Debate On Human Foot Prints

Number: 47 (Read 0 times) Date: 30 Apr 91 21:48:18

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 46 See msg: 48

To: Scott Watts Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

I understand, that there are a great many things that I do not

understand, and as a result my views may seem to be odd or distorted.

Have you ever heard of the Paluxy River Beds?

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 48 (Read 0 times) Date: 02 May 91 23:53:45

From: Scott Watts Reply to: 47 See msg: 49

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

Not offhand. Please elaborate.

Scott

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 49 (Read 0 times) Date: 03 May 91 00:22:34

From: Scott Faust Reply to: 48 See msg: 50

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> I understand, that there are a great many things that I do not

JB> understand, and as a result my views may seem to be odd or

JB> distorted. Have you ever heard of the Paluxy River Beds?

Hi Jack,

I don't know about Scott Watts, but I am fairly familiar with the

Paluxy River controversy over alleged human footprints found along

with dinosaur footprints in the limestone there. I also happen to

be acquanted with Ronnie Hastings and Glen Kuban, the researchers

who managed to convince most creationists that the tracks in

question were not human (although I suppose some creationists might

still wish to say merely that they are not demonstrably so).

-SF

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 51 (Read 0 times) Date: 04 May 91 03:59:24

From: Scott Faust Reply to: 50 See msg: 52

To: Phil Nicholls Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> rays of the sun from entering earths atmosphere. Creationist

JB> would like to build a model to study this, but grants do not

JB> come easy to scientists who believe in creation. There have

PN> Of course, it might help if creationist actually applied for

PN> these grants. Can you name a single creation scientist who

PN> was denied funding because he was a creationist? This means

Actually, Phil, I think I know who the creationist is who wants to

"build a model to study [the pre-flood, canopy influenced

environment]." Don't you have in mind Carl Baugh down here in

Texas with his hyperbaric biosphere, John? I assure you that if

the ICR had all the money they could want, THEY wouldn't give a

penny to Baugh. He is simply not considered to be a competent and

careful researcher, even by creationists.

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]

[Addendum to this message added for uploading: Carl Baugh,

though I bring up his name here in connection with his plan to

construct a gadget to test his version of the "canopy theory",

is a principal Paluxy "mantrack" proponent. Thus Jack Brannan

responds to my comments about him below in regard to our

discussion about the Paluxy footprints.]

Number: 53 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 22:49:41

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 52 See msg: 54

To: Scott Watts Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

Its an archeaological dig in Texas where they have found human

footprints alongside of dinosaurs.

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 54 (Read 0 times) Date: 06 May 91 01:00:40

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 53 See msg: 55

To: Scott Faust Sent

Subject: Radio-active

AREA:GEOLOGY

I suppose all creationist are suspect of shoddy work by

evolutionist.However ICR does not have anything but praise

for Carl Baugh. Glen Kuban and Ron Hastings had nothing to do

with Paluxi River Bed finds, they were the discoverers of the

Taylor Trail, which is a suspicious site. The oddity is Glen

Kuban a creationist, and Ron Hastings an evolutionist working

together. This area is stained with a reddish brown stain,

similar to an acid spill on rock, and has other suspicious

facts (sort of like piltdown, manufactured type). An area

resident says that the true finder of Taylor Trail was Ron

Hastings by Himself (Steve Schafersman). Perhaps a

creationist was needed for added viability? Whatever they did

or did not do to refute findings, the fact remains, they

never visited Paluxi, their find was a quarter mile away.

Dr. Baugh has a masters in archeology and a doctorate in

anthropology. His associates were Dr. Robert L. Whitelaw Phd.

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Dr. Clifford Wilson Phd. .

Dr Wilson was director of Australian Institute of Archeology,

and was named area supervisor for excavations at Gezer,

sponsored by The American School for Oriental Research and

Hebrew Union College. He was also honored as "An Outstanding

Educator of America" in 1971. If your trying to belittle

their work, by knocking their work habits, you have a big job

to do.

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 56 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 04:00:16

From: Scott Faust See msg: 57

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> I suppose all creationist are suspect of shoddy work by

JB> evolutionist.

