Scientific Creation, Public Classroom, Curricula,

Academic Justification for Voluntary Inclusion of Scientific Creation in Public Classroom Curricula, Supported by Evidence that Man and dinosaurs were Contemporary

By Carl Edward Baugh

Volume 1 of 3. Texas Extension (Burleson, Texas):

Pacific International University and Pacific College of Graduate Studies (Missouri Charter)

Academic Justification for Voluntary Inclusion of Scientific Creation in Public Classroom curricula, Supported by Evidence that Man and Dinosaurs were Contemporary

A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education

Submitted to Pacific College of Graduate Studies, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, and Poplar Bluff, Missouri, U.S.A.

By Carl Edward Baugh

Fall, 1989

This offering subordinates and recalls an earlier dissertation on Anthropology and Religious Motivation submitted December, 1986 with a view toward enlargement of scope and academic material.

Copyright © by Carl E. Baugh, 1989


This work is dedicated to Robert Summers, Glen Rose citizen, world-class artist and sculptor, and scholar in his own right. Bob verifies that he saw human footprints among dinosaur footprints in the limestone layers around Glen Rose, Texas from the time he was a child. He has never wavered from that testimony of truth.


I am gratefully indebted to men like Clifford Wilson and A.E. Wilder-Smith who followed the composite body of researched truth to its scientific and logical conclusions; to friends like Jack and Rexella Van Impe who stood by me during the long, searching years that made the text of this dissertation possible; to my loving family who understood my preoccupation with this work; and especially to the children in my life who, by their very presence, have cautioned me to make sure I have found the truth so it can be shared with them.

I also especially acknowledge the unnumbered host of volunteers who have labored in boiling sun and frigid cold to continue the academic search for the truth in the fossil record at Glen Rose. Their untiring efforts have made this research possible.


October 21, 1936 - Born, Kennedy, Texas 1959, Graduate of Theology, Baptist Bible College 1961, Bachelor of Arts, Burton College 1983, Master of Arts in Biblical Studies (with major course work in Biblical Archaeology), Luther Rice Seminar, Jacksonville, Florida


"Academic Justification for Voluntary Inclusion of Scientific Creation in Public Classroom Curricula, Supported by Evidence that Man and Dinosaurs were Contemporary''

In its broad outline this dissertation presents some of the central elements in the conflict between the concepts of naturalistic evolution and special creation. This conflict is viewed especially from the standpoint of Education with extensive research on the basis of appeal for both models. Academic justification, or the lack of it, is explored from both positions with a strictly secular view of educational inquiry.

The first proposition offered is that there is academic justification for including data on scientific creation in the public classroom independent of any religious overtones. The second proposition is that original research done near Glen Rose, Texas demonstrates academic evidence that man and dinosaurs were contemporary, thus falsifying the basic structure of evolutionary theory. Additional extant falsifying data are presented.

Extensive documentation is given with reference to the religious nature of evolution and creation in practice. In concept, however, both can be presented as purely academic inquiry. There have been few other works that have addressed the underlying motivational practices inherent within the influences of the two schools of thought. Throughout the work academic merit of both positions is compared with the secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness Of science instructions as basic tenets of each are viewed striped of religious overtones.

The appeal of Darwin to a universal mind-set is explored. Charles Darwin himself is examined with a view toward recognizing the association of his phobias with his theories. In turn his experience is identified with a large ``control group' observed and interviewed on an international scope.

Superior characteristics possessed by ancient man are documented and explored, with appropriate conclusions in the light of anthropology as they apply to the field of general education. Application is made with reference to the framework of life origins theory.

Data relative to design as opposed to random processes are presented and explored with universal ramifications. Experience in turn is explained in the light of universal disharmony.

In this work a unique contribution is made in the field of education as it is practiced in the classroom and contributes to the shaping of world-views. It is that both concepts, that of man in harmony with a discordant universe (evolution) and man in harmony with a designed universe (creation), may both be correct - with resulting consequences.

In this work an additional challenge is presented, demanding a complete restructuring of Fossil Man and the fossil record in general. In Part II of the dissertation this is especially related to the age of the dinosaurs. It is demonstrated that man and dinosaurs were contemporary thousands, not millions, of years ago.

