Weekly Column #56
May 27, 2000
By David Mathews
E-mail David Mathews: david_mathews@geocities.com
Return to the Weekly Column Introduction Page
Return to David Mathews' Home Page
Domesticated Dinosaurs?
"Now they planned the animals of the mountains,all of the guardians of the forests, creatures of the
mountains: the deer, birds, pumas, jaguars, serpents,
rattlesnakes, yellowbites, guardians of the bushes."
(Popul Vul, p. 76)
Defenders of the truth, or rather people who are defending what they think to be the truth, may appeal to doubtful evidences which are not effective as a defense of their beliefs and opinions. Potentially fraudulent evidence cannot sustain a controversial belief because opponents must question the interpretation and the validity of the evidence. A suspicion of fraud is sufficient reason to dismiss an argument no matter how sincerely and eloquently the evidence is presented. The presence of fraudulent evidence will cast doubt upon all of the evidence presented and may lead to the conclusion that those responsible for presenting the fraudulent evidence are untrustworthy, unreliable, deceptive or incompetent.
These negative byproducts of presenting questionable evidence should cause Christians to avoid using doubtful evidence under any circumstances. Wisdom itself dictates that matters of controversy are not resolved by creating more controversy. For example, arguments about the age of the Universe are not resolved by introducing a controversy about allegedly fraudulent artifacts. Even in cases where the allegedly fraudulent evidence may be vindicated by later research, present doubt about these evidences will serve as a distraction from the beliefs which are subject of the primary controversy.
I bring up all of the above because some Christians are defending Young Earth Creationism by an appeal to artifacts from Mexico, Peru and the American Southwest. The artifacts are said to display drawings or sculptures of dinosaurs and human interactions with dinosaurs. The Young Earth Creationists argue that the presence of dinosaurs in Central and South America in historical times constitutes evidence contrary to the scientific conclusion that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago and went extinct 65 million years ago.
Remarkably enough, archaeological evidence which such profound implications for the Age of the Universe and other aspects of evolutionary chronology is rejected by archaeologists. The Christians proponents of the artifacts will not abide by the judgment of the archaeologists, instead they accuse scientists of a conspiracy to hide evidence contrary to evolution. For that last five decades, supposedly, all archaeologists -- even those obscure ones who have not yet made a discovery worthy of worldwide attention -- have avoided and obscured evidence so that they would not disturb the work of their fellow-scientists, the paleontologists. Does anyone really imagine that archaeologists are so enamored with paleontologists that they would compromise their integrity and sacrifice international fame for the sake of not discovering that dinosaurs existed in Central and South America?
In defense of the integrity of a scientific discipline, these doubtful artifacts were not discovered or excavated under the supervision of any archaeologists. The scientific discipline of archaeology, which demands careful controls and documentation of the location, depth and relative position of artifacts, was not followed for these most significant discoveries. Concerning the Ica Stones of Peru, Don Patton reports that:
"Dr. Cabrera told us that in the early 1930's, his father found many of these ceremonial burial stones in area's numerous tombs. He has continued his father's research and has collected over 11,000 of them."
From a scientific standpoint, and even from a legal standpoint, a second-hand account of a claim is of little value. Where are the grave sites which Dr. Cabrera and his father excavated? Where were the stones found relative to other artifacts which might provides clues about the age of the stones and the culture which produced them? Why hasn't Dr. Cabrera invited archaeologists to accompany him in his search for the stones? Why hasn't any archaeologists discovered similar artifacts to the stones which Dr. Cabrera claims to have discovered?
Contrary to the claim that these stones are authentic, a person has admitted to creating some of Ica stones:
"Swift, McQueen and I went to the village of Ocucaje, met and talked with Bacilleo Achua, the graver robber mentioned in the video, who admitted manufacturing some of the stones which a hack saw blade. He says police were present when he was asked, "Did you manufacture the stones you sold to Dr. Cabrera?" If he said so and admitted that they came from the tombs, he had no doubt that he would go to prison. The average life expectancy in a Peruvian prison is two years."