What I said of Carl Baugh is that his work is considered to be

shoddy by both evolutionists AND creationists.

JB> However ICR does not have anything but praise for

JB> Carl Baugh.

Really? Please quote and reference some of this praise. When you

come up goose eggs on that, read the article by Tom McIver, "A

Creationists Walk Through the Grand Canyon," in Issue XX (Spring

'87) of the _Creation / Evolution_ Journal. McIver is a cultural

anthroplogist who did his dissertation on creationism. This

article describes an ICR field trip he participated in as part of

his research. On p.12 he writes:

At supper, we talked about other creationist groups and

interpretations. Depending upon the audience, creationists may

attack rival creationist interpretations as much as they do

evolution itself. ... [John] Morris offered some witty

impressions of Carl Baugh, the Paluxy investigator who sees

"manprints" everywhere. Morris and others at ICR think Baugh

does creationism a great disservice with his scientifically

naive and ill-founded claims.

Now, let me point out that Morris was also a strong proponent of

Paluxy "mantracks" at one time and wrote a book on the subject. He

would hardly be inclined to poke fun at Baugh gratuatously.

I would not be very suprised if the ICR has not PUBLICLY criticized

Baugh. Hard-nosed public critique of creationist models and

research -- by creationists -- is fairly rare. Personally, I have

only met one creationist who outwardly evinces the same sort of

critically minded approach to the evaluation of creation models as

I observe that mainstream scientists routinely do toward their

theories (or at least those of their colleagues <g>). The

individual I have in mind is Kurt Wise, BTW, who I see will be

addressing Walt's group there in St. Louis. Maybe Walt will ask

Wise what he thinks about Baugh and Paluxy mantracks and report

back to us. (I already know what he thinks <g>.)

JB> Glen Kuban and Ron Hastings had nothing to do with Paluxi

JB> River Bed finds, they were the discoverers of the Taylor Trail

JB> ... An area resident says that the true finder of Taylor

JB> Trail was Ron Hastings by Himself (Steve Schafersman). ...

JB> Whatever they did or did not do to refute findings, the fact

JB> remains, they never visited Paluxi, their find was a quarter

JB> mile away.

Jack, where are you getting your information!!?? The Taylor Trail

is IN the Paluxy River -- IN THE RIVERBED ITSELF -- about 1/2 mile

upstream from (and outside the borders of) Dinosaur Valley State

Park near Glen Rose, Texas. I have been there WITH Kuban and

Hastings (and Baugh) on several occasions. The Taylor trail is 1/4

or 1/2 mile downstream from sites (like the McFall ledge) which

Baugh frequently works (and which Kuban, Hastings and others have

also evaluated). Perhaps this explains part of your error.

Steve Schafersman is not and was not an "area resident." He is a

petroleum geologist (and now college instructor in geology) from

Houston. I don't know what Steve might have said, but you have

obviously misconstrued it.

The Taylor trail was not discovered by Kuban or Hastings, but years

before they began their research. It is named for Stanley Taylor

and was featured in _Footprints In Stone_ produced by Taylor's

Films for Christ. The site was excavated BY TAYLOR in 1969 and

'70, and his film was released in 1972.

JB> The oddity is Glen Kuban a creationist, and Ron Hastings an

JB> evolutionist working together. ... Perhaps a creationist was

JB> needed for added viability?

Kuban first went down to the Paluxy (1980 I think) hoping to

document the existence of "mantracks." Within the first year or

two he found that the claims he had read in John Morris' _Tracking

Those Incredible Dinosaurs: And the People Who Knew Them_ did not

atand up to his own observations. Again I am not certain of my

dates, but as I recall Hastings didn't begin looking into the

Paluxy footprints until about '82 or later. Kuban became a

"mantack" skeptic BEFORE he began working with Hastings (1983 or

'84 I believe. I can dig into my currently trashed out files and

nail down all these dates if you want me to.) Kuban tells me, BTW,

that it was he who first approached Hastings.

JB> ... the Taylor Trail ... is a suspicious site. ... This area

JB> is stained with a reddish brown stain, similar to an acid

JB> spill on rock, and has other suspicious facts (sort of like

JB> piltdown, manufactured type).

(What Jack is referring to is a coloration of the Paluxy limestone

which in some areas reveals the outlines of the often only

partially eroded material which infilled the dinosaur tracks. This

coloration began to become apparent in the Taylor trail by 1984,

revealing that the vaugely oblong, supposedly human, indentations

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 57 (Read 0 times) Date: 05 May 91 21:36:50

From: Scott Faust Reply to: 56 See msg: 63

To: Scott Faust Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

Oops! I didn't know the max message length here and it looks like

my message got truncated. Here is the remainder (with a bit of

overlap). I also apologize for a duplicate message I just

discovered I posted here earlier.

JB> ... the Taylor Trail ... is a suspicious site. ... This area

JB> is stained with a reddish brown stain, similar to an acid

JB> spill on rock, and has other suspicious facts (sort of like

JB> piltdown, manufactured type).

(What Jack is referring to is a coloration of the Paluxy limestone

which in some areas reveals the outlines of the often only

partially eroded material which infilled the dinosaur tracks. This

coloration began to become apparent in the Taylor trail by 1984,

revealing that the vaugely oblong, supposedly human, indentations

of the trail possesed tridactyl dinosaurian digits. It was this

evidence which compelled John Morris to back of the claim [though

he did so darkely hinting about Jack's "manufacted" "stains"], and

Stanley Taylor to shelve _Footprints In Stone_. There was already

adequate anatomical evidence, however, to reveal to Kuban that the

trial was dinosaurian before the colorations appeared.)

The colorations are NOT stains and do not resemble acid spills in

any way. The coloration is a SUBSURFACE phenomena, as has been

revealed by numerous cores taken from the tracks in the trial and

elsewhere. It is a LITHIC phenomena as revealed by differences in

grain sized between this darker infilling and the substrate

material. The coloration phenomena can be found in tracks, and in

rock that contains no tracks, all over that part of the river. It

occurs in association with tracks that are uncontroversially

dinosaurian, and in association with depressions and low spots in

the substate that are not tracks at all.

I don't claim to understand the geochemistry involved, but am told

that the infilling is probably material that washed over the

cretaceous mud-flats from an inland source, and that its iron

content causes it to rust and darken when exposed to the elements.

I may not have that quite right, but in any regard my earlier

points still stand: These are not "stains" or any sort of surface

phenomena. The only "manufacturing" going on here may be

attributed to your sources, Jack, and the only "suspicions" called

for are of their competence, knowledgability or honesty.

JB> Dr. Baugh has a masters in archeology and a doctorate in

JB> anthropology.

Listen, Jack, if a person is able to demonstrate their competence

in their craft, I don't give a hang about their credentials or lack

thereof. Furthermore, sound credentials don't assure sound work.

The leader of the Geocentrism movement in this country has a Ph.D.

in astronomy from Case Western!

All that being said... Baugh's "degrees" are meaningless. They

are cheesy diploma mill type stuff. If you want details, I can

give you details. I'll have to dig into my files and some boxes

and stuff. Maybe Walt will take care of this as I would really

prefer not to go into it. He might find the article by Kuban on

Baugh's credentials which was published a couple of years ago (I

think) in the _Creation/Evolution Newsletter_. I don't have access

to my back issues just now.

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 63 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 19:36:44

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 57 See msg: 65

To: Scott Faust Recv Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

I may be in over my head here, I dont know a lot about

Paluxi. I have read some reports on this (for want of a

better word)"stain". It does not appear to be Iron oxides, or

anything easily explainable as a natural phenomona, However

experimentation with hydrochloric acid has produced identical

stains. John Morris did indeed back off from the Paluxi finds

and wanted to divorce ICR from any controversy, but he has

since visited with Carl Baugh and inspected his work and

findings. At this point (late 88) John Morris again supports

Baugh. Carl Baugh does not have experience or credentials to

match many Archaeologist, so attacking him from this point is

easy, because he has nothing of note prior to reccommend him.

