of a world wide flood, because this is mentioned in the Bible (whoops!) and what self respecting modern scientist would want any of his ideas to be mixed up with a lot of old superstition and dogma?

Although present day evolutionary scientists are finally coming back to the concept that the earth might have suffered drastic changes to it’s environment over the millennia, even the sudden reversal of it’s magnetic fields, scientists of Christian faith had come to this conclusion centuries ago.

In The Deluge Story in Stone, Byron C. Nelson wrote of Professor William Whiston of Cambridge, who wrote A New Theory of The Earth in 1696. Whiston was an advocate of the Biblical flood and his idea as to how the flood was brought about is quite fascinating, especially considering what scientists are just now finally beginning to admit might have brought about the demise of the dinosaurs.

Nelson wrote: "Especially characteristic of Whiston is the suggestion he offered as to the manner in which the Deluge was brought on. This, he thought, might have been by means of a great comet which, passing near the earth at the propitious moment, so affected the earth by its powers of attraction that it set the earth to wobbling and so caused the waters in the seas and in the earths interior to flow upon the land."­ [21]

Another giant in Geology was John William Dawson, knighted for his achievments as Sir William Dawson. Dawson was a creationist geologist in the 19nth century who believed in the Flood of Noah. He stated "Patient observation and thought may enable us in time better to comprehend these mysteries; and I think we may be much aided in this by cultivating an acquaintance with the Maker and Ruler of the machine as well as with His work." Dawson, J.W., Acadian Geology. The Geological Structure, Organic Remains, and Mineral Resources of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, 1868. 2nd edition. MacMillan and Co.: London, 694pp.)

According to Susan Sheets-Pyenson, writing for the Geological Society of America in 1998, Dawson "attracted both vehement critics and adoring acolytes for his outspoken denunciation of Darwinian evolution." (GSA Today [Geological Society of America ], September 1998)

Near the end of his long and fruitful career as a geologist, Dawson had this to say on the topic of Noah's Flood: "Further, we know now that the Deluge of Noah is not mere myth or fancy of primitive man or solely a doctrine of the Hebrew Scriptures. The record of the catastrophe is preserved in some of the oldest historical documents of several distinct races of men, and is indirectly corroborated by the whole tenor of the early history of most of the civilized races."

"As to the actual occurrence of the Deluge as a wide-spread catastrophe affecting, with a few stated exceptions, the whole human race, we have thus a concurrence of the testimony of ancient history and tradition,and of geological and archaeological evidence, as well as of the inspired records of the Hebrew and Christian revelation. Thus no historical event, ancient or modern, can be more firmly established as matter of fact than this." (1895, pp. 4ff.).Dawson, John William (1895), The Historical Deluge in Relation to Scientific Discovery (Chicago, IL: Revell).
This statement should make it very clear that Dawson came to believe that the Flood was a universal catastrophe, not merely a local one.

Michael Rogers wrote in Newsweek in 1998: “What killed the dinosaurs? Eight years ago University of California scientists made the astonishing suggestion that the once mighty reptiles perished after a giant asteroid, several miles in diameter, struck Earth. The collision tossed so much dust and smoke into the atmosphere that the climate cooled, vegetation withered and the dinosaurs starved. . . Other researchers soon offered a counter theory, arguing that the extinction could have been caused by gigantic volcanic eruptions. Ash from these eruptions could have cooled the climate and pulled up the telltale iridium from deep within the earth . . .Both camps may be right. Last week University of Rochester geologist Asish Basu blended asteroids and volcanoes to describe a violent yet lingering end for the dinosaurs. At the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, Basu suggested that 66 million years ago, a giant asteroid did smash into Earth near present-day India, triggering massive volcanic eruptions that went on for hundreds of thousands of years. Basu’s proof for this one-two punch is his discovery in India of quartz that, under high magnification, shows evidence of tremendous physical impact. Such a shock, says Basu, could only be caused by an asteroid strike. The battered quartz lies beneath a giant lava flow, which some scientists believe began approximately when the dinosaurs started to disappear . . .But critics charge that Basu’s impacted quartz could have been created by the ancient volcano itself. And others question the precise dating of his samples . . . the exact culprit remains a mystery, the idea that global catastrophes may cause sudden extinction has profound implications for the study of evolution.” ( The Death of the Dinosaur: Newsweek, December 19, 1988)

There is no reason why the fact of Noah's Flood should conflict with the meteor or volcano theory that modern scientists are proposing. The impact of a great asteroid could have initiated the tectonic and volcanic activity that produced the flood, and the resulting dust and ash ascending into the stratosphere would have mixed with the vapor canopy and condensed it into rain. However there is one very important point to be considered when investigating these theories.

Whether or not a comet or an asteroid collision might have been responsible for the Flood of Noah, God was the chief agent behind everything in the first place. The Bible clearly states that the Flood was brought about with the foreknowledge of God as a judgment upon a wicked race, and that it was God Himself who brought the events to pass. This was no mere naturalistic occurrence. When we attempt to establish a purely naturalistic explanation for something that the Bible says was of supernatural and divine origin, we are treading on the same ground that the evolutionists are in their treatment of the history of life on earth. I do not wish to go down that slippery slope. God established the rainbow in the clouds to confirm His covenant that He would never again bring a flood to destroy the earth. Let us remember this amid all of our human speculations.

Now, as to the evidence for the Flood: Byron Nelson mentioned Benjamin Silliman, head of the Geology Department of Yale University. Silliman said in 1829: “Respecting the Deluge, there can be but one opinion: geology fully confirms the Scriptural history of the event . . .Whales, sharks, and other fishes, crocodiles andamphibians,the mammoth and the extinct (species of)elephant, and rhinoceros,the hippopotamus, hyenas, tigers, deer, horses, the various species of the bovine family and a multitude more, are found buried in diluvium(sedimentary strata formed by great tidal action) at a greater or less depth: and in most instances under circumstances indicating that they were buried by the same catastrophe which destroyed them: namely a sudden and violent deluge . . . a skeleton of a whale lay on top of the mountain Sanhorn on the coast of the northern sea..[ 22]

As mentioned, 99.9% of all fossils that have ever been found, except those of insects in tree sap and animals trapped in tar pits, (and why would one animal after another from a great variety of species run into a tar pit except to escape something quite frightening, perhaps a one-hundred foot tidal wave?) has been in sedimentary rock, i.e. rock formed by com­pressed layers of silt, mud, and other materials deposited by hydraulic action of swift moving water.

The Bible declares that when the flood of Noah occurred "all of the fountains of the great deep were broken up and the windows of heaven were opened, and the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights." Notice it does not only say in Sacred Scripture that it merely rained for forty days and nights, but that there was clearly some kind of tremendous upheaval of the ocean floors, along with great earthquake and tectonic activity that violently changed the surface of the earth.

The Genesis flood itself lasted for nearly a year, during which time the entire surface of the earth was changed. The "fountains of the great deep" burst forth as Earth's crust was fractured. Continents sank. Oceans were displaced. Vast amounts of plants and animals were buried in sediments; wave after wave of tremendous tidal currents created fossil layers of different species, then as the waters receded from off of the face of the earth in the later part of the flood the present mountains that we see today were uplifted while the new ocean floors sank back down.

The study of the process of mountain building, known as the science of orogeny, describes four different types of mountains: Volcanic mountains, Fold mountains, Fault block mountains, and Upwarped mountains. The above types of mountains are good evidence that the process was not a slow and gradual process, but the result of some sudden continental upheaval and cata­clysmic and violent action that occurred over a rela­tively short period of time.

The authors of An Introduction to Physical Science write: “The fundamental process of mountain building remains such a mystery that the enormous mass of data collected by scientists in the past decade serves as much to perplex as to enlighten.” ­[23].

