GEOSCIENCE REPORTS

Spring 1990 No. 11

CATASTROPHISM — Is It Scientific?
Ariel A. Roth, Director, Geoscience Research Institute

    Most of us were shocked by the disastrous earthquake that shook Mexico City on September 19, 1985, killing an estimated 8,000 people. We were equally shocked two months later when a mudflow resulting from a volcanic eruption destroyed the major part of the town of Armero, Colombia, burying at least 20,000people. Why were we surprised by these disasters? In both cases there had been warnings. Our reactions raise some interesting academic questions, but also, and more significantly, they raise questions indirectly related to belief or disbelief in the Genesis account of a worldwide flood.
    A brief historical review will help elucidate the issues involved. Around the end of the 18th century a number of geological controversies — some of them acrimonious — were in ferment.¹ Among them was the highly controversial proposal by the famous Scottish geologist James Hutton that the earth's crust had developed as a result of slow changes over long ages. His suggestion countered the then-prevailing concept that major catastrophes were the important agents of geologic change. (The number and type of catastrophes suggested varied with the theorist. Some considered the worldwide flood described in Genesis to be the prime catastrophe.) While Hutton!s writings have had a reputation for obscurity, it is clear that he wanted to explain geologic change on the basis of slow, normal processes. At one point he stated, "What more can we require? Nothing but time." In his most famous statement (first published in 1788), he pushed his emphasis on the normal to the limits of the past and future: "The result, therefore, of our present inquiry is that we find no vestige of a beginning — no prospect of an end."
    Several other scientists entered into the controversy over what rate of geologic change should be considered normative. Sir Charles Lyell, the most important among these, stressed even more strongly than his predecessor Hutton the importance of small, slow changes. In a letter to his fellow geologist Roderick Murchison he stated that "no causes whatever have from the earliest time to which we can look back, to the present, ever acted but those now acting and ... they never acted with different degrees of energy from that which they now exert."
    Lyell published a major treatise, Principles of Geology (1830-1833), that he called a polemic "to sink the diluvialists" (those who believed in a worldwide flood as described in Genesis). He was more successful than Hutton in gaining acceptance for the concept of slow changes. He was also more clever in his mode of argumentation. A letter he wrote to an active supporter reveals some of his methodology: "If you ... compliment the liberality and candor of the present age, the bishops and enlightened saints will join us in despising both the ancient and modern physio-theologians."
    S. J. Gould of Harvard University has also raised some questions about Lyell's methodology. He states: "Charles Lyell was trained as a lawyer, and his book is more a brief for gradualism than an impartial account of evidence.... Lyell denigrated catastrophism as an antiquated, last-ditch, effort by miracle-mongers trying to preserve the Mosaic chronology of an Earth only a few thousand years old.
    "I doubt that a more unfair characterization bas even been offered for a reputable scientific world view."²
    Lyell=s methods apparently worked, for soon thereafter the majority of geologists and other scholars adopted strict concepts of slow changes over eons. This new interpretation stood in stark contrast to the Bible's historical record, which proposes a recent creation and a worldwide flood that could have produced many of the geologic features under discussion.
    During Lyell's time the words unformitarianism and catastrophism came into use to describe the two contrasting modes of thought. Catastrophism refers to the concept that major catastrophes, usually of worldwide consequence, were the primary agents in shaping the crust of the earth. Uniformitarianism refers to the concept that the changes took place as a result of normal processes operating over long periods of time. The terms have recently undergone some confusing changes in meaning from their classical use, but the contrast between the two modes of thought still remains.

Catastrophism loses out

1. Catastrophism was sometimes associated with supernatural intervention, and during the time of the debate, science was emancipating itself from extraneous concepts and trying to explain everything within its own naturalistic framework. The theory of evolution, which was developing at that time, is a prime example. A little earlier Hutton himself expressed this tendency: "Therefore, there is no occasion for having recourse to any unnatural supposition of evil, to any destructive accident in nature, or to the agency of any preternatural [supernatural] cause, in explaining that which actually appears."
2. Catastrophic events are unusual, and we do not readily take them into our thinking.
3. In order to gain assurance that scientific conclusions are correct, it is highly desirable to test the underlying hypotheses. It is much easier to test for normal processes than for unusual, catastrophic events; hence the results of research are biased toward hypotheses which involve more easily accessible, normal event. Each of these three factors, and doubtless others as well, contributed to the rigorous application of uniformitarian interpretations in geology.

    Recently the picture has changed dramatically. The data from the rocks themselves have demanded a reinterpretation. The concept of the slow, constant rate of change is being challenged at many levels of geological interpretation, and catastrophes are again being considered as important geologic agents. Note the following authoritative statements, which highlight this recent shift in thought:
    W. Bahngrell Brown, Geology: "Of late there has been a serious rejuvenation of catastrophism in geological thought."³
    Derek V Ager, The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record. "The hurricane, the flood, or the tsunami may do more in an hour or a day than the ordinary process of nature have achieved in a thousand years."⁴
    Dag Nummendal, Geotimes: "The profound role of major storms throughout geologic history is becoming increasingly recognized."⁵
    Erle Kauffman, in Roger Lewin, Science: "It is a great philosophical breakthrough for geologists to accept catastrophe as a normal part of Earth history.@⁶
    Catastrophism was considered unscientific in the past but now geologists are finding similar concepts acceptable. At geological conventions discussions of major catastrophic events are now common. Some scientists have been particularly concerned that the new trend not be associated with the supernatural, as it often was in the 18th and 19th centuries. They have proposed new terms such as neocatastrophism, episodism, and convulsive events to distinguish the new approach but the terminology and definitions remain in a state of flux.
    While uniformitarianism is no longer dogma, there appears to be no trend toward shortening the billions of years assumed for the history of the crust of the earth. The theorists preserve the long ages by putting long periods of time between the catastrophic events. The new catastrophism does not posit one major event, such as the Genesis flood; nevertheless, current thinking often seriously considers events of worldwide significance.

The Missing Time Gaps

    The proposed time gaps between catastrophic events provide one more argument in favor of the authenticity of the biblical account of origins. The geologic record at these gaps offers no evidence similar to what the earth's surface now shows for the effects of long exposure to weathering agents. Evidence of erosion and soil development, and fossil evidence for the development of plant life are usually missing at these hypothetical major breaks. If long periods of time had intervened, such evidence should be apparent. Norman D. Newell, a leading evolutionary paleontologist, has admitted: "A puzzling characteristic of the erathem [one of the major fossil boundaries in the layers of the earth's crust] and of many other major biostratigraphic boundaries is the general lack of physical evidence of subaerial exposure. Traces of deep leaching, scour, channeling, and residual gravels tend to be lacking, even where the underlying rocks are cherty limestones.... These boundaries are paraconformities that are usually identifiable only by paleontological [fossil] evidence."⁷
    The paucity of time-dependent features at the so-called time gaps between many of the sedimentary layers of the earth poses a striking contrast with the irregular erosion on the earth's present surface. Since the boundaries between adjacent sedimentary layers usually do not show the physical evidence of the long time gaps, it does not appear that there ever were long periods between the depositions of these layers. These layers appear to have been laid down in rapid succession with little or no time between the events that precipitated their deposition. This is what we would expect of a single catastrophic event like such as the Genesis flood.
    A few samples of catastrophic activities will illustrate how rapid such action can be. In 1976 the great Teton Dam in Idaho gave way, and in less than two hours the waters had cut down through 300 ft of the earthen dam. In 1959 an earthquake in the Madison River canyon in southern Montana loosened material from as high as 1,000 ft above the canyon floor, forming a huge landslide that traveled with such momentum across the canyon that it rode 400 ft up the opposite side. Scientists estimated that the slide was traveling about, 100 mi/hr and that the whole process occurred in less than three minutes. Unfortunately 19 campers were buried beneath the slide.
    In 1929 the Grand Banks earthquake near Newfoundland loosened some mud on the edge of the continental shelf. Within 14 hrs that mud had traveled 500 mi into the North Atlantic and deposited a new, 2-4 ft-thick layer of sediment over 40,000 mi² of ocean bottom. It is estimated that the mudflow traveled at speeds up to 55 mi/hr⁸ and, interestingly, ran into the hull of the famous ship S.S. Titanic, which had sunk in this region on its maiden voyage in 1912.
    More significant than the simple recognition that changes can occur very rapidly, the new trend toward catastrophism has engendered the reinterpretation of several processes that once were thought to be slow. Tens of thousands of layers of sediment that scientists originally considered to have been deposited very slowly in shallow seas, are now interpret as having been deposited very rapidly in special underwater mudflows; called turbidites.⁹ A number of so-called reefs, composed of the skeletons of marine organisms, that were thought to require many hundreds to thousands of years to form are now considered to be the result of rapid debris flows.¹⁰ The Goosenecks area of the San Juan River in southeastern Utah has dramatic, deep meanders originally interpreted to have been eroded very slowly. New evidence indicates that they were cut by rapid currents.¹¹
    The southeastern portion of the state of Washington contains huge erosion channels, some of them scores of miles long. These were first thought to represent slow erosion, but after many years of controversy it is now agreed that they were formed by flood activity. Some geologists have postulated that one or more ice dams located upstream broke suddenly, releasing water over the area at the rate of 9.5 mi³/hr, which is 10 times the combined flow of all the rivers of the world.¹² Geology has moved a long way from the strict uniformitarianism of a few decades ago, and major catastrophes are again an acceptable part of scientific interpretation.

