The cure for cults that want to deny others their freedom of speech is more freedom of speech -- Fredric Rice

One of the hobby horses that creationist cults like to get on and ride is the gaps in the extant fossil record. Creationists want to pretend that the existance of gaps some how means that evolution doesn't happen some how -- as if the millions of fossils unearthed to day can all simply be ignored because science hasn't unearthed the rest of them.

If we were to apply the same idiot notion to other things, if you don't have a photograph of yourself taken daily since your birth, you don't exist because there are gaps in your photographic record.

Nobody ever accused creationists of having a bit of common sense. In this propaganda piece, the ICR cult take a look at "te dating gap." We start out with the usual bizarre claim which the cultist then attempts to justofy with tortured illogic:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Evolution places severe demands upon fossils used to support it.

-=- End quoted text in extract

Utter nonsense. Evolution is a directly observed phenomena which is not reliant solely upon the fossil record. Observed speciation events are well documented and little effort is needed for cultists to go on down to their local library to d a little research for themselves.

The fact that the fossil record _supports_ the directly observed phenomena of evolution is obvious. The fossil record shows that the speciation observed today is a phenomena that has been going on since life formed around four billion years ago.

We'll skip past the claim that dating of fossils is some how subjective to get to an even more amusing claim:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Popular presentations of human evolution show a rather smooth transition of fossils leading to modern humans.

-=- End quoted text in extract

No it doesn't. Like all other species except, perhaps, for the modern horse there are gaps in the geological record which still need to be filled in. A lot of work still remains to be done in the classification of fossils that are sitting in warehouses waiting to be properly cleaned and classified and then fitted into gaps in the fossil record.

Even more stupidly, the ICR cult then makes this remark:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

The impression given is that the dating of the individual fossils in that sequence is accurate enough to establish human evolution as a fact.

-=- End quoted text in extract

No, evolution is an established fact because it's a directly observed phenomena. The fossil record shows that speciation has occured far in the distant past. The fossilized remains of humans unearthed so far go back approximately one or two million years -- a small percentage of the time that life has existed on Earth.

Pick a species that has a longer history in the extant geological record. Pick the horse whos history can be traced back probably better than any other species and one finds that the geological record shows that horses slowly evolved from previous species into the modern equine. So, too, for all the plants and animals one cares to look at regardless of whether the fossil record is complete or not. And that goes for humans which are an utterly insignificant late addition to this planet's long history of life.

The ICR cultist claims that inaccuracies involved in dating of fossil samples means we can pretend that evolution doesn't happen:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

However, because of severe dating problems which are seldom mentioned, this alleged sequence cannot be maintained. To present the fossil evidence as a relatively smooth transition leading to modern humans is akin to intellectual dishonesty.

-=- End quoted text in extract

Presumably creationists aren't allowed to read science text books. The accuracy of common dating mechanisms are well known among scientists and it's certainly no secret. And no, the inaccuracies are hardly "severe." Given a sample to date it hardly matters if one is off on the date of the sample's death by 5 or 10 thousand years. The fact that the sample shows it's millions of years old remains.

Creationists have a large number of fatal problems they have to try to ignore. Dating of samples is obviously one of the most major flaws that puts "paid" to the occult notionsa held by creationists. The fact that the dating of samples yield consistant dates within the accepted margins of errors going back billions of years can't be easily denied.

The fact that humans and all other plants and animals have evolved from previous species is another fact that can't easily be denied -- yet that doesn't stop creationists from the attempt which is why they wind up looking of silly.

In this propaganda piece the cultist claims it's impossible to date humans because there's gaps in the fossil record. The cultist then goes on to claim there aren't enough human fossils to support the fact that humans -- like all other animals -- have evolved over time. It almost looks as if the cult want to pretend that humans are special some how.

Followers who read this crap are treated to bold lies which, it looks like, they're expected to swallow hole. Lies like the following:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Creationists have noted an interesting pattern in evolutionist writings regarding the dating of fossils. Shortcomings of a dating method in current use are not generally acknowledged by evolutionists. Only when they feel they have devised a better method for a specific time period, do they publicly admit the weaknesses of the method they had been using previously.

-=- End quoted text in extract

No, I guess they're not allowed to read paleontological text books or, for that matter, any science text book. In the physical science text book my 13-year-old son took home from school, the inaccuracies in the use of various dating mechanisms are covered in some detail. Here we have the ICR cult trying to claim that scientists don't like to admit to the fact that there are probability ranges in dating methods -- as if it were some how a secret. As if it some how made any difference what-so-ever.

<smile> It's also somewhat amusing to see the cult try to pretend they're some how forcing scientists to "admit" to stuff that can be found in any science text book on the subject. <heh> That's rather amusing.

The propaganda piece continues along these same lines, nothing new here. One common theme is the constant notion that humans are some how different or special than all the rest:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Human evolution demands precise dating of the relevant fossils.

-=- End quoted text in extract

No it doesn't.

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Evolutionists now admit that the dates for the human fossils in the significant Middle Stone Age period and elsewhere are uncertain.

-=- End quoted text in extract

Which doesn't detract one iota from the fact that humans -- like all the other animals and the plants, too -- have and continue to evolve over time. The ICR cult is trying to paint a picture that shows that the inaccuracies in dating methods -- which are recognied by scientists and isn't some kind of Satanic conspiracy -- some how means that the observed phenomena of evolution doesn't happen some how.

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

It means that there is no such thing as a legitimate evolutionary fossil sequence leading to modern humans.

-=- End quoted text in extract

Since there's no certificate of death offering the date and time that a human fossil sample died, one must ignore the sample. What stupidity!

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

It also means that evolutionists cannot make accurate statements regarding the origin of modern humans based on fossils discovered thus far.

-=- End quoted text in extract

What the fossil record shows for _all_ species of plants and animals, not just humans and the other primates, is that evolution has occured long into the past, just as it's observed today. Not being able to pin down someone's date of death somewhere around 400,000 years ago doesn't mean that the person didn't live approximately 400,000 years ago.

If the cultists want to play that game, they had better come up with the death date and year of their Jesus god otherwise theyre going to have to admit that it didn't exist. And we know cultists can't do that.

Finally -- thankfully -- we get to the ending:

-- Begin quoted text in extract -=-

Their continuing to do so reveals that their statements are based on a belief system, not on the practice of a rigorous science.

-=- End quoted text in extract

The supposition is that if they can pretend that scientists some how employ religious beliefs then the cult's own religions beliefs have just as much validity and just as much excuse to be taught as factual in the public schools. What a bunch of unsalted nuts.

Any text written by the creationist cult which may be quoted within this criticial examination of the creationist cult is provided according to U. S. Code Title 17 "Fair Use" dictates which may be reviewed at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

"You can lie about ICR all you want." -- Jason Daniel Henderson

"Thank you for your permission however there's never any need to.
Creationist propaganda is already self-debunking." -- Fredric L. Rice

This web site is not affiliated or associated with any creationist cult in any way and neither the web site host, the web site owner, or any of the authors which assisted in debunking creationist nonsense are in any way connected with any creationist cult.