<p>Copyright © 2000-2002<br />
[Article: May 30, 2000]<br />
[Links Updated: December 12, 2002]<br />
Re-Printed with Permission</p>
<p>Despite many people's tendency to think of all creationists in one
group and all evolutionists in another, "creationism" refers to a
wide range of beliefs. This article gives a brief introduction to
creationist positions. It tries to cover the breadth of creationist
beliefs (and a little of the variety of evolutionist belief), but it gives
little depth. In addition to the positions, it lists some influential
people, organizations, books, and periodicals which espouse the
positions. Interested readers may look up these references. Also, a
section near the end gives suggestions for further reading.</p>
<p>The differences between types of creationism are not minor. Most
of the creationist beliefs described below are mutually exclusive,
and often their differences are as great as their differences with
evolution. Many creationists disagree as much with other
creationists as they do with evolutionists. Morris, for example,
devotes the last 20% of his book Scientific Creationism to attacks
on other forms of creationism (Morris 1985).</p>
<p>Part 1 of this article examines varieties of Christian Creationism,
because Christianity in its various forms is by far the most
prevalent religion in the United States. (Creationism in any form is
a relatively minor force in other parts of the world.) Since
creationism grades gradually into evolution, part 1 also considers
evolutionary beliefs. Part 2 considers non-Christian creationism and
some other views of origins. Creationist ideas through history and
non-creationist anti-evolutionism are not covered here (but see the
"Further Reading" section).</p>
<h3>Part 1: The Creation/Evolution Continuum in Christian Creationism</h3>
<p>Creation and evolution are not a dichotomy, but ends of a
continuum, and most creationist and evolutionist positions may be
fit along this continuum (Scott 1999). The successive steps are
described below.</p>
<ul>
<li>CREATION
<ul>
<li>Flat Earthers</li>
<li> Geocentrists</li>
<li> Young Earth Creationists
<ul>
<li>(Omphalos)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Old Earth Creationists
<ul>
<li>(Gap Creationism)</li>
<li>(Day-Age Creationism)</li>
<li>(Progressive Creationism)</li>
<li>(Intelligent Design Creationism)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Evolutionary Creationists</li>
<li>Theistic Evolutionists</li>
<li>Methodological Materialistic Evolutionists</li>
<li>Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionist</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>EVOLUTION</li>
</ul>
<h4>Flat Earthers</h4>
<p>Flat Earthers believe that the earth is flat and is covered by a solid
dome or firmament. Waters above the firmament were the source of
Noah's flood. This belief is based on a literal reading of the Bible,
such as references to the "four corners of the earth" and the "circle
of the earth." Few people hold this extreme view, but some do.</p>
<p>International Flat Earth Society, Box 2533, Lancaster, CA.<br />
Charles K. Johnson</p>
<h4>Geocentrism</h4>
<p>Geocentrists accept a spherical earth but deny that the sun is the
center of the solar system or that the earth moves. As with flat-earth
views, the water of Noah's flood came from above a solid
firmament. The basis for their belief is a literal reading of the
Bible. "It is not an interpretation at all, it is what the words say."