Paradigms Influence Science

    We can learn from the pattern of thought illustrated by the controversies over catastrophism. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,¹³ Thomas Kuhn has pointed out that certain broad ideas, which he calls paradigms, dominate scientific interpretations. As long as these paradigms are normative, they are not questioned. One way or another, most data are interpreted to fit the accepted views.
    Classical uniformitarianism provides an outstanding example of how thinking can be influenced in this way. Hutton and Lyell so thoroughly established the concept of constant geologic change over long periods of time that major catastrophes were completely ignored for more than a century. The effect that this strict uniformitarian conditioning has had on the thought matrix of geology as a whole cannot easily be evaluated, but it is unquestionably considerable. The pattern of strict adherence to accepted ideas raises sobering questions regarding the validity of other dominant ideas in science (to say nothing of human intellectual activity as a whole — science is not alone subject to these episodic thought patterns).
    Because catastrophes are rare, we tend to ignore them and base our conclusions on the usual calm. The disaster caused by the Mexican earthquake and the Colombian volcano might not have seemed so devastating if we were more attuned to the reality of catastrophes, but the normal dominates our thinking. Likewise, because such an event is so unusual, we find it difficult to conceive of a worldwide flood as described in Genesis. But we must not fall into the trap of drawing our conclusions solely on the basis of the normal. In the case of geologic changes, the unusual catastrophe is much more important than the usual calm.
    Fortunately the possibility of catastrophes has important implications for anyone searching for truth regarding the history of this world. Since both the Bible and the book of nature have the same Author, they should agree if correctly interpreted. Much of the evidence of catastrophism found in the rocks does agree closely with what we would expect as a consequence of the worldwide flood described in Genesis. The present trend toward catastrophic interpretations in geology lends support to the authenticity of events described in the Bible.

[Pictures]

A view from Dead Horse Point, Utah. The striking contrast between the flat parallel layers of sediment and the deep gorge cut by the Colorado River illustrates the lack of evidence for time. Between several of the sedimentary layers major portions of the geologic column are missing. The lack of erosion at these assumed gaps suggests that the layers were laid down rapidly.

Aerial view of some of the unusual erosion channels of Eastern Washington which were produced by floods that broke through ice dams.

Turbidites in the Ventura Basin, California

Footnotes

1. For a more comprehensive discussion, see Chapter 2 of A. Hallam, 1983, Great Geological Controversies, Oxford University Press, New York. The quotations of Hutton and Lyell presented herein are from this text.
2. S. J. Gould, 1989, "An asteroid to die for," Discover, Oct., pp. 60-65.
3. W. Bahngrell Brown, 1974, "Induction, Deduction, and Irrationality in Geologic Reasoning, " Geology 2:456.
4. Derek V Ager, 1981, The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, p. 54.
5. Dag Nummendal, 1982, "Clastics," Geotimes 27(2):23.
6. Erie Kauffman, 1983, quoted in Roger Lewin, "Extinctions and the History of Life," Science 221:935-937.
7. Norman D. Newell, 1984, "Mass Extinction: Unique or Recurrent Causes?" in W. W. Berggren and John A.Van Couvering (eds.), Catastrophes and Earth History; The New Unformitariansm, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 115-127.
8. B. C. Heezen and M. Ewing, 1952, Turbidity Currents and Submarine Slumps, and the 1929 Grand Banks Earthquake,@ American Journal of Science 250:849-873.
9. R.G. Walker, 1973, "Mopping up the Turbidite Mess"in R. N. Ginsburg (cd.), Evolving Concepts in Sedimentology, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 1-37.
10. E. W. Mountjoy, H. E, Cook, L. C. Pray and P. N. McDaniel, 1972, "Allochthonous Carbonate Debris Flows-- Worldwide Indicators of Reef Complexes, Banks or Shelf Margins," Reports of the Twenty-Fourth International Geological Congress, Montreal, section 6, pp, 172-189.
11. R. G. Shepherd, 1972, "Incised River Meanders: Evolution in Simulated Bedrock," Science 178:409-411.
12. 1973, The Channeled Scablands of Eastern Washington: The Geologic Story of the Spokane Flood, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
13. Thomas S. Kuhn, 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed., The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Revised from an article in Ministry, July, 1986.

BOOK REVIEW

Gould, Stephen Jay. 1989. Wonderful Life. W W Norton & Company, NewYork. 347 pp.

    In a dream you are whisked into a wilderness where numerous strange and ferocious animals keep you on the run. Or you turn on the television and watch a thriller in which giant creatures, real or imagined, threaten terrified villagers. But could such an event actually happen in real fife?
    On a high mountain in the Rocky Mountains of eastern British Columbia, Canada, such a world has come to fight. Fortunately these animals are dead; in fact, they are fossils. But they reveal a microcosm of fantasy almost beyond imagination.
    Here is a ribbon-like worm with a mouth at one end surrounded by tentacles. There is a bizarre tuft of life that looks like a piece of bottle brush supported by stilts. That flying saucer with two strong pinchers in front and nut-cracker jaws; this wine goblet with a row of tentacles along the rim — what odd creatures!
    Wonderful Life describes these unusual creatures, the history leading up to their discovery, and the tedious work needed to reveal and describe them. Gould, a well-known scientist and science writer, attempts to interpret the meaning of these Middle Cambrian animals, found in the Middle Cambrian. They are not simple even though many have no modern representatives. Ancestors leading up to their appearance are not seen in lower or older rocks; therefore Gould considers them to have evolved suddenly — almost an explosive evolution. His philosophy is not the usual evolutionary gradualism; consequently, a creationist reads with interest because he also is not saddled with some of the usual preconceptions concerning origins.
    This window in the Cambrian opens up for us a small view of the marvelous diversity of God's original creation. We are slowly coming to the realization that life today, although probably consisting of more species, is impoverished relative to the numbers of basic body plans that have existed in the past. This appears to be true at least for marine benthonic organisms.
    A rich fauna that appears suddenly amplifies the position of creationists concerning the creation origin of the basic kinds of organisms. Evolutionists are being forced to postulate some kind of sudden evolution because transitional steps leading to these Cambrian animals are unknown.
    Gould gives little weight to survival of the fittest (natural selection) as a mechanism for progressive evolution. He suggests that survival was a random process, that if the tape of life could be rewound and played again, the results would be entirely different. For him humans are a most unexpected and fortunate end result of chance survival and evolutionary change that is almost unrepeatable.
    The research leading to the elucidation of the true morphology of this amazing collection of animals is dealt with in fascinating style. In this volume we have excellent examples of good science in operation and good science reporting. Any science student would be benefitted by reading it.

[Picture]

On the right is the quarry in the famous Cambrian Burgess Shale, high on a mountain side in Eastern British Columbia, Canada.

SCIENCE NEWS NOTES

The Yellowstone Fires

    In the summer of 1988, giant forest fires in Yellowstone National Park attracted the attention of the world. Despite the efforts of 2 5,000 firefighters, 1.4 million gallons of fire retardant, ten million gallons of water, and 120 million dollars, 1,405,775 acres (793,880 within the park — 36% of the park area) were burned. These giant fires were the result of record drought, double the usual number of lightning storms, much accumulated plant litter on the forest floor, and strong winds.
    The natural-burn policy of the park (allowing natural fires to bum themselves out) was under much criticism by local residents and merchants because they feared for the safety of their own dwellings and structures and because they envisioned a sharp turndown of tourists because of the destruction of the park forests.
    Although more than a third of the park was burned, most of the burn involved only the floor of the forest and the grasslands. A little less than half of the 36% of the park that was burned involved the forest canopy. Very few large animals were killed because they were able to move away from advancing fires.
    With the removal of much dense litter from the forest floor, a variety of herbs and shrubs is growing up, much of it good fodder for the grazing animals. An increase in native wild animals is expected within the next few years. Great numbers of seedlings of lodgepole pine have begun to spring up as a result of the fires which are needed to release seeds from the cones.
    A hundred years will be needed to mask the charred stumps and burned snags. Yet the long-term results are positive for enrichment of the soil, renewal of forest trees, and elimination of accumulated plant litter — all part of a cycle of nature made necessary with the entrance of sin. Tourists may complain for a few years but the continued maintenance of wilderness beauty has a price that must be paid.

