As we drove north, my wife and I talked about how the sea during the Cretaceous period (65 to 144 mya) came further inland than it does now. The area where we were headed was laid down during the the late Cretaceous, 113 mya according to the Dinosaur Valley State Park Brochure. During that time, the sea made several advances and retreats. Specifically, the particular formation we were going to see was most likely a coastal wetland during a period of retreat.
As we got closer to Glen Rose, the sedimentary nature of the underlying rock became obvious. The country side was quite hilly and the horizontal banding that is so typical of sedimentary rock was clearly visible in many of the hillsides. This rock is also very light in color, making the soil almost white wherever it showed through the vegetation. This is in sharp contrast to the dark tan soil of our home on the coastal plain.
I had done my homework before this trip by reading Impact No. 35 and Impact No. 151 by John Morris of the ICR. It should be noted that each Impact article ends with the following statements:
All ICR staff members adhere to a Statement of Faith in the form of two documents: "Tenets of Scientific Creationism," and "Tenets of Biblical Creationism." (see Impact No. 85)We believe God has raised up ICR to spearhead Biblical Christianity's defense against the godless dogma of evolutionary humanism. Only by showing the scientific bankruptcy of evolution, while exaulting Christ and the Bible, will Christians be successful in "the pulling down of strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (Disclaimer on all ICR Impact articles)
Just those statements should lead you to doubt the scientific intent and competence of these people. However, if you read Impact No. 85, there will be no doubt in your mind that their purpose is not science. In fact, they don't even know what science is.
But I digress. Impact No. 35 tells of John Morris' study of the Paluxy river tracks. He begins with a brief history of the site. Under the guise of "The Geologic Time Frame" he doesn't deal with the geologic time frame but with his perceived problems with the "evolutionists" position, complete with quotes from "uniformitarian scientists", admitting the weakness of the scientific position.
He then launches into the "Proper Identification" of the tracks. Much of this section is correct in that it deals in differentiating between tracks (of unspecified source) and erosional effects. And of course, "seldom does one find a perfect footprint in the Glen Rose formation..."
He then discusses the fraud tracks that were sold during the depression. I find it strange that these frauds do not weaken the creationists opinion of these tracks while they frequently hold out the Piltdown man as evidence of how evolution is false. Creationist reasoning forever baffles me.
The "Formation of the Tracks" section has more to do with the geology (that wasn't really covered in the geology section) and yet more problems with the "evolutionist" position.
This is followed by a section on the "Proper Interpretation" of the tracks, complete with Biblical citations and a story of how the men and dinosaurs were running for the Llano uplift, basement rock that Morris claims was being uplifted during the flood.
He concludes with information of how more tracks of men are being discovered almost continuously.
In contrast, to the 8 1/2 pages of text that make up Impact No. 35, Impact No. 151 is 3 1/4 pages. It is a justification of why his interpretation had been wrong and why the "man-tracks" are actually dinosaur tracks. It seems that over the 15 years that the tracks had been exposed to erosion, the trails had not degraded but had improved due to the erosion of the softer infill. Morris lists six "mysterious points" that caused his error. While I won't list his six points, I think his conclusion is interesting.
Even though it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution, in light of these questions, there is still much that is not known about the tracks and continued research is in order. We stand committed to truth, and will gladly modify or abandon our previous interpretation of the Paluxy data as the facts dictate. (From Impact No. 151)
Let me translate. 'I was wrong - dead wrong. But rather than admit that my incompetent twisting of geology and paleontology to conform to my preconceived notions when I am shown to be wrong - dead wrong - I will pretend that there is still the possibility that human tracks may be present and must be investigated, even though not one of these so called "man-tracks" can be shown to be anything other that that of a dinosaur or an erosional effect. I will claim that I am interested in the truth rather than the interpretation of the evidence according to my personal understanding of the Bible - in other words - my personal interpretation of the Bible is the truth.'
Armed with this knowledge my wife and I progressed toward Glen Rose and the Paluxy. About a mile from the entrance to Dinosaur Valley State Park we came upon the "Creation Evidences Museum."