It takes tremendous amounts of energy for a mountain range to form, and scientists are still uncertain just how this process takes place, however the old uniformitarian theories postulated that it took millions of years for this to occur. With the normal amounts of sedimentation and erosion this time scale is actually impossible. Various theories of how today’s mountains were formed involve shifting of continental plates, mantle boiling, convection, and contraction of the crust of the earth by thermal energy.

The annual amount of estimated sedimentary run-off that does occur naturally flowing off the continents of the world into the ocean has been estimated at 10 billion metric tons per year, which would have leveled off the mountains and continents to sea level at least 20 times if the creation of the great mountain ranges was by the supposed evolutionary uniformitarian standards.

The present mountains would have to have been raised during and within a few years or centuries after the flood, thus being only thousands instead of millions of years old. In Physical Anthropology, Stein and Rowe inform us: "In the fifteenth century Leonardo da Vinci wrote, 'The mountains where there are shells were formerly shores beaten by waves, and since then they have been elevated to the heights we see today.'"

According to the evolutionary scheme, fossils should be arranged with the oldest near the bottom and the youngest near the top. But what of the sea shells found at the top of the Alpine mountains?

And what of the dinosaur bones found nearly jutting out of the surface by Serreno in Saharan Africa and in Egypt?

Evolutionists have invoked a host of geologic processes to explain this, such as overthrusts, intrusions, faults, folds, and paraconformities (more on this later), and although these processes have occured, they are more in line with a catastrophic explanation for the history of the earth, not a slow, uniformitarian one, and even with these events, if this was a process that had taken place over millions of years, the dinosaur remains would have been reduced to rubble. The evidence for their deposition points more towards sudden burial under sediment by a great, hydraulic catastophe within the past five to ten thousand years.

It is known that the Sahara desert had a lush, tropical eco-system only a few thousand years ago, which would have further led to the deterioration of these fossil remains, thus fossils found near the surface of the earth, as Serreno and his little group of fossil hunters have discovered lately near the Sahara in immense numbers, could not have existed for millions or even hundreds of thousands of years so close to the surface; the chemical action in ground soil, even in sand at such a shallow depth, would have obliterated these fossils within a few thousand years. (See also Darwin quote above concerning ground percolation that would destroy fossils buried in the earth after a few thousand years)

Hotton wrote: “In upland areas the rapidity of weathering and predominance of erosion drastically reduce the upland dwellers’ chances for preservation. More often than not, their skeletal remains are either completely destroyed by weathering or are battered to pieces by fast-running water. Burial in local upland deposits improves their chances only slightly, for the life expectancy of these deposits is short. Sooner or later they too are torn up by erosion, their contents scattered and destroyed.” (Hotton, pp. 49, ibid.)

Contrary to popular opinion, the Grand Canyon does not have every layer of the geologic column and the fossils that are found there are not arranged from simple organisms at the bottom to more complex ones at the top.

Evolutionists have claimed that they have actually found the entire geologic column in part of North Dakota. Creationists do acknowledge that there are isolated places on the earth where all ten systems of the Phanerozoic column do exist, but they do not exist with the amount of soil that would suggest that each period is as old as evolutionists suggest, and they do not cover anywhere near the great expanses of geographic area over the surface of the earth necessary to establish it as a universal fact.

The geologic column is supposed to consist of successive layers of strata that each represent millions of years of time throughout the entire earth, yet there is less than 1% of the earths surface where they have found the entire column in the proper order, and even in those very rare places millions of years from many of the epochs are simply missing. If each period represented millions of years, and the entire Phanerozoic (where life once existed) column is at least 3,500 million years old and encompassed the entire planet, then why is it found in only less than a handful of places on earth?

The geologic column itself was worked out by men in the early part of the nineteenth century, years before any type of radiometric dating was available, and in fact was developed by men who were creationists and who accepted the Biblical account of the deluge. It is very rare to find any place on earth where even half of the layers are found anywhere in the right order, fossils of every major phyla of living creatures are found in the lowest layers of Cambrian rock,­ and there are so many places where the layers are out of place that geologists have had to use a number of terms to explain away these discrepancies, such as non-conformities, overthrusts, intrusions, thrust faults, folds, paraconformities, etc. etc.[24]

This does not mean that thrust faults and overthrusts do not actually occur. They do, and they are not always associated with fossils. Catastrophism would definitely predict that thrusts, overthrust, intrusions and folds would exist, even with the Flood of Noah. After all, Scripture states that “All the fountains of the great deep were broken up”, definitely implying that there was tremendous tectonic and volcanic activity concurrent with the Flood, and that afterward there were mountain building processes that would have produced folds, thrusts, faults, etc.

There are many mountain ranges throughout the world where the entire geologic column is reversed, where the upper strata, consisting of billions and billions of tons of rock, was moved (according to the evolutionary explanation) gradually over a period of millions of years, into horizontal position where it rests on a fairly even layer over rock that is supposedly hundreds of millions of years youngerthat now lies underneath it, despite the fact that there is no known force in existence that could accomplish this feat without wearing away the entire mountain in the process, (except tremendous hydraulic activity associated with a cataclysmic flood that would have deposited the material in layers while it was still in a state of solvency, followed within a few months or years by a sudden uplift).

In many cases the fault planes between the different layers of rock run smoothly for many miles in a continuous, horizontal line, exhibiting no signs of the broken stubble and breccia that should be scattered throughout the area in profuse amounts had the older rock on top been moved over the younger rock by the slow geologic processes that evolutionists claim occurred over millions of years. Their formation, with one geologic layer laid almost perfectly in horizontal fashion over the other, often with the younger deposits underneath the older rock, could only be explained by the successive tidal currents of a global flood depositing the sediment in place by specific gravity beyond the scope of anything that we see occurring today, and then afterward tremendous tectonic activity raising these mountains above the surrounding landscape. There is no other reasonable answer.

There are small-scale thrusts that show sings of breccia in isolated areas, and certain instances of folding (which would be expected even with Flood geology), probably caused by the normal processes of faulting, but nothing of the amount required to explain the giant formations of the size of the Heart Mountain and South Fork thrusts, and the Swiss Alps, in addition to the other mountain ranges throughout the world, where we do not find the vast geologic deformity, the broken and twisted rubble, and the uneven, fractured rock between the various layers should this have been due to a long, gradual process without the action of vast hydraulic and catastrophic tectonic forces associated with the Noahdic flood.

The great Matterhorn mountain in the Alpine ranges has its layers of rock completely inverted to the traditional time scale, a feat that should be impossible by normal uniformitarian means. It has an Eocene layer of rock, supposedly only 60 million years old, lying underneath the Triassic layer, supposedly 200 million years old, the Jurassic layer, supposedly 150 million years old, and the Cretaceous layer, dated at 70-100 million years ago.

Evolutionary geologists have presented us with the amazing story that this entire mountain was moved virtually intact over the course of millions of years from the African continent to the European continent! Whatever physical reason for the cause of the flood we know from Scripture that there was volca­nic and tectonic activity of an immense scale, and of course direct Divine interaction as to the cause of the flood is possible as well.

The Flood was divinely known and foretold, but that should not prevent us from certain conjectures as to how it may have occurred, especially when these conjec­tures have a sound basis in scientific evidence and do not conflict with Scripture. Should I find that any conjecture should conflict with Scripture, I would not hesitate to throw out the conjecture and adhere to Scripture.

Skeptics question how Noah would have been able to fit two of every kind of animal onboard the Ark, and seven of every clean beast. After all, there are literally millions of different species of plants and animals alive today. How did Noah do it?

First of all Noah would not have needed to take every variety of species living today. Of the five Kingdoms of living species, he would not have needed to take along the Monera, Protista, Fungi or Plantae (except for food). Many of these are aquatic and had no problem surviving the Flood, while the others would have survived on debris floating on the Flood, some possibly in seed form.

Of the remaining Kingdom, Animalia, Noah would not have needed to take along any dolphins, whales, fish, or any of the creatures that lived in the sea. In fact, he would only have needed to take along representatives of the birds, reptiles, and mammals.