This is not true of Clifford Wilson, who has been recognized

by other authorities and commended. He shares with Baugh in

this endeaver, he is a responsible and Im sure he would not

work with anyone doing "shoddy work", as this would also

reflect on him.

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 65 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 19:55:02

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 63 See msg: 67

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

Concerning Paluxi, I have seen a PBS program that promised to

reveal the truth. I dont remember who did this work, but I

realized very soon into it that there would be no truth. The

person in the film was a science teacher from a local school,

who went with camera and crew to the river. From a distance

they pointed out Baughs work area, but never visited it nor

talked with anyone from his camp. They did wade the river

with a glass aquarium looking for tracks and showed one they

found which unmistakably had three toes, and said this was

what the excitement was over. I have to question their

objectivity, why did'nt they speak with Baugh and film some

of his finds? One can only assume two results from filming

Baugh's finds. Baugh would have looked to be a fool or, his

opponents would have appeared to be blinded to evidence

supporting him. It is argued that these prints have been

carved, however some of these prints have been cut in half

lengthwise and they show compression underneath the heel and

ball of the foot, this could not be done by someone carving.

Paluxi could be very important, and could quite possibly be

the downfall of creation or evolution, but only if a true

objective investigation is made. Baugh has invited the media

to publicise these events, but has had little success with

response (except local) and what response he got was with a

ho-hum attitude.

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 66 (Read 1 time) Date: 13 May 91 08:34:06

From: Scott Faust

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Stinkin' Degrees

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> Carl Baugh does not have experience or credentials to

JB> match many Archaeologist, so attacking him from this point is

JB> easy, because he has nothing of note prior to reccommend him.

JB> This is not true of Clifford Wilson, who has been recognized

JB> by other authorities and commended. He shares with Baugh in

JB> this endeaver, he is a responsible and Im sure he would not

JB> work with anyone doing "shoddy work", as this would also

JB> reflect on him.

Clifford Wilson's Ph.D. is in psycholinguistics (don't know what

that is), not archaeology as is often assumed. This does not mean,

of course, that he has not done quality work in archaeology, and I

have noted various impressive *sounding* items in his vitae. If

you can give me some references to published results of field work

conducted by him or under his direction, though not qualified to

evaluate them, I would be happy to give them a read.

I am afraid, however, that Wilson's association with Baugh -- at

least in regard to the acquisition of Baugh's "degrees" and the

institutions which granted them -- does reflect poorly on Wilson.

I didn't want go into the mucky matter of Baugh's credentials, at

the risk of confusing that with the need to evaluate his mantrack

claims on their own merits, but since you bring up the matter again

I will do so. My reference here is Glen J. Kuban's article in

_National Center for Science Education Reports_, v9 n6, p.15.

Unless otherwise indicated, all quotes are from that article

(footnotes deleted). Before you slam me for using a secondary

source, I recommend that you look up Kuban's article (or post your

address in a private message and I will mail you a copy). It is

extensively referenced and I cannot find any substantive claim

therein that he is not able to support.

I also have some slight personal knowledge of some of these

matters. I supplied Kuban with the references noted in footnotes

26 and 31, and I have also driven by the "campus" of the school

that awarded Baugh his Ph.D. in anthropology -- the College of

Advanced Education; 2355 West Pioneer; Irving, TX. If you want to

look for yourself, you had better drive slow and look quick.

The CAE is housed in a small house adjacent to Sherwood Baptist

Church. The pastor of the church, who Baugh identified as the dean

of the school, told Kuban that CAE is a "missions" school with no

science classes or facilities. Kuban notes that "the school is

neither accredited by any national or regional agency, nor

certified by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (which

certification must be obtained to legally grant degrees in Texas)."

Indeed, Kuban found no record of the school with the Irving Chamber

of Commerce, Dept. of Taxation, or phone directory.

Baugh supplied Kuban with a copy of his CAE "diploma".