(Willis 2000) Both flat-earthers and geocentrists reflect the
cosmological views of ancient Hebrews. Geocentrism is not
common today, but one geocentrist (Tom Willis) was intrumental in
revising the Kansas elementary school curriculum to remove
references to evolution, earth history, and science methodology.</p>
<p>Biblical Astronomer, Cleveland, OH<br />
<a href="http://www.biblicalastronomer.org/" target="_blank">http://www.biblicalastronomer.org/</a><br />
Gerardus Bouw</p>
<p>Creation Science Association for Mid-America, Cleveland, MO.<br />
<a href="http://www.csama.org/" target="_blank">http://www.csama.org/</a><br />
Tom Willis</p>
<h4>Young-Earth Creationism</h4>
<p>Young Earth Creationists (YEC) claim a literal interpretation of the
Bible as a basis for their beliefs. They believe that the earth is 6000
to 10,000 years old, that all life was created in six literal days, that
death and decay came as a result of Adam & Eve's Fall, and that
geology must be interpreted in terms of Noah's Flood. However,
they accept a spherical earth and heliocentric solar system. Young-
Earth Creationists popularized the modern movement of scientific
creationism by taking the ideas of George McCready Price, a
Seventh Day Adventist, and publishing them in The Genesis Flood
(Whitcomb & Morris 1961). YEC is probably the most influential
brand of creationism today.</p>
<p>Institute for Creation Research (ICR), El Cajon, CA. <a href="http://www.icr.org/" target="_blank">http://www.icr.org/</a><br />
Henry Morris (president emeritus), John D. Morris (president), Duane Gish, Steven A. Austin, Larry Vardiman, Kenneth B. Cumming, Andrew Snelling, …<br />
Whitcomb, John C. & Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Flood (The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Philadelphia, PA, 1961)<br />
Morris, Henry M., Scientific Creationism (Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 1974, 1985)<br />
newsletter: Acts & Facts (includes Back to Genesis and Impact)</p>
<p>Answers in Genesis (AIG), Florence, KY.<br />
<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/" target="_blank">http://www.answersingenesis.org/</a><br />
Ken Ham<br />
periodical: Creation Ex Nihilo</p>
<p>Creation Research Society (CRS), St. Joseph, MO.<br />
<a href="http://www.creationresearch.org/" target="_blank">http://www.creationresearch.org/</a><br />
D. Russell Humphreys, Wayne Friar, Donald B. DeYoung, Eugene F. Chaffin<br />
periodical: Creation Research Society Quarterly</p>
<p>Creation Science Evangelism, Pensacola, FL.<br />
<a href="http://www.drdino.com/" target="_blank">http://www.drdino.com/</a><br />
Kent Hovind</p>
<p>Carl Baugh<br />
Creation Evidences Museum, Glen Rose, TX.</p>
<h4>Omphalos</h4>
<p>The Omphalos argument, first expounded in a book of that name
by Philip Henry Gosse (1857), argues that the universe was created
young but with the appearance of age, indeed that an appearance of
age is necessary. This position appears in some contemporary
young earth creationist writing. For example, Whitcomb & Morris
(1961, p. 232) argue that earth's original soils were created
appearing old. The position is sometimes satirized by suggesting
that the universe was created last week with only an appearance of
older history.</p>
<h4>Old Earth Creationism</h4>
<p>Old-Earth Creationists accept the evidence for an ancient earth but
still believe that life was specially created by God, and they still
base their beliefs on the Bible. There are a few different ways of
accommodating their religion with science.</p>
<p>American Scientific Affiliation, Ipswich, MA.
(This groups has mostly OEC members, but it doesn't turn away
members and has some YEC and Theistic Evolutionist members,
too.) <a href="http://www.asa3.org/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.asa3.org/index.html</a>
periodical: Perpsectives on Science and Christian Faith</p>
<h4>Gap Creationism (also known as Restitution Creationism)</h4>
<p>This view says that there was a long temporal gap between Genesis
1:1 and Genesis 1:2, with God recreating the world in 6 days after
the gap. This allows both an ancient earth and a Biblical special
creation.</p>
<p>Armstrong, Herbert W., Mystery of the Ages. Dodd, Mead, New York, 1985.<br />
Jimmy Swaggart</p>
<h4>Day-Age Creationism</h4>
<p>Day-age creationists interpret each day of creation as a long period
of time, even thousands or millions of years. They see a parallel
between the order of events presented in Genesis 1 and the order
accepted by mainstream science. Day-Age Creationism was more
popular than Gap Creationism in the 19th and early 20th centuries.</p>
<p>Anonymous, Life—How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or Creation? (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York,
Booklyn, NY, 1985)</p>
<h4>Progressive Creationism</h4>
<p>Progressive Creationism is the most common Old-Earth