This is a 40 x 14 portable building at present, but a new facility, financed by donation, is being built. [update: May 5, 2003. Almost 4 years later the "Creation Evidences Museum" is still in the same portable building. The new building does have glass in the windows now, but the inside is just unfinished concrete. The eves are just dirty plywood. But inside the new building is a huge hyperbaric chamber. More below.] Inside is a laugh. Running almost the entire length of the left wall is a painting that depicts the creation according the Baugh. On the right are the books for sale. The rest is made up of pictures (a few) and some casts of paluxy tracks, and some dinosaur models. It is ironic that none of the dinosaurs depicted in the museum are those that made the tracks in the river. Of course, these casts are "man tracks".
One of the casts I recognized immediately from Baugh's web site. It is described as a human track (a giant, by the way). The big toe is clearly visible and the other four toes are turned under, probably because he slipped. I did some experiments, and to turn one's toes under in that way, especially while walking would be quite painful. Besides, there was no impression of the underturned toes, only the outline. I'll come back to this later.
At any rate, the museum "tour" consists of a 45 min. video of Carl Baugh talking about each of his exhibits. Most of the time was Mr. Baugh talking about the series of globes in the painting on the left wall, which is his story of creation. It is laughable at best and directed at scientific illiterates. Some of the "high" points (or low points - depending on your point of view).
Mr. Baugh claims that we learn from paleontolgy that "everything in the past was bigger."
Mr. Baugh states that quantum mechanics tells us how God stretched the firmament.
Mr. Baugh claims that the stretching of the universe means that time runs faster at the edges than at the center (the earth) and this explains why stars appear so far away.
The best part was when I went back to examine the hyperbaric biosphere (it looked like a diver's decompression chamber to me). Mr. Baugh claimed that the snake inside underwent physiological changes because of his chamber - which proved something - I'm not clear on what and there was no one to ask. When I looked in side, I found that it was a different snake (and one that I could not verify was real). But as I was wondering how they fed that snake in the hyperbaric chamber (since I could see no pressure lock pass through, I noticed that the door was open slightly. That cleared up a lot.
Also there were two Pacu Piranha (one of the vegetarian species of Piranha). Baugh claims that although they are known to grow as large as his in nature, his grew faster because of his increased magnetic field (because everything was larger in the past and the magnetic field is decaying). I noted that not one of Baugh's "experiments" had any semblance of a control whatsoever.
It was a good laugh. My wife kept hitting me on the arm because I kept laughing and getting dirty looks from the fundies present, most of whom seemed to suck it all up. My wife told me later that she could tell that I wanted to shout "that's bullshit".
I've gone on and on and haven't even got to the interesting part - the real tracks in the river. At one point I looked down and found that I was looking at a track that was almost identical to one of Baugh's "man-tracks". As I carefully examined the series of prints of which this "man-track" was a part, it became apparent that it was the track of a Pleurocoelus (a sauropod), one of the three types of dinosaurs who's tracks have been found. Following the same path were the prints of an Acrocanthosaurus (theropod carnosaur).
It was hot and dry, but loads of fun. The river was quite low which made track viewing quite easy. And by chance I discovered why Morris and Baugh were fooled. They spent their time looking down at the tracks and failed to look up. Above the meander of the Paluxy are steep walls that are 60 to 70 feet high in places. These deposits were laid down during the flood according to creationists. Then how does on account for the several layers in which the tracks have been found? What about the layers below? It seems that at several times during the flood year the flood waters receded while dinosaurs and men ran about. The Llano uplift story doesn't fill the bill. Why is there more than one stratum with tracks?
A neat day that makes me able to discuss Paluxy and Baugh and his museum with some first hand knowledge. If you ever go to Glen Rose and you find that time is limited, Baugh's museum is somewhat like paying $2 to see the fat lady at the side show while your friends go to the circus and see the flyer do a quad. It just doesn't compare. During the dry season, pick the river over the museum every time.