The primary functions of the Society are:
||Publication of a quarterly peer-reviewed journal.|
||Conducting research to develop and test creation models.|
||The provision of research grants and facilities to creation scientists for approved research projects.|
|Providing qualified scientists to speak to groups or churches.|
Other functions of CRS include maintenance of a comprehensive directory of creationist organizations throughout the world. The CRS also runs a secure online bookstore for ordering books and videos on special creation.
The CRS was incorporated in the state of Michigan as a nonprofit corporation for educational and scientific purposes. Shortly thereafter it was granted 501(c)(3) not-for-profit tax-exempt status by the IRS. The first issue of the Creation Research Society Quarterly was published in July, 1964.
The CRS is independent and unaffiliated with any other organization, religious group or church body.
The CRS advocates the concept of special creation (as opposed to evolution), both of the universe and of the earth with its complexity of living forms. Membership in the Society requires agreement with the CRS Statement of Belief. Members of the society include research scientists from various fields of scientific accomplishment who are committed to full belief in the Biblical record of creation and early history.
The CRS does not engage in any political lobbying. Though its primary purpose is research and publishing, the CRS occasionally sponsors or co-sponsors seminars and field trips. These events serve to promote the purposes of the Society, to facilitate dialogue between creation scientists, and to serve the interests of our members. An open meeting is sometimes held in conjunction with the annual Board of Directors meeting to update members and other interested individuals on current activities of the Society.
For more detailed information on the CRS, please see the History and Aims of the Creation Research Society.
Copyright © 2001 by Creation Research Society. All rights reserved.
What appear to be red blood cells have been described from Tyrannosaurus rex bones (Weiland 1997a), while other dinosaur bones have been found which “cannot be distinguished from modern bone” (Weiland, 1999). Additionally, soft muscles, internal organs and even microscopic fibers have been well preserved in a juvenile dinosaur recovered in China (Snelling 1998).
In some of these writings it is often charged or implied by creationists that evolutionists are reluctant to make these startling revelations, even in recent times because it does not support their position that these fossils are over 65 million years old, or that they took millions of years to fossilize. Although the process of fossilization is not completely understood, it is assumed by both evolutionists and creationists that most fossils must be buried or stabilized very quickly in order to stand any chance of being preserved. Briggs states: “Of course fossilization is time dependent. But although the age of most fossils is measured in millions of years (and some diagenic processes are certainly long term), whether or not an organism is destined to become a fossil may be determined very rapidly” (Briggs, 1995). Mineralized and petrified oddities such as bowler hats, fencing wire and sacks of flour (Walker, 2000; Weiland 2000) certainly show us that fossilization can take place quite rapidly, “freezing” the feeding practice or even the process of giving birth, forever into rock.
It is incorrect, however, to state that evolutionists have not been forthcoming with data that may show that fossilization and mineralization of biological materials can happen so rapidly as to preserve microscopic structures. As early as 1962 these scientists have shown that microscopic structures, such as bone collagen are well preserved in dinosaur bones (Little, Kelly and Courts, 1962). This work was followed by a series of studies by Pawlicki and his associates demonstrating by scanning and transmission electron microscopy that not only were collagen fibers found in dinosaur bones (thought to be 80 million or more years old), but that blood vessels, osteocytes (bone building cells) and even intact proteins, lipids, mucopolysaccharides and DNA were found (Pawlicki, Korbel and Kubiak, 1966; Pawicki, 1975; 1977a; b; 1985; 1995). There are also good data in the literature that rapid fossilization of soft body structures may occur under certain anoxic or pH regulated (low pH level) conditions (Briggs and Kear 1993a; 1993b; Briggs, 1995). Experimental taphonomy (the study of the transition of organic remains from biosphere to lithosphere) is ongoing in many paleontology laboratories. To quote Briggs (1995, pp. 539, 544), “Unless the morphology of the most labile tissues is ‘stabilized’ before the decay (within days or weeks) nothing remains…The results demonstrate that replication of soft-tissue can take place within weeks, even where the only major source of the phosphate is the carcass itself. They also show that the closure of the system is as important, at least in some cases, as the absence of oxygen.”
In addition, some paleontologists are quite candid about the fact that the excellent preservation in many fossils must mean that fossilization or burial was instantaneous (Martill, 1989, p. 204). Martill even demonstrated muscle banding and cell nuclei in highly magnified fossilized fish muscle and stated that phosphatization (mineralization) must have been complete “within a few (probably less than 5) hours.” Thus, for over 40 years evolutionist workers have reported openly on the presence of such remarkable preservation in dinosaur and other fossils.
In this study, fossilized bone from a T. rex dinosaur recovered from a dig at New Castle, Wyoming was evaluated for the presence of microscopic cells, vessels and fibers under the scanning electron microscope. These results were compared to recent human hipbone fragments supplied by an anatomical supply company and human hip fragments from a mine at Moab, Utah.
The "Moab" or "Malachite Man" is controversial because there were actually two different sites in the same area. One yielded some bones in relatively loose material not far below the surface, while the other group was 58 feet down in actual rock that was labeled "Cretaceous" and associated with dinosaur fossils.
Talkorigins and Bible.Ca have had a war of words over the findings. Here is an overview of that particular discussion:
- Ten modern human skeletons have been excavated from 58 feet deep in the Lower Cretaceous Dakota Sandstone, which is dated as 140 million years old and is known for the same dinosaurs as in Dinosaur National Monument.
(Talk.Origins quotes in blue)
1. The skeletons are the same bones as the discredited Moab man bones, apparently with skeletons from eight nearby Indian burials added. [Kuban 1998]
The top of the hill seems to drop by about 40 feet as can bee seen in an image of the site. The result is that the 1971 Moab man site is 15 feet deep and the 1990 Malachite Man site is about 58 feet deep.
This seems to be based on the idea that the Moab man find and the 1990 Malachite Man are related. There are reasons to question this conclusion.
The bones found in 1990 do not appear to have been carbon 14 dated. If you look at the large images, it is clear that these bones are in solid rock. Even if the bones were in soft material, the layers of rock above them were hard. It was the hardness of the rock that forced the closure of the copper mine that lead to their discovery. 58 feet is really too deep to be intrusive burials, particularly given the rock that would had to have been carved through to dig a grave. It is not clear from the two in situ images if these bones are fossilized or not, but the images of those bones that were removed including a femur and a jaw do seem to be fossilized.
The conclusion is that while the two finds are in the same area, they are separate finds. The two 1971 skeletons are recent, but the 1990 find is probably as old as the rock.
Evolutionists date this rock at about 100 million years, but creationists would date it to the flood about 5,000 years ago.
Maybe they just don't trust those are making the request like Talk Origins. By the way when was the last time evolutionists made a major fossil find available to creationists so that their claims could be verified.
It is quite true that Talkorigins is not famous for correcting their errors but rather cling to them like their last dollar. It is also true that Don Patton is not friendly with their membership after the famous dinosaur track destruction a few years back. In any case the idea that I do not publish or reference peer-reviewed sources is now dead. I am a member of a short list of such organizations as a lay member but there are multitudes of great and good scientists who make up the heart of them.