Science in Christian Perspective
.
REACTION AND REBUTTAL
"THE DYING OF THE GIANTS"
(See Journal ASA 22, 91 (1970))
William A. Springstead, Pinedale, Wyoming
Roger I. Cuffey, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park,
Pennsylvania
From: JASA 23 (March 1971): 22-25
William A. Springstead
The implications of a world wide deluge, occurring within the last
10,000 years,
are thought provoking. Its existence would, of necessity, call for a critical
reappraisal of some long esteemed scientific theories.
Notwithstanding the dilemma,
if substantiated, scientists should follow Erhard Rostlund's dictum "The
task is to search for the truth wherever it is."
I stated: "objective appraisal of the nature of the
Pleistocene, of necessity must modify any undeviating
quietistic views of uniformitarianism." Evidently Dr. Cuffey
does not concur
that the Pleistocene epoch was different from past geological epochs. At least
not different enough to make an exception to uniformitarianism as a
"scientific
way of operating." Evidently there are fellow scientists who would differ
with him.
James R. Beerbower writes: "Uniformitarianism, therefore, is a
working principle
essential to paleontologists, but not an invariable rule or
scientific law."
C. C. Simpson elucidates: "Some processes (those of vulcanism or
glaciation
for example) have evidently acted in the past with scales and rates that cannot
by any stretch be called 'the same' or even 'approximately the same' as those
of today."2 Another author concurs: "It must be admitted
that movements
(earth) in the past must have been very different from those of the
present day,
and that it is debatable how far past events can be accurately
reconstructed from
the present day. Few geologists would care to enter the
lists decisively in favor of any of the theories."3
It is known that one glacier, for example, moved so fast that it
covered the living
forest. It is believed that the dome of Mt. Lassen and similar ones
may have risen
in less than a decade. Since 1943 Mt. Paricntin has risen over 1,600
ft. in height.
Since its last major earth tremor, certain ground areas of Alaska
have risen some
50 feet. Such phenomena as these cannot be called "slow, gradual
rise."
Many mountain ranges had large, active volcanoes during the Ice Age. Among them
are those of the Cascades, Caucuses and East African ranges.
In "The Dying of the Giants" I cited several authors as support of my
belief that many mountains may have been lower in elevation at the close of the
Ice Age. Gansser, whom I cited, writes, "We may well recall the
interesting
idea ventured by B. Sahni that the earliest migrations were
facilitated by a barrier
of less forbidding height and steepness than the impressive Himalayas
of today."4
Schneider, in his work on the Himalayas, has pointed out: "In
the formation
of the Himalayas we have to do with an intensity and tempo unknown to former geological
times."5 The close of the Ice Age saw men migrating all over the
world. Evidently
some believe that earlier Himalayan mountain passes were more
conducive for travel
than those of today.
One school of geographers holds that man was present when the great
rifts of East
Africa were being developed. Several Israeli geographers hold that the present
Dead Sea is no older than 12,000 years. The Dead Sea is part of the
same geological
rift that includes the Red Sea and East African grabens. Carl Sauer
writes: "East
Africa, still a land of volcanoes, was much more so at the time when the human
record
begins."6
Some geologists hold to the view that Mt. Vesuvius (over 3800 ft.) has risen to
its present height in the last 10,000 years. It is also believed that most of
the tallest Labrador mountains were submerged some time during the Pleistocene.
The same was probably the case with mountainous areas of Indonesia.
The reader should be aware at this point, that there is widespread disagreement
over the length of the Pleistocene Ice Age. And also aware, that the
shorter its
duration the more vexing and inexplicable some of its events should
be considered.
C. Wroe Wolf has said: "Probably at no time in earth history
have more changes
been produced upon the face of the earth in as short a time as during
the Pleistocene
epoch."7
Dr. Wm. F. Albright has stated his conviction: "One thing is certain, it
is increasingly difficult to place the beginning of the first
Pleistocene glaciation
at more than some 250,000 years ago." Further he notes of both the Age and
its fossil man: "They may both he much more recent."8 Boule and
Vallois, while holding for a possible 500,000 year duration of the Quarternary,
point out that a few geologists (French, Swedish, and American),
adhere to a duration
time of only 10,000; 30,000 and 100 - 150 thousand years
respectively.9
The close of the Ice Age used to be held by some as having terminated 40-50,000
years ago. Now numerous authorities place it at 11,000 years,10
10,000 years,11
and even 8,000 years.12 Radiocarbon dating has virtually silenced the
much older
dating position, once so widely held. Some authorities feel that the recency of
the close of the Ice Age calls for a much harder look at its time of beginning.
Dating is much more untenable than many people realize.
Dr. Cuffey writes: "The late Pleistocene extinctions took place gradually
over a period of many 'thousand years, and not all at the very end of
Pleistocene
times." This seeming refusal to agree with numerous authorities
is puzzling.
Carl Hubbs writes: "Radiocarbon dates confirm the fact, evident to Darwin
and Lyell, that extinction was mainly a post glacial event,'13
The Quarternarists,
Wright and Frey were cited: "Why did the most conspicuous
extinctions occur
so late and after the last glaciation?"14 The preface of "Pleistocene
Extinctions: The Search for a Cause" points out: "The
pattern of extinction
at the end of the Pleistocene did happen 'overnight' in a relative sense-in New
Zealand and perhaps in North America in less than 1,000 years-in
roughly 1 300th
of the estimated time for the longevity (duration) of a species of
mammals."15
Dr. Romer has pointed out: "No adequate explanation has ever
been given for
this mass extinction of large North American mammals." Concerning man he
writes: "He certainly played little direct part in killing of these large
beasts."16
Several necessary facts must be kept in mind. One is, that ordinarily
fossil finds
represent only an infinitely small number of the species that existed. Another
is that it takes a catastrophe to create good fossils. And the third
is that ordinarily,
mammal fossils are due to extermination by either man or geological
disturbances.
When writers speak therefore of "mass extinction", only one
of the two
factors are involved. Let me cite two examples. The finding of some thousands
of horse bones in France is thought to be by reason of human agency.
The discovery
of a thousand mammoth skeletons at Predmost is thought to be by either earth or
glacial activity.
Carl Sauer notes: "The ancient hunters and the ancient game animals seem
to have left the scene together."17 Were hunters the main reason
for the extinction?
How many hunters were present in the Americas 10,000 years ago? N. J. Berrill
points out: "All these extinctions coincided with the presence
of man."
Later he postulates: "Men may have been the victims as well as
the beasts."18
J. J. Hester notes: "Of
the species that became extinct, Early Man hunted only two to any
great degree-mammoth
and bison."19 Significantly mammoth molars are the chief mammal find
in Florida. From a seeming inexhaustible supply, around 50,000
mammoth tusks have
been found in Siberia over the last few centuries. The numbers of early man in
Europe at this time were probably few.
Concerning the unusual size of many of the Pleistocene mammals,
authority is not
lacking. Sonia Cole writes: "Giants are particularly characteristic of the
Pleistocene in Africa."23 Romer states: "The Pleistocene
giants include
representatives of almost every order of mammals."21 Kurten
comments: "A
number of the animals are now considerably smaller, on an average, than their
ancestors at the end of the Pleistocene: Successive samples indicate
that dwarfing
has proceeded continually during the last 10,000 years or more."22
I cited authority for extensive marine transgression in Western Siberia during
the Quarternary. An American team, Richards and Fairbridge write:
"Occurrence
of glacial-marine deposits in the Yenisei region of the West Siberian lowland
is firmly established. Fossils and the character of the Quarternary
rocks in which
the fossils were found prove that these rocks were formed by the concentrated
action of a transgressing and regressing sea, and by glacial
deposition."23
Encyclopedia Britannica notes that during the lee Age: "The
Caspian was once
again linked with the Black Sea by way of the Manych depression of the Northern
Caucuses."24 Alimen cities evidence of a "marine gulf"
penetrating
up the Rhone "as far as the region of Lyon."25 The areas
involved would
he extensive. West Siberia, for example, is a flat level plain some
90,000 miles
in size.
Genesis 7:11 (Ferrar Fenton translation) reads: "On that day all
the depths
of the Great Ocean were heaved up." Such language not only
provides a second
major source of deluge water; but strongly infers up
heaval of the ocean bottom, in order to release the subterranean water sources.
One is reminded of the conviction of the Christian archaelogist, Dr.
M. F. Unger.
Contending for a world deluge he wrote: "Nothing less than such
a cataclysmic
disaster can satisfy the scope of the Genesis passage." 25
Genesis 8:4 implicitly records: "And the ark rested in the seventh month,
on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat." Does
this geographic mention refer to the two Ararats or to nearby lower mountains?
Both Ararats rise from a base of about 8,800 feet. If the ark landed
on mountains
nearby, only half as high, it would need a flood depth of over four
thousand feet.
And a flood of that depth would cover more than three fourths of
today's world.
In conclusion I would like to say this. Science, by its nature, is
based on skepticism
and demands evidence. Scripture, by its nature, must be accepted by faith and
that based upon divine revelation. The reverent scientist needs to be aware of
both, but they cannot be held in equal esteem. Scientific evidence is limited,
accumulative and subject to constant re-evaluation. Scripture's
revelation, while
varying in degree as to interpretation, is static, and to strain its
interpretation
is to arrive at absurdity. I enjoyed writing "The Dying of the
Giants".
As an untrained layman I am only too aware of its shortcomings. If it creates
enough discussion to provoke some trained scientists to further
research, I will
obviously be amply rewarded. I trust I am not lacking in humility
when I re-echo
the statement of the controversial Robert Ardrey: "Truth is peering in my
window and I cannot ask him to go away."
REFERENCES
lSearch for the Past, James R. Beerbower, Prentice Hall, Inc.,
N.Y. 1964, P. 7,
2This View of Life, G. C. Simpson, Harcourt, Brace and World,
p. 132.
3Larousse Encyclopedia of the Earth, Leo Bertin, Prometheus
Press, N.Y. p. 197.
4Gealogy of the Himalayas, Augusto Gansser, John Wiley and Sons,
Ltd., 1964, N.Y.
p. 261.
5Mount Everest, Hageo Dyenforth Von Haimendorf Schneider, Oxford
Press, London,
1963, p. 72.
6Land and Life, Writings of Carl Sauer, Edited by John Leighly, UCLA
Press, 1963,
p. 291.
7This Earth of Ours, C. Wroe Wolfe, Boston University Press, 1949, p.
8"Digging Into Man's Past," William F. Albright, in An
Outline of Man's
Knowledge of the Modem World. Lyman Bryson, McGraw Hill, Basic Book Co., N.Y.
1960, p. 207.
9Fossil Men, M. Boule, H. V. Vallois, Dryden Press, N.Y. 1957, p. 61, 65.
10Digging for history, Edward Bacon, Forward by Wm. F. Albright, John Day
Publ., 1960, 1961, p. 3.
11The Story of Geology, Jerome Wyckoff, Golden Press, N.Y., 1960, p. 11.
12The World of Ice, James Dryson, A. Knopf, N.Y. 1962, p. 6.
13Zooegraphy, Carl Hnbbs, Editor, Wn. D.C., 1958 p. 396,
l4The Quarternary of the United States, H. E. Wright, Jr., David G.
Frey, Editors,
Princeton, 1965, p. 520.
15"Plcistocene Extinctions," The Search for a Cause. P. S. Martin and
H. E. Wright Jr. Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1967,
preface VI.
16The Procession of Life, Alfred S. Romer, The World Pub!. Co., Cleveland and
N.Y., 1968, p. 255.
17Land and Life, Writings 0f Carl Sauer, Edited by John
Leighly, UCLA
Press, 1963,
p. 209.
18Inherit the Earth, N. 3. Berrill, Dodd, 1966 (copyright renewed), p. 40.
19Martin and Wright, Op. cit. p. 181. Writing of J. J. Hester.
20The Prehistory of East Africa, Santa Cole, MacMillan Co., N.Y.,
1963, p. 89.
2lVertebrate Paleontology, A. S. Homer, University of Chicago Press,
2nd Edition,
1945, p. 569.
22"The Rate of Evolution," Bjorn Knrten, in Science in Archaeology, Bothwell and Higgs, Basic Books, Inc., N.Y., p. 219.
23Annotated Bibliography of Quarternary Shorelines, H. C. Richards and II. W.
Fairbridge, Academy of Natural Sciences, Phila. Pa., Special Publ. 6, 1965, p.
168.
24Encyelopedia Britannica, Vol. 4, 1961, p. 965.
25"The Quarternary," Kalervo Rankama, Editor: The
Quarternary of France,
Marie Henriette Alimen, Vol 2, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., N.Y.,
1967, p. 134.
26Archaeology and the Old Testament, Merrill F. Unger, Zondervan
Pub. House,
Grand Rapids, Mich., 2nd Edition, 1954, p. 61.
The extinction of some large mammals toward the end of the
Pleistocene Epoch suggested
to Springstead (1970) that a world-wide deluge or flood was a
reasonable scientific
possibility; however, a number of facts contradict his conclusion (Cuffey, 1970).
Springstead's present rebuttal requires further comment, although my
earlier critique (Cuffey, 1970) adequately treats some of the points which he raises as well as
his general methodology in these matters.
My "seeming refusal to agree with numerous authorities"
about when the
Pleistocene extinctions occurred is readily explained. Simply stated, when seen
in the entire context of the paleontologic literature regarding these matters,
Springstead's quotations mean something very different from what he interprets
them
I echo Springstea's call for further research, but urge those
heeding this call
to concentrate their efforts in directions which break new ground in
this field,
rather than in the direction of trying to revive defunct and
erroneous ideas,
to mean. Such unintentional misinterpretation frequently affects the output of
any of us when working outside his own immediate field of expertise
and specialization (Cuffey, 1970, p. 93, insert).
The Pleistocene extinctions are only part of the over-all history of
life, world-wide,
during the last several million years of the Cenozoic. They must therefore not
be treated in either temporal or geographical isolation, but must be considered
in relation to events transpiring from Miocene time onward and
occurring in Europe
and Africa as well as in New Zealand and perhaps North America. In particular,
I wish further to emphasize the fact that extinctions occurred through
out a long period of late Cenozoic time, not as a sudden and concentrated wave
at the end of the Pleistocene (as Springstead's quotations can be
misinterpreted
to imply). A number of organisms died out at various times within the Pliocene
(Leopold, 1967, p. 204, 211; Martin, 1967, p. 82, 84). Others became
extinct early
in the Pleistocene (Martin, 1967, p. 82, 84, 85); moreover, "in the oldest
Pleistocene (Villafranehian) a successive extinction of many evolutionary lines
occurred. . ." (Kowalski, 1967, p. 351). Later in the Pleistocene, as the
ice sheets waxed and waned, "particular species died out during different
glaciations" (Kowalski, 1967, p. 352; also note Martin, 1967, p. 82, 85,
86). Some of the large terrestrial herbivores, and the carnivores and
scavengers
depending on them, became extinct only about 8,000 to 10,000 years ago at the
end of the Pleistocene (Martin, 1967, p. 83, 84, 95); as Edwards
points out (1967,
p. 143), their conspicuousness results in the fact that "our present view
of the late-Pleistocene extinction rate is therefore exaggerated
...." Finally,
still other species have died out only in the last few centuries
(Kowalski, 1967,
p.
361-363; Martin, 1967, p. 102-105; Martin and Guilday, 1967, p. 5-6). Thus, in
summary, extinctions took place gradually and over an extended period of many
thousands of years during late Cenozoic times. Consequently, there is
no paleontologic
basis for believing that a major catastrophic event, such as a
world-wide flood,
is recorded in the rocks; Springstead's main thesis is simply not
consistent with
the available evidence.
As far as the actual causes of the Pleistocene extinctions are
concerned, at least
three can be recognized as having been critically important in
particular situations.
Sometimes, extinctions have been caused by change or disappearance of
a habitat,
due to climatic changes caused by glacial advance or retreat (Kowalski, 1967,
p. 354, 356, 357). Other extinctions have resulted from destruction of habitats
due to the agricultural activities of early man (Guilday, 1967, p.
122; Kowalski,
1967, p. 361). Still others have resulted from the direct influence
of the hunting
activities of early man (Martin, 1967, p. 75, 102-105, 115; Walker,
1967, p. 431-432).
Springstead's present rebuttal reflects some of the common and
widespread misunderstandings
of uniformitarianism as a working principle or attitude of the modern
earth scientist.
Van de Fliert (1969) gave
an excellent extended discussion of uniformitarianism which is
well-worth reading
in connection with the present notes. Let me elaborate very briefly, however,
on a few points raised by Springstead's rebuttal.
