Author : A.E. Proctor
The science of Paleontology deals with the study of fossil deposits found in the earth’s strata. It is the companion of Historical Geology, for the main concern of the paleontologist is the study of the fossils preserved in the geologic column. The paleontologist attempts to relate the various fossils into a pattern of evolution so that the line of descent or succession from simple animals to more complex can be charted. To do this, the so called “Law of Faunal Succession” is used. Simply put, this “law” states that an animal with a skeleton structure similar to another, evolved from the less complex creature (the parent) to the more complex organism (the child). It is assumed that the child will have improvements in its structure compared to the parent, and that these improvements were caused by an evolutionary response to a change in the world (or environment) In which the parent lived. (I want to note that this “law” is in direct conflict with the second law of thermodynamics which states that all things gradually decay and die. Without an external source of organization and energy, complex structures tend to decay to less complex structures.)
Once the line of descent has been charted, the paleontologist determines the age of the various fossils by conferring with the historical geologist as to the age of the strata where the fossils were found. The geologist, in turn, uses the index fossils in similar strata to determine the ages of the rock. (The age of the index fossils have been specified for the geologist by paleontologists in earlier times.) The circular reasoning used by these men in an attempt to specify ages of millions of years for the earth is well known to Bible scholars. Unfortunately, the student in the classroom is not informed of this, and the assumed nature of the ages of fossils are presented as fact with no possibility of error.
In fact, there is much error in these assumptions. The “law” of faunal succession is no law, but a theory that the similarity of structure of life forms is a result of evolution and evolution alone. An equally valid theory to account for the similarity is that the Creator used the similar design of body suitable for the environment in which similar creatures live. The historical geologist and the paleontologist insist on evolution as the only possibility, for without it, they must admit the existence of God, the Creator.
Let’s consider the consequences of the teaching of the paleontologist: His world is a world in which death, killing and fighting for survival are not only normal but required for the improvement of life. A pattern of violence which has existed for millions of years and will continue for millions of years into the future. A world of no hope, no joy, no love, but merely killing or being killed. Make things better for your children by swift disposal of anything or any one who might hinder their struggle to grow and survive. No matter how secular humanism might try to change the image of this philosophy, this is its core. This is what “survival of the fittest” is all about. It is, of course, a world where there is no sin, for the things Jesus defined as sinful are the desirable and proper works for the creatures of the world of the paleontologist. In this world, what is wrong is merely that which the strongest man or group of men have defined as wrong; and it’s wrong only as long as they are able to enforce the law they have conceived. (By definition, if you do something “wrong” and don’t get caught it is acceptable.)
The Christian knows that the Bible teaches that such violence is not what God created in the world. In the beginning God created the world and all the creatures in it. After the creation, God pronounced it “good” and gave it to man for his use. There was no death, for plants and herbs were given to man and all animals for food (Genesis 1:30). Consider the weight of that teaching: in the beginning the lion, tiger, and all other animals we know to be meat-eating ate only the plants and herbs. Why do they now behave differently? Let me suggest a possibility.
All animals were under the control of man, for God gave him dominion over them (Genesis 1:28). In the world we know today, the teaching of this testimony may not be understood. The best of animal trainers may have partial dominion over a tiger or lion or other creature, but the control is never complete. If the trainer fails to approach such an animal with caution, he is in danger of injury or death. The dominion Adam and his sons had was complete. They never faced any danger from any beast from the largest to the smallest, and all animals would do anything that man could teach them to do.
When man was tempted, and fell into sin, death came into this perfect world, and man died spiritually, and began to die physically. The physical decline of Adam and the death of his body was to take 800 years, a very long time for us today. (In terms of our time, he would have been “born” shortly after the signing of the Magna Carta, some 423 years before the King James Bible was first published.) His sons had equal and even longer life spans. The first physical death among animals occurred when God took their skins to make clothing for Adam and Eve. The first physical death of man happened when Cain killed his brother Abel.
We are told that Jabal, a descendant of Cain, was the first to dwell in tents and have cattle (Genesis 4:20). This, in itself, is not remarkable, for Abel had flocks which he used for sacrifice, clothing and milk. But God had not relaxed his requirement that man eat a vegetarian diet but had commanded him to grow his food as a farmer. What Jabal did was to create a lifestyle that used the flesh of animals for food, in complete rebellion to God’s command. Man, blessed with long life, and able to use animals under his dominion for food, was free from the hard labor of farming. Under these conditions, it is reasonable to surmise that some men would experiment with training and breeding of animals for the purpose of hunting and killing game, as they had both the leisure and many animals to use for raw material. Those animals which God had created with tooth and claw were very likely trained and bred to kill, furnishing meat to their masters and for themselves. Thus, the final product of sin created a world where all flesh had corrupted itself, and filled the earth with violence (Genesis 6:12,13).
After God destroyed the good world He had created by the flood, he gave Noah and his sons permission to use the flesh of animals for food. To make sure that man would not escape his labor, he also put the fear of man in all animals, and gave some the ability to kill man and continue to kill and eat other animals for food. (Genesis 9:1ff). God also placed in his law a command for man not to use the blood of an animal or to kill another man. The world of violence that we see, full of “kill and be killed” did not come about as a result of some fictitious evolutionary “force” but came from the sinful conduct of mankind . In the sermon on the mount, Christ taught the proper conduct of man was to love and obey God, and give of himself and his possessions in sacrifice for others. All was to be done out of the motive of love for God and man, that God might have the glory.
