> I was trying to find something on whale evolution rather something to
> discuss at work concerning this topic. I am a reformed believer who has
> a ministry of sorts at the Smithsonian, Natural History Museum. I am
> not a researcher but a technician who is presently in the Paleontology
> Lab making padded, plaster storage and shipping jackets for fossil
> whales. The primary thrust of this museum is the advancement
> evolutionary doctrine. Is this discussion group still ongoing ? If so
> I would like to participate. Thanks,
Welcome.
This group is still ongoing, but the volume of posts has dropped way down
over the last few months. I don't know if a lot of people unsubscribed,
or if everyone is still subscribed but too busy doing other things.
An informative essay on transitional fossils, written by a Christian, is:
http://asa.calvin.edu/ASA/resources/Miller.html
It briefly mentions whale transitional fossils and gives three recent
references:
--Berta, A., 1994, What is a whale?: Science, vol. 263, p. 180-1.
--Gingerich, P.D., Raza, S.M., Arif, M., Anwar, M., and Zhou, X., 1994,
New whale from the Eocene of Pakistan and the origin of cetacean swimming:
Nature, vol. 368, p. 844-7
--Thewissen, J.G.M., Hussain, S.T., and Arif, M., 1994, Fossil evidence
for the origin of aquatic locomotion in archaeocete whales: Science, vol.
263, p. 210-2.
(Note, _Nature_ and _Science_ might have more recent articles about
the whale fossil record since 1994,
and I'm sure the journals specialized in paleontology have more
information, but I don't know of any off-hand. A search in reader's guide
to periodicals should find some articles.)
I'm curious about what you said, "The primary thrust of this museum is the
advancement evolutionary doctrine."
Does the museum:
1) Primarily try to teach the public what scientists currently believe
about the timing and order in which various lifeforms first appeared in
the fossil record, along with the current best theories about lineages and
common ancestors.
2) Primarily try to convince the public that common ancestry and descent-
by-modification via natural mechanisms is an adequate and true
scientific description of biological history on earth.
3) Primiarly try to convince the public that evolution is true, and
therefore, there is no Creator.
Those are three different things. The first one is informing the public
about what most scientists currently believe about the fossil record and
the evidence upon which they base those beliefs. That's appropriate for a
public museum. The second one is trying to convince the public that the
scientists have got their history correct. That's problematic; I can see
how a museum doing the first might slip into the second without even
thinking about it. A public museum should definitely not be doing the
third. If some public displays, or staff members while "on the job," are
doing some of #3, that needs to be discussed and, if necessary,
confronted.
Loren Haarsma