[Picture]

Hundreds of thousands of acres off forest go up in flames in Yellowstone National Park during the summer of 1988.

The Rapid Natural Production of Crude Oil

    One of the perplexing problems of geology concerns the origin of petroleum. The most popular scenario is that marine micro-organisms (mainly plant) gradually accumulate on the sea bottom, become buried, and eventually produce droplets of oil that coalesce into massive reservoirs of crude oil. This process was thought to require much time (geological ages).
    A recent publication in Nature^l gives a case study of the rapid natural production of oil. Sediments that are settling in Guaymas Basin in the Gulf of California are yielding oils that are indistinguishable from commercial crude oil. Carbon-14 dating of this oil gives an age of less than 5000 years. However, these oil-bearing sediments in Guaymas Basin have been acted upon by heat from rifts and vents in the sea floor. The assumption is made that this heat has been a factor in speeding up the process of changing buried organic matter into oil.
    Could the Guaymas Basin reflect on a small scale what happened worldwide during the Genesis flood? There is considerable evidence that much heat from massive submarine volcanic fissure and vent eruptions occurred during the flood when the earth's crust was broken up. Although we cannot be certain that the large reservoirs of oil now supplying our fuel needs were produced by this method, we note that this research paper gives a possible answer to the problem of the origin of oil — an answer compatible with Scripture.

Footnotes

1. Borys M. Didyk and Bernd R. T. Simoneit, 1989, "Hydrothermal oil of Guaymas Basin and implications for petroleum formation mechanisms," Nature 342:65-69.

The Tasaday Hoax

    The December, 1971 National Geographic contained an article about a newly discovered primitive tribe in southern Mindinao Island, the Philippines, called the Tasaday, They lived in caves, used crude stone tools and foraged for food from the surrounding jungle. They supposedly were stone-age people who had never contacted civilization. During the same month, a television feature on the Tasaday was shown to millions of North American viewers. Several anthropologists and linguists made studies of the tribe and their language.
    Fifteen years later, a Swiss journalist hiked to the caves which he found empty. The Tasaday were living in villages near the caves and wearing modern clothes. He declared in a Swiss newspaper that the whole Tasaday story was a hoax. Unfortunately the American bombing of Libya took the total attention of the news media. Outside of Europe, this new information about the Tasaday was largely unreported. This deception, perpetrated by an official under former President Alarco's administration might have remained unknown if a British film entitled "Trial in the Jungle" had not been scheduled for showing on U.S. television.
    The American Association for the Advancement of Science then called for an investigation (one among several) which is still in progress. However enough is known to convince many that the Tasaday story was a cleverly contrived fabrication. In brief a few of the salient points of the deception are as follows:

1. Only a few families were induced to dress scantily and live in the caves for a few days.
2. Scientists and journalists were brought in by helicopter to prevent their discovering the close proximity of villages and telltale trails.
3. Crude stone tools were prepared to enhance the deception, as was also fire production by spinning a wooden stick between the palms of the hands.
4. The language of these people is not distinct but is a dialect of Cotabato Manobo (as determined by a missionary Bible translater who lived in southern Mindinao for many years and talked the Manobo language).

    It appears that the presupposition that humans have a primitive stone-age origin led anthropologists and others into a deception from which they now cannot withdraw without embarrassment. But before creationists grin too broadly, let them remember the recent case of the Texas human footprints that have turned out to be those of dinosaurs.

References

• Marshall, Eliot. 1989. Anthropologists Debate Tasaday Hoax Evidence. Science 246:1113-1114.
• Taylor, Ian. 1989. National Geographic and the Stone Age Swindle? Creation Ex Nihilo 9:6-8.

GEOSCIENCE NEWS

A Video on the Genesis Flood

    A video entitled Evidences: The Record and the Flood has just been released by the Review and Herald Publishing Association. The 45-minute video, prepared under the direction of Dr. Ariel Roth, discusses the Genesis Flood from the following aspects:

1. Marine sediments on the Continents. Around the world, about half of the sediments on the continents today comes from the sea. How could so much marine material come to be on top of the continents by any process short of a worldwide flood? Marine sediments are thicker on the continents than on the ocean floor.
2. Unique Sediments Widely Distributed. Many geologically unique sediment layers cover such vast areas that it is difficult to believe that they were deposited slowly under noncatastrophic conditions. The Shinarump conglomerate in the southwestern United States, usually less than 100 ft thick, covers almost 100,000 mi², and the Morrison formation extends for 400,000 mi² from Kansas to Utah and from Canada to New Mexico.
3. Turbidites. Thousands of sedimentary layers once thought to have been deposited in shallow water during long ages are now recognized as the result of fast-moving underwater mud flows (turbidites).
4. Lack of Erosion at Assumed Time Gaps. If two adjacent layers (strata), that are said to be separated by millions of years, show no evidences of erosion between them, they probably were laid down rapidly one above the other.
       A model of what might have occurred during the Genesis Flood is presented in the video. The sinking of the continents with the accompanying deposition of transported sediment from both the continents and the oceans may explain the varied nature of the sediments we now see on the continents.

    The video was given a second place Silver Screen award by the United States Festivals Association in the Religion, Ethics, and Brotherhood category at the 23rd Annual International Awards Competition. It was selected from over 1500 entries from 29 nations.
    Orders for this video may be placed with Adventist Book Centers or directly with the Review and Herald Publishing Association.

Discussion at Goddard Space Flight Center

   Dr. Ariel Roth, Director of the Geoscience Research Institute, presented a lecture entitled: "Some Questions About the Geologic Tune Scale" at the Engineering Colloquium on April 30 at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Green Belt, Maryland.
    In his presentation, Roth questioned the validity of the billions of years postulated for the development of the fossiliferous layers of Earth's crust. While this view has considerable acceptance in scientific circles, a notable body of data can be presented which challenges it. The question has considerable interest for the creation-evolution controversy.
    The lecture engendered a good discussion with some participants affirming their belief in the biblical account of beginnings, while others attempted to find alternative interpretations for the data presented.
    A highlight of the visit for the speaker was a tour of the Goddard Space Flight Center. Of special note was the control area for the Hubble telescope and the huge equipment used to manufacture and test satellites before they are sent into outer space. Equipment includes environments providing vacuum, vibrations, loud sounds, and temperature changes. A huge centrifuge provides major variations in the gravitational environment. The satellites are thoroughly tortured and tested before being released into outer space.

MAY I ASK A QUESTION?

Have new species been produced in the past? If so, does this not amount to evolution? How do you explain then, the Genesis "kind" which cannot change from one kind to another according to most Creationists?

    "Species" is a man-made category. Nothing is said in the Bible about species. The word "kind" that is used in the Bible is a general term. It is not correct to equate species with kind. Perhaps kind is more like our present-day family, like the dog family, the horse family, the cat family, etc. What the Bible is saying is that God produced different kinds of beasts and different kinds of birds and different kinds of creeping things. Although animals reproduce after their kinds, the commands in the first chapter of Genesis are commands of creation are not commands governing future reproduction. God has allowed variation within kinds but there is no evidence that change occurs from one basic kind to another basic kind. We see a large variety of dogs. If these were found wild we would consider them different species. But they are all dogs and dogs have not changed into other basic kinds. The production of new species (or varieties) of dogs has not violated the creation command concerning kinds. Evolution (change) can be demonstrated to occur within kinds but it has never been demonstrated between kinds.

GEOSCIENCE REPORTS

Spring 1990, No. 11

Editor --- Harold G. Coffin
Associate Editor --- Katherine Ching

Subscription requests, correspondence, and notices of change of address should be sent to: Geoscience Reports, Geoscience Research Institute, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350.

Geoscience Reports is a newsletter published by the Geoscience Research Institute to present current happenings at the Institute as well as articles of general interest which deal with creation/evolution issues for secondary-school and college science classes. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Institute.

