What do you think?
Rate this book
Fossils: Key to the Present
This discussion of fossils and the information derived from them concludes with the evolutionist and creationist summation of creation.
81 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1980
About the author
Duane T. Gish
35 books16 followersDuane Tolbert Gish is an American biochemist and a prominent member of the creationist movement. Gish is a former vice-president of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and the author of numerous publications on the subject of scientific creationism. Gish has been called "creationism's T.H. Huxley" for the way he "relished the confrontations" of formal debates with prominent evolutionists, usually held on university campuses."
He holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of California, Berkeley.
He spent 18 years in biochemical and biomedical research at Cornell University Medical College, the Virus Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley, and The Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, Michigan. He is the author or co-author of numerous technical articles in his field and a well-known author and lecturer on creation/evolution.
He holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of California, Berkeley.
He spent 18 years in biochemical and biomedical research at Cornell University Medical College, the Virus Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley, and The Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, Michigan. He is the author or co-author of numerous technical articles in his field and a well-known author and lecturer on creation/evolution.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
December 1, 2025
A PURPORTED ‘TWO-MODEL’ APPROACH TO INTERPRETING FOSSILS
Authors Richard Bliss, Gary Parker, and Duane Gish (1921-2013) were associated with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). Richard Bliss (d. 1995) had been Chairman of the Science Education Department for ICR. Biologist Gary Parker (b. 1940) was the head of the science department at Clearwater Christian College (CCC) in Florida. He also was a lecturer for Answers in Genesis and a faculty member of ICR for 12 years. Gish was the most fearsome ICR debater.
They wrote in the Introduction to this 1980 book, “Did all life that we see today form very slowly over vast periods of time? Was there a time when a Creator, a Master Designer, created all the different kinds of life on earth? Neither of these questions can be answered with certainty… some [say] that the study of fossils provides a means of ‘seeing EVOLUTION.’ Others have stated that the fossil evidence favors CREATION. Perhaps the student can decide, by observing the data, which idea seems to fit best… a ‘two-model’ study of this question is a way to approach the data through scientific inquiry… The actual scientific data, however, can be explained in both models. We will try to bring this data to you in a very objective way.” (Pg. 1)
They explain, “Fossils are the remains or traces of plants and animals preserved in rock deposits… Some fossils show EXTINCT forms of life, those no longer living today.” (Pg. 4-5) They add, “Petrified and leached specimens all contain material from once-living forms. Sometimes, however, an organism disappears entirely, leaving only an impression in the rock called a ‘mold.’ … Tracks or footprints and worm burrows are also called fossils, because they tell us something about once-living creatures.” (Pg. 9)
They state, ‘Living things today tend to be found in certain groups or ‘ecological zones.’ Lions and zebras, for instance, are found together on the African grasslands… In a similar way, fossils are also found with each other in groups called ‘geologic systems.’ If a rock layer contains mostly fossils of … trilobites and lampshells, then these layers would be a part of the Cambrian system. There are 12 major systems, each identified by the different kinds and numbers of fossils it contains. A system which includes fossils of many dinosaurs and flowering plants is called ‘Cretaceous.’” (Pg. 10)
They continue, “To identify a system, you either have to consider the numbers of different kinds of fossils or find any ‘index fossils.’ An index fossil is … [a] marker for a certain system, and is often found in that system and hardly ever in any other. Certain kinds of trilobites, for example, are index fossils for Cambrian rocks.” (Pg. 12) They add, ‘Sometimes fossils from different geological systems … are mixed together… But most of the time, fossils are found only in certain systems. This means that you are not likely to find trilobites in the same rock unit with dinosaurs.” (Pg. 13)
They note, “Often, but not always, geological systems are found in a certain vertical order. Sometimes trilobites, coal, and dinosaurs are found in three different rock layers in the same area. When this happens, the trilobites will usually be on the bottom, coal in the middle, and dinosaurs on top. The GEOLOGICAL COLUMN shows an ‘ideal’ vertical order of geologic systems… the geologic column … does not exist anywhere. All real rock layers include gaps and even reversals of this perfect sequence… the geologic column is not a column of rock; it is an idea. But… it does show a trend for rock layers or strata to be found in a vertical sequence.’ (Pg. 13-14)