"[It] indicates that CAE is the 'Graduate Division' of

International Baptist College (IBC). IBC is incorporated in

Missouri (where Baugh lived before coming to Texas); however,

the school is neither accredited not certified to grant degrees

in any subject. In fact, IBC appears to be as lacking in

science facilities and courses as CAE. When I called IBC in

1986, the man answering the phone stated the IBC is a

correspondence school for Bible studies based on cassette tapes

by Jerry Falwell. Further, the letterhead of IBC listed Baugh

himself as 'Pesident.' Thus, Baugh's anthroplogy degree

originated from a branch of his own unaccredited, correspondence

Bible school."

Clifford Wilson's name is listed on the incorporation papers for

IBC, BTW, and he was at one time on their letterhead as "Vice

President, International Studies." There also used to be a metal

plaque marking one of Buagh's earlier mantrack sites which gave the

location of IBC as Melbourne, Australia.

Kuban's article further discusses the connection to Wilson:

"Pacific College Incorporated (PCI) -- a.k.a. Pacific College of

Graduate Studies (PCGS) and Pacific International University

(PIU) -- from which Baugh claims a master's degree in

archaeology, traces to a small, private, religious school in

Australia headed by Clifford Wilson. Ian Plimer, a member of

the Australian Research Council and professor of geology at

Newcastle University, reported that PCI is not accredited or

authorized to grant degrees. Plimer stated, 'Any degrees from

this 'College' are illegal in Australia and are clearly being

used fraudulently in the U.S.A.'"

One of Baugh's associates here in Dallas, Don Patton (not to be

confused with Donald W. Patten), has claimed a Ph.D. candidacy in

geology with yet another unaccredited Australian school linked to

Wilson -- Queensland Christian University (QCU). When Ronnie

Hastings shared with Patton what he had learned about QCU's lack of

authority to grant degrees, Patton indicated that his degree was on

hold pending the accreditation of QCU. Hastings subsequently

learned from Plimer, however, that QCU had not applied for

accreditation in any field of science.

At the 1989 National Conference on biblical Origins in Dayton,

Tennessee (which I attended, incidently) Patton clarified to Kuban

that he had no degrees at all (even undergrad), though the printed

program implied that he had at least four. (Baugh, BTW, has been

known to refer to his associate as "Dr. Don Patton".)

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 67 (Read 0 times) Date: 13 May 91 07:11:22

From: Scott Faust Reply to: 65 See msg: 68

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> I may be in over my head here, I dont know a lot about

JB> Paluxi. I have read some reports on this (for want of a

JB> better word)"stain". It does not appear to be Iron oxides, or

JB> anything easily explainable as a natural phenomona, However

JB> experimentation with hydrochloric acid has produced identical

JB> stains.

I repeat, Jack... These are NOT stains. I have seen the tracks

and I have seen the cores that have been taken from the tracks at

the margins of the coloration. The coloration is revealed by these

cores to be a SUBSURFACE phenomena, and thus cannot be "stains" of

any sort. Iron oxides? I don't know. As I said, I don't know

zilch about geochemistry and may have botched even the very

supeficial explanation I gave earlier.

There have been one or more papers published in standard geological

journals on the geochemistry of the Paluxy (dolomitic I believe)