And even this might not have been as much as would be imagined if the Biblical concept of “kind” was closer to the genus concept than the species concept, and in some cases even encompassed the family level. This might be the case, or what is more probable, the species concept that we use today in taxonomy to classify animals might actually be broader than what we think it is. The different genus and species of cats alive today, for instance, might really be different varieties, or breeds from one “super-species” making up the entire cat family, and this could be true for other varieties of the same species that are classified as separate species by some taxonomists. They might simply be varieties of the same species, like the different varieties that we find among dogs. Thus it is possible that he only needed to take one pair of cat ancestors that gave birth to the many different species or varieties of cats alive today. Most cats are inter-fertile, and this is used by evolutionists themselves, at times, as a definition of species.

Thus a common ancestor of all the different types of parrots, parakeets, conyers and other similar birds could have been taken along. A common ancestor for the hawks, falcons, eagles and certain other birds of prey might have been taken along. These would all have been within the Biblical concept of “kind”. Amphibians might have lived on floating debris, which could have been extensive, forming huge floating islands of vegetable material.

The largest group of animals is the Class Insecta. Many of the insects would have survived in larval form on debris, and some winged species undoubtedly followed the Ark as it floated over the seas. Many of the different species of ants might have been represented by just a few colonies that survived on the wood of the Ark or on floating debris, and then after the Flood they migrated and developed into the various types of ants alive today. Also, it says in the Scripture that only those animals in whose nostrils was the breath of life would be destroyed. Insects breath through their skin by a system of tracheal tubes, not through their nostrils as other animals do.

Noah would only have needed to take one common pair of bear ancestors (creationism does acknowledge common ancestors within the species level, and perhaps within the genus level) that would have given birth over time after the Flood to the grizzly, polar, black and brown bears. This would be true for many other species of life as well.

If it is possible that the Biblical word “kinds” had a broader range than the narrow species concept used with certain animals alive today, and is closer to the genus level, or if the species concept is really much broader than we think it is for many animals, then many of the dinosaur species that paleontologists classify purely on the basis of size and certain anatomical novelties might only be different varieties or breeds of the same species, and when Noah took dinosaurs aboard the Ark with him, he would not have taken full grown dinosaurs, but baby ones, perhaps he would even have taken eggs of certain species and incubated them, so the size problem so often brought up by doubters is easily taken care of.

Thus a common objection of the skeptics of Scripture has no basis after a careful examination of the facts. These objections have been the common fodder for the "village atheist" for hundreds of years and can be easily answered- in fact, the presumptions behind these objections are highly illogical on the face of it.

Another common question besides the one of how did Noah get all the animals on the Ark is where did Noah get all the animals to put on the Ark. This type of question belies at least a couple of assumptions: That before the Flood all animals were distributed geographically over the face of the earth in the same manner that they are today; That Noah only had a very limited time to obtain the animals, and that there was very little planning and preparation made by Noah before he embarked on his historic voyage.

First of all, it was probable that Noah did not have to go to the ends of the earth to find representatives of the major Families of animals that he brought on the Ark. Fossils of many different types of plants and animals have been found in various locations on the face of the earth that have no correspondence to their current location. The fossils of tropical plants have been found in the antarctic and arctic regions. Fossils of camels have been found in the eastern parts of the United States. Fossils of extinct horses have been found in North and South America. Rhino fossils have been found in Europe. Fossils of species of various marsupials that only exist in Australia have been found in South America. Mammoths and mastodons, which are extinct relatives of the elephant have been found in Siberia and Alaska.

This indicates that at one time various types of animals probably shared universal habitats and were only isolated and widely dispersed over the face of the earth after the Flood, when seasons and climatic changes were much more severe, which led to geographic isolation and variations within species.

In addition, the continents were possibly not in the same position as they were before the break-up of the "fountains of the great deep". It says in Scripture that the mountains rose and the oceans sank into their present depths after the Flood. Before this all land surfaces on the face of the earth might have been connected and animals, although separated by various ecological zones, were not prohibited from traversing from one end of the available existing land mass of the original "supercontinent" to the other end.

Then there is the question of how was Noah able to collect such an enormous variety of animals. The Bible says that God brought to Noah two of every kind of animal and seven of every kind of "clean" animal. Wouldn't this have been an enormous task?

Only if you assume that Noah only had a week or two to accomplish this and that animals were much less numerous than they might have been before the Flood, and that animals hid from mankind as they do today.

This was probably not the case. The Bible says that it was only after the Flood that animals were in fear of man and the hostility between wild animals and man existed. This would imply that before the Flood man lived in a grand sort of huge beastiary with animals of all species browsing nearby him, possibly as we keep certain domesticated animals as pets today. Noah might merely have had to set some food out to attract animals of various species and then tended to these animals as a zookeeper does to his beasts. He might have spent years to corral the animals and could have created an enormous "Zoo" and then brought the young of the animals of this Zoo onto the Ark as the time came for the Flood to approach.

It is speculated by some theologians that Noah might have been warned about the Flood as early as one hundred and twenty years before the time of the actual Flood itself, so he had plenty of time to prepare. He could have even employed laborers to help him and his family in this task.

In addition, the Ark was roughly four hundred and fifty feet long, and held as much storage space as over five hundred railroad boxcars, and thus could easily have accommodated all of the major categories of terrestrial animal species, and again, many species that are nearly identical today anatomically and genetically, dogs and wolves and foxes for instance, or horses and zebras, would only have needed to have been represented by one set of parents.

Thus, as in other typical objections of skeptics and agnostics universal, there is a quite logical and simple explanation to these so-called discrepancies to the Biblical account of the Flood.

Another objection is how the many kinds of races could have come from Noah and his three sons. This is easily dealt with as well. It is nowhere stated just what nationality or race Noah was, or what ethnicity Noah's wife was. After all, Noah's grandparents and great grandparents could have been a mixture of four or more ethnic divisions. Noah's wife could have been of a quite diverse ethnic stock than Noah was. Then there were the wives of Noah's sons who came aboard the Ark as well. These women could each have been of quite diverse racial background, thus Noah's grandchildren from each of his three sons could have had ample opportunity to have been of varied genetic stock.

In tracing the table of nations listed in Genesis we find much from ancient history that corroborates the names and divisions of nations that testifies that what the Bible states concerning the origin of the races and nations of the ancient world has much to lend it historical veracity.

There have been disputes over how much sedimentary rock was already in existence before the Flood of Noah. Evolutionist Glenn Morton (he makes the claim of having been a young earth creationist at one time, but at least one former colleague has cast doubt on the geniuneness of this dubious claim) makes the interesting statement that "The YEC [Young Earth Creationist] paradigm requires that there be very little sedimentary rock prior to the flood. This is because none would have been made at creation (it would be a deception to make rocks appear sedimentary which were in fact not sedimentary). Thus we can calculate how much igneous rock must have been eroded to form the presently observed volcanic rocks."

Morton's basic contention is that a world-wide flood would have released toxic amounts of mercury from the basaltic and granitic rock that would have poisoned any life on earth that survived outside of the Ark, such as fish, vegetation floating on the surface on mats, etc.

Morton's reasoning is seriously flawed on a couple of counts.

First, he makes the presumption that creationists claim that all sedimentary rocks were created during the Flood of Noah. While creationists believe that most fossiliferous rocks were formed during the Flood, all sedimentary rocks were not necessarily fossiliferous before the Flood.

Morton has either misread Genesis where it states that prior to the Flood, during the Third Day of the creation week God separated the land from the waters, and this could surely have created sedimentary rocks from the tremendous tectonic processes taking place along with the hydraulic action, or alse he has somehow assumed that Young Earth Creationism demands that God separated the land from the waters in an instant of time on the Third Day and that there were no geologic and hydraulic processes going on in the earth during this process.

