What do you think?
Rate this book
Up with creation!: ICR acts/facts/impacts, 1976-1977
ACCOUNTS OF VARIOUS EVENTS
341 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1978
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 of 1 review
November 20, 2025
THE THIRD BOOK OF ARTICLES FROM THE ICR’S ACTS/FACTS/IMPACTS
The Preface to this 1978 book explains, “‘Acts and Facts’ is the monthly publication of the Institute for Creation Research. The main section contains articles of current interest on the creation/evolution controversy. These include reports on the activities of creationists, particularly those of the ICR staff, in their efforts to make known the tremendous scientific case for creation and to urge educational authorities to present both models of origins to our students. The activities of creationists have generated vigorous opposition from evolutionists and humanists… and some of this opposition is recorded as well. Reports of events… such as discovery of an unusual fossil … cosmological events or reports, etc., are included from time to time.
“Included as an insert with each month’s issue … is an ‘Impact’ article. These… articles usually … deal with some technical aspect of the creation/evolution question… Topics that have been touched upon include, for example, thermodynamics, the fossil record, the origin of life, evidences for a young earth… interpreting earth history, the decay of the magnetic field of the earth, and many others. [This book] contains most of the articles published … during 1976 and 1977… The activities of the Institute for Creation Research with its enlarged staff are continuing and expanding. Opposition is growing as well and we can expect a strong, organized effort to develop in the campaign to thwart the efforts of creation scientists to make known the powerful convincing case for creation.”
They report of an October 29, 1975 debate at Western Michigan University between Dr. Elizabeth Baldwin, professor of anthropology, and Dr. Duane Gish. “Dr. Gish completely undermined Dr. Baldwin’s story of human evolution through the introduction of recent evidence apparently unknown to this anthropologist. On her chart. Dr. Baldwin had shown the evolutionary sequence of Australopithecus---Homo Habilis---Homo Erectus. Dr. Gish pointed out that Dr. Louis Leakey had reported that he had found the remains of these three creatures contemporaneous in Bed II of Olduvai Gorge, and had found evidence of a circular stone habitation hut, an artifact of man, below this level in Bed I. This evidence renders untenable the idea that any of these creatures were ancestral to any of the others, or that any were ancestral to man.” (Pg. 4)
They report of a September 17, 1976 debate between Dr. Gish/Henry Morris and E.O. Wiley/Marion Blackford. “Dr. Wiley argues that the gaps in the fossil record could be explained in terms of recent concepts of mutation, in which random changes in ‘controller genes’ produce major changes in organisms by simultaneously affecting many structural genes. He also rejected the entropy argument, claiming that entropy had no relation to complexity, so that a world of increasing entropy had no bearing on whether organisms were increasing in complexity. Dr. Morris showed that Dr. Wiley was quoting out of context and distorting the arguments in his critique of [the book] ‘Scientific Creationism.’ He then documented the fact that entropy indeed WAS related to complexity and that some leading evolutionists are now admitting that they do not yet know how to harmonize the contradictory concepts of entropy and evolution.” (Pg. 14)
In a debate held in Holland, Dr. Gish “showed that the possession of similar structure and organs by different animals does not prove descent from a common ancestor, since such homologous structures are found to be governed by entirely different genes.” (Pg. 45)
They note, “In a recent article, some of the very significant work of Robert Gentry on radiohalos is reviewed, together with comments on its significance by various well-known scientists… One of the most significant of Gentry’s discoveries has been … Since polonium has a very short half-life, this phenomenon seems to require an almost instantaneous crystallization of the rocks in which they are found… Otherwise the polonium would have disappeared and no halos would have been produced… the data… seem to require an instantaneous creation of the earth’s primordial crust.” (Pg. 105-106)
They assert, “A recent discovery… has demolished Archaeopteryx as a transitional form… the discovery of the remains of an undoubted true bird some ‘60 million years older’ than Archaeopteryx… Prof. John H. Ostrom … [said] ‘we must now look for the ancestors of flying birds in a period of time much older than that in which Archaeopteryx lived.’ Ostrom thus concedes that Archaeopteryx was not the ancestor of birds.” (Pg. 109)
They quote an evolutionist criticizing creationism, “According to creation theory, biological life began during a primeval period only five to six thousand years ago.” But they add, “Most creationists believe that creation was between 6000 and 10,000 years ago.” (Pg. 131)