They assert, “When it comes to interpreting the fossil evidence, we also encounter two scientific MODELS: the evolutionary-gradualism model, and the creation-catastrophe model… According ot the Creation-Catastrophe Model… All the kinds of life we find as fossils can be grouped into separate and distinct created ‘kinds.’… According to the Evolutionary-Gradualism Model… Fossils [demonstrate] evolution from simple beginnings to complex forms. They should allow us to trace out the in-between links through which one kind of life evolved into another.” (Pg. 20)
They outline, “Predictions Based on the Creation Model: Creationists believe that all of the basically different kinds of plants and animals were created MATURE by a supernatural Creator... each basic kind would appear in the fossil record complete, with no ancestors in an incomplete form. The fossil record should indicate that living things arose suddenly in many different complex living forms… Predictions Based on the Evolution Model: Evolutionists believe that all living forms have gradually evolved from … a few single-celled beginnings… Thus, rocks lowest in the column should contain only fossils of very simple forms of life. Fossils further up in the column should show a gradual change… into more and more complex forms of life… the fossil record would be expected to produce many in-between or transitional forms.” (Pg. 23-25)
They state, “Paleontologists have searched Precambrian rocks intensely for ancestors of the Cambrian animals… However, no fossils have been found; instead, life seems to have suddenly come into existence. Which model does this evidence seem to favor most?” (Pg. 29)
They suggest, “As you study these fossils, also consider… the bone-pattern in the lobe-finned fish appears abruptly and complete in the fossil sequence… Creationists say that … lobe-finned fish … are distinct kinds; instead of descent from a common ancestor, they show creation according to a common plan. Here is a tough case. The similarities seem to support evolution; the dissimilarities seem to support creation. Use the questions below to help you figure out which model seems to fit the data best." (Pg. 38-39)
The explain, “We cannot expect fossils to tell us much about the origin of reptiles from amphibians, but we should expect any gradual change from reptiles to birds to leave clear in-between forms. There are big differences in the skeletons of reptiles and birds. Feathers and scales … are also found as fossils. At this point we meet the most famous fossil claimed as support for evolution: Archaeopteryx… Notice the bird-like features: feathers, wings and a bill. But notice also the reptile-like features: a long, bony tail; claws on the wings; and teeth in the bill. Lack of a breastbone and backbones that are not fused are also more reptile-like than bird-like. Thus, Archaeopteryx appears to be a perfect example of an evolutionary link. Or is it?… Is it an odd mixture, or does it give us real clues as to how certain traits might have evolved?” (Pg. 47-48)
They state, “There is one mammal… which is often offered as proof that traits can evolve beyond the original kind. That mammal is the horse… It is possible, unlike Archaeopteryx, to arrange the fossil specimens to show a series of changes.” (Pg. 55-56) “The so-called five-toed horses may have nothing to do with horses at all…. Horses are though to be the best to next best evidence of evolution. Examine the evidence. Where does it lead you?” (Pg. 58)
They summarize the evolutionary position: “We see mutations taking place about us everyday. Flu viruses change, insects become resistant to DDT, and bacteria learn to live on penicillin. These are only a few of the many things that show evolution in action… But the most striking example of evolutionary change is provided by … Archaeopteryx [which] is truly an in-between link. It has feathers and a bird-like beak, but it has teeth in its bill, wing claws, and a long, bony reptile-like tail.” (Pg. 64-66)
They summarize the creationist position: “Many scientists openly wonder and challenge others to think whether the KIND of design seen in living thing does imply a Designer. Clearly creation seems to be the best idea from our present knowledge of cells, heredity, and ecology. Our observations of fossils… strongly supports the creation model… The fossils also clearly show that man has always been man. Modern types of human skeletons have been found in lower Tertiary rock than man’s supposed ancestors. We even have trails of fossil footprints suggesting that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.” (Pg. 68-71) [But we now know that the January 1986 issue of the ICR’s publication ‘Impact’ (no. 151, ‘The Paluxy River Mystery’) admits that these ‘human’ footprints are actually 3-toed dinosaur footprints, and that “it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution.”]