Don Patton does well to point out why Bacilleo Achua would lie about creating fake artifacts, but he has not presented any evidence that this man actually did lie about creating fake artifacts. To the contrary, Don Patton concedes that Bacilleo Achua did create counterfeit artifacts:
"Even so, I suspect that he did manufacture some of the stones to sell to Dr. Cabrera and tourists shops. I made a purchased from such a shop a stone depicting a dinosaur, which some one carved. Dr. Cabrera acknowledged on the video that some carvings were recently produced but were easily distinguished from the originals."
So the existence of fake artifacts is an undeniable fact, and it would appear that Dr. Cabrera is somehow related and perhaps responsible for the production for these hoaxes. Given that some of Dr. Cabrera's stones are hoaxes, archeologists may reasonably suppose that all of his artifacts -- especially those extraordinary artifacts which contain carvings of dinosaurs -- are hoaxes.
In opposition to the reasonable suspicion that Dr. Cabrera's extraordinary evidence is a hoax, all Don Patton offers is a claim by an implicated man:
"Even Mr. Achua, after admitting he carved some, said on the video that Dr. Cabrera had authentic stones from the tombs. He told us he had personally found many of the stones in the tombs. One skeptic on the video says that Cabrera stones have crude, brusk carvings and some do. However, many are absolutely exquisite. The idea of producing them with a hack saw is ludicrous."
If Bacilleo Achua is a hoaxer and therefore a dishonest man by trade, Don Patton ought not appeal to him as a trustworthy source of information about the existence of authentic Ica stones. Even supposing that some authentic stones do exists, there is no reason to suppose that the extraordinary stones in question -- that is, stones which depict dinosaurs and humans -- are authentic rather than hoaxes produced by Bacilleo Achua or another counterfeiter.
Should Christians rely upon evidence allegedly discovered by confessed hoaxers? Is the Young Earth Creationists position so desperate for corroborating evidence that it must rely upon the undoubtedly counterfeit Ica stones possessed by Dr. Cabrera, a man who is implicated in perpetrating a hoax and associating himself with people who are known counterfeiters?
Christians must recognize that the Ica Stone evidence for what it is -- doubtful and worthy of rejection wholesale. Don Patton's acceptance of these evidences is sufficient to cast doubt upon his reliability as a teacher. He has displayed questionable scholarship and judgment and is for that reason worthy of skeptical investigation. Christians should seek out scholarly evaluations of all of his evidence and arguments before either accepting them provisionally or rejecting them.
There is a number of evidences which Don Patton has presented which Christians ought either to reject or to demand more careful (independent) scholarly and scientific investigation. The following is a list of his evidences and my own evaluation of them. The reader is advised to examine the evidence and reach a conclusion about these matters for himself or herself.
List of Evidences & Evaluation:
1. Evidence from Peru [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/peru-tomb-art.htm] (subject of present article) : Reject completely because of suspicion of hoax and questionable character of the discoverer of the alleged artifacts.
2. Evidence from Mexico [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks-acambaro.htm] : Reject completely because of suspicion of hoax and questionable character of the discoverer of the alleged artifacts. (NOTE: Evidence of Mexico is presented by Dr. Dennis Swift)
3. Evidence from Ancient Americans [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/native-american-dino-art.htm] : Reject completely because of suspicion of hoax and doubts about the proper interpretation of the petroglyphs in question.
4. Evidence from fossilized allegedly human footprints [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks.htm] : Comprising the tracks found in situ, specifically the Taylor Trail, McFall Trail, Ryals Track and the Morris Track: Reject provisionally based upon the existence of an alternative explanation for the tracks and the suspicion that the tracks are only superficially similar to human footprints.
5. Evidence from fossilized allegedly human footprints [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks.htm] : The Burdick tract: Reject completely based upon the suspicion that this track is a hoax. Reject also because the track is merely an alleged human footprint and is not associated with any dinosaur footprint.
6. Evidence from fossilized allegedly human footprints [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks.htm] : New Mexico Track: Reject completely because track is not verified by scientists and it is potentially a hoax. The interpretation of the track as a human footprint is also subject to great doubt.
7. Evidence from fossilized allegedly human footprints [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/tracks.htm] : Large Cat Track: The track may or may not be authentic. However, it is not associated with any dinosaur footprints nor is it possible to verify that the track was ever associated with any dinosaur footprints.