Duane Gish argues, “If the primitive earth atmosphere contained a significant quantity of oxygen… an evolutionary origin of life would have been thermodynamically impossible, since all substances would have been oxidized to carbon dioxide, water, nitrogen, and other oxidized products, leaving no organic chemical compounds to serve as precursors for biochemical evolution. Evolutionists are thus forced to assume, a priori, that the primitive earth atmosphere contained no oxygen, but rather contained hydrogen, and that carbon existed mainly in the form of methane and/or carbon monoxide.” (Pg. 139)
He critiques various origin-of-life experiments: “while the production of these compounds is a vital necessity in any origin of life scheme, success at this stage is [much]… easier… than success at… arranging these subunits in the precise order required for biologically active proteins, DNA and RNA… Secondly, the success that was achieved… was due to special conditions imposed by the research scientists, conditions that would not have existed on the primitive earth.” (Pg. 142)
He also argues, “[Sidney] Fox’s reaction mixture consists solely (as far as organic material is concerned) of pure amino acids… Where on earth could a mixture of pure amino acids be found? Only in the laboratory of a 20th century scientist!… Heating amino acids at almost any temperature with a mixture of such chemicals would be certain to result in complete destruction of the amino acids… This factor alone completely eliminates Fox’s scheme from any rational discussion.” (Pg. 153-154)
In another article, he states, “Theories that attempt to account for the origin of stable metabolic systems from loose macromolecules thus suffer from a number of fatal weaknesses. First is the requirement that the necessary macromolecules be produced in sufficiently vast amounts to saturate the primeval seas to the point where complex coacervates or proteinoid microspheres would precipitate out of solution. Second, such globular products are inherently unstable and would easily be dissolved or disintegrated, spilling their contents out into the medium.” (Pg. 171)
Stuart E. Nevins asserts, “If continental separation did occur, the only place within the Bible framework where it could fit would be during Noah’s Flood… If continental separation occurred during Noah’s Flood, a host of problems in the tectonic dilemma can be solved… continental separation occurred toward the end of the Flood.” (Pg. 177-179)
John D. Morris says of the Paluxy River ‘human’ tracks, “Skeptics have claimed that the prints are carvings, not real prints at all. Unfortunately this has some basis; in fact, several enterprising Texans from Glen Rose did make their living during the Great Depression by digging out the best tracks and selling them… Soon, the best tracks were gone and a few men began to carve out new tracks… These counterfeit tracks do not, of course, disprove the genuine tracks.” (Pg. 197) [But of course, we now know that in the January 1986 issue of the ICR’s publication ‘Impact’ (no. 151, ‘The Paluxy River Mystery’) John Morris himself admits that these ‘human’ footprints are actually 3-toed dinosaur footprints, and that “it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution.”]
Morris (who was an active researcher/explorer trying to locate Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat in Turkey) reports that “The first of the major [Noah’s Ark] news stories of this decade was the report on February 21, 1974, that a NASA satellite… had photographed Noah’s Ark… The news was repeated in virtually every newspaper and on every radio and television station. Unfortunately, when examined by photographic experts, the object in question turned out not to be the Ark. It was many times too large and not at all in the area under consideration as the possible resting place of the Ark.” (Pg. 283-284)
This book may interest a variety of modern creationists.
The Preface to this 1978 book explains, “‘Acts and Facts’ is the monthly publication of the Institute for Creation Research. The main section contains articles of current interest on the creation/evolution controversy. These include reports on the activities of creationists, particularly those of the ICR staff, in their efforts to make known the tremendous scientific case for creation and to urge educational authorities to present both models of origins to our students. The activities of creationists have generated vigorous opposition from evolutionists and humanists… and some of this opposition is recorded as well. Reports of events… such as discovery of an unusual fossil … cosmological events or reports, etc., are included from time to time.
“Included as an insert with each month’s issue … is an ‘Impact’ article. These… articles usually … deal with some technical aspect of the creation/evolution question… Topics that have been touched upon include, for example, thermodynamics, the fossil record, the origin of life, evidences for a young earth… interpreting earth history, the decay of the magnetic field of the earth, and many others. [This book] contains most of the articles published … during 1976 and 1977… The activities of the Institute for Creation Research with its enlarged staff are continuing and expanding. Opposition is growing as well and we can expect a strong, organized effort to develop in the campaign to thwart the efforts of creation scientists to make known the powerful convincing case for creation.”