Staff of the Institute are Ariel A. Roth - Director, Katherine Ching, Ben L. Clausen, Harold G. Coffin, L. Jim Gibson, and Clyde L. Webster.

GEOSCIENCE REPORTS

Fall 1990, No. 12

SPECIES ON ISLANDS: Evidence for Change
L. J. Gibson, Geoscience Research Institute

The Significance of Islands

    In the early development of the theory of evolution by natural selection, two men stand out as having played a central role: Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace. Both men traveled widely and were keen observers of nature. For both men, visits to islands played an important role in developing their understanding of nature. Darwin's visit to the Galapagos Islands is of special interest.
    The Galapagos Islands are located about 1000 km west of Ecuador, South America. The largest island is Isabela, about 4670 km², rising to 1680 m. Volcanic activity continues into the present, fresh water is scarce, and many arts of the islands are desert-like. When Darwin visited the islands in 1835, he was impressed with the unusual composition of the flora and fauna. Having taken a theology course in England, Darwin apparently believed that God had specially created each species for its present habitat and that no changes could occur in the species. The flora and fauna of each area on earth had supposedly been designed specifically for that area.

FIGURE: The unusual cactus fauna of one of the Galapagos Islands. These are volcanic islands far removed from the nearest continents.

    The fauna of the Galapagos Islands did not seem to fit with Darwin's expectations. There are no freshwater fish or amphibians native to the islands, and hardly any mammals, although suitable habitat for mammals is available. Many of the birds and reptiles are distinct species, yet look similar to those of South America, from where Darwin had just come. Giant tortoises, a species of snake, and several kinds of lizards live on the islands, each with probable ancestors in South America. The iguanas belong to genera that are endemic (restricted in distribution) to the Galapagos Islands. The other lizards on the islands are endemic only at the species level. The birds include several subspecies of South American derivation, as well as a group of finches named after Darwin (see Lack 1983). There are about 13 species of Darwin's finches, divided into three genera and forming an endemic group variously classified as a subfamily or tribe. A flightless cormorant is also present.
    Understandably, Darwin was puzzled as to why God would create such an odd assembly of animals for the Galapagos, and why they should be similar to the species living in South America. As he considered the evidence he had seen, Darwin concluded that the species on the Galapagos had originally come from South America and had changed since arriving in the islands. To explain how animals could change and how such peculiar distribution patterns could come about occupied Darwin's attention for many years after his return to England. The result was publication of his famous book The Origin of Species, which presented his theory of evolution of species by natural selection. The study of the fauna of islands thus played an important part in the development of evolutionary theory.

Characteristics of Islands

    One of the most important characteristics of islands is their geology. Islands may be formed by different geologic processes. Some islands are actually parts of a continent, separated from the main landmass by shallow water. There is evidence to suggest that these islands were once part of the mainland. It appears that large areas, especially of the northern continents, were once covered by extensive ice sheets and inland seas. At this time, sea level appears to have been as much as 100 in lower than at present. As a result, many present-day islands were part of the mainland. Examples of this kind of island include Trinidad, the British Isles, and Borneo. A second type is the volcanic island that formed in deep water and never has been connected to any large landmass. Examples include the Galapagos Islands and the Hawaiian Islands. The Seychelles Islands in the Indian Ocean and a few other groups represent a third type that is composed partly of continental granitic rocks and partly of volcanic rocks. They may represent continental fragments resulting from the breakup of continental plates. Larger continental fragments compose the islands of Madagascar and Australia. Finally, a fourth type of island is found in archipelagos fringing the edge of a continental shelf. They are mainly volcanic, with some limestones. The West Indies, the Philippines, and the Lesser Sundas are examples of fringing archipelagos.
    Biogeographically, islands may be classified as either oceanic or continental. Oceanic islands typically have faunas that are ecologically and taxonomically unbalanced (incomplete). Colonization of these islands is by some form of overwater dispersal. Continental islands generally have a more complete and balanced fauna that fills the available habitats and closely resembles that of the adjacent mainland portion of the continent. Separation of continental island and mainland terrestrial faunas is due to division of pre-existing faunas (vicariance) rather than to overwater dispersal.
    The study of islands can provide evidence relating to several important questions such as speciation, methods of dispersal, and past events. It seems obvious that the distinctiveness of species on isolated volcanic oceanic islands must be a result of change in species. Distribution patterns indicate the relative dispersal abilities of organisms under past conditions. By comparing the characteristics of faunas from different types of islands, we may be able to improve our understanding of the history of our world.

Faunas of Volcanic Islands

    The Galapagos Islands, discussed above, are a group of volcanic islands. In comparing the fauna of the Galapagos Islands with those from other volcanic islands, certain patterns emerge.
    The faunas of isolated volcanic islands are not balanced, either ecologically or taxonomically. The same types of organisms, particularly birds, lizards and rats, are often found on many different oceanic islands, showing that they disperse over water readily. Strictly freshwater fish and amphibians are absent or very rare, as are most kinds of mammals. Rats occasionally may have rafted to islands, but transport by humans is probably also an important factor. Snakes are also rare, but lizards are fairly common. The greatest diversity of vertebrates on volcanic islands is among the birds. Isolated groups of islands may have species groups that are distinct enough to be classified as a separate tribe or subfamily. Most isolated islands have, or did have, one or more species of flightless birds.

Faunas of Some Continental Shelf Islands

    Trinidad is an island lying on the northeastern edge of the South American continental shelf. Trinidad has an area of 4845 km², a maximum elevation of about 925 m, and is separated from the mainland by about 16 kin. The island is inhabited by seven families and 10 subfamilies of amphibians and a wide variety of reptiles (Maclean et al. 1977). Many species of birds (Herklots 1961) and mammals (Vesey-Fitzgerald 1936) are present. Among the mammals are two species of monkeys, many kinds of rodents, several carnivores, a species of deer, a peccary, three edentates, and about four marsupials. The faunal diversity of Trinidad is far greater than the faunas of remote volcanic islands, and the distinctiveness is much less. No vertebrate genera, and only a few species, are endemic to Trinidad.
    The close similarity of the fauna of Trinidad with that of the mainland, the separation by shallow water, the presence of strictly freshwater fish and amphibians, and the ecological and taxonomic balance of the fauna all support the concept that the island was once part of the mainland.
    Several factors contribute to the differences between the faunas of continental islands such as Trinidad as compared with those of volcanic islands such as the Galapagos. Volcanic islands tend to be smaller and less ecologically diverse than continental islands, and so cannot support as many species. However, although the island of Hawaii is over twice the size of Trinidad and is ecologically diverse, Trinidad has a much greater faunal diversity.
    The origin of the island and the degree of its isolation seem to be the most important factors affecting the faunal diversity. Faunas of continental islands are primarily derived from overland dispersal, rather than from overwater dispersal. As the Pleistocene continental ice sheets melted, rise of sea level divided what was one fauna into two vicariant faunas. This means that the continental islands once had a mainland fauna, with some extinctions occurring after the island was isolated. The faunas are limited by climate and area, but not by distance to the mainland or by method of dispersal. Volcanic islands have never had a balanced fauna, but are populated only by those species that chanced to reach there. Their faunas are limited by climate and area, and also by distance to a mainland and dispersal method.

Islands that are Continental Fragments

    Nearly all small oceanic islands are volcanic, but there is one interesting exception, the Seychelles Islands. This group of granitic islands lies in the Indian Ocean between Madagascar and India. The islands are separated from each other by relatively shallow water, and it seems likely that the islands were once connected into a large island with an area perhaps as great as 31,000 km² (Stoddart 1984). The largest island, Mahe, has an area of 145 km² and reaches 914 m elevation, the highest peak in the islands. The nearest faunal source for the Seychelles is Madagascar, 930 km distant. The distance to East Africa is nearly 1600 km, and India is over 1700 km to the northeast.
    The fauna of the Seychelles lacks strictly freshwater fish and land mammals, except for a few species of bats (Darlington 1957). The islands are richer in amphibians than one would expect on such isolated islands. Of the 12 species, 11 are endemic. These include a family of frogs, the Sooglossidae, and three genera and seven species of caecilians, worm-like amphibians found only in the tropics. Nine of the 18 species of lizards, but none of the genera, are endemic (Gardner 1986). Two species of snakes (family Colubridae, to which most snakes belong) are present, one of which forms an endemic genus (Darlington 1957). The most spectacular members of the fauna are undoubtedly the giant tortoises, now much reduced in range. A freshwater turtle (family Pelomedusidae) also inhabits some of the islands, but it may have been introduced by man. Nile crocodiles were present at one time, but are now extinct on the islands. Several endemic species of birds inhabit the islands, with few if any known extinctions. The caecilians and the sooglossid frogs are of uncertain origin, but the other frogs and most of the rest of the fauna are related to species in Africa or Madagascar (Nussbaum 1984).
    From this limited information, it can be seen that continental fragments have unbalanced faunas much as volcanic islands do. The major differences may be due to island size and distance from a source area. Continental fragment islands are usually larger and not as isolated as, for example, the Hawaiian Islands. Australia is an island continent and has a low diversity of freshwater fish and a high degree of endemism of its vertebrates. The faunal origins of continental fragment islands, especially Australia, are sometimes unclear. Groups with puzzling ancestries include the sooglossid frogs of the Seychelles, the marsupials and monotremes (egg-laying mammals) of Australia, the iguanid lizards of Madagascar and the kiwis of New Zealand.