8. Evidence from dinosaur and human fossils [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino- fossils.htm] : Malachite man: The location and association of these fossils is subject to intense doubt and their relationship to dinosaurs fossils is unknown and impossible to verify.
9. Evidence from dinosaur and human fossils [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino- fossils.htm] : Fossilized Hammer: The fossil is highly questionable and its association with dinosaurs is doubtful and impossible to verify.
10. Evidence from dinosaur and human fossils [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino- fossils.htm] : Fossilized Human Finger: The fossil is suspicious and possibly a hoax. There are no means of verifying that the alleged fossil is in any way associated with dinosaurs.
11. Evidence from dinosaur and human fossils [http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino- fossils.htm] : Fossilized Hand Print: The fossil is suspicious and possibly a hoax. The interpretation of the alleged fossil as a hand print is doubtful and worthy of rejection. The fossil is not associated with any known dinosaur fossil.
These eleven evidences are altogether of extraordinary low grade and they cannot sustain a young earth argument either individually or collectively. Christians would do well to reject all of these alleged evidences as they are subject to either refutation or alternative interpretation.
Don Patton's reliance upon doubtful evidences and arguments is sufficient cause to doubt anything that he says as a scientist, an interpreter of science, and an archeologist. Because the presence of numerous scientific errors in Don Patton's materials, I advise Christians to reject his teachings wholesale or accept them only after intense skeptical scientific investigation.
I encourage Don Patton to reject the above eleven evidences and all of his other teachings which are either erroneous, inaccurate or incomplete. Honor itself dictates that Christians reject hoaxes and doubtful evidence. Don Patton has an opportunity to behave honorably, and by doing so he will exonerate himself from the above mentioned errors.
I encourage all Christians, whether of a Young Earth or an Old Earth persuasion, to carefully evaluate all of the evidence presented on behalf of any viewpoint, to allow fellow Christians and others to investigate these evidences for the purpose of refutation, and to reject refuted evidence. Gullibility is not a virtue and deception is a sin. Faulty arguments are worthy of refutation and incomplete arguments are worthy of rejection. All evidence and arguments will stand or fall based upon their own merits.
Notes:
1. Quote of the Popul Vul is taken from: Popul Vul: The Definitive Edition of the Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life and the Glories of God and Kings. Translated by Dennis Tedlock.
2. Materials by Don Patton and Dennis Swift are found on The Interactive Bible, a web site produced and maintained by brother Steve Rudd. The web site's address is: http://www.bible.ca/bible.htm
3. Additional pictures and discussion of Dr. Cabrera and the Ica Stones is located on a web site titled Stones of Ica Peru. This site offers a book published by Dr. Cabrera for $30 (US) and it is very likely associated directly with Dr. Cabrera. The site is remarkable because it includes evidence which is not normally associated with Young Earth Creationism. The web site's address is: http://www.geocities.com/ Paris/Rue/3378/stones.html
4. A negative evaluation of the Ica Stones is provided by The Skeptic's Dictionary, a web site devoted to debunking extraordinary claims. Christians should heed the criticisms of these alleged artifacts present on this page. Also included are a number of links to web sites favorable and unfavorable towards the Ica Stones. Overall an extremely valuable web site. The web site's location is: http://www.dcn.dav is.ca.us/~btcarrol/skeptic/icastones.html
5. An interesting presentation of the Ica stones in presented on a web page titled "Journey to Mysterious Marcahuasi and the Labyrinthine Nazca Lines of Peru!" A Christian reading this web page will discover that the Ica stones are associated with several beliefs which are not routinely associated with Young Earth Creationism. The web site's location is: http://www.flinet.com/~labyrin thina/ica.htm#ica.
6. A Peruvian web page designed for tourism, titled Ica, contains the following statement about Dr. Javier Cabrera's musuem:
"Museo de Piedras Grabadas. - (Engraved Stones Musuem). - Bolivar Street 1st block - thousands of years of human activities. Exhibition of engraved stones depicting - supposedly - thousand of years of human activities. Based upon the found pieces, collection owner doctor Javier Cabrera, holds a theory according to which Ica was the seat of the first Peruvian culture."
© 1999 david_mathews@geocities.com
