What do you think?
Rate this book
Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!
This captivating book written by the author of the " Those Terrible Lizards" and " The Fossils Say No!" contains all the information in the latter plus it gives up-to-date information on the fossil record to challenge the evolution theory. --- from book's back cover
366 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1973
4 people are currently reading
125 people want to read
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 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 22, 2014
This book disproves evolution based on fossils. Duane T.Gish debates his argument in well supported factual evidence. He does this by prefacing evolution as a philosophy not a science. Secondly he compares the evolution and creation model side by side. Last, he concludes the theory of evolution must be disproved because of the fossil records.
The fossil record supports creationism for many reasons. According to the evolutionary principles, as a result of simple life forms becoming more complex, there should be a transitional life form. However, these transitional life forms are seemingly absent from the fossil record. The in accordance of the principles of evolution and the fossil record is one of the main points of Dr. Gish.
As he begins the book Gish openly puts evolution as philosophy not a science. He points out that while many scientist openly accept evolution as a fact, there is no concrete proof to establish evolution as scientific fact. With this opening idea Gish puts creationism and evolution on the same level scientifically, and as he goes through the book he also proves that while these two ideas may be on the same level scientifically, it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does creation.
In the comparing the creation model with the evolution model there is a “sudden appearance in great variety of complex forms.” (Gish 54) Whereas in the evolutionary model, it is a slow change from simple life forms to more complex life forms. This leads to the arrival of the transitional life forms.
First Impression: Gish's explanation disproving evolution through the fossil record kept me interested. Here is an examples from the book that impressed me:
“If life arose from an inanimate world through a mechanistic, naturalistic, evolutionary process and then diversified, by a similar process via increasingly complex forms, into millions of species that have existed and now exist, then the fossils actually found in the rocks should correspond to those predicted on the basis of such a process.” (Gish 33)
Reading this book, I discovered how the theory of evolution was disproved using the fossil records. This book helped to firm my beliefs on creation. I will use what I learned to guide students who are struggling with evolution versus creationism. This subject affects the world so bad it damages and manipulates society into believing that evolution is the only answer to the origin of life.
This book is strongly recommended for people who are trying to find an answer on evolution versus creationism. The book would aid people in High School and College.
“The historical, or fossil, record, thus provides excellent support for special creation, but contradicts the major predictions of evolutionary theory. In answer to the question, did evolution really occur, the fossils shout a resounding NO!” (Gish 178)
The fossil record supports creationism for many reasons. According to the evolutionary principles, as a result of simple life forms becoming more complex, there should be a transitional life form. However, these transitional life forms are seemingly absent from the fossil record. The in accordance of the principles of evolution and the fossil record is one of the main points of Dr. Gish.
As he begins the book Gish openly puts evolution as philosophy not a science. He points out that while many scientist openly accept evolution as a fact, there is no concrete proof to establish evolution as scientific fact. With this opening idea Gish puts creationism and evolution on the same level scientifically, and as he goes through the book he also proves that while these two ideas may be on the same level scientifically, it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does creation.
In the comparing the creation model with the evolution model there is a “sudden appearance in great variety of complex forms.” (Gish 54) Whereas in the evolutionary model, it is a slow change from simple life forms to more complex life forms. This leads to the arrival of the transitional life forms.
First Impression: Gish's explanation disproving evolution through the fossil record kept me interested. Here is an examples from the book that impressed me:
“If life arose from an inanimate world through a mechanistic, naturalistic, evolutionary process and then diversified, by a similar process via increasingly complex forms, into millions of species that have existed and now exist, then the fossils actually found in the rocks should correspond to those predicted on the basis of such a process.” (Gish 33)
Reading this book, I discovered how the theory of evolution was disproved using the fossil records. This book helped to firm my beliefs on creation. I will use what I learned to guide students who are struggling with evolution versus creationism. This subject affects the world so bad it damages and manipulates society into believing that evolution is the only answer to the origin of life.
This book is strongly recommended for people who are trying to find an answer on evolution versus creationism. The book would aid people in High School and College.
“The historical, or fossil, record, thus provides excellent support for special creation, but contradicts the major predictions of evolutionary theory. In answer to the question, did evolution really occur, the fossils shout a resounding NO!” (Gish 178)
January 2, 2019
He's done a lot of good research on the comparative data on the status of the fossils (1985 and earlier). He does believe in an earth that is younger than 10,000 years but does write from a modern paleontologist's perspective that the earth is billions of years old based.
He does mention the day-age theory or old-earth creationism which could use his research to state similar cases. However, he notes that those positions are erroneous with very little reason as to why.
The book is good for those who already do not believe in evolution but it would not score points for skeptics of evolution because of what I see to be harsh criticism for scientist who are sincere evolutionists.
He does mention the day-age theory or old-earth creationism which could use his research to state similar cases. However, he notes that those positions are erroneous with very little reason as to why.
The book is good for those who already do not believe in evolution but it would not score points for skeptics of evolution because of what I see to be harsh criticism for scientist who are sincere evolutionists.
October 27, 2019
Most books are rated related to their usefulness and contributions to my research.
Overall, a good book for the researcher and enthusiast.
Read for personal research
- found this book's contents helpful and inspiring - number rating relates to the book's contribution to my needs.
Overall, a good book for the researcher and enthusiast.
Read for personal research
- found this book's contents helpful and inspiring - number rating relates to the book's contribution to my needs.
