Forbearance doesn't mean we tuck sin away for another time. It is not a variation of patience nor is it some Christianized, external “niceness” where you pretend nothing bothers you. It's not even a kind of ignoring the sin, in the sense of refusing to acknowledge it. In forbearance we know (or at least suspect) we have been sinned against, but we actually make a choice to overlook the offense and wipe the slate clean, extending a heart attitude of forgiveness, and treating the (apparent) sin as if it never happened. Proverbs 19:11 tells us it is a “glory to overlook an offense.” Forbearance is preemptive forgiveness, freely and genuinely bestowed.
Dave Harvey

Debate On Human Foot Prints

Debate On Human Foot Prints

Debate On Human Foot Prints 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 <g>). 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 <g>.)

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 <g>.

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)