The question I hear most often concerning the fossil record relates to the existence of dinosaurs. What then are we to understand of the fossil record? Did the dinosaurs really exist? Were they really as large as men say? What happened to them? The answer is, of course they really did exist and the fossils on display in many museums confirm their size. The error is to assume that they could only have lived many millions of years before modern man, and that such men as existed at that time were the prey of these beasts. The creation model calls for a thick canopy of water vapor over all the world before the flood. The land masses are assumed to have been larger, and the oceans to have been much smaller and relatively shallow compared to the world we know today. The temperature would have been moderate over the globe with frost and freezes unknown. Under these conditions much of the vegetation would be tropical in nature, with large amounts of forage for all animals. The Bible speaks of Nephilim being in the world in that time (Genesis 6:4). Although the exact meaning of the word is unclear, there is no doubt that the Jews used the term to refer to men of large stature, or giants. It would be reasonable to assume that if a nearly perfect set of chromosomes and ideal growing conditions could lead to giants among men, the same would be true of animals that lived so close to the time of creation. That the dinosaur lived, we know, but at that time it could not be a danger to man, for it was under his dominion by the will of the Creator. Even the mighty Tyrannosaurus Rex was subject to man and did his bidding.
Where did the dinosaurs go? They went the way of all flesh when God destroyed the world that then was by the Flood. Did Noah take any along in the ark? Most likely yes, but probably not full grown adults. The world after the flood was a place of spring, summer, fall and winter. Hot and cold were experienced by man and beast for the first time. The dinosaur did not have the forage or the climate to grow to his former size. Those of the reptile kinds that did survive were able to adapt to the world of today and live. Those that did not fell by the wayside. (Yes, adaptation of species did occur from the root kinds of animals in the ark, but not as evolution for this would in reality require interbreeding among kinds to produce a new and different kind of creature.) It is important to keep in mind that the world we live in now was shaped by the Creator during the flood to be suitable for man after his fall into sin. The deposits of oil, coal and minerals which we use were formed by the force of the Flood of Noah to preserve and protect man in his struggle to live in a world of harsh climate and violence. It is the thesis of the Creation Model that we can never determine from observation and study of nature what the world before the flood was like, because that world was completely blotted out. Oil and gas deposits created by the flood have been found as deep as six miles below the surface of the earth. They are mute testimony to the completeness of destruction of the surface of that old world.
A final point to consider is the supposed law of faunal succession. If this “law” did exist, the life in this world and in the fossil record would show not only what we find, but would also show many more animals who were changing from one kind to another. Displays in museums may have skeletons grouped from small to large (such as the display of supposed horse skeletons in a Chicago Museum), but there are no intermediate forms to show how an animal with toes changed to an animal with a solid hoof. If this had truly happened, we would not only have these skeletons, but hundreds between each one displayed showing beyond a doubt that the “evolution” claimed really did occur. There are no such intermediate forms and those who presented this display knew it at the time it was created. This lack of intermediate forms has troubled evolutionists from the time of Darwin. In this century, some paleontologists have proposed “bursts of evolution” that occurred so quickly there was no time for the intermediate fossils to form. They believe in something from their imagination with no evidence whatsoever, and accuse those who wish to believe the testimony of God to be following “fairy tales.”
The evidence of fossils and deposits in the surface of the earth is there for all to see. They do not prove or disprove any theory of their existence, or how they came into being, for they simply exist. It is the interpretation of these facts, the attempt to build some philosophical framework to arrange the facts, and produce a logical explanation of how the facts came to be that is the point of argument between the evolutionist and the creationist. The system of Evolution of the Species is one such philosophical framework; the Creation Model is another. Science is involved in all such frameworks when we use known processes (Laws of Nature subject to experimental verification) to describe a logical sequence of events; however, the use of techniques and tools of science does not make the philosophical framework “scientific.” Unless each and every part of the logical framework can be subject to experimental analysis, it must remain a theory or philosophy.
The twin fields of Historical Geology and Paleontology can never prove by use of the scientific method the assertion of millions of years for the age of the earth and life. Extremely detailed chronologies of how life might have evolved, and how the strata were built up may be constructed; many eminent scholars may spend their lifetimes adding to this structure, but unless hard, repeatable, experimental evidence can be presented to verify the conclusions reached, the work must remain a philosophical structure, sustained only by the faith of those who believe in it. All of the court battles won or lost or the number of men who believe in the framework cannot change faith to reality.
Those who advocate the Creation Model recognize that it is simply that, a philosophical framework constructed in an attempt to reconcile the facts in nature with the clear teaching of the Bible. Known processes are used in harmony with what we know. No appeal is made to the miraculous unless the Bible teaches it to be so. The first and second law of thermodynamics are respected. The nature and action of the Flood of Noah and the subsequent movement of the earth as the waters were gathered into the seas is adequate to explain the arrangement of Earth’s strata and the fossils trapped in them.
In closing, I want to note that I am neither a Geologist nor a Paleontologist. I do have a scientific education, and have made a personal study of both fields, but I am not qualified to address detailed studies in either field which seek to embroider the theory of evolution with little or no new evidence which is subject to verification. For me to attempt to do so would be as presumptuous as one from these fields who attempts to dismiss the existence of a Creator with little or no knowledge of the Bible or the Creation Model.
