by John K. Reed and Peter Klevberg.
CRS Quarterly, Volume 48, Number 1
Summer 2011, pp. 20-32.

Abstract:

The closing decades of the eighteenth century saw the beginnings of modern geohistory. Recent work by historians of science have broken through the persistent mythology of Hutton-Playfair-Lyell, and many lessons have been drawn from a better understanding of the early fusion of secularized science and secularized history. But one lesson that has received little attention is the inhibitive role played by “geotheory,” a genre of scientific writing popular in the last half of the eighteenth century. Geotheories were broad systematic attempts to scientifically explain Earth in its totality. They proved a barrier to the development of geology because of (1) their unrealistic scope, (2) unrealistic expectations, and (3) an unrealistic adherence to the hypothetico-deductive method of Newtonian physics, which in turn was related to serious misunderstandings of the limits of science and the nature of history. Numerous geotheories were published, each attempting to build a comprehensive explanation of Earth. By 1800, geotheory had fallen out of favor, replaced by inductive, limited, self-consciously historical investigations. Yet since geotheory reflects an innate drive in the human psyche for comprehensive understanding, it never really died. Our view of science and its disciplines is much different now, but facets of geotheory still exist—evolution being a secular example and grand “Flood models” a creationist manifestation.

pdf of article

by Tom Hennigan and Jerry Bergman
CRS Quarterly, Volume 47, Number 4
Spring 2011, pp. 260-270.

Abstract:

According to Genesis, trees were created on the third day of the Creation Week. Within a Biblical worldview, this suggests that they are discontinuous with other plant forms. Naturalists posit that trees arose by random processes from simpler photosynthetic organisms. Fossil evidence for tree evolution from putative non-tree precursors is evaluated. It is concluded that the fossil record does not support an evolutionary origin for trees from non-tree plant forms. The earliest trees found in the fossil record were well developed, and no plausible explanation exists to overcome the enormous odds against their evolutionary origins from single-celled ancestors. It is concluded that when the fossil record, tree ecology, global Flood, and complex biochemical systems are analyzed within a Biblical worldview, the data are consistent with the Genesis account that God directly created trees.

pdf of article

by D. Russell Humphreys
CRS Quarterly, Volume 47, Number 3
Winter 2011, pp. 193-201.

Abstract:

A new curve fit to a new compilation of data shows with new clarity that from 1900 to 2010, the main “dipole” part of the earth’s magnetic field decayed exponentially (constant percent loss per year) with a small sine-wave variation. The time constant of the exponential part is 1611 (± 10) years. The sinusoidal part has a period of 66.1 (± 1.3) years and an amplitude of 0.29 (± 0.02) % of the main part today. The fit is very good, with most points within 0.05% of the curve. The distinctness of the exponential part gives new strength to the creationary model of the field, that losses in the earth’s core today are steadily decreasing the electric current producing the dipole field, thus supporting a young earth. A simple electric circuit clarifies the decay model. The small sine-wave part, apparently not noticed in the dipole moment data before now, may be due to an east-west torsional oscillation between core and mantle. This corresponds to an approximately 60-year cycle observed in the rate of earth’s rotation.

pdf of article

by Jerry Bergman
CRS Quarterly, Volume 47, Number 2
Fall 2010, pp. 139-145.

Abstract:

Orthogenesis is the theory that evolution occurs in a straight line, not branching, and is internally goal-directed. The theory was an attempt to explain the source of new genetic information in biological evolution. Although the theory boasted a number of prominent supporters, it did not survive scientific scrutiny and is now effectively moribund. The main problem with orthogenesis was that no plausible mechanism to drive straight-line evolution was ever demonstrated, and all of the examples used to support orthogenesis could be explained by other theories. Today the most widely accepted theory concerning the source of new genetic information is gene mutations. But mutation is regarded by some prominent biologists as an inadequate source of genetic novelty. It is important to study the doctrine of orthogenetic evolution because it prepares us to understand what may very well happen to the mutation-based evolutionary theory in the future.

pdf of article

by Richard L. Overman
CRS Quarterly, Volume 47, Number 1
Summer 2010, pp. 23-30.

Abstract:

Abstract During the last half of the twentieth century, the argon-argon method of dating geologic rocks and formations became very popular. This method replaced K/Ar as the method of choice for many types of rocks. This paper explores the fundamental mathematics of the argon-argon dating method and evaluates the impact of the assumed date of the “standard sample” on the calculated argon-argon date. A method for testing the validity of an argon-argon date is proposed with example evaluations. The analysis in this paper shows that when the results of dating studies are validated against the foundational equations upon which the argon-argon dating method is based, the “older” the standard sample the greater the results differ from the foundational equations. This seems to indicate that the assumed age of the standard sample has an effect on the calculated age of the unknown sample. The paper proposes a way to further investigate and quantify the effect of the assumed age of the standard sample.

pdf of article

by Guy Berthault
CRS Quarterly, Volume 46, Number 4
Spring 2010, pp. 261-269.