His second mistake is denying that God could well have made sedimentary rock with an appearance of age. This would not be deceptive, any more than when Christ made wine instantly from water with the appearance of age. Both processes, the hydraulic processes on the third day, and the instantaneous fiat of God's Word could have worked together to have formed sedimentary rock before the Flood.

This consideration would seriously alter Morton's calculations concerning the amount of mercury released when granite and basalt were crushed during the Flood to create sand and shale to form sedimentary rock.

There were also great, although comparatively minor floods from the run-off of lakes and inland seas for centuries after the flood when they either broke through their inland dams or gradually drained from their basins in the interior of the continents after the mountains were raised in the post-Flood world.

Morton makes other assumptions about the creationist position, such as "Since plants were not taken on the ark, they must have survived by floating on the surface of the flood waters." (SEE MORTONS' MESSED UP GEOLOGY)

It says nowhere in Scripture that Noah took no plants with him on the Ark. He obviously could and probably did take seeds and seedlings with him to plant after he disembarked from the Ark, and if he had quite a long time to build the Ark he could quite possible have had an extensive nursery on board with him with which to grow food to help to feed himself and his family with.

He further states: "In order to avoid a creationist objection that the mercury might escape to the atmosphere, I would point out that rainfall effectively removes mercury. And given that the Flood is envisioned as a major rainfall event, mercury would probably not pollute the atmosphere."

Again, Morton needs to read his Bible. The Bible states that it only rained for the first forty days, yet the Flood lasted for nearly a year, and many creationists believe that many of the sedimentary rock layers were not deposited until the latter stages of the Flood.

Essentially Morton sets up a simplistic straw argument that he claims represents the position of Young Earth Creationists, then he conveniently shoots down this argument of his own making. He does make one statement that I can agree with though, and this is a no brainer: "What this means is that the global flood would be very harmful for Noah, the fish and life on earth."

Didn't God say that somewhere too?

Recent discoveries on Saturn's moon Titan have also discredited one of Morton's primary arguments against creationism, which is that if there were a young earth, and consequently if most fossils were formed during the relatively recent period of Noah's Flood, which lasted only a little over a year, then this would not have provided enough time for the vast amount of gas and oil reserves that we find on this planet.

This argument of Morton's is based on the traditional tack that these reserves were formed by gradual accumulation of swamp sediment and the decaying bodies of dinosaurs and other ancient flora and fawna. However, new findings by NASA scientists have shown that this hypothesis is probably wrong; that indeed, oil and gas deposits were not formed from decaying biological material: 

"We argue that oil and natural gas are abiotic products, not 'fossil fuels' that are biologically created by the debris of dead dinosaurs and ancient forests," states Jerome R. Corsi, co-author of 'Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oi,' as reported in World Net Daily ("'Fossil fuel' theory takes hit with NASA finding: New study shows methane on Saturn's moon Titan not biological", World Net Daily, December 1, 2005)

The article in World Net Daily goes on to state: "The realization that hydrocarbons [gas and oil deposits] are produced inorganically throughout our solar system was a key insight that led Cornell University astronomer Thomas Gold to write his 1998 book, 'The Deep Hot Biosphere: The Myth of Fossil Fuels.'

Gold wrote 'It would be surprising indeed if the earth had obtained its hydrocarbons only from a source that biology had taken from another carbon-bearing gas – carbon dioxide – which would have been collected from the atmosphere by photo-synthesizing organisms [ancient plants which in turn became fodder for dinosaurs, etc] for manufacture into carbohydrates and then somehow reworked by geology into hydrocarbons.
All this, while the planetary bodies bereft of surface life [i.e. Titan] would have received their hydrocarbon gifts by purely abiogenic [non-living] causes.'
Gold wryly noted that he was sure there had not been any "big stagnant swamps on Titan" to produce the biological debris that conventionally trained geologists think was required on Earth to produce oil and natural gas as a "fossil fuel."" (World Net Daily, December 1, 2005 , ibid)

The full report will be published in the December 8, 2005 issue of Nature magazine.

These findings, if confirmed, effectively demolish Morton's argument for an old earth based on natural oil and gas reserves from fossil deposits. Furthermore, creationists have already known for years that the rate and amount of sediment deposits from presently existing swamps such as those found in Florida and Australia do not produce the type of sedimentation that would effectively produce vast reserves of oil and gas; long before they would be buried in sufficient quantities to produce an oil field they would be recycled back into the biosphere by other organisms feasting on their decaying masses.

The world before the flood must have been a very different world than the one that we now live in. Scripture says concerning the original era of creation: "God divided the waters that were abovethe firmament from the waters that were below the firmament." There is good evidence that before the flood of Noah a "vapor canopy" existed above our present atmosphere, with a thicker ozone layer shel­tering living organisms from the damaging cosmic rays and ultra-violet rays of the sun, also diffusing the heat and light from the sun to create a worldwide "greenhouse effect."

We know that the thin ozone layer we now have protects us from ultra-violet rays of the Sun, which can cause serious genetic damage after prolonged exposure. Before the great flood, not only would this ozone layer high above our earth have been much thicker, the atmosphere would have been richer and more profuse with oxygen. When combined with the world wide moderate climate, this would have contributed to living systems flourishing and living to greater ages, plants would have been more luxuriant and healthy to eat, man as well as the great reptiles would have lived to hundreds of years, (even today we have reptiles, like turtles, that can live for well over a hundred years) and since certain reptiles do not cease from growing for their entire lives, this would have given dinosaurs the time they needed to reach the enormous sizes that we find from their fossils.

Recent research has shown that there was indeed a much richer oxygen atmosphere during the Carboniferous Age, and that plant life was much more abundant then, with the level of oxygen at roughly 35% compared to today’s level of 21% oxygen in the atmosphere.

Jeffrey Graham is a scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, who along with his colleague, Carl Gans of the University of Michigan, has concluded that the atmosphere must have contained more oxygen in the past than it does today, simply from noting the fact that insects had formerly attained to such huge sizes, with dragonflies having wingspans of over two feet in breadth, while mayflies, among the smallest of flying insects today, reached the size of small birds. Instead of having a respiratory lung system such as humans and other higher animals have, insects breath through pores in their skin, from which oxygen is directly transported to each cell by a system of tracheal tubes. This limits the size to which an insect can grow to, for after an insect would have reached a certain size, this respiration process is too slow with our present atmosphere for the oxygen to be diffused throughout all of the internal organs for the insect to live. Yet we find much larger insects in the Carboniferous Period than those of today. Graham and Gans have concluded that a denser atmosphere, richer in oxygen, provides the only reasonable explanation.[25]

In addition, apart from the richer atmospheric hypothesis, scientists have not been able to figure out how it would have been possible for such large insects to have sustained the aerodynamic lift necessary to propel them through the air if they had lived with today’s limited, thinner atmosphere. The richer atmosphere would also have provided the large flying dinosaurs, such as a 350-pound pterodactyl, with the buoyancy they needed to fly through the air, along with the oxygen necessary for proper respiration for their huge bodies. Scientists have no idea today how such a bulky creature like the pterodactyl could have lifted off from the ground if the atmosphere then was as thin as our present atmosphere is.

If the idea of a previous vapor canopy covering the earth and ending in a rainstorm for forty days and nights seems to some people a bit hard to believe, then consider that many evolutionaryscientists also believe that the present oceans were formed from a previous vapor canopy that covered the earth, but instead of raining forty days and nights, they believe there was a downpour that lasted for sixty thousand years! ­[26]Personally, I prefer the Bible’s explanation to that of the evolutionists.