Fringing Archipelagos

    Island archipelagos along or just beyond the edge of a continental shelf are a fourth island type, the fringing archipelago. Examples of this kind of island are the Philippine Islands, the Lesser Sundas, and the West Indies. Geologically, the West Indies are principally volcanic, with a mixture of mostly marine sediments (Woodring 1964). These islands are separated from both North and South America by deep water and are biogeographically oceanic. The largest island is Cuba, with an area of nearly 115,000 km². The highest peak, about 3100 m, and the greatest habitat diversity are on the island of Hispaniola (shared by Haiti and the Dominican Republic). These two islands plus Jamaica and Puerto Rico comprise the Greater Antilles. A double arc of volcanic islands, the Lesser Antilles, extends from Puerto Rico toward the coast of South America.
    Biogeographically, the West Indies are oceanic, in agreement with the fact that they are separated from the continents by deep water. The vertebrate fauna of the West Indies is unbalanced, although there is a reasonable diversity of birds (Bond 1978). Of the seven amphibian genera, three are endemic to the West Indies (Schwartz 1978). The largest group of frogs belong to the genus Eleutherodactylus, which has no tadpole stage.
    Reptiles are well represented in the West Indies, with a total of 55 genera (Schwartz 1978). Most families of New World snakes and lizards are represented, with five genera of lizards and six genera of snakes endemic to the region. Only one genus of freshwater turtle and one genus of crocodile are native to the West Indies.
    Among the mammals (see Varona 1974, Hall 1981) there are no native marsupials, hoofed mammals or carnivores. Raccoons, agoutis and rice rats are present on some islands, but the pattern of distribution suggests human transport. With these exceptions, all terrestrial mammals known from the islands (except bats) are endemic. This includes two families of insectivores, a family of ground sloths, and several genera of rodents, including two families. The ground sloths, one family of insectivores, and several of the rodents are now extinct. The rodents and ground sloths are most similar to South American species. The insectivores seem to be from North America, but their origin is an enigma (see MacFadden 1980). The birds are North American, while the reptiles are South American (Maglio 1970). Distributional patterns suggest the main route has been from Central America through Jamaica, even though this is not the shortest route (Briggs 1984, Darlington 1937, Gill 1978). If sea level were lowered some 100 m, as is believed to have occurred in prehistoric times (Milliman & Emery 1968), the distance from Central America to Jamaica would be reduced to about 400 kin. More importantly, certain submerged banks would then be above water, and the greatest required overwater dispersal distance would be less than 150 Ian. Nevertheless, the obstacles to dispersal would be considerable. The area seems to have a history of tectonic activity, and the geography may have been different during the time dispersal was occurring. The possible effect of prehistoric man on these distributions is unknown.

FIGURE: Taal crater lake and crater (right). The Philippine Islands are representative of fringing archipelagos.

Taxonomic Distribution Patterns

    Different groups of vertebrates have different distribution patterns on islands. Strictly freshwater fish are absent on islands except those on continental shelves. Even Australia has very few primary freshwater fish. Amphibians are generally absent on volcanic islands, although some are present in the West Indies, and from Australia to as far as Fiji in the Pacific. Salamanders are generally not found on islands, except for a few continental shelf islands. Frogs are found on many islands, especially those having continental rocks. Island-dwelling frogs often seem to have direct larval development; that is, there is no tadpole stage but the eggs hatch into little "froglets". This feature may facilitate island colonization by making the frogs less dependent on permanent water supplies. Caecilians are found on some oceanic islands, such as the Seychelles and Cuba. Their dispersal method is unknown, but they are burrowers and perhaps could raft inside rotting logs.
    Reptiles, especially lizards, are common on islands. Lizards are small and cling easily to floating vegetation, and it is generally believed they are good rafters. However, lizards are probably also easily transported by man, either intentionally or accidentally. Snakes are uncommon on islands. The most widespread snakes are small burrowers and might be able to raft in rotting logs. It seems surprising to find giant tortoises on islands, but perhaps they can simply float on currents far out to sea.
    Birds and bats can fly to islands; so there is less of a problem imagining how they could arrive at nearly any point on earth, especially if carried by storms. Land mammals are essentially absent from volcanic islands, except for rodents, which could have been accidentally transported by man, or rafted on mats of vegetation. Of the 66 families of mammals that are restricted in distribution to no more than a single continent, 25 families are restricted to islands (including Australia). The mammal faunas of the West Indies, Madagascar and Australia are highly endemic, and the origins of some groups are obscure.

Changes in Island Species

    Island species often differ in size from closely related continental species. Small species are often larger, while larger species are often smaller on islands, although these tendencies do not always hold (Lawlor 1982). Traits other than size may also be involved, sufficient to justify classification in separate genera or higher taxa. In some cases, plausible ancestry of endemic insular genera can be postulated from the mainland fauna, (e.g., Wyles & Gorman 1978). In other cases, such as the duck-billed platypus, the origins of an endemic group are unknown.
    It is generally assumed that the more distinctive a species is, the older it must be. However, this may not be true. The distinctiveness of species on isolated oceanic islands may be a reflection of the degree of isolation rather than the amount of time involved. Without competitors or predators, aberrant individuals might survive and give rise to a new species able to adapt to a different ecological niche. Such species might be expected to be vulnerable to extinction if competitors or predators were to become established in their habitat. This may help explain why many island species have become extinct or are endangered as man and his associated animals move in.
    The question of the extent to which species are able to change is of considerable interest to creationists. Island species may provide a useful indication of the natural limits to change. It appears that significant changes in species have occurred but the evidence is circumstantial rather than demonstrable. The evidence suggests that new species and new genera, have been produced many times. Madagascaran primates appear to have changed enough to be classified in different families. Of course, whether a species is classified in a new genus or a new family, etc., depends on the subjective judgment of a taxonomist. Since higher taxonomic categories are not based on any objective criteria, no particular taxonomic category can be taken to represent the limits of change in species. Each case must be examined individually. However, it is noteworthy that no new structures have originated in island species. Changes have been by modification of previously existing structures. Island species provide evidence for change in species, but do not show any evidence of the origin of new morphological structures or an increase in complexity.

Summary and Conclusions

    Island faunas are of two types. Continental shelf islands have faunas that are balanced both ecologically and taxonomically, with species number depending on size and habitat availability. Species are generally not very distinct from those on the mainland. Dispersal to continental islands probably occurred during periods of lowered sea levels, when there was land connecting the island with the mainland.
    Isolated oceanic islands typically have many empty niches and only a few taxonomic groups are represented. Colonization of such islands must have been by overwater dispersal. Whether this occurred during periods of lowered sea level is not known, but seems plausible. Overwater dispersal of land vertebrates appears to be quite rare under present conditions. Groups of oceanic islands and large islands often have one or more taxonomic groups that appear to show adaptive radiation, with species often distinct enough to be classified as separate genera or even families. In some instances, it is difficult to determine the closest relatives of groups of species that have undergone such extensive changes, or to determine whether they may be the only surviving relicts of some previously more widespread group.
    Different kinds of organisms differ in their ability to disperse to islands. Birds and bats have the greatest dispersal abilities, followed by lizards and rats. Amphibians and strictly freshwater fish are the poorest dispersers to islands. The amount of change occurring in species on an island seems related to the degree of isolation of the island. Both the frequency of endemism and the taxonomic level involved are lowest in those groups that are good dispersers, such as bats and birds, and higher in groups of rare dispersers such as reptiles and mammals. Changes in island species can only be inferred, not observed. Though they suggest that the morphology of a species can be significantly modified, there is no evidence for the origin of new structures or any increase in complexity.

