Creationist Arguments Research Articles

Radiocarbon in Dinosaur Bones Revisited

Evidence from isotopes other than radiocarbon shows that dinosaur fossils are millions of years old. Despite that, bone mineral from Mesozoic dinosaur fossils yields a falsely young radiocarbon “date” of less than 50,000 years, due to its accumulation of new radiocarbon via recrystallization. Similarly, the so-called collagen fraction of Mesozoic fossil bone (actually the total organic fraction) yields a falsely young “date,” due to the presence of organic contaminants, including glue that is added during fossil excavation. The contaminants are responsible for the falsely young radiocarbon “date.” That problem can be overcome by the HYP method: subjecting only the hydroxyproline (the part of the “collagen” fraction that is specific to collagen) in the “collagen” fraction to radiocarbon dating. Science educators need to be aware of the details of these phenomena, so as to be able to advise students whose acceptance of biological evolution has been challenged by young-Earth creationist arguments that are based on radiocarbon in dinosaur bone “collagen.”

South Koreans' responses to evolution and creationism: A survey and its implications.

I analyze the results of a survey on the public reception of evolution and creationism in South Korea. I reconfirm findings from previous studies, which demonstrated the significance of antievolutionism in the country. The proportion of Koreans who deny or are skeptical toward evolution constitutes 31.6% of the population. They tend to be Protestants, women, seniors, political conservatives, and from rural regions. I also report several seemingly anomalous findings. Notably, many respondents who professed no religion take creationist stances. Moreover, young-earth creationism seems unpopular even among creationists, although it is the mainstream theory of the Korea Association for Creation Research, the country's flagship creationist organization that influenced many Protestants. In contrast, the majority of the respondents, including evolutionists, endorse the creationist argument that both evolution and creationism should be taught in class. I provide my analyses and hypotheses on these results within Korea's historical, religious, and cultural contexts.

Preservation of Soft Tissues in Dinosaur Fossils

The recent discovery of preserved cells and soft tissues in certain dinosaur bones seems incompatible with an age of millions of years, given the expectation that cells and soft tissues should have decayed away after millions of years. However, evidence from radiometric dating shows that dinosaur fossils are indeed millions of years old. Under certain circumstances, cells and soft tissues in bone are protected from complete disintegration. Formation of a mineral concretion around a bone protects biomolecules inside it from hydrolysis by groundwater. Infusion and coating with iron and iron compounds at a critical point in the decay process protects cells within a bone from autolysis. Cross-linking and association with bone mineral surfaces furnish added protection to collagen fibers in a bone. These protective factors can result in soft-tissue preservation that lasts millions of years. It would benefit educators to be aware of these phenomena, in order to better advise students whose acceptance of biological evolution has been challenged by young-Earth creationist arguments that are based on soft tissues in dinosaur fossils.

THE FINAL DOMINO: YASIR QADHI, YOUTUBE, AND EVOLUTION

AbstractDebates around the compatibility or mutual exclusivity between Islam and evolution have received increasing academic attention in recent years. While research into Islam and evolution has often focused on the views of Muslim publics, a body of literature has emerged that has focused on the views of Muslim clerics and public figures. However, little research has been conducted about how prominent Muslim voices have used online platforms, such as YouTube, to promote their own views on Islam and evolution. This article explores the online video presentations of one such figure, namely, the American Muslim theologian Dr Yasir Qadhi. The article will demonstrate that Qadhi holds a relatively nuanced position on the compatibility between Islam and evolution, based on his understanding of the scientific consensus and Islamic scripture. Furthermore, it will also explore how Qadhi appeals directly to Muslims to reject many of the most common creationist arguments against evolution.

Radiocarbon in Dinosaur Fossils: Compatibility with an Age of Millions of Years

The recent discovery of radiocarbon in dinosaur bones at first seems incompatible with an age of millions of years, due to the short half-life of radiocarbon. However, evidence from isotopes other than radiocarbon shows that dinosaur fossils are indeed millions of years old. Fossil bone incorporates new radiocarbon by means of recrystallization and, in some cases, bacterial activity and uranium decay. Because of this, bone mineral – fossil or otherwise – is a material that cannot yield an accurate radiocarbon date except under extraordinary circumstances. Mesozoic bone consistently yields a falsely young radiocarbon “date” of a few thousand to a few tens of thousands of years, despite the fact that it is millions of years old. Science educators need to be aware of the details of these phenomena, to be able to advise students whose acceptance of biological evolution has been challenged by young-Earth creationist arguments that are based on radiocarbon in dinosaur fossils.