Climatologist Wallace C. Broecker, Newberry Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory has written:
“While the focus on climate change has been on past and present fluctuations in temperature, precipitation patterns are equally revealing. New evidence from the deserts, suggesting that these patterns can change rapidly and on a global scale, is one more piece of the puzzle. . . The old idea that the Earth’s climate cycles smoothly through stages lasting tens of thousands of years is giving way to the realization that these cycles arepunctuated by abrupt shifts. Roughly once every thousand years during the Ice Age, the global climate system changed rapidly.”[27]

He further wrote, and it should be born in mind that he is not, at least as far as can be determined, a creationist arguing for the Biblical Flood, an incredible vindication for the pre-Flood vapor canopy theory: “But what accounts for the abrupt changes in global rain and snowfall patterns?”
“Putting aside the unlikely explanations that Earth was responding to fluctuations in the Sun’s energy output, I can think of only one: a change in the vast cumulus cloud systems that tower over the equatorial oceans. The intense heat of the Tropics evaporates huge quantities of water from the ocean, generating thick belts of the anvil-shaped cumulus clouds that reach up to the base of the stratosphere. These systems replenish most of the atmosphere’s greenhouse gas. Its contribution to our planet’s warming dwarfs the role of carbon dioxide, which we hear so much about. Can this great water-vapor pump change?” [28]

After the flood, as stated, the ecology of the entire planet was drastically changed, with the absence of the thick protective vapor canopy and the reduction of the ozone layer to shield the earth from ultra violet rays and cosmic rays, hence living systems would suffer drastic genetic changes, with mutations, mostly harmful, occurring. "Friendly bacteria" became deadly viruses, diseases developed.

The extremes of climate that we experience now would make environmental conditions much harsher than before the flood, the atmosphere would be thinner and less oxygenated. There would be a lack of lush plant growth, men lived shorter lives. The Word of God indicates that greater temperature extremes were introduced on the earth after the Flood. In Genesis 8:22 God seemed to expand on Genesis 1:14, where he added "heat and cold, and summer and winter" to seasons and times. Possibly the cold of winter and the heat of summer were not as pronounced before the Flood. This would imply that at the time of the flood the tilt of the earth upon it's axis might have increased or been altered, and that before the flood this motion was not as great, again suggesting some great change in the entire geography and weather conditions over the surface of the world.

Even though scientists admit that the earth was formerly possessed of a tropical climate over most of it’s surface, and then for unknown reasons suffered a precipitous drop in temperature that brought on global extinctions and drastic climatic changes, aside from the world-wide flood of Noah, which most of them (except for the creationist scientists, a distinct and unpopular minority) refuse to acknowledge, they still have come up with no other explanation for this, yet this is what the Bible and proper science teaches.

According to Rick Gore, Philip Currie of Alberta's Royal Tyrell Museum of Paleontology said concerning the great fossil graveyard at Dinosaur Provincial Park in Alberta, Canada.”‘ This was the first confirmed mass death of a dinosaur herd,' while Gore reported “. . . In dinosaur days this park was all lush, warm coastal wetlands." [29]

Obviously, present day Alberta does not possess this climate.

Howells wrote: “During the sixty million years of the Tertiary the climate had been warm and stable, and for many million years before that it had been even warmer. Then in a space of a single million it suffered a violent shock.”
“The temperature fell and the precipitation of rain and snow increased, and in the colder regions and high altitudes of the world the snow persisted through the summer and became compacted into great sheets of blue ice which, chilling the air still further, spread and swelled to become the continental glaciers; not the minor streams of ice that today flow out of the mountains of Switzerland and Alaska, but enormous expansions of the polar cap which were like the great cake which covers everything but the shore of Greenland, and a mile or so thick . . . Nor is it known for certain what caused the Ice Age. It wastoo sudden, and besides there have been a series of several other such short periods of glaciation well back in the earlier life of the earth." ­[30]
“The changes in geography would certainly have affected both the temperatures and the rainfall. It has been variously suggested that at the end of the Cretaceous the world became hotter or colder and/or wetter or drier, and it is probably true that there was a marked increase in latitudinaltemperature differences (i.e., according to the distance from the Equator) and in seasonal temperature differences (i.e., according to the time of year). It could also have been that, towards the end of the Cretaceous, the winters became so cold that the dinosaurs-if warm blooded-could no longer keep themselves warm enough, for they had neither fur nor feathers.”­[31]

The flood model explanation would explain all of this quite adequately, and many of the ocean dwelling animals would not have survived after the flood because the pre-diluvian waters were kept warmer by the thermal insulation of the vapor canopy around the entire hydrosphere, as well as by geothermal energy. The pre-diluvian waters were also probably not as extensive, consisting more of great seas instead of the oceans of today, as much of the present water in the oceans was formerly stored in the vapor canopy surrounding the earth and in the “fountains of the great deep,” vast, underground reservoirs. These seas held a more temperate climate, and were more conducive for living creatures such as trilobites to survive in.

Howells believed that there were four ice ages, but this number is conjecture, and it need not have taken place over a span of millions of years.

Every student of criminal law and prospective research scientist is familiar with one of the primary rules in evidentiary logic, known as Occam’s Razor, which states, briefly, that if one cause can satisfactorily explain all of the events in a situation, then that one cause is to be preferred rather than opting for many causes, thus it is highly probable that there was only one ice age accounting for the conditions that Howells described.

The harsh new conditions after the flood, the lack of a "greenhouse effect" after the collapse of the vapor canopy to keep the earth in a stable, warm, tropical climate, and the new tilting of the earth upon it's axis with the appearance of polar regions and the greater amount of water upon the surface of the earth would have contributed to the ice-age that lasted for centu­ries. Newly formed desert conditions in other parts of the globe as well as the reduced amount of tropical vegetation would have accounted for many animals not being able to survive.

An additional factor for the diverse types of life that have adapted after the Flood to harsher climatic conditions, such as polar bears living in the Arctic, would be the possibility of continental shifting during the time of the Flood. It is probable that "pangea", the original collective continental land mass where all land animals lived before the Flood, was situated in some temperate or semi-tropical zone on the earth.
Then during the Flood there was great continental shifting, and the new land masses that arose after the Flood occupied positions nearer the poles, and as life migrated to these far off habitats, variation through natural selection occured within the species or genus level, the Biblical "kind", and life adapted to survive the various climes where it had spread to. No new life forms "evolved", only specific character traits that were already in existence within the gene pool of species or genus "kinds" were selected for survival value in specific climatic regions. A "weeding out" process, which would have occured naturally, is the very opposite of some type of valid origination process, which has never been observed to have occured in nature since the Creation.

The dinosaurs, some carnivorous with voracious appetites and inadequate food supplies, and others with ponderous bulk and slow metabolism, probably died out within a few thousand years after the Flood, if they made it that long, although many might have survived much longer in isolated pockets of the globe, though much smaller in physical size.

Although he does not necessarily believe in the Biblical flood, according to M. L. Keith, professor emeritus of geochemistry at Pennsylvania State University, the destruction of the earth’s ozone layer could have been caused by the gaseous emission from volcanoes, which would have let the ultraviolet rays from the sun filter through at a much greater intensity, which in turn could have killed off large, bare skinned creatures such as dinosaurs, while leaving the smaller, furrier creatures, and those with feathers protected. Other smaller bare-skinned creatures, like rhino’s, hippos, alligators, snakes etc, could have protected themselves by submerging in the water, hiding under leafy foliage, and under rocks and in dens of the earth. Turtles are obviously protected by their shells, and even elephants frequently bathe themselves, and often have sand baths, using their trunks as shovels.

If a meteor or even a shower of meteors passed by the Earth and impacted our planet, with one or more of them landing in the ocean, it is possible that it would not only have created tremendous tidal waves hundreds of feet high rushing over the land, but the impact on the oceans bottom could have caused a rupture in the outer crust, creating a fissure with tremendous quantities of water flowing into it. When coming into contact with the molten lava rising out of the opening this would have sent a great volume of steam rushing up into the stratosphere, where it would have frozen into ice particles, and then descended and caused freezing temperatures almost instantaneously in many parts of the globe.