Literature Cited

• Bond,J. 1978. Derivations and continental affinities of Antillean birds. In F. B. Gill (ed.), Zoogeography in the Caribbean, pp. 119-128. Spec. Publ. No. 13. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
• Briggs, J. C. 1984. Freshwater fishes and biogeography of Central America and the Antilles. Syst. Zool. 33:428-435.
• Darlington, P. J. 1937. The origin of the fauna of the Greater Antilles, with discussion of dispersal of animals over water and through air. Quart. Rev. Biol. 13:274-300.
• Darlington, P. J. 1957. Zoogeography. John Wiley, New York.
• Gardner,A.S. 1986. The biogeography of the lizards of the Seychelles Islands. J. Biogeog. 13:237-253.
• Gill, FB. (ed.). 1978. Zoogeography in the Caribbean. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., Spec. Publ. No. 13.
• Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. John Wiley, New York.
• Herklots, G. A-C. 1961. The birds of Trinidad and Tobago. Collins, London.
• Lack, D. 1983. Darwin's finches. Rev. ed. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
• Lawlor, T. E. 1982. The evolution of body size in mammals: evidence from insular populations in Mexico. Am. Nat. 119:54-72.
• MacFadden, B.J. 1980. Rafting animals or drifting islands?: biogeography of the Greater Antillean insectivores Nesophontes and Solenodon. J. Biogeog. 7:11-22.
• Maclean, W. P., et al. 1977. Island lists of West Indian amphibians and reptiles. Smithson. Herpet. Info. Serv. No. 40.
• Maglio, V. J. 1970. West Indian xenodontine colubrid snakes: their probable origin, phylogeny, and zoogeography. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 14:1-54.
• Milliman, J. F. & K. O. Emery. 1968. Sea levels during the past 35,000 years. Science 162:1121-1123.
• Nussbaum, R. A, 1984. Amphibians of the Seychelles. In D. R. Stoddart (ed.), Biogeography and Ecology of the Seychelles Islands, pp. 379-415. junk, The Hague, Boston, Lancaster.
• Schwartz, A. 1978. Some aspects of the herpetogeography of the West Indies. In F. B. Gill (ed.), Zoogeography in the Caribbean, pp. 31-51. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. Sp. Publ. No. 13.
• Stoddart, D. R. 1984. Scientific studies in the Seychelles. In D. R. Stoddart (ed.), Biogeography and Ecology of the Seychelles Islands, pp. 1-15. Junk, The Hague, Boston, Lancaster.
• Varona, L. S. 1974. Catalogo de los marniferos vivientes y extinguidos de las antilles. Acad. de Ceincias de Cuba.
• Vesey-Fitzgerald, D. 1936. Trinidad mammals. Tropical Agric. 13:161-165.
• Woodring, W. P. 1964. Caribbean land and sea through the ages. Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 165:719-732.
• Wyles, J. S. & G. C. Gorman. 1978. Close relationship between the lizard genus Sator and Sceloporus utiformis (Reptilia, Lacertilia, Iguanidae): electrophoretic and immunological evidence. J. Herp. 12:343-350.

SCIENCE NEWSNOTES

NATIONAL PARK ESTABLISHED IN NEVADA

    Great Basin National Park was established in 1986 in Eastern Nevada, 65 miles east of Ely. Although Lehman Caves National Monument has been under the protection of the Department of Agriculture or the National Park Service since 1922, the new 120 mi² park also includes part of the high Snake Range that culminates in Wheeler Peak, 13,063 ft., the highest in the Great Basin. Nestled in a glacial cirque is the southernmost active glacier in North America. Ancient Bristlecone Pines, some with over 5000 rings, guard high slopes of this range which rises like an island from the surrounding sagebrush desert. A paved road gives access to the high country above 10,000 feet.
    Sometime in the 1870's, Ab Lehman's horse fell into a natural opening, leading to the discovery of a marvelous labyrinth of passages named Lehman Caves after the old homesteader. Although the higher elevations of Wheeler Peak are quartzite and granite, a thick deposit of Cambrian limestone, later intruded by granite, lies at the eastern base of the mountain. Lehman Caves are among the most beautiful in North America. Unique among a wide variety of cave formations are the plates or shields from which hang curtains and folds.
    Great Basin National Park, the only National Park in Nevada, stands with the other National Parks as a worthy guardian of outstanding unspoiled scenery, unusual geological formations, and native animals, including mountain lions, mule deer, coyotes as well as a good variety of birds. As human populations grow such oases will become increasingly important.

FIGURE: The Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology (only part showing in this photo) is located near the city of Drumheller, Alberta, Canada.

TYRRELL MUSEUM OF PALEONTOLOGY

    In 1985 the province of Alberta, Canada, opened the Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology. This world-class museum, one of the finest for paleontology in North America, is situated among the badlands near Drumheller, (90 miles northeast of Calgary). This small town may seem like an unlikely place for the placement of a major museum but it must be noted that the Red Deer River, on which the town is located, has been famous for dinosaurs since before the turn of the 20th century.
    A striking feature of this museum is a skywalk where the viewer can gaze down into a huge room of giant reptiles from the past. Eastern Alberta has furnished many specimens of both Mesozoic reptiles and Tertiary mammals. Some of these remains, along with casts of some of the more famous fossils exhibited in other museums, have been mounted or displayed with appropriate backdrops. From the elevated viewpoint, the visitor can make his way down to the walkways that lead among and past these spectacular specimens. Conveniently placed benches provide a moment of rest while video screens gives additional information on microfossils, collecting methods, or conflicting theories. Attached to the museum is an arboretum containing living relatives of fossil plants.
    This is no museum of dusty specimens and aging discolored labels. Elegant maintenance is evident and there is an aura of class and authority. Scientists trained in various aspects of paleontology are employed not only to operate the museum but to undertake research on the museum collections and in field sites throughout the West. Presently a major dinosaur project is being pursued in cooperation with the People's Republic of China.
    No admission is charged although a donation of .00 per person is suggested. Any visitor to Alberta would be well rewarded by including a trip to this museum in his plans.

MAY I ASK A QUESTION?

How do creationists relate to the current theory of drifting continents?

    The theory of continental drift (now more correctly called plate tectonics because the moving plates may or may not incorporate continents) has stimulated a major revolution in geology. Twenty years ago few accepted this mind-boggling idea but now the tables are turned — most geologists accept it in principle.
    Critical examination of the evidences for matching coastlines, paleomagnetic lineations on both sides of spreading centers, correlations of geology for areas once thought to have been together, plates plunging below or sliding past plates, etc., makes a strong case for the validity of the general theory. However many details have yet to be explained. In fact, modifications of the theory have been rapid. No doubt more revisions can be expected in the future. The driving force that moves the plates is still debated. Nevertheless the main features are likely valid.
    Contorted or overturned strata in mountain ranges and deep basins filled with fossiliferous sediments were evidences that pushed creationists to view the Genesis flood as a major event. Now the evidence concerning moving plates has forced us to enlarge even further our concepts of the global extent and catastrophic dynamics of this event.
    If major earth plates have moved to create the modern pattern of oceans and land masses, when would this movement have occurred? Creationists notice that Paleozoic sediments are absent from the ocean basins. These sediments are among those considered to have been deposited by the Genesis flood. This observation suggests that the separation of the continents (when the Atlantic Ocean, for instance, was created) commenced in the latter stages of the flood or in early post-flood time.
    In summary: creationists familiar with the evidences generally accept the idea of moving plates but place the main activity during the last stages of the flood and early post-flood time. Obviously they also postulate high rates of plate movements. Perhaps the present movement (said to be 2-3 cm/yr) represents a residual of much more rapid motion that commenced a few thousand years ago as flood waters began to recede. Such rapid movements of plates is not without its own problems. The relationship of plate tectonics to the Genesis flood is a subject that needs more study.

GEOSCIENCE NEWS

AT THE GC SESSION

    During the July session of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (including the Ministerial Department Pre-session meetings) which convened in Indianapolis, the Geoscience Research Institute conducted two Science and Religion Seminars and maintained a booth in the exhibit hall. In addition, Dr. Ariel Roth, the director of the Institute, spoke in a morning devotional to assembled delegates and visitors.
    About 800 individuals attended the two Science and Religion seminars, each of which ran for four hours. The Geoscience Research Institute staff reported on recent developments, their research, and on issues of concern to the world church.
    Several thousand copies of a Geoscience brochure, Origins, Geoscience Reports, and Ciencia de los Origenes were distributed at the booth. Many visitors stopped to ask questions, to watch the continuous run of the Flood video, and to examine the dinosaur footprint and fossils on display. Interest in the relationship of science to Scripture appeared to be high.

