dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (04/17/85)
/* Written 10:48 pm Apr 2, 1985 by miller@uiucdcsb in uiucdcsb:net.origins */ /* ---------- "film reply" ---------- */ Now that I've dealt with the topic of what creationists believe and of the CRS policy statement, it's time to return to the Paluxy, one of my favorite topics. Keith Doyle provides excerpts from a PBS documentary. I saw that film too, and it was reviewed in ICR's "Acts & Facts". I thought the net might like to hear the other side on some of the points that caught my attention, so here goes. First, some of the evolutionists claimed that the toes on the Paluxy human prints had "sprouted" later, as if to imply that creationists carved them. Others attributed them to erosion, etc. The test in both cases is the same: Do the lamination lines follow the contours of the depression or do they inter- sect the contours? Since the lamination lines can only be made to follow the surface if it is compressed when the mud has not yet become hard, it is a rela- tively trivial thing to cross-section the prints (including the toe regions) and check for authenticity. Why is it that evolutionists *never* discuss the lamination lines? The answer, of course, is that it is easier to *claim* that the tracks are carved than it is to *document* that charge, especially when the evidence points in the opposite direction. Keith also quotes from Kitcher's book, where he discusses John Morris' book on the Paluxy. Kitcher's description of what Morris says about the carvings is extremely misleading; I invite everyone on the net to read Morris directly, and not to believe Keith telling us about Kitcher telling us about Morris telling us about those tracks. Next, the evolutionists claimed that they had collected 260 tons of material from the area and had recovered dinosaur bones from the region. This is blatantly false. Until (the creationist) Dr. Carl Baugh's discovery last year of a dinosaur skeleton, NO dinosaur bones had been uncovered in the Glen Rose formation. Most evolutionists, in fact, did not even believe it possible to find bones there, as the manner of deposition favorable for footprints is generally different than that required for fossil bones. And last, there was a discussion in there between Gish and Dolittle. What PBS did here is unethical, in my opinion. They interviewed the two men separately, and then took and showed Gish's tape to Dolittle. They then shot another se- quence with Dolittle attempting to refute Gish's comments. No such second opportunity was afforded to Gish. Next week, I'll be typing in a BSAN review of an evolutionary film shot in part on site at the Paluxy. A. Ray Miller Univ Illinois /* End of text from uiucdcsb:net.origins */