Abstract:

Stratigraphy, the basis of geological dating, was founded in the seventeenth century on three principles proposed by Nicolas Steno: superposition, continuity, and original horizontality. Successive observations and experiments show that his stratigraphic model was not in line with experimental data, because it overlooked the major variable factor of sedimentation: the current and its chronological effects. Experiments simulating the formation of sedimentary layers at variable current velocities using different-sized particles show that Steno’s principles apply only to the case of deposition at zero current velocity. Since sedimentary processes affect stratigraphy and geological dating, paleohydraulic conditions must be considered in any stratigraphic analysis. The estimated time of deposition is often the crucial factor in developing a local timescale, and the paleohydraulic approach links deposition to the critical transport velocity of current as determined by particle size. From this velocity, the corresponding transport capacity in units of volume and time is calculated. The time of sedimentation is the quotient obtained from dividing the volume of sedimentary rocks by the transport capacity. A team of Russian sedimentologists have applied this method to geological formations of the Crimean Peninsula and of the Northwest Russian Plateau in the St. Petersburg region. They discovered that the time required for sedimentation was only 0.01% of the corresponding period of the geological timescale. This is at variance with the time required for species to evolve.

pdf of article

by Tom Hogan
CRS Quarterly, Volume 46, Number 3
Winter 2010, pp. 119-125.

Abstract:

Two court cases, McLean v. Arkansas (“Arkansas”) in 1980 and Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District et al. (“Dover”) in 2005, showed how decisive philosophy can be when wielding the demarcation argument, as both creation science and intelligent design were denied victories because they were judged to be unscientific based on demarcation arguments. However, since the Arkansas decision and before Dover, the demarcation problem has generally come to be viewed by philosophers of science as intractable (i.e., “unsolvable”). The corollary of the intractability of the demarcation problem is that anything and everything can claim to be science without fear of being proved otherwise and that, therefore, the term “science” has no meaning. This has some clear implications for the creation project, including the renewed prospect for success in the courts and powerful answers to anti-creationist rhetoric.

pdf of article

by Jerry Bergman
CRS Quartlery, Volume 30, Number 3,
December 1993, pp. 140-149.

Abstract:

One of the most fascinating historical accounts about the fallout of biological evolution theory on human relations is the story of Ota Benga, a pygmy who was put on display in an American zoo as an example of an evolutionarily inferior race. The incident clearly reveals the racism of evolutionary theory and the extent that the theory gripped the hearts and minds of scientists and journalists in the late 1800s. As humans move away from this time in history, we can more objectively look back at the horrors that evolutionary theory has brought to society of which this story is a poignant example.

Html of article

Hybrid: The History and Science of Plant Breeding by Noel Kingsbury gives a brief mention of creationist Walter E. Lammerts on page 350:

Modern varieties may include an enormous amount of complexity–the ‘Queen Elizabeth’ rose, introduced by veteran breeder and grower Harry Wheatcroft (1898-1977) to celebrate the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953, was of American origin, bred by Dr. Walter E. Lammerts (1904-1996), “known in the United States as the father of scientific rose-breeding.”

Lammerts was flamboyant too in a curious way; his approach to breeding may have been scientific, but he was also a Creationist, and in 1964 he became the first president of the Creation Research Society.

Kingsbury, Noel. Hybrid: The History and Science of Plant Breeding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 512 pages. Cloth, 9780226437040, $35. October 2009.

University of Chicago Press
Amazon
Google Books

by Jerry Bergman
CRS Quarterly, Volume 46, Number 2,
Fall 2009, pp. 119-125.

Abstract:

The evidence for dinosaur evolution was reviewed, along with the various theories of dinosaur evolution and the evidence for their support. Dinosaurs are commonly believed to have evolved from a small, crocodile-like animal; however, a review of the known fossils provides no evidence for dinosaur evolution from non-dinosaurs, despite the excellent and abundant dinosaur fossil record. This finding is very significant because the bones of many of the average- to larger-sized dinosaurs discovered to date are usually fairly well preserved due to their large size and thickness. Dinosaurs appear abruptly in the fossil record and disappear just as suddenly. The fossil findings for several major dinosaur species also were reviewed.

PDF of article