In the field of general education, and the disciplines of science instruction in particular, the academic implications of contemporaneous human and dinosaur cohabitation cannot he ignored. Leading secular scholars have apprized their colleagues that academic verification of cretaceous human occupation would seriously disrupt conventional interpretations of the biological order. This paper proceeds to provide such verification in documented form.

Valid characterization of human footprints is explored from the view of anatomical specialists. Enlargement and variation from the published literature are noted and verified.

Unpublished manuscripts relating to the views of old-timers about human footprints among dinosaur footprints are contained in this expansion of the data they observed in nature near Glen Rose, Texas.

Original excavations are detailed in text, diagram, and photographic documentation. Academic witnesses are called upon to express their views regarding the validity of the claims and the reliability of the excavation process.

Individual footprints and trails of tracks are examined exhaustively with the standardized formulae in reference. Mathematical calculations are applied to modern footprints and fossil prints alike. Comparisons are made between fossil and modern, and fossil to fossil, prints. Favorable results are demonstrated among the categories, confirming human habitation among dinosaurs. Graphic line drawings demonstrating this co-habitation are supplied.

Formulae relating to dinosaur trails and velocity are evaluated and restructured. Finally, man in Cretaceous habitation is assigned technical classification.


On June 19, 1987 the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Louisiana Balanced Treatment Act (Edwards v. Aguillard, No. 85-1513), but simultaneously affirmed voluntary flexibility on the part of public teachers to introduce alternate scientific theories about the origins of humankind (in addition to the theory of evolution). This is to be done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction. The specific text was:

It is equally clear that requiring schools to teach creation science with evolution does not advance academic freedom. The Act does not grant teachers a flexibility that they did not already possess to supplant the present science curriculum with the representation of theories besides evolution, about the origin of life. Indeed, the Court of Appeals found that no law prohibited Louisiana public school teachers from teaching any scientific theory. 765 F.2d, at 1257. As the president of the Louisiana Science Teachers Association testified, '[a]ny scientific concept that's based on established fact can be included in our curriculum already, and no legislation allowing this is necessary.' 2 App. E616. The Act provides Louisiana school teachers with no new authority. (p.8)

Teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to schoolchildren might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction. (p.14)

As an outcome of this decision the Alabama State Board of Education adopted the Alabama Course of Study for Science Education, K-12 at its June 9, 1988 meeting. The specific text of the position statement was:

Consistent with the expressions of the U.S. Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard, teachers shall have the freedom and flexibility to supplement the curricula with the presentation of various scientific theories about the origins of life, if done with the secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction.

On March 10, 1989 the Texas State Board of Education adopted Proclamation 66 which sets the standards for textbooks to be adopted in 1990 for use beginning in 1991. ``The Board's March 11 vote mandated the following specifics for Biology I textbooks:


6.3 examining alternative scientific evidence and ideas to test, verify, modify, or refute scientific theories


1.4 scientific theories and laws based on existing evidence as well as new evidence

2.6 Darwin theory of evolution (see 6.3 under Process Skills)

4.2 theory of chemical origin of life (see 6.3 under Process Skills)

8.2 theory of inheritance (see 6.3 under Process Skills)

9.1 scientific theories of evolution ["theories" replaced "theory"]

9.2 scientific evidence of evolution and other reliable scientific theories, if any. (see 6.3 under Process Skills)

In addition to requirements for Biology I, these specific mandates are also included for High School Biology II, Elementary science (English) grades 1-6, and Elementary Science (Spanish) grades 1-6."

It is within the constitutional lights of schoolchildren to receive factual disclosure of basic data available in scientific inquiry. It is of interest to note that the Edwards v. Aguillard decision by the U.S. Supreme Court sustained the finding of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in an important area:

No court of which we are aware had prohibited voluntary instruction concerning purely scientific evidence that happens, incidentally, to be consistent with a religious doctrine or tenet.

