Number: 47 (Read 0 times) Date: 30 Apr 91 21:48:18
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 46 See msg: 48
To: Scott Watts Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
I understand, that there are a great many things that I do not
understand, and as a result my views may seem to be odd or distorted.
Have you ever heard of the Paluxy River Beds?
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 48 (Read 0 times) Date: 02 May 91 23:53:45
From: Scott Watts Reply to: 47 See msg: 49
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
Not offhand. Please elaborate.
Scott
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 49 (Read 0 times) Date: 03 May 91 00:22:34
From: Scott Faust Reply to: 48 See msg: 50
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> I understand, that there are a great many things that I do not
JB> understand, and as a result my views may seem to be odd or
JB> distorted. Have you ever heard of the Paluxy River Beds?
Hi Jack,
I don't know about Scott Watts, but I am fairly familiar with the
Paluxy River controversy over alleged human footprints found along
with dinosaur footprints in the limestone there. I also happen to
be acquanted with Ronnie Hastings and Glen Kuban, the researchers
who managed to convince most creationists that the tracks in
question were not human (although I suppose some creationists might
still wish to say merely that they are not demonstrably so).
-SF
--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 51 (Read 0 times) Date: 04 May 91 03:59:24
From: Scott Faust Reply to: 50 See msg: 52
To: Phil Nicholls Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> rays of the sun from entering earths atmosphere. Creationist
JB> would like to build a model to study this, but grants do not
JB> come easy to scientists who believe in creation. There have
PN> Of course, it might help if creationist actually applied for
PN> these grants. Can you name a single creation scientist who
PN> was denied funding because he was a creationist? This means
Actually, Phil, I think I know who the creationist is who wants to
"build a model to study [the pre-flood, canopy influenced
environment]." Don't you have in mind Carl Baugh down here in
Texas with his hyperbaric biosphere, John? I assure you that if
the ICR had all the money they could want, THEY wouldn't give a
penny to Baugh. He is simply not considered to be a competent and
careful researcher, even by creationists.
--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
[Addendum to this message added for uploading: Carl Baugh,
though I bring up his name here in connection with his plan to
construct a gadget to test his version of the "canopy theory",
is a principal Paluxy "mantrack" proponent. Thus Jack Brannan
responds to my comments about him below in regard to our
discussion about the Paluxy footprints.]
Number: 53 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 22:49:41
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 52 See msg: 54
To: Scott Watts Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
Its an archeaological dig in Texas where they have found human
footprints alongside of dinosaurs.
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 54 (Read 0 times) Date: 06 May 91 01:00:40
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 53 See msg: 55
To: Scott Faust Sent
Subject: Radio-active
AREA:GEOLOGY
I suppose all creationist are suspect of shoddy work by
evolutionist.However ICR does not have anything but praise
for Carl Baugh. Glen Kuban and Ron Hastings had nothing to do
with Paluxi River Bed finds, they were the discoverers of the
Taylor Trail, which is a suspicious site. The oddity is Glen
Kuban a creationist, and Ron Hastings an evolutionist working
together. This area is stained with a reddish brown stain,
similar to an acid spill on rock, and has other suspicious
facts (sort of like piltdown, manufactured type). An area
resident says that the true finder of Taylor Trail was Ron
Hastings by Himself (Steve Schafersman). Perhaps a
creationist was needed for added viability? Whatever they did
or did not do to refute findings, the fact remains, they
never visited Paluxi, their find was a quarter mile away.
Dr. Baugh has a masters in archeology and a doctorate in
anthropology. His associates were Dr. Robert L. Whitelaw Phd.
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Dr. Clifford Wilson Phd. .
Dr Wilson was director of Australian Institute of Archeology,
and was named area supervisor for excavations at Gezer,
sponsored by The American School for Oriental Research and
Hebrew Union College. He was also honored as "An Outstanding
Educator of America" in 1971. If your trying to belittle
their work, by knocking their work habits, you have a big job
to do.
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 56 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 04:00:16
From: Scott Faust See msg: 57
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> I suppose all creationist are suspect of shoddy work by
JB> evolutionist.
