Monday, August 2, 2010

National Geographic Folklore

While waiting for Nancy to have her ear checked in a doctor's office I was surprised to find a July 2010 copy of the National Geographic. The cover photo was a 4 million-year-old fossil woman skull. I had time to read the whole story and their recap of our descending from the apes and chimpanzees. What ran through my mind was that Dr. Sylvia Grider was in the appropriate place on the faculty of the Anthropology Dept. at A&M. Her degree was in Folklore and I was impressed by the story in the NG as modern folklore. The author followed the "scientists" uncovering fossils in Eastern Africa. They would dig up fossil bones and create a story about how the ancient person represented by the fossilized bones lived, worked, tools that they did or did not use. There was the mention that another scientist thought the bones were that of a primate, not a human, but that comment was ignored because it didn't fit the folklore that was being spun. Spin isn't restricted to politics. Most of the magazine was devoted to their story with no comment that there are other explanations for the geology and fossil finds.

It is interesting how ever fossil find has to be older than any former find. Four million years is a real stretch for bones that are dug up in a couple of inches of top soil. But it had to exceed the 2 million old Lucy. No question was made as to the dating nor was the dating explained satisfactorily to me. The few bones were identified as a person, but the foot bones were typical of a monkey. The other scientist said he thought it was a primitive monkey. But the Folklore had to make it a woman four million years old! A much better story to encourage fossil hunters.

No where did anyone question the fact that evolution is scientifically impossible and can not be an explanation that is logical.

I have been buying a lot of Creation Science books and am impressed by the size of Walt Brown's book IN THE BEGINNING:Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. He was an engineering prof at the Air Force Academy and left to publish this complete look at science from every viewpoint explaining how the creation model is a much better scientific model to explain all the different sciences. I have just started reading it. It is 448 pages of text with a lot of references. He says he uses quotes from evolutionists to show the fallacies of evolution. I like the essays in IN SIX DAYS: Fifty scientists tell why they believe in a six-day creation. I sent a copy to Dr. Grider to read during her recooperation from hip replacement surgery. She promised she would read it, sometime.