This book will interest creationists---but they should note that a number of proposed ‘transitional’ forms have been found since (e.g., for whales), including some for humans. And of course, the authors do not consider any objections to their ‘Young-Earth,’ ‘worldwide Flood’ model (e.g., distant starlight; the separation of the continents, etc.).
Authors Richard Bliss, Gary Parker, and Duane Gish (1921-2013) were associated with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). Richard Bliss (d. 1995) had been Chairman of the Science Education Department for ICR. Biologist Gary Parker (b. 1940) was the head of the science department at Clearwater Christian College (CCC) in Florida. He also was a lecturer for Answers in Genesis and a faculty member of ICR for 12 years. Gish was the most fearsome ICR debater.
They wrote in the Introduction to this 1980 book, “Did all life that we see today form very slowly over vast periods of time? Was there a time when a Creator, a Master Designer, created all the different kinds of life on earth? Neither of these questions can be answered with certainty… some [say] that the study of fossils provides a means of ‘seeing EVOLUTION.’ Others have stated that the fossil evidence favors CREATION. Perhaps the student can decide, by observing the data, which idea seems to fit best… a ‘two-model’ study of this question is a way to approach the data through scientific inquiry… The actual scientific data, however, can be explained in both models. We will try to bring this data to you in a very objective way.” (Pg. 1)
They explain, “Fossils are the remains or traces of plants and animals preserved in rock deposits… Some fossils show EXTINCT forms of life, those no longer living today.” (Pg. 4-5) They add, “Petrified and leached specimens all contain material from once-living forms. Sometimes, however, an organism disappears entirely, leaving only an impression in the rock called a ‘mold.’ … Tracks or footprints and worm burrows are also called fossils, because they tell us something about once-living creatures.” (Pg. 9)
They state, ‘Living things today tend to be found in certain groups or ‘ecological zones.’ Lions and zebras, for instance, are found together on the African grasslands… In a similar way, fossils are also found with each other in groups called ‘geologic systems.’ If a rock layer contains mostly fossils of … trilobites and lampshells, then these layers would be a part of the Cambrian system. There are 12 major systems, each identified by the different kinds and numbers of fossils it contains. A system which includes fossils of many dinosaurs and flowering plants is called ‘Cretaceous.’” (Pg. 10)
They continue, “To identify a system, you either have to consider the numbers of different kinds of fossils or find any ‘index fossils.’ An index fossil is … [a] marker for a certain system, and is often found in that system and hardly ever in any other. Certain kinds of trilobites, for example, are index fossils for Cambrian rocks.” (Pg. 12) They add, ‘Sometimes fossils from different geological systems … are mixed together… But most of the time, fossils are found only in certain systems. This means that you are not likely to find trilobites in the same rock unit with dinosaurs.” (Pg. 13)
They note, “Often, but not always, geological systems are found in a certain vertical order. Sometimes trilobites, coal, and dinosaurs are found in three different rock layers in the same area. When this happens, the trilobites will usually be on the bottom, coal in the middle, and dinosaurs on top. The GEOLOGICAL COLUMN shows an ‘ideal’ vertical order of geologic systems… the geologic column … does not exist anywhere. All real rock layers include gaps and even reversals of this perfect sequence… the geologic column is not a column of rock; it is an idea. But… it does show a trend for rock layers or strata to be found in a vertical sequence.’ (Pg. 13-14)
They assert, “When it comes to interpreting the fossil evidence, we also encounter two scientific MODELS: the evolutionary-gradualism model, and the creation-catastrophe model… According ot the Creation-Catastrophe Model… All the kinds of life we find as fossils can be grouped into separate and distinct created ‘kinds.’… According to the Evolutionary-Gradualism Model… Fossils [demonstrate] evolution from simple beginnings to complex forms. They should allow us to trace out the in-between links through which one kind of life evolved into another.” (Pg. 20)