They report of an October 29, 1975 debate at Western Michigan University between Dr. Elizabeth Baldwin, professor of anthropology, and Dr. Duane Gish. “Dr. Gish completely undermined Dr. Baldwin’s story of human evolution through the introduction of recent evidence apparently unknown to this anthropologist. On her chart. Dr. Baldwin had shown the evolutionary sequence of Australopithecus---Homo Habilis---Homo Erectus. Dr. Gish pointed out that Dr. Louis Leakey had reported that he had found the remains of these three creatures contemporaneous in Bed II of Olduvai Gorge, and had found evidence of a circular stone habitation hut, an artifact of man, below this level in Bed I. This evidence renders untenable the idea that any of these creatures were ancestral to any of the others, or that any were ancestral to man.” (Pg. 4)
They report of a September 17, 1976 debate between Dr. Gish/Henry Morris and E.O. Wiley/Marion Blackford. “Dr. Wiley argues that the gaps in the fossil record could be explained in terms of recent concepts of mutation, in which random changes in ‘controller genes’ produce major changes in organisms by simultaneously affecting many structural genes. He also rejected the entropy argument, claiming that entropy had no relation to complexity, so that a world of increasing entropy had no bearing on whether organisms were increasing in complexity. Dr. Morris showed that Dr. Wiley was quoting out of context and distorting the arguments in his critique of [the book] ‘Scientific Creationism.’ He then documented the fact that entropy indeed WAS related to complexity and that some leading evolutionists are now admitting that they do not yet know how to harmonize the contradictory concepts of entropy and evolution.” (Pg. 14)
In a debate held in Holland, Dr. Gish “showed that the possession of similar structure and organs by different animals does not prove descent from a common ancestor, since such homologous structures are found to be governed by entirely different genes.” (Pg. 45)
They note, “In a recent article, some of the very significant work of Robert Gentry on radiohalos is reviewed, together with comments on its significance by various well-known scientists… One of the most significant of Gentry’s discoveries has been … Since polonium has a very short half-life, this phenomenon seems to require an almost instantaneous crystallization of the rocks in which they are found… Otherwise the polonium would have disappeared and no halos would have been produced… the data… seem to require an instantaneous creation of the earth’s primordial crust.” (Pg. 105-106)
They assert, “A recent discovery… has demolished Archaeopteryx as a transitional form… the discovery of the remains of an undoubted true bird some ‘60 million years older’ than Archaeopteryx… Prof. John H. Ostrom … [said] ‘we must now look for the ancestors of flying birds in a period of time much older than that in which Archaeopteryx lived.’ Ostrom thus concedes that Archaeopteryx was not the ancestor of birds.” (Pg. 109)
They quote an evolutionist criticizing creationism, “According to creation theory, biological life began during a primeval period only five to six thousand years ago.” But they add, “Most creationists believe that creation was between 6000 and 10,000 years ago.” (Pg. 131)
Duane Gish argues, “If the primitive earth atmosphere contained a significant quantity of oxygen… an evolutionary origin of life would have been thermodynamically impossible, since all substances would have been oxidized to carbon dioxide, water, nitrogen, and other oxidized products, leaving no organic chemical compounds to serve as precursors for biochemical evolution. Evolutionists are thus forced to assume, a priori, that the primitive earth atmosphere contained no oxygen, but rather contained hydrogen, and that carbon existed mainly in the form of methane and/or carbon monoxide.” (Pg. 139)
He critiques various origin-of-life experiments: “while the production of these compounds is a vital necessity in any origin of life scheme, success at this stage is [much]… easier… than success at… arranging these subunits in the precise order required for biologically active proteins, DNA and RNA… Secondly, the success that was achieved… was due to special conditions imposed by the research scientists, conditions that would not have existed on the primitive earth.” (Pg. 142)
He also argues, “[Sidney] Fox’s reaction mixture consists solely (as far as organic material is concerned) of pure amino acids… Where on earth could a mixture of pure amino acids be found? Only in the laboratory of a 20th century scientist!… Heating amino acids at almost any temperature with a mixture of such chemicals would be certain to result in complete destruction of the amino acids… This factor alone completely eliminates Fox’s scheme from any rational discussion.” (Pg. 153-154)
In another article, he states, “Theories that attempt to account for the origin of stable metabolic systems from loose macromolecules thus suffer from a number of fatal weaknesses. First is the requirement that the necessary macromolecules be produced in sufficiently vast amounts to saturate the primeval seas to the point where complex coacervates or proteinoid microspheres would precipitate out of solution. Second, such globular products are inherently unstable and would easily be dissolved or disintegrated, spilling their contents out into the medium.” (Pg. 171)
Stuart E. Nevins asserts, “If continental separation did occur, the only place within the Bible framework where it could fit would be during Noah’s Flood… If continental separation occurred during Noah’s Flood, a host of problems in the tectonic dilemma can be solved… continental separation occurred toward the end of the Flood.” (Pg. 177-179)
John D. Morris says of the Paluxy River ‘human’ tracks, “Skeptics have claimed that the prints are carvings, not real prints at all. Unfortunately this has some basis; in fact, several enterprising Texans from Glen Rose did make their living during the Great Depression by digging out the best tracks and selling them… Soon, the best tracks were gone and a few men began to carve out new tracks… These counterfeit tracks do not, of course, disprove the genuine tracks.” (Pg. 197) [But of course, we now know that in the January 1986 issue of the ICR’s publication ‘Impact’ (no. 151, ‘The Paluxy River Mystery’) John Morris himself admits that these ‘human’ footprints are actually 3-toed dinosaur footprints, and that “it would now be improper for creationists to continue to use the Paluxy data as evidence against evolution.”]
Morris (who was an active researcher/explorer trying to locate Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat in Turkey) reports that “The first of the major [Noah’s Ark] news stories of this decade was the report on February 21, 1974, that a NASA satellite… had photographed Noah’s Ark… The news was repeated in virtually every newspaper and on every radio and television station. Unfortunately, when examined by photographic experts, the object in question turned out not to be the Ark. It was many times too large and not at all in the area under consideration as the possible resting place of the Ark.” (Pg. 283-284)
This book may interest a variety of modern creationists.
Displaying 1 of 1 review