What I said of Carl Baugh is that his work is considered to be
shoddy by both evolutionists AND creationists.
JB> However ICR does not have anything but praise for
JB> Carl Baugh.
Really? Please quote and reference some of this praise. When you
come up goose eggs on that, read the article by Tom McIver, "A
Creationists Walk Through the Grand Canyon," in Issue XX (Spring
'87) of the _Creation / Evolution_ Journal. McIver is a cultural
anthroplogist who did his dissertation on creationism. This
article describes an ICR field trip he participated in as part of
his research. On p.12 he writes:
At supper, we talked about other creationist groups and
interpretations. Depending upon the audience, creationists may
attack rival creationist interpretations as much as they do
evolution itself. ... [John] Morris offered some witty
impressions of Carl Baugh, the Paluxy investigator who sees
"manprints" everywhere. Morris and others at ICR think Baugh
does creationism a great disservice with his scientifically
naive and ill-founded claims.
Now, let me point out that Morris was also a strong proponent of
Paluxy "mantracks" at one time and wrote a book on the subject. He
would hardly be inclined to poke fun at Baugh gratuatously.
I would not be very suprised if the ICR has not PUBLICLY criticized
Baugh. Hard-nosed public critique of creationist models and
research -- by creationists -- is fairly rare. Personally, I have
only met one creationist who outwardly evinces the same sort of
critically minded approach to the evaluation of creation models as
I observe that mainstream scientists routinely do toward their
theories (or at least those of their colleagues ). The
individual I have in mind is Kurt Wise, BTW, who I see will be
addressing Walt's group there in St. Louis. Maybe Walt will ask
Wise what he thinks about Baugh and Paluxy mantracks and report
back to us. (I already know what he thinks .)
JB> Glen Kuban and Ron Hastings had nothing to do with Paluxi
JB> River Bed finds, they were the discoverers of the Taylor Trail
JB> ... An area resident says that the true finder of Taylor
JB> Trail was Ron Hastings by Himself (Steve Schafersman). ...
JB> Whatever they did or did not do to refute findings, the fact
JB> remains, they never visited Paluxi, their find was a quarter
JB> mile away.
Jack, where are you getting your information!!?? The Taylor Trail
is IN the Paluxy River -- IN THE RIVERBED ITSELF -- about 1/2 mile
upstream from (and outside the borders of) Dinosaur Valley State
Park near Glen Rose, Texas. I have been there WITH Kuban and
Hastings (and Baugh) on several occasions. The Taylor trail is 1/4
or 1/2 mile downstream from sites (like the McFall ledge) which
Baugh frequently works (and which Kuban, Hastings and others have
also evaluated). Perhaps this explains part of your error.
Steve Schafersman is not and was not an "area resident." He is a
petroleum geologist (and now college instructor in geology) from
Houston. I don't know what Steve might have said, but you have
obviously misconstrued it.
The Taylor trail was not discovered by Kuban or Hastings, but years
before they began their research. It is named for Stanley Taylor
and was featured in _Footprints In Stone_ produced by Taylor's
Films for Christ. The site was excavated BY TAYLOR in 1969 and
'70, and his film was released in 1972.
JB> The oddity is Glen Kuban a creationist, and Ron Hastings an
JB> evolutionist working together. ... Perhaps a creationist was
JB> needed for added viability?
Kuban first went down to the Paluxy (1980 I think) hoping to
document the existence of "mantracks." Within the first year or
two he found that the claims he had read in John Morris' _Tracking
Those Incredible Dinosaurs: And the People Who Knew Them_ did not
atand up to his own observations. Again I am not certain of my
dates, but as I recall Hastings didn't begin looking into the
Paluxy footprints until about '82 or later. Kuban became a
"mantack" skeptic BEFORE he began working with Hastings (1983 or
'84 I believe. I can dig into my currently trashed out files and
nail down all these dates if you want me to.) Kuban tells me, BTW,
that it was he who first approached Hastings.
JB> ... the Taylor Trail ... is a suspicious site. ... This area
JB> is stained with a reddish brown stain, similar to an acid
JB> spill on rock, and has other suspicious facts (sort of like
JB> piltdown, manufactured type).
(What Jack is referring to is a coloration of the Paluxy limestone
which in some areas reveals the outlines of the often only
partially eroded material which infilled the dinosaur tracks. This
coloration began to become apparent in the Taylor trail by 1984,
revealing that the vaugely oblong, supposedly human, indentations
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 57 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 21:36:50
From: Scott Faust Reply to: 56 See msg: 63
To: Scott Faust Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
Oops! I didn't know the max message length here and it looks like
my message got truncated. Here is the remainder (with a bit of
overlap). I also apologize for a duplicate message I just
discovered I posted here earlier.
JB> ... the Taylor Trail ... is a suspicious site. ... This area
JB> is stained with a reddish brown stain, similar to an acid
JB> spill on rock, and has other suspicious facts (sort of like
JB> piltdown, manufactured type).
(What Jack is referring to is a coloration of the Paluxy limestone
which in some areas reveals the outlines of the often only
partially eroded material which infilled the dinosaur tracks. This
coloration began to become apparent in the Taylor trail by 1984,
revealing that the vaugely oblong, supposedly human, indentations
of the trail possesed tridactyl dinosaurian digits. It was this
evidence which compelled John Morris to back of the claim [though
he did so darkely hinting about Jack's "manufacted" "stains"], and
Stanley Taylor to shelve _Footprints In Stone_. There was already
adequate anatomical evidence, however, to reveal to Kuban that the
trial was dinosaurian before the colorations appeared.)
The colorations are NOT stains and do not resemble acid spills in
any way. The coloration is a SUBSURFACE phenomena, as has been
revealed by numerous cores taken from the tracks in the trial and
elsewhere. It is a LITHIC phenomena as revealed by differences in
grain sized between this darker infilling and the substrate
material. The coloration phenomena can be found in tracks, and in
rock that contains no tracks, all over that part of the river. It
occurs in association with tracks that are uncontroversially
dinosaurian, and in association with depressions and low spots in
the substate that are not tracks at all.
I don't claim to understand the geochemistry involved, but am told
that the infilling is probably material that washed over the
cretaceous mud-flats from an inland source, and that its iron
content causes it to rust and darken when exposed to the elements.
I may not have that quite right, but in any regard my earlier
points still stand: These are not "stains" or any sort of surface
phenomena. The only "manufacturing" going on here may be
attributed to your sources, Jack, and the only "suspicions" called
for are of their competence, knowledgability or honesty.
JB> Dr. Baugh has a masters in archeology and a doctorate in
JB> anthropology.
Listen, Jack, if a person is able to demonstrate their competence
in their craft, I don't give a hang about their credentials or lack
thereof. Furthermore, sound credentials don't assure sound work.
The leader of the Geocentrism movement in this country has a Ph.D.
in astronomy from Case Western!
All that being said... Baugh's "degrees" are meaningless. They
are cheesy diploma mill type stuff. If you want details, I can
give you details. I'll have to dig into my files and some boxes
and stuff. Maybe Walt will take care of this as I would really
prefer not to go into it. He might find the article by Kuban on
Baugh's credentials which was published a couple of years ago (I
think) in the _Creation/Evolution Newsletter_. I don't have access
to my back issues just now.
--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 63 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 19:36:44
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 57 See msg: 65
To: Scott Faust Recv Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
I may be in over my head here, I dont know a lot about
Paluxi. I have read some reports on this (for want of a
better word)"stain". It does not appear to be Iron oxides, or
anything easily explainable as a natural phenomona, However
experimentation with hydrochloric acid has produced identical
stains. John Morris did indeed back off from the Paluxi finds
and wanted to divorce ICR from any controversy, but he has
since visited with Carl Baugh and inspected his work and
findings. At this point (late 88) John Morris again supports
Baugh. Carl Baugh does not have experience or credentials to
match many Archaeologist, so attacking him from this point is
easy, because he has nothing of note prior to reccommend him.