This is one possible explanation for the beginning of the ice age after the flood. When the atmosphere was suddenly deprived of it’s insulating vapor canopy by the dust and ash from the cataclysm, some of the primeval atmosphere escaped from the earth itself, probably at the polar areas, creating a vortex and immense wind chill that would have frozen the great beasts in that area almost instantly. This, combined with the earth suddenly tilting on it’s axis at that time would have caused the polar regions to shift and freeze.

Modern respected scientists such as Dr. Henry Morris, former head of the Civil Engineering Department at Virginia Polytechnic Institute for thirteen years, geochronologist Robert Gentry, and biochemist Duane Gish, former Berkeley Professor and expert in the subject of comparative anatomy and paleontology, all agree on the reliability of the Genesis record and the historicity of the Biblical Flood. These men are sincere, committed Christians who see no conflict with the reliability of Scripture and the true pursuit of scientific knowledge.

As stated, the ice age would have occurred during and after the Noahdic flood when the oceans were running off the newly uplifted continents and the sea floors were sinking back to their present levels. At that time the vapor canopy no longer existed to diffuse the heat from the sun around the entire earth. For centuries after the flood large inland lakes such as lake Bonneville still covered much of the new landscape, which is what geologists tell us was the situation the American west where we find the former shorelines of ancient inland seas, in many places high up on mesas and buttes.

Some of these lakes must have burst through their natural barriers as they thawed near the end of the ice age, with the tremendous run-off creating awesome geologic wonders such as the Grand Canyon in Arizona. In fact, this is what some leading scientists propose did form the Grand Canyon. The traditional explanation given by evolutionists, that the Colorado river gradually eroded the rock away during the course of thousand of years, is not feasible, as the Canyon is too wide and too deep for normal river current to have caused it.

There are two types of flow in river systems, shallow meandering and deep cutting.

While both of these may be in the same river at different geographic points, they can not both occur at the same point, since a river that had cut a deep enough channel into a land surface would continue running through that same channel, cutting deeper, but not changing course and spreading over a wide area.

We find evidence of meandering action and deep cutting action in the Grand Canyon at the same place on an immense scale, prompting scientists like Robert Gentry to suggest that a former great lake covering a large section of the North American Continent may have been a remnant of the Flood, then it broke through it’s natural dam and flooded the area where the Grand Canyon now exists. T

his would make sense, as large mesas in the area that are separated by many miles have the exact same geologic features in their rock layers, as though they had once been part of the same land formation but had been suddenly separated when the earth between them had been washed away by a sudden, immense, hydraulic action, while many miles off to the southwest there is evidence of widespread alluvial deposits from this flood.

This tremendous gully-washer could have been from the latter stages of the actual flood of Noah, or from the overflow of a large inland lake that remained after the flood, then burst through it’s dam. It was obviously a great and catastrophic hydraulic event that occurred in the geography of the southwest. Wallace C. Broecker wrote: “During the Ice Age, the Great Basin’s ancient lakes covered an enormous area, the result of a much wetter climate in the not-so-distant past.”[32]

Broecker mentions the terraced shore lines found along the edges of the Great Basin area of the western United States that show that in the past there was once, and in fairly recent geologic time, a much greater quantity of water contained in the Basin, including the shorelines of ancient Lake Lahontan, once 570 feet higher than present Pyramid Lake. Interestingly enough, the former existence of much larger lakes indicating a much wetter climate in the past was a global phenomenon.

Broecker wrote: “More revealing than the groundwater reservoirs are the wave-cut terraces in hillsides and pebble beaches-some coated with limestone deposited by algae-which mark the extent of huge bodies of water that have long since evaporated. Remnants of much larger lakes and inland seas, the Sahara’s Lake Chad, Utah’s Great Salt Lake, Israel’s Dead Sea, Asia’s Caspian Sea, and Australia’s Lake Eyre are all ringed by abandoned shorelines. Lacking outlets to the ocean, these basins filled up during wetter times to levels much higher than those of any lakes that remain in them today.”

Broecker wrote that traditional schemes of glacial run-off could not account for the enormous amounts of water that once filled the Great Basin: “As early as 1844, explorer John C. Fremont, noticing the Great Basin’s prominent raised shorelines, suggested that enormous lakes once filled many valleys . . . Russell and Gilbert postulated that the lakes swelled to maximum size when the glaciers capping the surrounding mountains melted. But the glaciers held far to little water to fill the lakes. Instead, the rivers feeding them must have carried three times more water than they do now.”[33]

Broecker stated further that this once wetter condition was not caused solely by the Canadian Ice Sheet, but was the result of a sudden change in global climate.

According to the Flood theory, this change was consistent with the drastic effects concomitant with the Noahdic Flood, and that the present mountains were raised during the last stages of this flood, while the present ocean basins were being formed at the same time. When the new continents were raised into place, much of the water of the flood would have been trapped to form the enormous lakes that once existed in the United States and in other parts of the world.

The formation of coal presents another grave difficulty for evolutionists. Coal is made up of compressed, carbonated vegetable matter, which the evolutionists claim was formed from peat, pressed down over the course of many centuries by the gradual accumulation of plant sediments in swamps. The problem with this is that there is no place in the world today where coal is being formed in this manner. Worse still, trees are often found upright in coal deposits, in standing positions, running through many horizontal seams in coal beds that are supposedly separated by millions of years. If it took so long for the coal to form how could the tree trunks be preserved vertically for such long periods of time while exposed to the elements as the coal formed around them?

Derek Ager wrote: “In the late Carboniferous Coal Measures of Lancastershire, a fossil tree has been found, 38 feet high and still standing in its living position. Sedimentation must therefore have been fast enough to bury the tree and solidify before the tree had time to rot. Similarly, at Gilboa in New York State . . . a flashflood uncovered a whole forest of in situ Devonian trees up to 40 feet high.”­[34]

Francis Hitching wrote: “There were also many indications that coal was formed by violent incursions of the sea. ‘Coal balls’ of matted plant and animal remains, ranging from the size of a fist to massive examples weighing a ton, sometimes include marine fauna such as sponges, mollusks, and corals. Spirobis, usually less than one-eighth inch long, never found in freshwater deposits [e.g., bogs] today is widespread in coal seams, mixed in with plant debris.”

Hitching quoted Russian scientist Emmanuel Velikovsky, (who believed in a world wide catastrophe): ‘Apparently the coal was not formed in the ways described (traditional uniformitarian theory). Forests burned, a hurricane uprooted them, and a tidal wave or succession of tidal waves coming from the sea fell upon the charred and splintered trees and swept them into great heaps, tossed by the billows, and covered them with marine shells, and weeds and fishes; another tide deposited on top of the sand more carbonized logs, threw them into heaps, and again covered them with marine sediments. The heated ground metamorphosed the charred wood into coal . . .”[35]­

We know now that coal can be formed in a much shorter time than the evolutionary idea of millions of years. German geologist Otto Stutzer wrote of observations made by Petzholdt in 1882 of compressed wooden piles rammed into the ground during the construction of a railway bridge at Alt-Breisach, near Freiburg. The wooden piles were examined and “in the center of the compressed piles was a black, coal-like substance. In continuous succession from center to surface was blackened, dark-brown, light-brown and finally yellow-colored wood. The coal-like substance corresponded in its chemical composition, to anthracite, and the blackened wood resembled brown coal.”[36]­

Since that time scientists have succeeded in duplicating the coal making process in laboratories, thus disproving the uniformitarian “peat-bog” theory.