Yet, there appears to be organized professional stifling of some inquiry in common practice in the name of technological instruction. Deet Schumacher, President of the Houston Geological Society, in the June 1989 bulletin deplored what he called scientific and technological illiteracy":

Results of a survey of more than 2000 university students in the U.S., reported in a number of newspapers last October, shows that nearly half have some fundamental misconceptions about earth history and evolution. The most common chronological errors are:

45% believe that fossils resulted from the biblical flood,
40% believe that cavemen co-existed with dinosaurs,
30% believe that man originated in the Garden of Eden,
10% believe that the Earth was created in 4004 B.C.,
U.S. scientific and technological illiteracy has been on the minds of many scientists and educators in recent months, and some professional organizations (AAAS, ACI, AAPG, CSA, etc.) have established committees to develop programs to attack this problem.

There should be a better approach to the problem of scientific illiteracy than exclusion of ideas at variance with an exclusive concept. The fact is that scientific illiteracy occurs when students are deprived of adequate disclosure pertaining to available scientific data in their course of study.

These data can, and should be, presented without intent to enhance or inhibit a particular religious view. Effective educational procedure occurs when the student is free to make informed academic discovery in basic questions after all available data have been presented with a secular intent.

The literature reviews and original research outlined in this dissertation offer an academic basis with specific information for voluntary inclusion of creation materials in the public classroom.

Any teacher presenting any information on life origins or biological order with a secular intent in view should be aware of the fact that the material and the student are often oriented with bias overtones. This fact, however, does not nullify the teacher's ability or responsibility in an objective presentation of scientific data in either direction. By intent this secular presentation should neither enhance or inhibit the student's religious orientation. It may come as a surprise to most educators that evolutionary concept is at least as religious as creationistic concept.

The Western World has intellectually surrendered to the influence of two men. Their influence accounts for more moment-by-moment preoccupation and mind-set disposition within Western man that all the pondering inspired by the remaining giants of the intellectual reservoir. Their shadows cast over the affairs of nations have revolutionized governments and controlled the attitudes and actions of men from the cradle to the grave. The name of the first man was Jesus of Nazareth, and the name of the second was Charles Darwin.

What was so important about Charles Darwin? Educators and anthropologists in general are schooled in, and many are committed to, the concepts he taught. Is there genuine empirical evidence to substantiate this commitment? More importantly, does Darwin embody a rationale secretly held within the make-up of natural man? If this is true then his experience is commonly shared by an innumerable host, and his appeal reaches farther than his shadow is cast. If there is merit to the thesis that all mankind at some point in time re-thinks the embryo of Darwin's thoughts, then his dominating appeal is better understood. For man is man is man.

Darwin wondered about the concept of a God who would create a world of beauty and make it decay, who would let little children suffer, who would impose disharmony within man's consciousness and restraint throughout his actions. In consequence he began to consider time, chance, and natural circumstances as being responsible for our very existence. But there is far more in what he said that appeals to those disposed toward naturalistic thinking. His basic concepts were not even novel or original, but his experiences were universal.

Darwin's concepts have been cast into the crucible of scientific scrutiny. As supportive data will reveal, rigorous scientific investigation has produced insurmountable obstacles to his views. Yet, devotees hold to these tenets with a commitment rarely witnessed in all history. It appears that he struck a chord common to all mankind.

His interpretations regarding man's origins have become accepted as conventional discourse. Yet those very interpretations are now being challenged. Is there an appeal inherent within those interpretations which transcends even the right to question?

With all its appeal as a universal construct, is there a method by which the very model of evolutionary development can be falsified and the concept of creation be posited as a viable scientific explanation for life origins? This work offers such evidence for academic scrutiny. In Part I we explore the original falsification possibilities outlined by Darwin himself toward his own theory, and in Part II we offer original research in the area stipulated by Darwin's modern advocates as having the potential to falsify his total concept.

Displaying academic evidence of human occupation among dinosaurs without precursor life forms preceding them would divest evolutionary theory of any plausible mechanism. In Part II of this dissertation special emphasis has been placed on this very important aspect involving both mankind and those legendary, yet factual, dinosaurs. As stated in the Abstract, we shall demonstrate that humans and dinosaurs walked together in relatively recent times, with evidence personally uncovered at the Paluxy River in Texas at properly conducted excavations directed by this researcher.