Creationism view today. It accepts most of modern physical
science, even viewing the Big Bang as evidence of the creative
power of God, but rejects much of modern biology. Progressive
Creationists generally believe that God created "kinds" of
organisms sequentially, in the order seen in the fossil record, but
say that the newer kinds are specially created, not genetically
related to older kinds.</p>
<p>Reasons To Believe, Pasadena, CA.<br />
<a href="http://www.reasons.org/" target="_blank">http://www.reasons.org/</a><br />
Hugh Ross</p>
<h4>Intelligent Design Creationism</h4>
<p>Intelligent Design Creationism descended from Paley's argument
that God's design could be seen in life (Paley 1803). Modern IDC
still makes appeals to the complexity of life and so varies little
from the substance of Paley's argument, but the arguments have
become far more technical, delving into microbiology and
mathematical logic.</p>
<p>In large part, Intelligent Design Creationism is used today as an
umbrella anti-evolution position under which creationists of all
flavors may unite in an attack on scientific methodology in general
(CRSC, 1999). A common tenet of IDC is that all beliefs about
evolution equate to philosophical materialism.</p>
<p>Discovery Institute, Seattle, WA., Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC)<br />
<a href="http://www.discovery.org/csc/" target="_blank">http://www.discovery.org/csc/</a><br />
Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, William Dembski, Paul Nelson, Jonathan Wells, Stephen C. Meyer.<br />
periodical: Origins & Design<br />
Behe, Michael, Darwin's Black Box (Free Press, NY, 1996)<br />
Dembski, William, The Design Inference (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998)<br />
Johnson, Phillip, Reason in the Balance (Inter-Varsity, Downers Grove, IL, 1995)</p>
<p>Davis, Percival & D. H. Kenyon, Of Pandas and People<br />
(Haughton, Dallas, TX, 1989)</p>
<h4>Evolutionary Creationism</h4>
<p>Evolutionary Creationism differs from Theistic Evolution only in
its theology, not in its science. It says that God operates not in the
gaps, but that nature has no existence independent of His will. It
allows interpretations consistent with both a literal Genesis and
objective science, allowing, for example, that the events of creation
occurred, but not in time as we know it, and that Adam was not the
first biological human but the first spiritually aware one.</p>
<p>Schneider, Susan, 1984. Evolutionary creationism: Torah solves
the problem of missing links. <a href="http://www.orot.com/ec.html" target="_blank">http://www.orot.com/ec.html</a></p>
<h4>Theistic Evolution</h4>
<p>Theistic Evolution says that God creates through evolution. Theistic
Evolutionists vary in beliefs about how much God intervenes in the
process. It accepts most or all of modern science, but it invokes
God for some things outside the realm of science, such as the
creation of the human soul. This position is promoted by the Pope
and taught at mainline Protestant seminaries.</p>
<p>Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, The Phenomenon of Man<br />
(HarperCollin, San Francisco, 1959, 1980)</p>
<h4>Methodological Materialistic Evolution</h4>
<p>Materialistic Evolution differs from Theistic Evolution in saying that
God does not actively interfere with evolution. It is not necessarily
atheistic, though; many Materialistic Evolutionists believe that God
created evolution, for example. Materialistic evolution may be divided
into methodological and philosophical materialism. Methodological
materialism limits itself to describing the natural world with natural
causes; it says nothing at all about the supernatural, neither affirming
nor denying its existence or its role in life.</p>
<p>Gould, Stephen J., Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life (Ballantine Publishing Group, NY, 1999)</p>
<h4>Philosophical Materialistic Evolution
<p>Philosophical materialism says that the supernatural does not exist.
It says that not only is evolution a natural process, but so is
everything else.</p>
<p>Richard Dawkins<br />
William Provine</p>
</h4>
<h4>Part 2: Non-Christian Creationism<br />
Not Easily Classifiable Positions</h4>
<p>There are some positions on origins which don't fit cleanly in the
continuum given above. Nor are they based on religion (although
the Raelian position is the basis for a religion). They have little
influence, but they are worth noting as illustrations of the variety of
beliefs which people hold.</p>
<h4>Raelians</h4>
<p>The Raelians believe that life was created by scientists from
another planet. The scientists continue to visit earth and were
mistaken for gods.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.rael.org/" target="_blank">http://www.rael.org/</a><br />
Rael, The True Face of God (The Raelian Foundation, 1998)</p>
<h4>Panspermia</h4>
<p>Panspermia is the position that primitive life, in the form of