August 18, 2024
GISH'S REVISION OF HIS FIRST (AND MOST FAMOUS) BOOK
Duane Tolbert Gish (born 1921) is an American biochemist and a prominent member of the "young earth" creationist movement (as well as a former vice-president of the Institute for Creation Research/ICR, with whom he has long been associated). He was probably the most well-known creationist debater, as well as the author of key creationist books such as 'Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics,' etc. He updated his origInal 1972 book 'Evolution: the Fossils Say NO!' in 1985 as 'Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record.'
He ends the first chapter of this 1995 book with the statement, "The question is, then, who has more evidence for his faith, the creationist or the evolutionist? The scientific case for special creation, as we will show in the following pages, is much stronger than the case for evolution. The more I study and the more I learn, the more I become convinced that evolution is a false theory and that special creation offers a much more satisfactory interpretive framework for correlating and explaining the scientific evidence related to origins." (Pg. 23)
He argues, "If fish evolved into amphibia ... we would predict that we would find transitional forms showing the gradual transition of fins into feet and legs... If reptiles gave rise to birds, then we would expect to find transitional forms in the fossil record showing the gradual transition of the forelimbs of the ancestral reptile into the wings of a bird, and the gradual transition of some structure on the reptile into the feathers of a bird... In the pterosaurs, or flying reptiles, the wing membrane was supported by an enormously lengthened fourth finger. If the pterosaurs actually evolved from a nonflying reptile, we would predict that the fossil record would produce transitional forms showing a gradual increase in length of the fourth finger..." (Pg. 40-41)
He states, "What makes such [evolutionary] stories or scenarios so incredible is the belief of evolutionists that what ever is needed will be produced by genetic change or mutations, which are totally random ... Thus, as ordinary land reptiles ventured into the water... they now needed fish-like tails. Obligingly... accidental mutations altered the incredibly complex genetic apparatus ... [so that] marvelously functional fish-like tails were produced on a reptile previously floundering awkwardly around in the water." (Pg. 104-105)
He critiques the notion that feathers arose either from scales, or from hair: "Scales are flat horny plates; feathers are... a central shaft from which radiate barbs and barbules... with tiny hooks which lock only the barbs and bind the feather surface into a flat, strong, flexible vane. Feathers and scales arise from different layers of the skin... Feathers, as do hairs but unlike scales develop from follicles. A hair, however, is a much simpler structure than a feather..." (Pg. 135-136)
He rejects the Gould/Eldredge model of punctuated equilibria: "this notion is without empirically observable scientific evidence. The only evidence for it is the absence of transitional forms. According to the punctuationist, since obviously one form did not slowly and gradually evolve into another, then just as obviously it must have rapidly evolved into the new form." (Pg. 355)
This is probably the best "summary" of Gish's positions, and is worth serious study by anyone interested in the Creation/Evolution debate.
Duane Tolbert Gish (born 1921) is an American biochemist and a prominent member of the "young earth" creationist movement (as well as a former vice-president of the Institute for Creation Research/ICR, with whom he has long been associated). He was probably the most well-known creationist debater, as well as the author of key creationist books such as 'Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics,' etc. He updated his origInal 1972 book 'Evolution: the Fossils Say NO!' in 1985 as 'Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record.'
He ends the first chapter of this 1995 book with the statement, "The question is, then, who has more evidence for his faith, the creationist or the evolutionist? The scientific case for special creation, as we will show in the following pages, is much stronger than the case for evolution. The more I study and the more I learn, the more I become convinced that evolution is a false theory and that special creation offers a much more satisfactory interpretive framework for correlating and explaining the scientific evidence related to origins." (Pg. 23)
He argues, "If fish evolved into amphibia ... we would predict that we would find transitional forms showing the gradual transition of fins into feet and legs... If reptiles gave rise to birds, then we would expect to find transitional forms in the fossil record showing the gradual transition of the forelimbs of the ancestral reptile into the wings of a bird, and the gradual transition of some structure on the reptile into the feathers of a bird... In the pterosaurs, or flying reptiles, the wing membrane was supported by an enormously lengthened fourth finger. If the pterosaurs actually evolved from a nonflying reptile, we would predict that the fossil record would produce transitional forms showing a gradual increase in length of the fourth finger..." (Pg. 40-41)
He states, "What makes such [evolutionary] stories or scenarios so incredible is the belief of evolutionists that what ever is needed will be produced by genetic change or mutations, which are totally random ... Thus, as ordinary land reptiles ventured into the water... they now needed fish-like tails. Obligingly... accidental mutations altered the incredibly complex genetic apparatus ... [so that] marvelously functional fish-like tails were produced on a reptile previously floundering awkwardly around in the water." (Pg. 104-105)
He critiques the notion that feathers arose either from scales, or from hair: "Scales are flat horny plates; feathers are... a central shaft from which radiate barbs and barbules... with tiny hooks which lock only the barbs and bind the feather surface into a flat, strong, flexible vane. Feathers and scales arise from different layers of the skin... Feathers, as do hairs but unlike scales develop from follicles. A hair, however, is a much simpler structure than a feather..." (Pg. 135-136)
He rejects the Gould/Eldredge model of punctuated equilibria: "this notion is without empirically observable scientific evidence. The only evidence for it is the absence of transitional forms. According to the punctuationist, since obviously one form did not slowly and gradually evolve into another, then just as obviously it must have rapidly evolved into the new form." (Pg. 355)
This is probably the best "summary" of Gish's positions, and is worth serious study by anyone interested in the Creation/Evolution debate.
Read
August 21, 20120537
January 10, 2017
terrible trash book
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews