In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

S E V E N The Rise of "Creation Science," I963, The reappearance of evolution in biology courses proved to be a stimulus for creationists, and their voices and activities increased. At first, only a few creationists were actively involvedoutside their community, but they proved to be skillful, determined, and effective. For example, the efforts largely of one couple in Texas were sufficient to make the adoption of biology books that discussed evolution extremely difficult in that state. The major voices for creationism were those of ten men with advanced university degrees who in 1963formed the Creation Research Society and later, in 1972,founded the Institute for Creation Research, an educational institution with faculty, students, and research programs . A pamphlet from the Creation Research Society-issued at the society's own creation in 1963-gave a brief history of the movement, a list of activities, and requirements for membership. The credo of the organization read: I. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in all the original autographs. To the student of nature, this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths. 168 / The Rise of "Creation Science," 1963 2. All the basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the creation week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since creation week have accomplished changes only within the original created kinds. 3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian flood, was a historic event worldwide in its extent and effect. Two members of the institute, Henry M. Morris (now retired) and Duane Gish, were until recently the principal professional creationists in the United States. They, along with other members of the institute, set the pattern for the activities of the antievolutionists since the 1960s by promoting what they claim is an alternative to the scientific evidence for evolution, namely, creation science. Creation scientists refuse to accept merely on faith that the story of creation in Genesis is true and to ignore the scientific evidence for evolution. Instead, they try to discredit the scientific evidence for evolution and to assemble their own body of scientific evidence to support the P version of creation in Genesis. T H E CREATION SCIENTISTS' APPROACH The "bible" of the creation science movement is ScientzJicCreationism, edited by Morris and first published in 1974. It appeared in two editions , a general edition and one for public schools. The general edition discusses the evidence used by evolutionists and suggests that none of it proves that evolution occurred. The concluding chapter of the general edition attempts to present data that prove divine creation and are in full accord with a literal interpretation of the Bible. The public school edition "deals with all the important aspects of the creationistevolution question from a strictly scientific point of view, attempting to evaluate the physical evidence from the relevant scientific fields [52.14.85.76] Project MUSE (2024-04-25 11:06 GMT) The Rise of "CreationScience," 1963 / 169 without reference to the Bible or other religious literature. It demonstrates that the real evidences dealing with origins and ancient history support creationism rather than evolutionism" (iv). The major ideas developed in creation science deny the general conclusions of biologists and geologists. For example, the Earth is assumed to be very young, ~o,oooyears being the outside limit. The authors reject radiometric dating by arguing that no one was present to see when the strata of the geological column were laid down. Since there can be no direct evidence of age, any such estimates must be uncertain at best. We can be certain that no evolutionist observed events about 4.5 billion years ago, but come to think of it, was there any creationist on hand ro,ooo years ago to record what happened? Many things in science, especially historical subjects such as evolution, can be studied only by seeking indirect evidence of past events-the detective's approach. The utility of radiometric dating has long been accepted by scientists, especially when two different methods give essentially identical results. There was no way that the formation of ancient strata could have been seen by geologists. An important implication of evolution is that there must have been intermediates, or transitional forms, between major groups if members of one group evolved into another. Many examples of intermediates are...

Share