bacteria or other microbes, was carried to earth from other star
systems. Other life evolved from there.</p>
<p>Hoyle, Fred & Chandra Wickramsinghe, Evolution from Space: A Theory of Cosmic Creationism (Simon & Schuster, NY, 1981)<br />
<a href="http://www.panspermia.org/" target="_blank">http://www.panspermia.org/</a></p>
<h4>Catastrophic Evolution</h4>
<p>This position says that evolution occurred suddenly, driven by
extreme, planet-wide catastrophes.</p>
<p>Velikovsky, Immanuel, Earth In Upheaval (Pocket Books, New
York, 1955)<br />
"Scientific" Creationism from Other Religions</p>
<h4>Islamic Creationism</h4>
<p>Contemporary Islam has a greater tendency to literalism than
Christianity does. The Koran is taken by almost all Muslims as the
direct and unaltered word of Allah, and Genesis is considered a
corrupted version of God's message. However, the creation
accounts in the Koran are more vague and are spread among
several surahs (chapters) (2:109-111, 7:52-57, 16:1-17, 40:66-70,
41:9-12, 42:28, 65:12), allowing a range of interpretations similar
to those described in part 1. Most Islamic Young Earth Creationism
is imported directly from the USA. (Edis 1994)</p>
<h4>Vedic Creationism</h4>
<p>Hinduism speaks of a very ancient earth. One book influenced by
Hindu belief argues that anatomically modern humans have existed
for billions of years.</p>
<p>Cremo, Michael A. & Richard L. Thompson, Forbidden
Archaeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race (Govardhan
Hill, Inc., San Diego, CA, 1994)</p>
<h4>American Indian Creationism</h4>
<p>The term "American Indian" refers to hundreds of groups with at
least as many stories of creation. Deloria has put together a version
of creationism which takes from many Native American cultures. It
says that originally there was no essential difference between
people and animals, that giant people and megafauna once
coexisted, and that people and animals shrunk in stature after the
golden age came to an end with the earth being ravaged by fire
from volcanism.</p>
<p>American Indian Creationism has also come into American politics
over the Kennewick Man. Kennewick Man is a 9000-year-old
Caucasian fossil man found in Washington state. The fossil is of
great interest to anthropologists because of its great age and its
anatomical differences from indigenous North Americans.
According to the creation beliefs of the Umatilla Indians, though,
their ancestors have always been there, so Kennewick Man must be
an Indian ancestor. Thus, under the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act, the fate of his remains should be
for the Umatilla to determine (Morell 1998). Members of the Asatru
religion have also filed suit to stop the repatriation on the grounds
that Kennewick Man's possible European ancestry is important to
their own religious views (Anon., 1999). A court decision in favor
of the Umatilla could be the only Federal legal decision in decades
to support one particular view of creationism over another.</p>
<p>Deloria, Vine Jr., Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and
the Myth of Scientific Fact (Scribner, New York, 1995)</p>
<h4>Creation Beliefs of Other Cultures</h4>
<p>There are hundreds, if not thousands, of creation myths among the
peoples of the world. Many Christians object to having their beliefs
called myths, but a myth is simply a story which is (or has been)
considered true and sacred by a group of people. Other cultures
believe their creation myths for exactly the same sorts of reasons
that Christians believe theirs.</p>
<p>There are far too many different creation myths to give more than a
sampling here. Only a few myths exemplifying some common
themes will be given. Unless otherwise noted, all examples come
from Sproul (1979).</p>
<h4>Cosmic Egg (example: Finnish)</h4>
<p>A teal flew over the primeval waters but could find no place to
land. The Mother of the Water raised her knee above the water, and
the teal made a nest on it. It laid six golden eggs and one iron egg,
and then it sat warming them. The heat became so intense that the
Mother of the Water twitched her knee. The eggs dislodged and
broke. The earth formed from one half of a shell, and the sky from
the other half. The sun formed from the top half of one yolk, and
the moon from the top half of the white. Stars and clouds also
formed from parts of the egg.</p>
<h4>Separation of Earth and Sky (example: New Hebrides)</h4>
<p>Naareau the Elder created the earth, but the sky and the earth clove
together with darkeness between them. Naareau the Younger, with a
spell, created a slight cleft between earth and sky. He created a bat
and told it to look around. The Bat reported finding a Company of
Fools and Deaf Mutes. Naareau crawled in the cleft and, with the
Bat as his guide, went to the people. Naareau told them to push up,
and the sky was lifted a little, but they could lift it only so high.
