Customer Reviews

A Case for Creation

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book gives an excellent, clearly defined explanation for science that no scientist would dispute, and then investigates Evolution, Taxonomy, and other related fields in light of true science. Extremely well written, a bit technical in some areas.

At the time the 3rd revised edition of this book was published in 1983, Percival Davis was professor of life science at Hillsborough Community College in Florida, and Wayne Frair was professor of biology at The King's College in New York. Percival Davis was a co-author of the Intelligent Design textbook, Of Pandas and People, The Central Question of Biological Origins, and Wayne Frair has also written Biology and Creation: An Introduction Regarding Life and Its Origins (Creation Research Society Reader Series, No. 4) and Science and creation: An introduction to some tough issues (Reader series).

They wrote in the Preface, "It is our aim to enter a plea for increased research by Christians concerning the origins of life on Earth and Earth's subsequent history. We also want to urge a creative reinterpretation that is biblically harmonious with what is already known. If this book stimulates either the initiation of well-conceived research programs or scholarly studies, it will have amply repaid our efforts."

Here are some quotations from the book:

"If male nipples really were vestigial, they would indicate that Australopithecus nursed HIS young!" (Pg. 29)
"Another possibility is that in the creation pattern of some or all birds, God place in the cells the necessary genetic information for ontogenesis, because there ARE fossil birds with teeth. Because of mutation, tooth production was lost. Embryonic teeth have also been reported in a species of turtle, whereas all extant adult turtles lack teeth (just as birds do). Turtle toothlessness, then, may have resulted from loss by mutation..." (Pg. 46)
"Intermediate forms are poor evidences for evolution because they imply a circular argument, as arguments for evolution tend to be. The argument begins with the assumption that evolution has occurred and that therefore later forms have descended from earlier ones. IF it can be established which forms are later and which are earlier... THEN we can know what intermediate forms to look for. If we find something that approximates those forms, we take it to be a vindication of evolution." (Pg. 61-62)
"Some creationists have embraced continental drift ... (but) a problem still exists. If the usual geological time scale is accepted, continental drift would have occurred at a rate of inches per year, which is reasonable. But if the much shorter chronology consistent with biblical revelation is accepted, the rate would have had to be many miles per year to produce the present location of the continents. This would have been a sort of continuous catastrophe, with belching volcanoes, earthquakes, and tidal waves. More creationist geologists are urgently needed to address these problems." (Pg. 74)
"This evidence, although interesting, is certainly only circumstantial. It does suggest that eukaryotes MAY have originated in this fashion, but it does not show that they did in fact do so." (Pg. 96)
"The sorest points faced by creationists today were also the sorest points of creationism in Darwin's day... creationist scientists too often have retreated into an intellectual shell, leaving the discovery and interpretation of the facts solely to the opposition." (Pg. 136)