GEOSCIENCE RESEARCH

    During the summer Clyde Webster and Harold Coffin spent two weeks in the Yellowstone region collecting samples of volcanic ash. It is hoped that these samples will give some information regarding the source areas of the ash and breccia layers in which the petrified trees of Specimen Creek are buried. Collecting the ash samples required the climbing of several 10,000 foot peaks and much hiking (including one hike of 20 miles). A previously unknown fossil forest was discovered, the full significance of which has yet to be determined.
    From Yellowstone, Coffin went on to Central Oregon to examine and collect specimens of fossil Equisetum (horsetail plants) and to study the paleoecology of these Eocene fossils.
    In the months of August and October Ben Clausen spent a total of six weeks doing research at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The purpose was to develop some features of the nuclear shell model. In this model, protons and neutrons orbit in shells in the nucleus just as electrons orbit in shells in the atom. One experiment studied ²⁶Mg and ³²S nuclei by hitting them with pions and then detecting the energy and angle at which the pions were scattered. These pions, with half-life of less than a microsecond, are the particles that hold the nucleus together. The other experiment involved hitting a ¹⁰B nucleus with a neutron to make ¹⁰Be plus a proton whose energy and scattering angle were measured. This reaction is comparable to the inverse of beta decay. The data from these experiments are currently being analyzed.

BOOK REVIEW

Peth, Howard. 1990. Blind Faith: Evolution Exposed. Amazing Facts, Inc. P. O. Box 680, Frederick, MD 21701. 188 pp.

    Howard Peth, a Seventh-day Adventist professor in a public college, has often faced the problem of secular humanism so prevalent on university campuses. The need for written materials to assist students without any foundation in Christianity or Scripture led him to write a two volume work entitled Seven Mysteries ... Solved. From these volumes, Blind Faith: Evolution Exposed has been extracted and adapted, with the subject being limited to the evolution/creation issue.
    Although Peth is not a scientist, he has handled the question of evolution/creation carefully and as thoroughly as the size of the volume permits. Quotations from the writings of past and current evolutionary theorists are liberally sprinkled through the volume. Peth has limited himself almost entirely to a discussion of the theory of evolution and to the problems a belief in this theory holds for those who accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. Little attention is given to evidences of a world-wide flood or to geological time and dating methods. Considering its main purpose, to acquaint secular individuals with the fallacies of evolution and to do so in one concise handy booklet, the decision to limit the discussion to the question of origins was wise. The book concludes with a unique and important discussion of theological implications of a belief in evolution.
    In general the presentation is remarkably accurate and authoritative. One short section (pp. 111 to 116) in the chapter on paleontology does not maintain the quality of the rest of the book. Arguments concerning the geological column reflect some of the erroneous information that is commonly found creationist writings. With the exception of these few pages, the few minor errors and statements that need qualification will not seriously detract from the value of the work.
    This booklet would be excellent additional reading to accompany a high school or college freshman biology course. It would be an appropriate gift for a friend who has questions about creation and evolution. It would be good reading for anyone who wants to review again the weakness of the evolutionary theory and the incompatibility of belief in evolution with biblical Christianity.

GEOSCIENCE REPORTS
Fall 1990 No. 12

Editor Harold G. Coffin
Associate Editor Katherine Ching

Subscription requests, correspondence, and notices of change of address should be sent to: Geoscience Reports, Geoscience Research Institute, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92350.

Geoscience Reports is a newsletter published by the Geoscience Research Institute to present current happenings at the Institute as well as articles of general interest which deal with creation/evolution issues for secondary school and college science classes. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Institute.

Staff of the Institute are Ariel A. Roth - Director, Katherine Ching, Ben L. Clausen, Harold G. Coffin, L. Jim Gibson, and Clyde L. Webster.

GEOSCIENCE REPORTS

Spring 1991, No. 13

THE SANTANA FORMATION

    In past years unusual fossil fish from Brazil came to the attention of the Geoscience Research Institute staff. Recent scientific research on these fossils (Martill, 1988) also stimulated our interest and led us to include this fossil location in the itinerary of a research trip to South America in early 1991.
    The Santana Formation, in which the fossil fish are found, is located in the southern part of Ceara Province in Northeast Brazil. These fossils first came to the attention of the world in 1828 when two European travelers briefly mentioned them and included one illustration in their publication. In 1841 George Gardner described a collection he had obtained in the Reports of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Louis Agassiz (famous American zoologist) did taxonomic studies in 1841 and 1844 on Gardner's collection. E. D. Cope, Smith Woodward, and David Starr Jordan, well-known ichthyologists, also studied the Santana fish in 1871, 1887, and 1908 respectively. More recently there has been a revival of interest by paleontologists from several countries.
    The fish fossils are usually contained in concretions and often still retain their original three-dimensional form (Fig. 1). The fossils in a concretion may range from part of one fish to several complete fish. Occasionally other organisms also are seen in these concretions.

Fig. 1: Four fish from the Santana Formation that still maintain their three-dimensional form.

    This Cretaceous bed is exposed around the slopes of the Chapada do Araripe, an irregular plateau with dimensions about 115 miles long east-west and 30 miles wide north-south. The plateau is about 1000 ft above the surrounding country at an elevation between 1800 and 2700 ft (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2: The Araripe Plateau from which the concretions containing fossil fish are eroding. The concretions are scattered over the slopes closer to the top of the plateau.

    The large variety of fishes and other organisms are a mixture of oceanic and fresh-water species. Along with many modern species of true fishes are several species of extinct Mesozoic fishes and one bat fish (Rhinobatus). The true fishes come from benthic, semi-benthic, pelagic, littoral, and estuarine environments. They also include surface feeders, microphagous planktonic feeders, small fish eaters, and two coelacanth fish, one a new genus. Coelacanths are generally considered to be deep sea fish. Fossil coelacanth fish also have been uncovered in West Africa (Martill, 1988).
    Jordan and Branner (1908) regarded a specimen of Calamoplurus cylindricus from Brazil as the most perfect fossil fish they had ever seen. Color stiff remained on the scales and even the eyeballs were preserved. In the field, we opened one concretion with a fish head. The eyeballs of this specimen still maintained the spherical form even though now petrified (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3: A concretion containing a fish head.

    Fossil Aspidorhyncus comptoni Agassiz are among the most abundant fossil fish. They are slender appressed fish with a pointed snout and with unusual slender scales along the sides. If only part of the body of the fish is exposed, one might think he were looking at a snake with its ventral scales (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4: Two well-preserved fish, one strongly coiled, within one concretion.

    Most of the Santana fossil fish still have their scales. When a fish dies, one of the first indications of decay is the loss of scales which can commence a few hours after death. The full armament of scales on these fossil fish and the absence of isolated scales in the surrounding sediments are strong indications of extreme rapidity of burial and preservation.
    In addition to fish, a surprising array of other fossil organisms is present. A list of invertebrates is as follows:

1. Pelecypods - rare except for local pockets
2. Gastropods - rare except for local pockets
3. Copepods - rarely found on the fossil fish
4. Ostracods - abundant
5. Crustaceans
6. Echinoids
7. Scorpions
8. Dinoflagellates - occasional
9. Concostracans
10. Insects
11. Cephalopods

    Besides a wide variety of fishes and a few plants, the following vertebrates have been collected:

1. Crocodiles
2. Chelonians (turtles)
3. Dinosaurs
4. Pterosaurs (flying reptiles)

    An examination of these fists immediately indicates the mixed nature of the fauna. For instance, some of the marine fishes are embedded in calcareous shale in which also are located hundreds of tiny fresh-water ostracods. The marine echinoids mentioned in the invertebrate fist above were found in sediments of a fresh-water sequence.
    The ostracods are mostly adults of only a few species. This lack of variety is suggestive of fresh-water environments. Marine environments support a large suite of species. The valves of these minute animals (not much larger than a pin head) often are closed, suggesting rapid burial while the animals were alive. The preservation of these ostracods and the copepods mentioned below allowed us to see minute details of appendages, mouth-parts, reproductive organs, eggs, etc. All these parts are covered with submicroscopic phosphatic crystals (Bate, 1972; Creasey and Patterson, 1972).
    The copepods were parasites on two fossil Cladocyclus fish skulls. The oldest copepod parasites previously reported as fossils are Miocene — said to be 10 to 20 millions of years old. These parasites of Cretaceous fish extend the range back to 100 million years based on the standard geological time scale, yet they are fully adapted to a parasitic existence on fish. These fish containing marine copepod parasites are buried with freshwater ostracods. Parasitic copepods are a highly specialized group with bizarre morphology. Their presence in Cretaceous fish means that the evolution of the group would have had to be completed before the Cretaceous. This is another example of homeostasis (stability) of a specific group even when the geologic range is greatly extended.
    Recent discovery of a fossil crocodile skull from the Republic of Niger in west central Africa suggests, along with numerous other fines of evidence, the juxtaposition of Brazil with West Africa in the Cretaceous (as does also the coelacanth fish mentioned earlier) (Buffetaut and Taquet, 1972). It has been identified as Araripesuchus, the same genus as those from the Santana Formation.
    Ten species of pterosaurs (flying reptiles) have been identified. The bones are uncrushed and well preserved, occasionally even articulated. In one unusual case, part of the wing membrane was preserved (Unwin, 1988).
    The hardening of the concretions must have started before or during early decomposition of the fish. The bones are little altered. The body fluids of the animals probably contributed to the hardening by seeping into the sediments directly surrounding the fish. In many instances, phosphate (cryptocrystalline francolite) replacement of tissues (especially muscle tissues) prevented decay and preserved the three-dimensional shape of the fish.
    Soon after the crystallization of the phosphate came the pyrite. Ovoids such as body cavities and swim bladders are lined with pyrite and calcite, the calcite being the innermost and the last to crystallize. Gas produced before the sediments hardened helped to maintain the three-dimensional features of the fish. In some instances gas bubbles forced their way through the body wall and pushed several scales out into the sediments to produce a small eruption-like crater (Martill, 1988). Release of gas pressure from within body cavities might be expected to allow the fish carcasses to collapse. In most instances this did not happen. Usually sediments and fish tissues hardened so rapidly that the fish are still "in the round."
    Under the electron microscope the lamellae of the gills can be seen uncollapsed. These structures will collapse in one to three hours when removed from fresh fish. Greater magnification even shows the individual cells of the lamellae still turgid. Such a condition indicates that the preservation probably occurred within one hour (Martill, 1989)! Beautiful preservation in such abundance has not been found anywhere else in the world.
    Collection of these famous fossils is done by local farmers. The concretions are scattered over the slopes along the edges of the plateau. Trenches and pits are dug to give access to more of them. We spent several fascinating hours cracking open concretions. Of the many excellent fossils we kept only a few of the best because of the weight limitations imposed by air travel. Those that we discarded would normally be classed as marvelous fossils!
    The museum in the small town of Santana contains an excellent representation of fossils from this formation. Insects of unusual detail and variety, leaves and stems of plants, fish of great size and detail, flying reptile skeletons, possible dinosaur bones, invertebrates, and other miscellaneous fossils, emphasize the heterogeneous mixture from these beds.
    At one location several miles beyond automobile access, we dickered with a local peasant for the purchase of some especially beautiful fish specimens. In his yard was a pile of discards that would have been considered valuable fossils elsewhere. In a small shed with thatched roof, fish fossils were piled up awaiting purchase by a middleman who would pass them on to curio stores and rock shops. By the time these fish reach Europe and North America, they will command a substantial price.
    The sequence from top to bottom for the Santana Formation is as follows: Below thick deposits of sandstone and limestone that cap the plateau he the fossil-bearing beds. Directly below a thin layer of marine invertebrates fossils consisting mainly of gastropods lie the fish fossil concretions. Below the fish fossils is a 90 ft bed of evaporite (gypsum). Under the gypsum a layer of fine-grained calcareous shale that is being quarried for building stone, contains insects, small fish, and plant fossils (Fig. 5). Below these laminated limestones scattered remains of dinosaurs and petrified trees have been collected.
    There is much similarity of the laminated calcareous beds with the Green River Shales of Wyoming. Martill (1989) also compares this section of the Santana with the famous German Solnhofen limestones from which several Archaeopteryx specimens have been collected (see book review, this issue). The nature of the laminated limestones is similar, and both are quarried for building stones. Fossil preservation in both is remarkable, with that in Brazil the most spectacular. Preservation of soft tissue is less common in the Solnhofen. A variety of habitats represented by the fossils (marine, limnetic, terrestrial, etc.) is a feature of both areas. The kinds of organisms are in good agreement. For instance dragonflies, cockroaches, beetles, wasps, and flies among these listed for the Solnhofen are also found in the Santana. Vertebrates especially noticeable in both areas are small sharks, ratfish, rays, turtles, ichthyosaurs, crocodiles, and pterosaurs. The most notable differences are the presence of an evaporite bed (gypsum) and the lower abundance of marine invertebrates in the Santana Formation. As yet no birds have been found in the Santana limestones but this area, although extensive, has had little attention from paleontologists.

Fig. 5: A small fish and a plant preserved together on the same slab of calcareous limestone.

    What conditions were necessary to bring about so remarkable a fossil deposit as the Santana? Much additional study is required but some tentative conclusions can be drawn.
    The Chapada do Araripe is probably not the full extent of the original Santana Formation.
    Many miles beyond the edges of this plateau, patches or pockets of Santana are found. The broad range of this formation, the evidences of rapid sedimentation and preservation, the quick cementation of the nodules with enclosed fish fossils, and the mixture of fresh-water and marine organisms, has been surprising to paleontologists and geologists who have tried without much success to encompass all these requirements in an estuarine environment that was stirred up by a catastrophic tsunami. The resulting sediments could have been a mixture of marine, brackish, and fresh-water sediments, and the fauna caught and buried also could have come from these three major types of environments. Yet the absence of typical bay and estuary invertebrate organisms is a problem for this model.
    The evaporite layer and the fine-grained flat-lying shales could suggest quiet conditions and the passage of time. However, water of sufficient depth can allow for quiet sedimentation even when a major storm is ravaging the surface. Most evaporites, contrary to the name, probably were not produced gradually by long continued evaporation. Evaporites can readily be transported. It is most unlikely that the fish fixed within the concretions were originally living normally in water directly above a salt deposit (gypsum). Some of the concretions he directly upon the gypsum. Also there does not seem to be a transition from the underlying shale sheets to the massive evaporite as would be expected if the origin of the gypsum were truly by evaporation.
The unnatural mixture and the rapid stratigraphic shifts of fauna seem to require catastrophic water transport into the area. The large geographic extent precludes a local event. Creationists suggest that a world-wide flood could produce results as seen in the Santana Formation and is a better explanatory model.

Literature Cited

• Bate, Raymond H. 1971, Phosphatized ostracods from the Cretaceous of Brazil. Nature 230:397-398.
• ___ 1972. Phosphatized ostracods with appendages from the lower Cretaceous of Brazil. Palaeont. 15:379A-393.
• Buffetaut, Eric and Philippe Taquet. 1979. An early Cretaceous terrestrial crocodilian and the opening of the South Atlantic. Nature 280:486-487.
• Creasey, Roger and Colin Patterson. 1972. Fossil parasitic copepods from a lower Cretaceous fish. Science 180:1283-1285.
• Gee, Henry. 1988. Cretaceous unity and diversity. Nature 332:487.
• Jenks, William F. 1956. Handbook of South American geology. Geol. Soc. Am. Mem. 65.
• Jordan, David Starr and John Casper Branner. 1908. The Cretaceous fishes of Ceara, Brazil. Smithsonian Misc. Coll., Vol. 52, Part 1, pp. 1-19, pl. I-VIII.
• Mabesoone, J. M. and I. M. Tinoco. 1973. Palaeoecology of the Aptian Santana Formation (northeastern Brazil). Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclim. Palaeoecol. 14:97-118.
• Maisey, John G. 1986. Coelacanths from the lower Cretaceous of Brazil. Am. Mus. Novitates, No. 2877, pp. 1-30.
• Martill, David M. 1988. Preservation of fish in the Cretaceous Santana Formation of Brazil. Palaeontology 31:1-18.
• ___ 1989. The Medusa effect: instantaneous fossilization. Geol. Today, Nov.-Dec., pp. 201-205.
• ___ 1990. Macromolecular resolution of fossilized muscle tissue from an elopomorph fish. Nature 346:171-172.
• Schaeffer, Bobb. 1947. Cretaceous and Tertiary actinopterygian fishes from Brazil. Arm Mus. Nat Hist. Bull. 89:5-39.
• Unwin, David M. 1988. New pterosaurs from