Naareau summoned Riiki, the conger eel, and told it to push up on
the sky against the land. While Riiki pushed and Naareau sang,
Great Ray, Turtle, and Octopus tore at the roots of the sky. The sky
was pushed high and the land sank. The Company of Fools and
Deaf Mutes were left swimming in the sea; they became the sea
creatures. (von Franz, Marie-Louise, 1986. Patterns of Creativity
Mirrored in Creation Myths. Spring Publications, Inc., Dallas, TX,
pp. 151-154, 170)</p>
<h4>Creation from a Primordial Being (example: Norse)</h4>
<p>The heat from Muspell, the firey area to the south, met with the
cold from icy Ginnungagap in the north and created the frost giant
Ymir. A man and woman were born from his armpits, and one of
his legs mated with the other to make a son; these began a race of
frost ogres. Some melting ice became the cow Audhumla, whose
teats gave rivers of milk. The man Buri appeared from a block of
ice which Audhumla licked. His descendents included the gods
Odin, Vili, and Ve. They slew Ymir, and his blood flooded and
killed all people except the giant Bergelmir and his family. The
three gods turned Ymir's body into the earth and his blood into the
surrounding seas. His bones and teeth became mountains and
rocks, his skull became the sky, his brains became clouds, etc. They
made the sun, moon, and stars out of sparks from Muspell. The
three gods made a man and woman (Ask and Embla) from two
fallen trees. Odin gave them life, Vili gave them intelligence, and
Ve gave them speech, sight, and hearing. They made a stronghold,
Midgard, out of Ymir's eyebrows to protect them from the giants
outside. (Sturluson, Snorri (transl. by Jean I. Young), 1954. The
Prose Edda, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 31-37)</p>
<h4>Earth Diver; Dualism (example: Huron)</h4>
<p>In the beginning, there was only a wide sea. A divine woman fell
from the upper world. Two loons saw her falling and together
caught her to keep her from drowning. They called for help from
other animals. One of the animals to come was tortoise, and he
accepted the woman onto his back. The animals decided the
woman should have earth to live on, and tortoise directed them all
to dive to the bottom of the sea to bring up some earth. Many tried
but failed. Finally toad dived; he came back exhausted and almost
dead, but he had some mud in his mouth. Tortoise gave it to the
woman, who placed it around the tortoise's shell. It extended on all
sides, forming a vast country. The woman was pregnant with twins,
Tijuskeha and Tawiskarong. Tawiskarong, the evil one, did not
consent to be born in the usual manner, but broke through his
mother's side, killing her. Her body was buried, and from it came
many forms of vegetation. Tijuskeha created useful and innocent
animals, and Tawiskarong created fierce and monsterous ones.
Tijuskeha reduced these in size when he discovered them. The two
brothers eventually duelled; Tijuskeha prevailed and killed his
brother, but Tawiskarong's spirit appeared, said he had gone to the
far west, and said that all men would go to the west when they died.</p>
<h4>Emergence (example: Lipan Apache)</h4>
<p>In the beginning, all people lived in darkness in the lower world.
They held a council and decided to send someone above to find
whether there was another world. First they sent wind. Water had
covered the earth originally, but the wind rolled it back, and land
appeared. The people next sent up Crow, but Crow stayed to eat the
dead fish that had been exposed and didn't report back. They sent
Beaver next, but he stayed to build dams in the streams and didn't
report back, either. Next they sent Badger, who reported back that
there was dry land up there. The people next sent four men to
prepare the world above, which was flat and empty. These four
men chose one named Mirage from whom to make things as we
know them now. They formed Mirage into the shape of a ball, and
of that ball made all things of this earth. Those people went around
making hills and mountains, lightning and springs, etc. Then the
people of the lower world ascended. First the animal and plant
people came out. They moved around the edge of the earth
clockwise, and different tribes stopped at different places. The real
humans came out after them and likewise migrated to different
places. Sun and Moon were originally with the people, but they
later went ahead and separated.</p>
<h4>Creation by SpokenWord; Repeated Creation (example: Quiche Maya)</h4>
<p>At first there was only sky above and water below. The gods
Sovereign Plumed Serpent and Heart of Sky spoke together, joined
their thoughts, and conceived of creation. Simply by their word,
they brought it forth. First they created and formed earth and
vegetation; then they created animals and gave them homes. They
told the animals to speak and gave them different cries, but the
animals didn't speak like people. So the animals were appointed to
serve by their flesh being eaten. The gods tried making a human
body out of earth and mud, but it could not turn its head, and it
crumbled in water, so they gave up on it. Next they created
manikins out of carved wood. These people talked like men, and
they multiplied and populated the earth, but there was nothing in
their hearts, and they did not remember their creators. Heart of Sky
devised a flood for them. A rain of resin came from the sky;
animals attacked them, and even their cooking pots and grinding
stones turned on them. The manikins were destroyed, but some of
their descendants are today's monkeys. Finally, just before the first
dawn, before the sun and stars appeared, four men were made from
corn meal and water. These people saw everywhere and understood
everything, and they gave thanks for being made. The creators
thought the people would become like gods themselves, so they
clouded the men's vision to its present state. Four women were
made next, and these eight people became the parents of the
Quiche people. (Tedlock, Dennis (transl.), 1985. Popol Vuh. Simon
& Schuster, New York)</p>
<h4>For Further Reading</h4>
<p>Elsberry, Wesley E., 1999. Viewpoints on Evolution, Creation, and
Origins. <a href="http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/essays/ea.html" target="_blank">http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/essays/ea.html</a> —
gives another perspective on classifying evolution and creation
ideas.</p>
<p>Leeming, David and Margaret Leeming, 1994. A Dictionary of
Creation Myths. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.