This is not true of Clifford Wilson, who has been recognized
by other authorities and commended. He shares with Baugh in
this endeaver, he is a responsible and Im sure he would not
work with anyone doing "shoddy work", as this would also
reflect on him.
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 65 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 19:55:02
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 63 See msg: 67
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
Concerning Paluxi, I have seen a PBS program that promised to
reveal the truth. I dont remember who did this work, but I
realized very soon into it that there would be no truth. The
person in the film was a science teacher from a local school,
who went with camera and crew to the river. From a distance
they pointed out Baughs work area, but never visited it nor
talked with anyone from his camp. They did wade the river
with a glass aquarium looking for tracks and showed one they
found which unmistakably had three toes, and said this was
what the excitement was over. I have to question their
objectivity, why did'nt they speak with Baugh and film some
of his finds? One can only assume two results from filming
Baugh's finds. Baugh would have looked to be a fool or, his
opponents would have appeared to be blinded to evidence
supporting him. It is argued that these prints have been
carved, however some of these prints have been cut in half
lengthwise and they show compression underneath the heel and
ball of the foot, this could not be done by someone carving.
Paluxi could be very important, and could quite possibly be
the downfall of creation or evolution, but only if a true
objective investigation is made. Baugh has invited the media
to publicise these events, but has had little success with
response (except local) and what response he got was with a
ho-hum attitude.
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 66 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 08:34:06
From: Scott Faust
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Stinkin' Degrees
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> Carl Baugh does not have experience or credentials to
JB> match many Archaeologist, so attacking him from this point is
JB> easy, because he has nothing of note prior to reccommend him.
JB> This is not true of Clifford Wilson, who has been recognized
JB> by other authorities and commended. He shares with Baugh in
JB> this endeaver, he is a responsible and Im sure he would not
JB> work with anyone doing "shoddy work", as this would also
JB> reflect on him.
Clifford Wilson's Ph.D. is in psycholinguistics (don't know what
that is), not archaeology as is often assumed. This does not mean,
of course, that he has not done quality work in archaeology, and I
have noted various impressive *sounding* items in his vitae. If
you can give me some references to published results of field work
conducted by him or under his direction, though not qualified to
evaluate them, I would be happy to give them a read.
I am afraid, however, that Wilson's association with Baugh -- at
least in regard to the acquisition of Baugh's "degrees" and the
institutions which granted them -- does reflect poorly on Wilson.
I didn't want go into the mucky matter of Baugh's credentials, at
the risk of confusing that with the need to evaluate his mantrack
claims on their own merits, but since you bring up the matter again
I will do so. My reference here is Glen J. Kuban's article in
_National Center for Science Education Reports_, v9 n6, p.15.
Unless otherwise indicated, all quotes are from that article
(footnotes deleted). Before you slam me for using a secondary
source, I recommend that you look up Kuban's article (or post your
address in a private message and I will mail you a copy). It is
extensively referenced and I cannot find any substantive claim
therein that he is not able to support.
I also have some slight personal knowledge of some of these
matters. I supplied Kuban with the references noted in footnotes
26 and 31, and I have also driven by the "campus" of the school
that awarded Baugh his Ph.D. in anthropology -- the College of
Advanced Education; 2355 West Pioneer; Irving, TX. If you want to
look for yourself, you had better drive slow and look quick.
The CAE is housed in a small house adjacent to Sherwood Baptist
Church. The pastor of the church, who Baugh identified as the dean
of the school, told Kuban that CAE is a "missions" school with no
science classes or facilities. Kuban notes that "the school is
neither accredited by any national or regional agency, nor
certified by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (which
certification must be obtained to legally grant degrees in Texas)."
Indeed, Kuban found no record of the school with the Irving Chamber
of Commerce, Dept. of Taxation, or phone directory.
Baugh supplied Kuban with a copy of his CAE "diploma".
"[It] indicates that CAE is the 'Graduate Division' of
International Baptist College (IBC). IBC is incorporated in
Missouri (where Baugh lived before coming to Texas); however,
the school is neither accredited not certified to grant degrees
in any subject. In fact, IBC appears to be as lacking in
science facilities and courses as CAE. When I called IBC in
1986, the man answering the phone stated the IBC is a
correspondence school for Bible studies based on cassette tapes
by Jerry Falwell. Further, the letterhead of IBC listed Baugh
himself as 'Pesident.' Thus, Baugh's anthroplogy degree
originated from a branch of his own unaccredited, correspondence
Bible school."
Clifford Wilson's name is listed on the incorporation papers for
IBC, BTW, and he was at one time on their letterhead as "Vice
President, International Studies." There also used to be a metal
plaque marking one of Buagh's earlier mantrack sites which gave the
location of IBC as Melbourne, Australia.
Kuban's article further discusses the connection to Wilson:
"Pacific College Incorporated (PCI) -- a.k.a. Pacific College of
Graduate Studies (PCGS) and Pacific International University
(PIU) -- from which Baugh claims a master's degree in
archaeology, traces to a small, private, religious school in
Australia headed by Clifford Wilson. Ian Plimer, a member of
the Australian Research Council and professor of geology at
Newcastle University, reported that PCI is not accredited or
authorized to grant degrees. Plimer stated, 'Any degrees from
this 'College' are illegal in Australia and are clearly being
used fraudulently in the U.S.A.'"
One of Baugh's associates here in Dallas, Don Patton (not to be
confused with Donald W. Patten), has claimed a Ph.D. candidacy in
geology with yet another unaccredited Australian school linked to
Wilson -- Queensland Christian University (QCU). When Ronnie
Hastings shared with Patton what he had learned about QCU's lack of
authority to grant degrees, Patton indicated that his degree was on
hold pending the accreditation of QCU. Hastings subsequently
learned from Plimer, however, that QCU had not applied for
accreditation in any field of science.
At the 1989 National Conference on biblical Origins in Dayton,
Tennessee (which I attended, incidently) Patton clarified to Kuban
that he had no degrees at all (even undergrad), though the printed
program implied that he had at least four. (Baugh, BTW, has been
known to refer to his associate as "Dr. Don Patton".)
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 67 (Read 0 times) Date: 13 May 91 07:11:22
From: Scott Faust Reply to: 65 See msg: 68
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> I may be in over my head here, I dont know a lot about
JB> Paluxi. I have read some reports on this (for want of a
JB> better word)"stain". It does not appear to be Iron oxides, or
JB> anything easily explainable as a natural phenomona, However
JB> experimentation with hydrochloric acid has produced identical
JB> stains.
I repeat, Jack... These are NOT stains. I have seen the tracks
and I have seen the cores that have been taken from the tracks at
the margins of the coloration. The coloration is revealed by these
cores to be a SUBSURFACE phenomena, and thus cannot be "stains" of
any sort. Iron oxides? I don't know. As I said, I don't know
zilch about geochemistry and may have botched even the very
supeficial explanation I gave earlier.
There have been one or more papers published in standard geological
journals on the geochemistry of the Paluxy (dolomitic I believe)
limestone deposites. They may shed some light on the cause of the
coloration. Pictures of the cores from the Taylor trail has also
been published on one or more occasions. I will contact Ronnie
Hastings for the references and post them here.
~~~~~~~~
JB> John Morris did indeed back off from the Paluxi finds
JB> and wanted to divorce ICR from any controversy, but he has
JB> since visited with Carl Baugh and inspected his work and
JB> findings. At this point (late 88) John Morris again supports
JB> Baugh.
Please clarify... Are you saying that (as of late '88) *Morris*
said that he again supports Baugh, or did Baugh or one of his
supporters say that *about* Morris? I recall that Morris visited
the Paluxy in '88. I heard (through the grapevine) that he wasn't
very impressed, but I could be mistaken. Morris had a report later
in _Acts and Facts_, but I can't find the issue now. (If anyone
else can, please comment.)
This short piece concerned Baugh's new improved Taylor trial claim:
The main tracks were probably made by dinosaurs allright (unless
maybe it really was those nasty humanists sneaking out there at
midnight with bottles of hydrochloric acid!), but there are human
tracks INSIDE the dinosaurs tracks. As I remember it, Morris'
report mixed a hint of cautious optimism about the new claim, with
about a half pound of skepticism that it would bear out. I did not
take it at the time as indicating "support". I think it could best
be described as neutral. I you or someone else find this item, you
may be able show me up. I wouldn't consider Morris' renewed
support of Baugh to count for much anyway, but would be surprised
if Morris turned out to be that foolhardy.
--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 68 (Read 0 times) Date: 13 May 91 08:20:44
From: Scott Faust Reply to: 67 See msg: 71
To: Jack Brannan Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
JB> Concerning Paluxi, I have seen a PBS program that promised to
JB> reveal the truth. I dont remember who did this work, but I
JB> realized very soon into it that there would be no truth.
You are probably referring to the NOVA show, "God, Darwin and the
Dinosaurs" (or some title along that line). I have found that many
of the NOVA shows, especially over the last several years, are
rather lacking in substance. I didn't like this one much myself.
Thought it was much too easy on the creationists .
~~~~~~~~
JB> The
JB> person in the film was a science teacher from a local school,
JB> who went with camera and crew to the river. From a distance
JB> they pointed out Baughs work area, but never visited it nor
JB> talked with anyone from his camp. They did wade the river
JB> with a glass aquarium looking for tracks and showed one they
JB> found which unmistakably had three toes, and said this was
JB> what the excitement was over.
The science teacher was Ronnie Hastings. Along with Glen Kuban he
is one of Baugh's principal critics. The track was from the Taylor
trail. The river runs dry there once about every 4 years or so
when there is a good drought. Otherwise, the trail has to be
studied in this rather cumbersome manner. Either that or sandbag
around the tracks you want to examine and pump out the water. I
had the good fortune to be able to spend some time on the site in
'88 when there was a major drought.
~~~~~~~~
JB> I have to question their
JB> objectivity, why did'nt they speak with Baugh and film some
JB> of his finds? One can only assume two results from filming
JB> Baugh's finds. Baugh would have looked to be a fool or, his
JB> opponents would have appeared to be blinded to evidence
JB> supporting him.
I vote for result #1! I don't know why they didn't film Baugh.
Maybe they DID and he came off as TO MUCH of a buffoon. Thats
entirely speculation on my part, however, so I will pass your post
along to Ronnie Hastings and see if he has any comment.
~~~~~~~~
JB> It is argued that these prints have been
JB> carved, however some of these prints have been cut in half
JB> lengthwise and they show compression underneath the heel and
JB> ball of the foot, this could not be done by someone carving.
It was cut crosswise into three sections. You refer to one of the
carved "footprints" acquired years ago by Clifford Burdick. It had
long been removed from the riverbed at the time that Burdick
discovered it and was apparently carved by one of the locals back
in the thirties.
This claim was touted at the 1990 International Conference on
Creationism. (Baugh wasn't present, but his associate Don Patton
was, along with Hugh Miller and some other Paluxy "manprint"
diehards). It didn't go over very well at all. Some of the
geologically knowledable CREATIONISTS present readily recognized
the supposed "compression" marks as stromatolite-like algal
growths. I think that Gregg Wilkerson of Students for Origin
Research was going to debunk this claim in _Origins Research_.
Maybe Walt or some other subscriber will be able to tell us if this
article has appeared there. I might try checking the index on the
SOR BBS.
--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
Number: 71 (Read 0 times) Date: 14 May 91 23:17:57
From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 68
To: Scott Faust Sent
Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"
AREA:GEOLOGY
I appreciate your reply and will take time to see what it is I am
reading (it wont be the first time an author has suckered me). This
doesnt mean, I no longer believe in creationism, it simply means I
realize there may be opportunist among creationist to. SO,,,Back to the
library for me.
--- RBBSMail 17.4A
* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)
