keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (03/21/85)
[.......................]
Here is an excerpt regarding the Paluxy river data from the book
'Abusing Science, The Case Against Creationism' by Philip Kitcher,
MIT Press, (c) 1982 pp. 121-123:
So we come to Paluxy, and the Creationists' favorite example. The
Paluxy river bed, in central Texas, is alleged to contain "large numbers
of both dinosaur and human footprints" (Morris 1974a, 122; see also
Wilder-Smith 1981, 96-98; Wysong 1976, 373-377). This would shake
the foundations of evolutionary theory, because, of course, the dinosaurs
are supposed to have been long extinct by the time the homonids
arrived on the scene. Evolutionary theorists reply that the alleged
human footprints are not genuine. In fact, it is sometimes charged
that the tracks have been modified. These charges provoke Wilder-
Smith to some accusations of his own: "G. G. Simson labels them
[the supposed tracks] as a plain lie. The authenticities of the discoveries
at Glen Rose [Paluxy] would in one blow absolutely and radically
destroy Simpson's lifetime work as a proponent of Neodarwinism.
The well known publishing scandals involving Macmillan and the
suppression of Velikowski's research, as well as the Piltdown hoax,
provide us with much food for thought in respect to the publication
of facts which would correct erroneous generally accepted scientific
philosophies" (Wilder-Smith 1981, 98).
There is utterly no reason to believe that Simpson is a villan,
desperately conniving to prevent the unwelcome truth form emerging.
He is a sincere and dedicated scientist, who has shown himself able
to retract and modify his views in response to informed and responsible
criticism. Moreover, he like other scientists, has heard the Creationists
cry "Wolf!" too often.
However, because Creationists have placed so much emphasis on
the Paluxy findings, a number of trained scientists have gone to take
a look. Their first-hand observations have exposed some interesting
features of the Paluxy situation. Many of the tracks are not readily
distinguished, even by expert palentologists. Yet more interesting is
the disclosure of a piece of social history. During the Depression, a
few local inhabitants made money by carving tracks in pieces of rock.
Because of these unwelcome discoveries, some Seventh-Day Adventists
have abandoned the Paluxy findings as evidence for Creationism. Even
John D. Morris, the son of Henry Morris, and himself a member of
the Institute for Creation Research, has been forced to concede that
some of the tracks are counterfeit. Nevertheless, "scientific" Creationists
continue to insist that Paluxy yeilds serious evidence against evolution.
The most recent printings of Creationist books do not intimate that
much of the "Paluxy data" is already recognized as dubious by Creationists
themselves -- and that even people who share their theological
views reject it wholesale.
The rewards of going forth to confirm orthodox explanations of
Creationists "findings" are slight. If scientists do not investigate, then
they are assailed with complaints that they do not attend to the
counterevidence that would topple evolutionary theory. When they
do answer the call, they are accused of making biased observations
and failing to see what is really there. Even if the tracks at Paluxy
finally disappear from the Creationist literature, there will always be
new Paluxies. Creationists will raise pedestrian problems of no
theoretical interest, and they will "discover" new peculiarities in the fossil
record. The fact that they are so obviously grinding their pet axes
generates concern about the purity of their findings. To go out and
verify that standard applications of evolutionary theory will take care
of the problematic phenomena takes time from more profitable research.
To go out and show that some of the alleged findings are
counterfeit only leads Creationists to proclaim more loudly that the
rest are genuine and that prejudiced scientists look only at what supports
their preconceptions. The facts that Creationists cite are not 'inexplicable'
by evolutionary theory. They are simply 'unexplained'. Ironically, they
remain unexplained because they are not sufficiently problematic to
merit further attention. So, the invitation to chase wild geese is usually
declined.
Keith Doyle
# {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd
"You'll PAY to know what you REALLY think!"
P.S. I find it interesting that Wilder-Smith should cite Velikowski in
his example, as Velikowski's book implies that much of biblical phenomena,
(destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, manna from heaven, the flood) was
in fact caused by Venus sideswiping the earth a couple of times until
it finally came to rest in its present orbit.