Beyond memorization: an intermediate-level paleontology activity that integrates anatomy, ecology, and macroevolutionary theory using trilobites

Here we present a stand-alone, upper level undergraduate laboratory exercise that integrates organismal ecology and evolutionary concepts and minimizes the need for student memorization. This laboratory seeks to integrate both anatomical and conceptual content into paleontology lab pedagogy by demonstrating how taxon-specific anatomical information are the fundamental data by which scientists evaluate big picture questions related to the study of macroevolution and ecology. Real specimen photos are provided to familiarize students with a relatively limited suite of anatomical terms and taxonomic detail while allowing schools lacking large paleontology collections to participate in specimen-based inquiry. A matching exercise requires students to assign various trilobite morphologies to their interpreted ecological niches, thus reinforcing the students’ new anatomical knowledge and helping students to distinguish between primary and secondary interpretation of scientific evidence. The use of trilobites as a macroevolutionary case study introduces students to questions still being actively investigated by scientists and provides an effective refutation of creationist arguments. By deemphasizing systematics and highlighting intriguing patterns from the recent published literature, this laboratory hopes to promote paleontology as a vibrant and relevant field, and avoid the misconception that paleontologists are simply stamp collectors, intent on naming and categorizing fossils. We hope that the broad implementation of this laboratory exercise will generate the data necessary to evaluate the validity of this approach and its ease of use in the classroom.

What is natural and unnatural about religion and science?

Judging by its title, unsuspecting readers, unfamiliar with the scientific study of religion, might expect Why Religion is Natural and Science is Not to be advancing some creationist argument. If a...

Early Terrestrial Animals, Evolution, and Uncertainty

Early terrestrial ecosystems record a fascinating transition in the history of life. Animals and plants had previously lived only in the oceans, but, starting approximately 470 million years ago, began to colonize the previously barren continents. This paper provides an introduction to this period in life’s history, first presenting background information, before focusing on one animal group, the arthropods. It gives examples of the organisms living in early terrestrial communities and then outlines a suite of adaptations necessary for survival in harsh terrestrial environments. Emphasis is placed on the role of uncertainty in science; this is an integral part of the scientific process, yet is often seized upon by god-of-the-gaps creationist arguments. We hope to illustrate the importance of both uncertainty and scientists’ freedom to express doubt while a consensus is being built.

Scientific Authority in the Creation–Evolution Debates

At the heart of debates among creationists and evolutionists are questions about scientific integrity and rigor. Creationists often justify their rejection of biological evolution by claiming that the methodologies and interpretations of evolutionary scientists are flawed. A consideration of creationists’ critiques of the scientific data, however, reveals a deficient understanding and appreciation of the nature of the scientific process. It is essential that our schools educate students about the character of scientific inquiry. Clarifying the nature and limitation of scientific knowledge for our students will equip our students to evaluate evolutionary or creationist arguments critically. Recognizing and teaching both the strengths and limitations of the scientific process will do much to further the ongoing dialogue between science and religion.

How to Win the Evolution War: Teach Macroevolution!

If the American public understood what is actually known about the major evolutionary transitions in the history of life and how we know about them, uncertainty about evolution would drop precipitously, creationist arguments would fall on deaf ears, and public education in biology would make much more sense than it now does. Macroevolution must take a much more prominent place in K-12 science teaching. To do so, a curriculum must be redeveloped at both K-12 and college levels, so that preparation in macroevolution is a required part of K-12 biology preparation.

Why “Sudden Appearance” Is Not as It Appears

Recent action taken by the Texas State Board of Education has opened the door to the inclusion of creationist arguments into public school science curriculum in that state and—because of the critical role of Texas in textbook adoptions—perhaps in many other states as well. One of the arguments that have been targeted by creationists is the “sudden appearance” of animal phyla at the base of the Cambrian period (i.e., the Cambrian explosion). While the creationist argument is both misleading and deeply flawed, high school biology teachers are often lacking the relevant paleontological knowledge to refute the argument. This paper attempts to provide teachers with a set of core counterpoints to the creationists’ claims along with a list of online resources that are highly visual in nature and should provide the means to help stimulate genuine student critical thinking about this issue, an alleged goal of the creationist agenda.

A Crash Course in Evolution

A Crash Course in Evolution

Scientists confront intelligent design and creationism

With the pseudoscience of creationism rising again under the guise of intelligent design, this powerful collection eviscerates the new assault on evolution and reveals the pervasive and insidious threat posed to genuine science by ID proponents like Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, and William Dembski. The sixteen original essays address two key issues: the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution gathered over 150 years and the dubious underpinnings of creationism; and how society can mount better educational and legal policies to prevent a theological takeover of our public and scientific institutions. The book includes powerful voices in the modern culture war against ID, including Kevin Padian, paleontologist and expert witness in the landmark lawsuit of Kitzmiller v. Dover. With creationist arguments forever morphing and reappearing under new aliases, this new confrontation is a must- read for teachers, students, and general readers, and a ringing and lasting refutation of creationism's fraudulent claims.

Creationism and Evolution: It's the American Way

The recent ruling in the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case that intelligent design is a form of religion and cannot be taught alongside evolution in science classes in US public schools garnered worldwide attention. But why is the antievolution movement so powerful in the United States?

Perspective: evolution's struggle for existence in America's public schools.

