first vertebrate track

Glenn.Morton@ORYX.COM
Fri 07 Jul 1995 12:29 CT

Ashby wrote:
"What I questioned was yo8ur refusal to acknowledge that reasonable,
data-loving scientists could reach a contrary conclusion."

I stand corrected. But why are we Christians, in our efforts to disprove
evolution, forced so often to use data like this "vertebrate track"? The
entire paleontological community has serious doubts about the usefulness of
this particular piece of evidence. They don't know where the foot prints came
from, the authors admit that this is not proof of tetrapods on earth because
there are no digits in the tracks. I admitted that this was a possible
trackway but I will not admit that it is a probable trackway and certainly we
can't use this as a proven trackway. If we Christians want to disagree with
the data from science,then our evidence must be of a higher caliber. This is
not a double standard--it is reality for the challenger. No human endeavor
treats the challenger with the same attention and worth as the champion. Look
at what boxing challengers are paid vs. what the champion gets. In reality,
the challenger for his lesser pay gets his brains beat out far more often than
the champion.

My point on this trackway is that it is very weak evidence for the existence
of earlier tetrapods. If you see that as a refusal to acknowledge that others
can come to different conclusions from me, I am sorry.

I will tell you exactly what evidence will convince me of the trackway.

1. The finding of tetrapod skeletal parts in lower devonian strata.

2. The finding of a trackway, in lower Devonian, with digits.

3. The finding of the soruce of this courtyard flagstone with the discovery
that the tracks continue into a set with digits on the feet.

Any one of these events will convince me. If you find that, I will most
gladly admit before the reflector that you are correct and I am wrong.

glenn