They outline, “Predictions Based on the Creation Model: Creationists believe that all of the basically different kinds of plants and animals were created MATURE by a supernatural Creator... each basic kind would appear in the fossil record complete, with no ancestors in an incomplete form. The fossil record should indicate that living things arose suddenly in many different complex living forms… Predictions Based on the Evolution Model: Evolutionists believe that all living forms have gradually evolved from … a few single-celled beginnings… Thus, rocks lowest in the column should contain only fossils of very simple forms of life. Fossils further up in the column should show a gradual change… into more and more complex forms of life… the fossil record would be expected to produce many in-between or transitional forms.” (Pg. 23-25)
They state, “Paleontologists have searched Precambrian rocks intensely for ancestors of the Cambrian animals… However, no fossils have been found; instead, life seems to have suddenly come into existence. Which model does this evidence seem to favor most?” (Pg. 29)
They suggest, “As you study these fossils, also consider… the bone-pattern in the lobe-finned fish appears abruptly and complete in the fossil sequence… Creationists say that … lobe-finned fish … are distinct kinds; instead of descent from a common ancestor, they show creation according to a common plan. Here is a tough case. The similarities seem to support evolution; the dissimilarities seem to support creation. Use the questions below to help you figure out which model seems to fit the data best." (Pg. 38-39)
The explain, “We cannot expect fossils to tell us much about the origin of reptiles from amphibians, but we should expect any gradual change from reptiles to birds to leave clear in-between forms. There are big differences in the skeletons of reptiles and birds. Feathers and scales … are also found as fossils. At this point we meet the most famous fossil claimed as support for evolution: Archaeopteryx… Notice the bird-like features: feathers, wings and a bill. But notice also the reptile-like features: a long, bony tail; claws on the wings; and teeth in the bill. Lack of a breastbone and backbones that are not fused are also more reptile-like than bird-like. Thus, Archaeopteryx appears to be a perfect example of an evolutionary link. Or is it?… Is it an odd mixture, or does it give us real clues as to how certain traits might have evolved?” (Pg. 47-48)
They state, “There is one mammal… which is often offered as proof that traits can evolve beyond the original kind. That mammal is the horse… It is possible, unlike Archaeopteryx, to arrange the fossil specimens to show a series of changes.” (Pg. 55-56) “The so-called five-toed horses may have nothing to do with horses at all…. Horses are though to be the best to next best evidence of evolution. Examine the evidence. Where does it lead you?” (Pg. 58)
They summarize the evolutionary position: “We see mutations taking place about us everyday. Flu viruses change, insects become resistant to DDT, and bacteria learn to live on penicillin. These are only a few of the many things that show evolution in action… But the most striking example of evolutionary change is provided by … Archaeopteryx [which] is truly an in-between link. It has feathers and a bird-like beak, but it has teeth in its bill, wing claws, and a long, bony reptile-like tail.” (Pg. 64-66)
They summarize the creationist position: “Many scientists openly wonder and challenge others to think whether the KIND of design seen in living thing does imply a Designer. Clearly creation seems to be the best idea from our present knowledge of cells, heredity, and ecology. Our observations of fossils… strongly supports the creation model… The fossils also clearly show that man has always been man. Modern types of human skeletons have been found in lower Tertiary rock than man’s supposed ancestors. We even have trails of fossil footprints suggesting that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.” (Pg. 68-71) [But we now know that the January 1986 issue of the ICR’s publication ‘Impact’ (no. 151, ‘The Paluxy River Mystery’) admits that these ‘human’ footprints are actually 3-toed dinosaur footprints, and that “it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution.”]
This book will interest creationists---but they should note that a number of proposed ‘transitional’ forms have been found since (e.g., for whales), including some for humans. And of course, the authors do not consider any objections to their ‘Young-Earth,’ ‘worldwide Flood’ model (e.g., distant starlight; the separation of the continents, etc.).
Displaying 1 of 1 review