The ongoing creation-evolution controversy in North America thrives on the widespread special creationist beliefs of a significant portion of the public. Creation science supports a literal interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible, an earth that is no more than 10.000 years old and created ex nihilo in six days by a monotheistic God, with no new kinds arising since the period of creation, and with a single flood of staggering force shaping layers of rocks and trapping the organisms fossilized within them. Despite decisions in numerous court cases that specifically exclude creationism and creation science from primary and secondary biology classes in America's public schools, creationists now work locally to minimize or remove evolution from science teaching standards. The nationally organized movement to resist the teaching of evolution has proven highly effective, influencing state and district school boards in addition to individual teachers and schools. Thus, if teaching about evolution and the nature of science is to survive in America's primary and secondary schools, scientists must likewise work with teachers and reach out to state and local school boards. In this perspective we outline the typical creationist arguments we encounter from students, teachers, school board members, and neighbors. We explain briefly how knowledge of both microevolution and macroevolution is important in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. We describe a science education controversy that arose within our own school district, how we responded, and what we learned from it. Finally, we argue that even modest outreach efforts to science teachers will be richly repaid.

PERSPECTIVE: EVOLUTION'S STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE IN AMERICA'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS

The ongoing creation-evolution controversy in North America thrives on the widespread special creationist beliefs of a significant portion of the public. Creation science supports a literal interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible, an earth that is no more than 10,000 years old and created ex nihilo in six days by a monotheistic God, with no new kinds arising since the period of creation, and with a single flood of staggering force shaping layers of rocks and trapping the organisms fossilized within them. Despite decisions in numerous court cases that specifically exclude creationism and creation science from primary and secondary biology classes in America's public schools, creationists now work locally to minimize or remove evolution from science teaching standards. The nationally organized movement to resist the teaching of evolution has proven highly effective, influencing state and district school boards in addition to individual teachers and schools. Thus, if teaching about evolution and the nature of science is to survive in America's primary and secondary schools, scientists must likewise work with teachers and reach out to state and local school boards. In this perspective we outline the typical creationist arguments we encounter from students, teachers, school board members, and neighbors. We explain briefly how knowledge of both microevolution and macroevolution is important in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. We describe a science education controversy that arose within our own school district, how we responded, and what we learned from it. Finally, we argue that even modest outreach efforts to science teachers will be richly repaid.Corresponding Editor: J. Mitton

"New" Persuasive Evidence for Evolution

Research Article| November 01 1998 "New" Persuasive Evidence for Evolution Edward E. Max Edward E. Max Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The American Biology Teacher (1998) 60 (9): 662–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/4450577 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Edward E. Max; "New" Persuasive Evidence for Evolution. The American Biology Teacher 1 November 1998; 60 (9): 662–670. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/4450577 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe American Biology Teacher Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright The National Association of Biology Teachers Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

A Gambler's Model of Natural Selection

Research Article| May 01 1996 A Gambler's Model of Natural Selection Michael J. Nolan, Michael J. Nolan Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar David S. Ostrovsky David S. Ostrovsky Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The American Biology Teacher (1996) 58 (5): 300–302. https://doi.org/10.2307/4450155 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Michael J. Nolan, David S. Ostrovsky; A Gambler's Model of Natural Selection. The American Biology Teacher 1 May 1996; 58 (5): 300–302. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/4450155 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe American Biology Teacher Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1996 The National Association of Biology Teachers Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Using the lllogic of Creationism to Teach the Logic of Science

Creationism and other pseudosciences can be invaluable in teaching students what science is by serving as fascinating examples of what it is not. Many creationist arguments have just the right appearance of authority and sophistication to intimidate a student initially, but when inspected closely they fail simply and interestingly in suitably subtle ways. Understanding their failures is challenging but possible for introductory-science students because the flaws are mostly accessible to critical thinking, although sometimes pointed hints or short reading assignments are also needed.

Teleostean Interrelationships, Morphological Function and Evolutionary Inference

SYNOPSIS. Notions of functional and behavioral transformations among traits of similar organisms are ad hoc unless viewed within the context of a corroborated scheme of relationships of the taxa involved. For purposes of exposition a current best estimate of the interrelationships of the main groups of teleosts (as expressed by a branching diagram or cladogram) is used as a basis for evaluating the transformations of feeding and locomotor mechanisms. When the various states of these mechanisms are incorporated into the branching structure, the cladogram, when interpreted historically, specifies certain conceptual constraints such that, 1) specializations of the upper jaw first arose and proliferated before specializations of the paired fins, and 2) that fin spines arose only after changes in both feeding and locomotor mechanisms were well under way. These results are contrasted with familiar though unsupported adaptationist statements about the relative importance of locomotor and feeding mechanisms for the evolution of the spiny-finned teleosts ( acanthopterygians )—a contrast between the interpretation of what happened as opposed to why it happened. The particular reasons why a given structure, function or behavior exists are unknowable and theories addressing such questions are untestable. Adaptationist arguments in general are framed in terms of forces external to the organism which impose a process of change that leads to good design. The concept of an external agency or process (such as selection) that can design structures or whole organisms to fit their environments, even when stated in rigorously biological language, are effectively the same, and almost as far removed from the empirical data, as the creationist argument for adaptation. To the extent that the empirical data of systematics are not allowed to constrain the evolutionary interpretation of functional anatomists, their explanation of historical change will be limited only by their own inventiveness and the gullibility of their audience.