limestone deposites. They may shed some light on the cause of the

coloration. Pictures of the cores from the Taylor trail has also

been published on one or more occasions. I will contact Ronnie

Hastings for the references and post them here.

~~~~~~~~

JB> John Morris did indeed back off from the Paluxi finds

JB> and wanted to divorce ICR from any controversy, but he has

JB> since visited with Carl Baugh and inspected his work and

JB> findings. At this point (late 88) John Morris again supports

JB> Baugh.

Please clarify... Are you saying that (as of late '88) *Morris*

said that he again supports Baugh, or did Baugh or one of his

supporters say that *about* Morris? I recall that Morris visited

the Paluxy in '88. I heard (through the grapevine) that he wasn't

very impressed, but I could be mistaken. Morris had a report later

in _Acts and Facts_, but I can't find the issue now. (If anyone

else can, please comment.)

This short piece concerned Baugh's new improved Taylor trial claim:

The main tracks were probably made by dinosaurs allright (unless

maybe it really was those nasty humanists sneaking out there at

midnight with bottles of hydrochloric acid!), but there are human

tracks INSIDE the dinosaurs tracks. As I remember it, Morris'

report mixed a hint of cautious optimism about the new claim, with

about a half pound of skepticism that it would bear out. I did not

take it at the time as indicating "support". I think it could best

be described as neutral. I you or someone else find this item, you

may be able show me up. I wouldn't consider Morris' renewed

support of Baugh to count for much anyway, but would be surprised

if Morris turned out to be that foolhardy.

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 68 (Read 0 times) Date: 13 May 91 08:20:44

From: Scott Faust Reply to: 67 See msg: 71

To: Jack Brannan Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

JB> Concerning Paluxi, I have seen a PBS program that promised to

JB> reveal the truth. I dont remember who did this work, but I

JB> realized very soon into it that there would be no truth.

You are probably referring to the NOVA show, "God, Darwin and the

Dinosaurs" (or some title along that line). I have found that many

of the NOVA shows, especially over the last several years, are

rather lacking in substance. I didn't like this one much myself.

Thought it was much too easy on the creationists <g>.

~~~~~~~~

JB> The

JB> person in the film was a science teacher from a local school,

JB> who went with camera and crew to the river. From a distance

JB> they pointed out Baughs work area, but never visited it nor

JB> talked with anyone from his camp. They did wade the river

JB> with a glass aquarium looking for tracks and showed one they

JB> found which unmistakably had three toes, and said this was

JB> what the excitement was over.

The science teacher was Ronnie Hastings. Along with Glen Kuban he

is one of Baugh's principal critics. The track was from the Taylor

trail. The river runs dry there once about every 4 years or so

when there is a good drought. Otherwise, the trail has to be

studied in this rather cumbersome manner. Either that or sandbag

around the tracks you want to examine and pump out the water. I

had the good fortune to be able to spend some time on the site in

'88 when there was a major drought.

~~~~~~~~

JB> I have to question their

JB> objectivity, why did'nt they speak with Baugh and film some

JB> of his finds? One can only assume two results from filming

JB> Baugh's finds. Baugh would have looked to be a fool or, his

JB> opponents would have appeared to be blinded to evidence

JB> supporting him.

I vote for result #1! I don't know why they didn't film Baugh.

Maybe they DID and he came off as TO MUCH of a buffoon. Thats

entirely speculation on my part, however, so I will pass your post

along to Ronnie Hastings and see if he has any comment.

~~~~~~~~

JB> It is argued that these prints have been

JB> carved, however some of these prints have been cut in half

JB> lengthwise and they show compression underneath the heel and

JB> ball of the foot, this could not be done by someone carving.

It was cut crosswise into three sections. You refer to one of the

carved "footprints" acquired years ago by Clifford Burdick. It had

long been removed from the riverbed at the time that Burdick

discovered it and was apparently carved by one of the locals back

in the thirties.

This claim was touted at the 1990 International Conference on

Creationism. (Baugh wasn't present, but his associate Don Patton

was, along with Hugh Miller and some other Paluxy "manprint"

diehards). It didn't go over very well at all. Some of the

geologically knowledable CREATIONISTS present readily recognized

the supposed "compression" marks as stromatolite-like algal

growths. I think that Gregg Wilkerson of Students for Origin

Research was going to debunk this claim in _Origins Research_.

Maybe Walt or some other subscriber will be able to tell us if this

article has appeared there. I might try checking the index on the

SOR BBS.

--- via Silver Xpress V2.28 [NR]

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)

Number: 71 (Read 0 times) Date: 14 May 91 23:17:57

From: Jack Brannan Reply to: 68

To: Scott Faust Sent

Subject: Paluxy "mantracks"

AREA:GEOLOGY

I appreciate your reply and will take time to see what it is I am

reading (it wont be the first time an author has suckered me). This

doesnt mean, I no longer believe in creationism, it simply means I

realize there may be opportunist among creationist to. SO,,,Back to the

library for me.

--- RBBSMail 17.4A

* Origin: Origins Talk * Talking_Origins Here! * (1:100/435.0)