Paternoster has recently published a book co-authored by BCM’s Steve Lloyd: Debating Darwin. Two Debates: Is Darwinism True & Does it Matter? by Graeme Finlay, Stephen Lloyd, Stephen Pattemore and David Swift (ISBN 9781842276198), price £8.99. The book can be ordered from the Authentic Media website or through a Christian bookshop.

The book is a debate between Christians who take opposing views on the scientific merits of neo-Darwinism and its compatibility with the Bible. The first half considers the theological issues and the second the science. Each contributor responds to their opponent’s essay.

Steve’s chapter moves the biblical argument into new territory by comparing the whole biblical story of creation to new creation with the neo-Darwinian account of earth history. Understood in this way the debate is not merely over the interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis but the coherence of the historic Christian understanding of core doctrines such as the cross and resurrection. Steve sets out three doctrines that express aspects of the ‘story-line’ of the Bible (Adam as a historical individual, a global flood and ‘no-agony-before-Adam’) and argues that these are incompatible with neo-Darwinism.

In his response to the chapter by Finlay and Pattemore, Steve demonstrates that the mere presence of literary structure in the early chapters of Genesis does not make them a-historical in the way that is required to make them consistent with neo-Darwinism. He goes on to suggest that the real point of disagreement is not over the interpretation of the Bible but whether we approach the Bible with the belief that the neo-Darwinian account of earth history is an unassailable fact.

In both his contributions Steve points to new creationist research as the way to provide a satisfying and compelling scientific narrative to complement the biblical story.

The Creation Biology Study Group (BSG) held its annual conference at the Holiday Inn Hurstbourne, Louisville, Kentucky on 30 and 31 July 2009. Once again, the conference took place jointly with the annual meeting of the fledgling Creation Geology Society. Paul Garner was there representing Biblical Creation Ministries. (The photo on the right shows some of the geologists visiting Louisville Zoo. From l to r: Steven Austin, Paul Garner, Kurt Wise and Andrew Snelling).

The first day of the conference was devoted to the symposium of talks that were given at the Genesis Kinds Conference in England in February. You can read a full report of those talks here.

The second day was given over to the contributed biology and geology talks. The biology talks were as follows:

• Tom Hennigan began with a survey of the current taxonomic status of bears and the implications for baraminology. More data are needed, but the bears appear to form a holobaraminic group that underwent rapid diversification after the Flood.
• Todd Wood gave a fascinating talk about Odontochelys, the toothed, half-shelled fossil turtle that has been interpreted as an evolutionary intermediate. Baraminological studies suggest that Odontochelys occupies odd positions in morphological space that would not be expected of an intermediate. However, the analyses were based on data sets including relatively few morphological characters and so firm conclusions could not be drawn.
• Jean Lightner spoke about the strange patterns of variation observed in the Anatidae (ducks, geese and swans) and what this means for the intrabaraminic evolution of the group. A possible role for directed mutation in speciation was also discussed.
• Kurt Wise offered a series of suggestions for creation biology research from the field of evolutionary genetics. Research since the 1940s has yielded many insights with interesting implications for how we understand the role of natural selection and mutation in the natural world.
• Roger Sanders talked about the origin of the liver toxins found in Lantana (‘shrub verbena’). He suggested mechanisms by which the liver protectants also known to occur in this plant genus could have given rise to the toxins during diversification.
• Jud Davis gave some theological reasons for God’s use of ‘negative elements’ (such as darkness, formlessness, emptiness, nakedness) in his pre-Fall creation. These elements play an important role in the overall salvation story of the Bible, especially as we understand the final consummation of all things.
• Cindy Golian presented some initial data from molecular genetics comparisons between modern human populations and discussed their implications for migration patterns following Babel.
• Ying Liu spoke about his research on human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs) and their role during the menstrual cycle. Such retroviruses are usually regarded as molecular fossils that point to the common ancestry of humans and chimps, but his research suggests that at least some HERVs were created in situ for a purpose.

The geology talks given later in the afternoon were as follows:

• Kurt Wise presented compelling evidence favouring the rapid formation of a cave system in Cumberland County, Tennessee, by the passage of rising hydrothermal fluids. This is in stark contrast to the usual model of slow dissolution by weakly acidic water flowing from the surface.
• Paul Garner reviewed what is currently known about the grain size and textural characteristics of sediments from modern sandwaves. Sandwaves are underwater dunes common in tidally dominated shallow marine environments and have been suggested as a possible modern analogue for certain cross-bedded sandstones in the stratigraphic record.
• John Whitmore showed numerous photographs of thin sections documenting the presence of detrital mica grains throughout the Coconino Sandstone in central and northern Arizona. Mica is a soft mineral that is not expected to survive the harsh abrasion that occurs in desert environments. Thus it poses a challenge to the conventional interpretation of the Coconino Sandstone as an eolian deposit.
• Stephen Cheung described the discovery of four types of dolomite (dolomite beds, clastic dolomite grains, dolomite cements and concentric ooids) within the Coconino Sandstone at Andrus Point and several other outcrops in northern and central Arizona. These discoveries suggest the need to re-think the depositional environment of the Coconino Sandstone.

Another exciting development was the announcement that the Creation Geology Society, established last year, is now open to members. Anyone wanting to join is invited to contact Dr Marcus Ross, the Society Secretary, for more information.

This year’s biology abstracts can be found on the BSG website (see Occasional Paper 13) and the geology abstracts will shortly be available on the Cedarville University website. The next conference will be held at Truett-McConnell College in Cleveland, Georgia, on 28-30 July 2010 and will once again be a joint meeting of the biology and geology groups.

Photos from left to right: Paul Garner (a) studying Coconino Sandstone outcrops at Picacho Butte, Arizona, (b) examining the contact between the Coconino Sandstone and the underlying Hermit Formation along the Tanner Trail, Grand Canyon, Arizona, (c) bagging and labelling rock specimens in Burro Canyon, Arizona, and (d) walking across an exhumed bounding surface in the gypsum dunes of White Sands National Monument, New Mexico. Photos courtesy of Dr John H. Whitmore.

In July Paul Garner and his colleagues, Dr John Whitmore (Cedarville University) and Ray Strom (Calgary Rock and Materials), undertook ten days of geological field research in Arizona and New Mexico. The team is studying the origin of the Coconino Sandstone as part of the Flood-Activated Sedimentation and Tectonics (FAST) project sponsored by the National Creation Science Foundation.

Critics of creationism have often appealed to the Coconino Sandstone because it is typically thought to have been laid down by the slow accumulation of sand dunes in an ancient desert. They use this argument to challenge the biblical idea of a global Flood. How could a sandstone like the Coconino have been laid down in a desert while the continents were underwater?

This summer John, Ray and Paul travelled thousands of miles and hiked to many remote places to study the Coconino Sandstone in northern Arizona, including Grand Canyon. They were also able to trace the Coconino eastwards into New Mexico, where it becomes the Glorieta Sandstone. They collected about 100 rock samples which will be studied using thin section microscopy and other laboratory techniques. This brings the total number of samples collected so far during the project to almost 700. John and Paul also visited White Sands National Monument in New Mexico to observe how sand accumulates today in windblown dunes.

The team are excited about what they are finding. Their new field and laboratory investigations suggest that much of what has previously been written about the Coconino Sandstone is incorrect. They have made many surprising discoveries that challenge the idea that this rock unit was laid down in a desert, including the suite of minerals found within the sandstone, the type of bedding that it displays, and its relationship to other rock layers around it. They believe that a strong case can be made for the catastrophic underwater deposition of the Coconino Sandstone.

The team presented some of its findings at this year’s creation geology conference in Louisville, Kentucky, and more publications are in preparation.

Future First (ISSN 2040-0268) has published a review of Paul Garner’s The New Creationism, in its August 2009 issue (Volume 1, Number 4, p.6). It reads:

It seems appropriate in the bi-centenary year of Darwin’s birth to include a review of a book on the broad subject of evolution. This book is, however, unlike many which have been published this year to celebrate the event. It focuses on the possibility of the earth being formed several thousand years ago rather than several million.

In this context it looks at a wide variety of evidence – biological, geological and chemical, as well as taking a careful look at fossil and dating data – and puts them all into a scriptural context. It is written by a man who is an environmental scientist and describes an astonishingly wide phalanx of detailed scientific work in a range of different fields. It looks comprehensively at the creationist scene and justifies it as a serious contender for our origins.

In the process it faces objectively the differing points of view on this topic, the evidence for evolution, the data behind the often-quoted date of the origin of earth 4.7 million [sic] years ago, and quotes up-to-date research and thinking which suggests some (most!) of this “evidence” could be mistaken.

However, a further commendation for this well written book is not just its comprehensiveness, and the usefulness of having in one volume the varying viewpoints of the interpretations of Genesis chapters 1-11, but its style. Unlike the arrogance of some writers from a creationist viewpoint, this book is written humbly, positively commending the beauty and detail of God’s creation, and pointing very simply to the awesome purposes of an inscrutable but wonderful Creator.

Paul Garner’s book, The New Creationism, has been reviewed in the August edition of the British newspaper Evangelicals Now by its editor, Dr John Benton. You can read his review here.

The New Creationism is available for £8.95 to readers in the UK and $15.99 to readers in the USA.