John Williams was an eighteenth century geologist and mineralogist, F.S.S.A, who wrote The Natural History of the Mineral Kingdom, in 1789. He studied extensively on coal seams, rock and sediment formations, and their geologic history. He wrote: “It will appear highly probable, from what is said in that history, that the greatest part of the antediluvian (pre-flood) earth was covered with a tall and luxuriant growth of timber, and it is easy to conceive that so many millions of acres of tall timber formed into coal would produce a great quantity of that valuable fossil: and in this respect the effect and cause exactly correspond to one another . . . Now every intelligent, unprejudiced naturalist, who has taken any notice of the order and disposition of the several strata in a coal field, must acknowledge that those several strata are spread out and formed, in the order we find them, by successive tides or by similar streams of water, bringing the matter and depositing it in regular strata . . . I have already made it pretty evident that the greatest part of the surface of the earth, before the Deluge, was covered with a luxuriant growth of tall timber, that this antediluvian timber is the origin of our pit-coal; and that it was a sufficient and an adequate source of all coals in the world. I am of the opinion that the antediluvian timber floated upon the chaos, or waters of the Deluge, until the strata of the highest mountains were formed, with much of the other strata in our sight, and that during the height of the Deluge, and at the time when the greatest part of the strata were forming, the timber was preparing and being fitted (being transformed by the agitation and pressure of the tidal waters into a pulp constituent of mushy, matted, vegetable material) for being deposited in strata coal . . . we may examine what we may see with our eyes, and what is to be seen we may investigate by the aid of philosophy [i.e. natural science, as well as common sense]; and it is allowable for us to draw such inferences as naturally and inevitably result from our observations and discoveries.”[37]

Tar pits do not go back millions of years ago either. Hotton wrote: “But since caves, bogs, and tar pits are of very limited extent, it does not take much erosion to destroy them, and those that survive for us to study are seldom more than a few tens of thousands of years old. As a consequence, most fossils from caves, bogs, and tar pits are the remains of animals only lately extinct, or which may very well be still living in nearby areas.” (Hotton, pp. 57)

After the Mount St. Helen’s eruption there has been an excellent study done by Creationist geologists who have reported that strata very similar to that of the Grand Canyon has been formed, only not in the space of millions of years, but all within the space of a single year. Not a word of this remarkable discovery has been breathed by the major scientific journals that should specialize in this sort of thing.

But what about the huge time factors involved in the paleologic record? Again, as with the coelacanth, much of that is guesswork arranged to accommodate an evolutionary setting. We have the immense ages involved in uniformitarian geology because evolution demanded it, not because it was a more accurate method of discerning the history of the earth., Stein and Rowe state, "Evolution required an extremely long time span...Because the concept of time is so central to human paleontology, it is important to understand the long periods of time involved."[38]

The major radiometric methods for determining the age of fossils, carbon-12, potassium/argon, uranium/lead, and rubidium/strontium, are often wildly inaccurate, and in many cases only the "good" dates are kept while the unacceptable dates are thrown out and rarely published. This fact has been document­ed. See R.H. Rastall, Encyclopedia Britannica,Vol.10 (Chicago: William Benton Pub., 1956), and Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, Vol.16, No.4, 1979, pp.794.

Scientist Robert E. Lee wrote: “In the light of what is known about the radiocarbon method and the way it is used, it is truly astonishing that many authors will cite agreeable determinations as ‘proof’ for their beliefs . . . the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. ‘This whole thing is nothing more than 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.” [39]­

Dried seal carcasses killed less than thirty years previously have been dated at 46,000 years old and blood from a freshly killed seal at McMurdo Sound yielded a carbon-12 date of 1,300 years in age.­ [40]Living snails in southern Nevada dated by this method supposedly died 27,00 years ago,­ and yet this method is still used by evolutionists to assure us of the dates of their fossil finds. [41]Carbon-12 is completely useless for dating anything older than forty thousand years, hence it should be of no benefit to attempt to date dinosaur fossils by evolutionists standards.

A far as the other radiometric dates, it has been found that contamination of the daughter elements have yielded grossly inaccurate readings, some lava flows less than a few hundred years old have been given dates of 3-4billion years by these methods.­ [42]Mixture and contamination of the original elements in rocks by a worldwide catastrophe would definitely affect the relative amount of parent-daughter material in them.

So how do paleontologists date the age of a fossil? Even though correlation of strata to their type system by bed to bed analysis is probably the best way to date strata, it has been well known among scientists for years that theyoften date the rocks from the fossils that are found in them, and then they in turn date the fossils from those very same rocks that they are found in, rather like which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Thus when Serreno and his group find a fossil similar to a Tyrannosaurus Rex, they state that it was found in Jurassic strata. Why? Because the animal is said to have lived in the Jurassic period, so the strata must be Jurassic. And since the strata is Jurassic, the animal must have lived in the Jurassic!

This may sound like utter nonsense, yet it is indeed how many fossils, including dinosaurs, are frequently dated. J.P. O'Rourke, in the American Journal of Science, Vol.276, No.1, (Jan.,1976), pp.48, states in his article Pragmatism Versus Materialism in Stratigraphy: "The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply..."[43]

In An Introduction To Physical Science, the authors write: “Rocks of different age contain different fossil assemblages, even if deposited in the same environment. The age of a sedimentary rock can, therefore, be determined from the fossils contained within it.”­ [44]

Then they turn right around and date the fossil by the rock that it is in! This is circular reasoning: evolutionists first assume that the coelacanth has been extinct for sixty million years, thus any coelacanth fossil found must be in rock sixty million years old or older, until they find a coelacanth that is alive and well and swimming quite happily in the ocean off the coast of Madagascar, at which time they have to revise the entire time-table. ­

Prominent evolutionist, Tom Kemp, Curator of the University Museum of Oxford University, has stated: "A circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in terms of a particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory. Well, it would, wouldn't it?"­[45]

This is unbelievable, yet it has been the accepted method to date fossils for over a century!

The late Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith, Ph.D. in Physical Organic Chemistry at University of Reading, England; from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich; F.R.I.C. (Fellow of the Royal Institute of Chemistry); held Professorships at the University of Illinois, University of Geneva School of Medicine, University of Bergen, and the Norway School of Medicine. He was a committed creationist, who saw from a purely scientific outlook that the evolutionists’ views were more fabrications than fact. In his book, Man's Origin, Man's Destiny he wrote:"So firmly does the modern geologist believe in evolution up from a simple organism to complex ones over huge time spans, that he is perfectly willing to use the theory of evolution to prove the theory of is applying the theory of evolution to prove the correctness of evolution..."­[46] ­

Thus we have examined the evidence of the fossil record over the past two chapters, and found that there is no geologic validation for Darwin’s theory of evolution of species ever having occurred in the past history of the Earth. We have instead found the true explanation for the formation of fossils, which would have been by massive flooding from a global catastrophe, as recorded in the Old Testament and in legends from various tribes of people found throughout the entire Earth, but because men did not like to retain God in their knowledge, they instead prefer fairy-tales and fanciful stories of evolution in place of the divinely revealed truth of Earth’s past, a record in Scripture and in stone that fully accords with sound, scientific enquiry.

After having brought to the attention of the patient reader what I hope should be substantial and convincing evidence that much of what is taken for granted and presented to the public as “fact” by evolutionary minded scientists is not in the slightest bit scientific, but is a mass of erroneous conjectures based on a mistaken philosophic predisposition known as the doctrine of Uniformitarianism, which doctrine Darwin inculcated into his Origin for the explanation of the formation of past geologic strata and of fossils. This is a doctrine demonstrably without a mote of scientific validity, yet it has been one of the bulwarks of evolutionary theory for over a century.

Next we shall investigate the evolutionary descent (or ascent as others have put it) of that most remarkable of God’s creatures, Homo sapiens,Mankind.

[1]Stein and Rowe, Physical Anthropology, pp. 311, 1982.

[2](ibid, pp. 301)

[3](ibid, pp. 299)

[4]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic, pp. 26, January, 1993.

[5]A & E Voyages, December 23, 1995.

[6]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic,January, 1993.

[7]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic, Jan., 1993

[8]Paleoworld, (ibid), Peter Sheehan Narrator.

[9]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic, pp. 39, Jan., 1993.

[10]Paleoworld, The Learning Channel, 5 P.M. Pacific Time, February 24, 1996.