— tells many additional creation myths. See also Sproul 1979 in
the References.</p>
<p>McIver, Tom, 1992. Anti-evolution: A Reader's Guide to Writings
Before and After Darwin. John Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore, MD. — a reprint of McIver's Anti-evolution: An
Annotated Bibliography (McFarland, Jefferson, NC, 1988), briefly
describing 1850 anti-evolution works, most of them creationist.</p>
<p>James L. Hayward's The Creation/Evolution Controvery: An
Annotated Bibliography (Scarecrow Press, Lanham, MD, 1998)
covers more recent works, 393 from 1981 or later. Henry Morris
gives an unannotated bibliography of over 125 YEC books in the
Nov. 1995 Impact (#269).</p>
<p>Numbers, Ronald L., 1992. The Creationists. Knopf, New York. —
details the development of modern creationism.</p>
<p>Scott, E.C., 1997, Antievolution and creationism in the United
States. Annual Review of Anthropology 26: 263-289. — gives
more detail about the various types of creationism and their legal
history and influence in the U.S. The variety of creationists is also
discussed in chapter 1 of Robert T. Pennock's Tower of Babel: The
Evidence Against the New Creationism (MIT Press, Cambridge,
1999).</p>
<p>Young, Davis A., 1988 (1982). Christianity and the Age of the
Earth. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA. — Part 1 gives a
historical overview of Christian attitudes towards geology.</p>
<h4>Acknowledgements</h4>
<p>The following people provided helpful suggestions and corrections
to earlier drafts: John Cole, Paul Heinrich, John Mark Ockerbloom,
John Wilkins, Jon Woolf.</p>
<h4>References</h4>
<p>Anonymous, 1999. Kennewick Man fact sheet.<br />
<a href="http://www.runestone.org/kmfact.html" target="_blank">http://www.runestone.org/kmfact.html</a>, accessed 11 Mar. 2000.</p>
<p>CRSC, 1999. The Wedge Strategy.<br />
<a href="http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/idt/wedge.html" target="_blank">http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/idt/wedge.html</a><br />
Edis, Taner, 1994 (summer). Islamic creationism in Turkey.<br />
Creation/Evolution 14(1): 1-12.</p>
<p>Gosse, Henry Philip, 1857. Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the
Geological Knot. J. Van Voorst, London.</p>
<p>Morell, Virginia, 1998. Kennewick Man's trials continue. Science
280: 190-192.</p>
<p>Morris, Henry M., 1985. Scientific Creationism. Master Books,
Green Forest, AR.</p>
<p>Paley, William, 1803. Natural Theology: Or, Evidences of the
Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected From the
Appearances of Nature. Faulder, London.</p>
<p>Scott, Eugenie C., 1999 (Jul/Aug). The creation/evolution
continuum. Reports of the National Center for Science Education
19(4): 16-17,21-23.
<a href="http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/1593_the_creationevoluti
on_continu_12_7_2000.asp" target="_blank">http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/1593_the_creationevoluti
on_continu_12_7_2000.asp</a></p>
<p>Sproul, Barbara, 1979. Primal Myths: Creation Myths from Around
the World. HarperCollins, New York.</p>
<p>Whitcomb, J.C. & Morris, H.R., 1961. The Genesis Flood: The
Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications. The Presbyterian
and Reformed Publishing Co., Philadelphia, PA.</p>
<p>Willis, Tom, 2000 (Mar/Apr). The laws of cause and effect, and the
1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics have been invalidated by
modern science, part 2. CSA News 17(2): 1-2.
<a href="http://www.csama.org/200003NL.HTM" target="_blank">http://www.csama.org/200003NL.HTM</a></p>