CRSLogo2

CRSQ Archive

Copyright © 1982, 2000 by the Creation Research Society. All rights reserved.

Volume 18, Number 4
March, 1982
Abstracts


THE MONOTREMES

COLIN BROWN

Some have tried to point to the monotremes as links between the mammals and reptiles. That notion is challenged here; it is shown that the monotremes are true mammals, albeit having certain peculiarities. They provide no support for evolutionary theories.


AN ESTIMATE OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF EVOLUTIONARY THINKING

JOHN N. MOORE

This article is a critical examination of current evolutionary thinking, as exemplified in statements by prominent evolutionists. Six points especially noticeable in this thinking are (1) disregard of the grounds of and limiting principles of scientific methodology; (2) equivocations of the word "evolution"; (3) primary reliance on circumstantial evidence; (4) extensive extrapolation; (5) dependence on error; and (6) use of "cover words" as practiced by evolutionists.


VELOCITY EFFECTS ON ATOMIC CLOCKS AND THE TIME QUESTION

THOMAS G. BARNES and FRANCISCO S. RAMIREZ IV

The experimental and theoretical work of Herbert Ives is presented as a logical alternative to Einstein's special theory of relativity. Rotational experiments are shown to indicate a light-beating medium, refuting thefoundations of special relativity. The relativity concept of time dilation is replaced by physically produced clock rate reduction when clocks move through the reference medium. The common sense concept of time is upheld as a fundamental quantity of science. The philosophy of relativism is shown to be detrimental to science.


AN ANTHOLOGY OF MATTERS SIGNIFICANT TO CREATIONISM AND DILUVIOLOGY: REPORT 2

JOHN WOODMORAPPE

This report is not about one specific topic, but is a collection of miscellaneous findings conveying a diverse body of information of interest to Creationists and Diluvialists. It is thus a natural sequel to the author's first anthology. Highlights of points concerning biological evolution include: 1) fallacies in claims of life from non-life, 2) lack of a proven driving mechanism; 3) the problem of "living fossils, 4) fundamental biologic phenomena not explained by evolution. The section on "ancient reefs" further shows that. 1) ancient "reefs" lack a reef network, 2) these deposits were cemented inorganically, 3) growth orientation is no proof of growth in situ over immense periods of time. Previous Creationists' observations about "overthrusts", such as lack of gouge, and perfectly conformable "thrust" contacts, are confirmed. Over two hundred cases of anomalous fossils are tabulated; and it is shown that such fossils typically do not show morphological evidence of the "reworking" which has been invoked to explain them. A final section on uniformitarianism notes evidence to show that thick igneous and metamorphic rocks have formed and cooled quickly; and illustrates the blinding influence of uniformitarianism.


CREATION, WHY AND HOW?

EVERETT H. PETERSON

In this article the question: Creation-Why? is examined; and it is concluded, among other things, that the second law of thermodynamics was put into operation as soon as Creation was complete. The question: Creation-How? is also examined; and it is suggested that one of the results of making creation subject to vanity (Romans 8:20) at the fall was radioactivity.


ELECTROMAGNETICS AND THE APPEARANCE OF AGE

GLENN R. MORTON

Creationists have discussed how the light from distant stars, created only a few thousand years ago, could be reaching us. An analogous question is why no radioactive isotopes with half-lives less than many millions of years exist naturally; apparently if any ever existed they have decayed. Again, while it is no doubt true that there are many sources of error in radiometric dating, yet there seems to be a certain consistency in giving long ages. Creationists need to investigate all of these matters carefully. In this article it is proposed that a change in the electrical forces associated with elementary particles, possibly at the time of the Flood, may provide a Creationist explanation for all of these points.

 

Read 211 times Last modified on Sunday, 16 March 2014 14:54