[11](ibid, see note 52 for reference)

[12] The Discovery Channel, A Guide to T-Rex, May 1, 1996, 10 P.M., Pacific Time.

[13]Alan Charig, A New Look At Dinosaurs, pp. 36, Facts on File Inc., 460 Park Avenue South, New York, N.Y., 10016, 1983. The extinction of the dinosaurs throws absolutely no light on the origin of mammals either, as they have been around since nearly the beginning of dinosaurs as well. Charig wrote: “Mammals, however, are nothing whatever to do with dinosaurs. They evolved [supposedly] from an entirely different group of extinct reptiles called the mammal-like reptiles.” (Charig, pp. 37) .

[14] (A)Mary H. Schweitzer, Mark Marshall, Keith Carron, D. Scott Bohle, Scott C. Busse, Ernst V. Arnold, Darlene Barnard, J. R. Horner*, and Jean R. Starkey, Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Evolution, Vol. 94, pp. 6291-6296, June 1997;
(B)Science News, November 11, 1995, Volume 128.

[15]Dinosaur Beauty Spots, Discover Magazine, August, 1995.

[16]Biblical Science Network News, Auldany, 11860, Magnolia R209, Riverside, Ca, 92503, 1996.

[17]In the Spring and Summer of 1995 the Discovery Channel program Terra X ran a two-part documentary of an expedition to Auyan Tepui. in South America. Tepui’s are great plateaus rising straight up for thousands of feet above the cloud tops of the South American Rain Forests. Of the hundreds of tepuis in existence, most of them have never been explored, as the sheer sides are almost impossible to climb, being too steep for ordinary ascent, while the terrain on the tops of them is too rugged in most cases for a plane to land, the only access is by helicopter. These islands in the sky have unique forms of life, since they have been ecologically isolated for thousands of years, in fact it is postulated that they have been in existence since Africa and South America separated. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s science fiction classic written near the end of the last century,The Lost World, was based on an actual expedition that made it to the top of one of these tepuis in the 1880's. Among the many strange and unknown varieties of plants and animals found up on these mesas have been fairly fresh three toed footprints. National Geographic covered a recent expedition that flew to the top of Auyan Tepui (National Geographic, Tepuis: Islands in Time, 1989), and the helicopter pilot reportedly spotted creatures resembling plesiosaurs near a lagoon as he flew over them above the tepui, although these were not extremely large ones. If these reports are genuine, then it would entirely destroy the evolutionists time scale of millions of years of evolution between the time of the dinosaurs and modern man.

[18]Readers Digest, Strange Stories, Amazing Facts,pp. 334-336, Pleasantville, New York, 1976.

[19]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic, pp. 42, Jan., 1993.

[20]Steven Jay Gould, Hen’s Teeth And Horses Toes,pp. 322-324, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1983.

[21]Byron C. Nelson, The Deluge Story in Stone, Bethany Fellowship Publishers Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1968. Even though the flood might have been precipitated by a comet, or meteor shower that vastly disrupted the ecosystem of the pre-flood earth, this was still no mere naturalistic occurrence. The flood was foreknown and foretold by God to Noah. Whatever caused the flood, it was brought about by the will and power of God. The possible meteor shower itself would have been set in motion by the Divine Will of God as a judgment on mans’ sin and rebellion.

[22]From a quote from Silliman’s “Geology Lectures” given in 1829, courtesy of Byron C. Nelson, The Deluge Story in Stone, pp. 85.

[23]An Introduction to Physical Science, pp. 583, James T. Shipman, Jerry L. Adams, Jack Baker, Jerry D. Wilson, D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington Massachusetts, 1971

[24]E.M. Spieker, Mountain Building Chronology and Nature of Geologic Time Scale, pp. 1805, referenced courtesy of Henry M. Morris’ excellent book The Twilight of Evolution, pp. 53, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing co., 1964.

[25]Insects of the Oxygeniferous, Shanti Menon, Discover Magazine, September, 1995, pp. 32.

[26]Readers Digest, Strange Stories, Amazing Facts,pp. 71.

[27]The Once and Future Climate, Wallace C. Broecker, Natural History, 9/96, pp. 33-34.

[28]Ibid, pp. 37

[29]Rick Gore, Dinosaurs, National Geographic, Jan., 1993.

[30]William Howells, Mankind So Far, pp. 113-115, 1949.

[31]Alan Charig, A New Look At The Dinosaurs, pp. 150. Professor Charig, world famous paleontologist and head of the British Museum’s Paleontology Department, demonstrates an evolutionists blindness when confronted with a situation that definitely rules out every other explanation but the obvious, a world wide tectonic upheaval and flood, by refusing to even consider the obvious, chiefly perhaps because this explanation would agree with the account in the Bible and challenges pre-chosen assumptions on the reliability of the Bible as a guide to the history of the earth. Charig wrote: “Now comes the important question. What caused all these extinctions at one particular point in time, approximately 65 million [evolutionary] years ago? Dozens of reasons have been suggested, some serious and sensible, others quite crazy, and yet others merely as a joke. Every year people come up with new theories on this thorny problem. The trouble is that if we are to find justone reason to account for them all, it would have to explain the deaths, all at the same time, of animals living on land and of animals living in the sea; but in both cases, of only some of those animals, for many of the land-dwellers and many of the sea-dwellers went on living quite happily into the following period. Alas, no such one explanation exists.” (Charig, ibid).

An explanation does exist, for those who have eyes to see.

[32]Ibid, pp. 32-33

[33]Ibid, pp. 33

[34]From a quote of Agar’s referenced from Francis Hitching’s The Neck of the Giraffe,pp. 138, Mentor Books, New York, 1982.

[35]Francis Hitching, The Neck of the Giraffe, pp. 138, where Hitching quoted a paper of Velikosvskies, 1956, pp. 190-191. See also Velikosvskie’s book, Worlds In Collision, Pocket Books, 1980.

[36]Otto Stutzger, Geology of Coal, Translated from the German by A.C. Noa, University of Chicago Press, 1940, pp. 105-106; referenced from The Genesis Flood by Morris and Whitcomb.

[37]John Williams, The Natural History of the Mineral Kingdom; referenced from Byron C. Nelson’s The Deluge Story in Stone, pp. 69-81, Bethany Fellowship Publishing, 1968.

[38]Philip L. Stein and Bruce M. Rowe, Physical Anthropology, 311.

[39]Robert E. Lee, Radiocarbon Ages In Error,Anthropological Journal of Canada, Volume 19, No. 4 (1981), pp. 9-10.

[40]Wakefield Dort Jr, Mummified Seals of Southern Victoria Land, Antarctic Journal of the United States, Volume 6, (September -October, 1971), pp. 210; referenced from The Illustrated Origins Answer Book, by Paul S. Taylor, Eden Productions, P.O. Box 41644, Mesa Arizona, 85274-1644, 1992, pp. 60.

[41]Dr. Alan C. Riggs (formerly top scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey, currently member of the faculty of the University of Washington), Major carbon-12 deficiency in modern snail shells from southern Nevada springs’, Science Volume 224, April 6, 1984, pp. 58; referenced fromThe Revised Quote Book, pp. 23.

[42]Silvia Baker, M. Sc., Bone of Contention, pp. 25, Creation Science Foundation, Ltd., Australia, P.O. Box 302, Sunnybank, Queensland, 4109, Australia, 1993.

[43]J.P. O’Rourke, Pragmatism Versus Materialism in Stratigraphy, American Journal of Science, Volume 276, No. 1, pp. 48, Jan., 1976.

[44]James T. Shipman and Jerry L. Adams, An Introduction To Physical Science, pp. 631, D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington, Massachusetts, 1971.

[45]Tom Kemp, A Fresh Look at the Fossil Record, New Scientist, Volume 108, No. 1285, pp. 66, December 3, 1985, Courtesy of The Revised Quote Book.

[46]A.E. Wilder Smith, Man’s Origin, Man’s Destiny,1987.