ABSTRACTS
EVOLUTION, SCIENCE AND RELIGION
GLEN W. WOLFROM
There are those who object to the mention, in school, of Creation as a possible origin of the world and living things on it. Usually the objection is on the grounds that, while an account according to the evolutionary theory is scientific, to mention Creation is to teach religion. The author shows that any such objection is not well founded. In the first place, no account of origins can be really scientific; for origins cannot be observed, repeated, or subjected to experiment. Moreover, evolutionary theory, as commonly presented, becomes in fact a religion. The only fair thing, in considering origins, is to present both possibilities for comparison. Moreover, it is pedagogically advantageous to do so.HORSE BRAIN, COW BRAIN
BOLTON DAVIDHEISER
That the brain of the horse and the brain of the cow are basically similar is not surprising, but it may be surprising that the cerebral cortex of the two animals is so similar in detail, wrinkle for wrinkle (fissure for fissure). This is especially surprising from an "evolutionary" point of view since in the alleged ancestry between them there were smooth brains that had no fissures.THE CANOPY AND GENESIS 1:6-8
STANLEY V. UDD
Genesis 1:6-8 is the primary source of information concerning the earth's early canopy. This portion of Scripture has been abused by proponents of the three-storied universe concept. Close scrutiny of that concept shows that the Biblical text cannot be cited as supporting such a theory. The second day of creation speaks of the creation of the atmosphere, the location of the atmosphere, and the function of the atmosphere. The text also clearly and repeatedly indicates that the initial canopy was composed of water in the liquid state. Other passages such as 2 Peter 3:5-6 confirm the liquid nature of the canopy. This understanding also brings to life the figures used in describing the Noachic Flood.SCIENTISTS EVALUATE THE EXCEPTION
WILLIAM J. TINKLE
Science, by its very nature, must be centered on the type-the universal, as the philosophers say. But the fact that scientists study individuals should never be forgotten. Every individual, while typical, is also exceptional in some respect. Thus the exception should never be ignored or denied. Herein lies the error of uniformitarianists who are bound by a dogma and deny exceptions, although there is clear evidence to show that exceptions have happened and have been important.ARGUMENTS AGAINST SYMMETRY AND DESIGN FROM CHANCE EVENTS
HOWARD B. HOLROYD
The theory of evolution, whether in Darwin's original form or in the modern form since the introduction of mutations, amounts, in the final analysis, to saying that the forms of all of the living creatures in the world have come about by chance. The obvious objection is that, in cases in which scientists can follow what is happening, intricate designs do not come about by chance. The author emphasizes this point by reference to the sand paintings made by some tribes of Indians. It might be claimed that, if sand of different colors were mixed and scattered at random, a painting might result. But nobody in his right mind would wait for such a thing to happen. Since living creatures are more intricate than any sand painting, how much less could they have come about by chance?DARWIN'S LAST HOURS
WILBERT RUSCH
Some have stated that Charles Darwin, toward the close of his life, repudiated evolution and was enthusiastic for Christianity. In Christian charity, one could wish that this were true; but according to the evidence nothing of the sort happened. Some investigation into what Darwin wrote, and presumably believed, in the last two years or so of his life is described by the author.USE OF THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS IN MACROSCOPIC FORM IN CREATION STUDIES
H. L. ARMSTRONG
Often creationists appeal to the second law of thermodynamics to show that evolution could never have happened in the way commonly alleged. Usually the second law is thought of in such arguments in terms of statistical mechanics, or of information theory. The author uses the law in its original macroscopic form, which entails nothing at all about any microscopic structure of things, to reach the same conclusion: that the alleged evolution is impossible. There may be certain advantages to the macroscopic formulation: for instance, it may leave less opportunity for quibbles about open and closed systems.
PLANT DORMANCY: A KEY TO THE PAST (Genesis 1:14 and Plant Dormancy)
ALBERT B. FERGUSON
Many plants undergo periods of dormancy, which fit in with seasonal changes of the weather. But it does not follow that dormancy is caused, in the first place, by the weather. In fact, provisions of dormancy at the right times are seen as more examples of the Creator's superb skill and foresight.