Copyright © 1981, 2000 by the Creation Research Society. All rights reserved.

NEANDERTHAL, OH HOW I NEED YOU!

ERICH A. von FANGE

For a century or more, and despite some voices raised to the contrary, Neanderthal man was touted as a bestial missing link; and that view was used to support the theory of evolution. More recently it has become apparent that Neanderthal was a true human, not so very much different from modern man; and that fact is generally admitted, albeit sometimes reluctantly.

---

MECHANICAL DESIGN IN THE HUMAN BODY

DAVID A. KAUFMANN

In the real world a design logically implies a designer. The human body abounds with both simple and complex parts with intricate designs. The pulley is one of man's most work-saving machines. Thirteen examples of pulleys in the human body, grouped into five classes, are discussed. It is logical to conclude that these complex, mechanical examples did not evolve by consecutive random accidents of unthinking molecules but are the results of the planned thinking and workmanship of a Divine Designer.

---

A RECENT CREATION EXPLANATION OF THE 3° K BACKGROUND BLACK BODY RADIATION

RUSSELL AKRIDGE, THOMAS BARNES, and HAROLD S. SLUSHER

We examine the big-bang explanation of the origin of the 3° K background blackbody radiation over billions of years. We find the big-bang explanation self-contradictory and unrealistic. We propose the Heating Model as an explanation of the origin of the 3° K background radiation consistent with a recent creation.

---

HAVE THE GENESIS KINDS EVER CROSSED?

FRANK LEWIS MARSH

Among special creationists today it is generally believed that basic types of organisms cannot now cross. About the past, two schools of thought exist. One holds that in the past some crossing probably occurred nearer creation week when the stocks were more "viable" and "virile" than now. The other school holds that crossing of basic types never occurred, and that our modern basic kinds have, with more or less internal variation, kept their general characteristics ever since creation week. Attention is called to the opinion of geneticists, based upon laboratory findings, that crossing of basic types has never taken place. Each basic type is visibly distinguished by its unique morphology, and the morphology of every organism is in turn determined by the specific sequence of the same two pairs of nucleotides in the DNA of the chromosomes. Dobzhansky, Lagerkvist, and Levine are quoted on this point. The unique sequence of the nucleotides in an organism's DNA determines the chemistry in its cells. Hybridization can occur only between individuals in which the chemistries of the body cells are quite similar. Such similarity occurs only among the members of the same Genesis kind. These discoveries of geneticists have shown that "viability" and "virility" have had nothing to do with the crossability of basic types of organisms. Because crossability rests wholly upon chemical compatibility (close similarity), and because such compatibility does not exist between the members of different basic types of organisms, it follows that two different basic types have never crossed. There is no known case in which two morphologically different individuals have produced a hybrid. Crossing of variants within a single basic type may result in improved stocks, and again it may result in something undesirable, such as the development of poisonous substances in the hybrid. Monkshood and guayule are cited. Because of their amenability to laboratory proof, in the study of origins two vitally important biological principles or laws are (1) Basic types (Genesis kinds, baramins) cannot cross; and (2) The Law of Limitation of Variation (Processes of variation can go no further than to produce additional variants with already existing basic types). Organic evolution and these two biological laws cannot exist on the same planet at the same time.

---

IMPLICATIONS OF PALAEOLITHIC STRATIGRAPHY FOR CREATIONIST MODELS OF PREHISTORY

KEN GUENTER

Creationist models of world prehistory are usually enriched by geological considerations and are integrated with biology and anthropology. Claims concerning radiometric dating have been qualified or challenged. However, the archaeological data from before the Neolithic have hardly been noticed. In this article are outlined some of those data, and some implications for Creationist models.

 

---

SPECIATION OR IRRUPTION: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DARWIN FINCHES

G. H. HARPER

Criticism is made of the conventional use of the Darwin finches in teaching. An alternative, 'irruption', theory is presented, to explain the occurrence of the finches in the Galapagos Islands. This postulates that all the species we know today arrived in the archipelago as a mass irruptive migration movement from the north-east. The theory is explained by reference to the European crossbills. In a discussion of the educational role of the theory, it is suggested that we need to make more effort to encourage the creative and critical faculties in advanced work in schools and at undergraduate level. The occasional presentation of alternative theories, and the discussion of their evaluation, are recommended as means to achieving these aims.

 

Home | Quarterly Journal | Popular Publication | Membership | Bookstore | Speakers | Donate | Search | Site Map

© Copyright 2001-2013, Creation Research Society. All rights reserved.
Copyright & Permissions