Uniformitarianism, as used by the modern practicing geologist, is
simply the attitude
that the kinds of processes and events which we see operating today
were responsible,
over long periods of time, for shaping the earth and the organisms
living on it,
unless convincing evidence to the contrary exists. As Beerbower
(quoted by Springstead)
says, uniformitarianism is indeed a working principle or attitude, rather than
an invariable rule. Geologists agree that these kinds of processes and events
can (and sometimes did) operate at different intensities than
today's, as Springstead's
quotation of Simpson's comment implies; however, difference in rates or scales
certainly does not invalidate the practical use of uniformitarianism. In fact,
although many seem not to realize this, even such a different event as a brief
world-wide flood would leave unmistakab!e evidence from which
uniformitarian principles
would correctly interpret the actual historical event. (The reason
modern geologists
do not accept a recent world-wide deluge is that there is no such evidence for
it, as well as much evidence inconsistent with its ever having
occurred.) To return
to Spring
stead's rebuttal, the examples cited-in which geological processes are shown to
have operated with noticeable results within relatively short periods
of geologic
time-are all clearly well within the uniformitarian scope of action, in spite
of his implication to the contrary. In particular, note that some
geological processes
-such as explosive volcanic eruptions, ground movements due to earthquakes, and
large floods resulting from sudden breaking of natural (or artificial) dams or
levees-produce dramatic effects on a local or regional scale. These
are therefore
sometimes loosely referred to as "catastrophic", but are nonetheless
fully uniformitarian in character; quoting descriptions of such
events certainly
does not disprove uniformitarianism.
The events of the Pleistocene are closely related to the events of
the late Cenozoic
as a whole, and are quite well understood in terms of modern
uniformitarian geologic
thought (Flint, 1957; Dunbar and Waage, 1969, p. 431-446; Kay and
Colbert, 1965,
p. 557-603). In particular, many regions of the earth's crust covered
by the large
continental ice sheets were depressed by the load of the ice. The ice
melted away
(about 10,000 years ago) quite rapidly compared to the rate at which
the earth's
crust could rebound upward to its preglacial
elevation. Consequently, sea waters came in and briefly submerged
such areas (like
coastal New England, Canada, and Siberia) until crustal rebound
carried the land
back above sea level (a process still underway in some regions). This
submergence,
however, is quite different from the kind of world-wide cataclysmic flood which
Springstead suggests might have occurred (and for which geologic evidence does
not exist). Also, the dating of the Pleistocene-while obviously
capable of further
refinement-is not nearly so controversial or uncertain as Springatead seems to
have concluded (Flint, 1957, p. 272-301; Coon, 1962, p. 221-227,
309-318, 577-579).
Springstead is certainly correct in emphasizing our requirement to search for
and accept the truth regardless of where it is to be found. Moreover,
geological
truth is indeed peering in through our window. However, it seems to
me to be saying
that all the evidence supports the ideas and conclusions of modern
geology, rather
than those of flood geology. I echo Springstead's call for further
research, but
urge those heeding this call to concentrate their efforts in directions which
break new ground in this field, rather than in the direction of
trying to revive
defunct and erroneous ideas.
REFERENCES
Coon, CS. 1962, The Origin of Races; Knopf, New York; 724 p.
Coffey, R.J., 1970, Critique of "The Dying of the Giants":
Journal ASA
22, p. 93-96.
Dunbar C.O., and Waage, KM., 1969, Historical Geology, 3rd ed.; John Wiley, New
York; 556 p.
Edwards, WE., 1967, The Late-Pleistocene Extinction and Diminution in Size of
Many Mammalian Species: p. 141154 of Martin and Wright, 1967.
Flint, R.F., 1957, Glacial and Pleistocene Geology; John Wiley, New York; 553
p.
Gnilday, J.E., 1967, Differential Extinction during Late-Pleistocene and Recent
Times: p. 121140 of Martin and Wright, 1967.
Kay, M., and Colbert, E. H., 1965, Stratigraphy and Life History; John Wiley,
New York; 736 p.
Kowalski, K., 1967, Pleistocene Extinction of Mammals in Europe: p. 349-364 of
Martin and Wright, 1967.
Leopold, E.B., 1967, Late-Cenozoic Patterns of Plant Extinction: p. 203-246 of Martin and Wright, 1967.
Martin, P.S., 1967, Prehistoric Overkill: p. 75-120 of Martin and
Wright, 1967.
Martin, P.S., and Guilday, J.E., 1967, A Bestiary for Pleistocene Biologists:
p. 1-72 of Martin and Wright, 1967.
Martin, P.S., and Wright, HE., Jr., eds., 1967, Pleistocene Extinctions-The Search for a
Cause; Yale Univ. Press, New Haven; 453 p.
Springstead, WA., 1970, The Dying of the Giants: Journal
ASA 22, p. 91-97.
Van de Fliert, JR., 1969, Fundamentalism and the Fundamentals of
Geology: Journal
ASA 21, p. 69-81 (with insert comments by Boardman, Coffey, and Tanner).
Walker, A., 1967, Patterns of Extinction among the Subfossil
Madagascan Lemuroids:
p. 425432 of Martin and Wright, 1967.