The work has been undertaken scientifically. Otho Perkins, director of science curricula for the entire public school system of Columbus, Ohio, and an admitted evolutionist, wrote on an available paper for this researcher: "What I've seen in your presentation is 'real science'." He further stated: "This certainly adds new documented evidence which should cause us to rethink our concept of life history. This is a bright spot in research uncovering new evidence rather than relying on old documentation." (10/26/83).

The implications of documenting human footprints among dinosaur footprints are staggering. It would literally call into question the entire geologic column. Additionally, it would require further restructure since the evolutionary order was in error. Ultimately it would mandate a complete restructuring of a model in keeping with evidence of abrupt appearance in the form of human occupation among dinosaurs. This dissertation attempts to form the basis for such evidence and restructuring.

A recent publication, Dinosaurs and Other Prehistoric Animals, published by Exeter Books (New York, 1986) refers to the question of human and dinosaur co-existence on page 45:

Did man ever see a dinosaur? This has been the subject of much heated debate in recent years, because of the discovery of some interesting sets of footPrints.

In each case - and there are several different sets - there appears the be a man's footprint walking beside a dinosaur track. Some people point to this as evidence that Man existed long before scientific reference books would have us believe.

The paleontologists, however, think that the smaller prints were probably made by the forelimbs of a bipedal dinosaur, just touching the ground slightly as it walked along, bending forward to spread out its weight.

This dissertation will document sets of human footplints which appear within, and continue in left-light left-right pace and stride for as many as twelve prints, and extend far beyond the physical capabilities of the dinosaur making the adjacent prints.

Discover Magazine (August, 1956, p. 8) referred to Rolan T. Bird who did extensive work along the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas. The article states that "Indeed, Bird deliberately called the smaller footplints 'mystery tracks,' leaving open the possibility that they had been made by humans.'' James Stewart Monroe, writing in Journal of Geological Education (Creationism, Human Footprints, and Flood Geology, v.35, p.93), candidly asserted that "Human footprints in geologically ancient strata would indeed call into doubt many conventional geologic concepts."

David H. Milne, of The Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, and Steven D. Schafersman, of the Department of Geology, Rice University, Houston, Texas, carried the issue to further admissions when they wrote in Journal of Geological Education (1983, v.31, p. 111) that "Such an occurrence, even if verified, would seriously disrupt conventional interpretations of biological and geological history and would support the doctrines of creationism and catastrophism."

Steven M. Stanley, in The New Evolutionary Timetable (1981, p.l71) had previously admitted that "any topsyturvy sequence of fossils would force us to rethink our theory... As narW/in recognized, a single geographic inconsistency would have nearly the same power of destruction."

William E. Dannemeyer of the United States Congress carried the issue to its ultimate conclusion in writing to this researcher that "This is a significant breakthrough with enormous implications for establishing the origin of mankind."

This dissertation represents an attempt to follow these admissions and conclusions with detailed documentation. Additional video documentation is available in the library of this researcher.

Table of Contents

COVER    iv
VITA... vi
CONTENT    viii

Fossil Record    1
Microbiology    3
Australopithecines    5
Speech Adaptation    6

Classification    10
Skills of Ancient ``Primitive'' Man    11
Footprints of Laetoli    12
Artifacts of Ancient Man    16
Categories of Excellence    19
Restructure of Fossil Man    24

Ancient Evolutionary Concepts    28
Impact of Charles Darwin    29
Conflict In Confirmation    29
Evidence For Design    31
Attempts At Ape Communication    32
Darwin's Trauma    33
Darwin's Theology    35
Darwin's Phobias    36
Darwin's Followers    37

Universal Evolutionary Influence    45
Evolutionary Missionary Practice    46
Creationist Academic Explanation    48


Original Pages 147-149
Original Pages 150-152
Original Pages 153-155
Original Pages 156-157
Excerpt from Dinosaur

The Tracks of a Sick Dolphin?
A Human Footprint Under a Dinosaur Print
Let the Media See a Print Uncovered
Verification by educator Clifford Wilson, Ph.D.
Many Points of Veriffcation
The Imprint of a Human Hand
Press Reactions
Additional Positive Response
Letter from Hilton Hinderliter, Ph.D.
Dinosaur Prints on the Top Stone Layer - And a Giant Skeleton
Dinosaur Tracks Later than Human Footprints
We Find a Dinosaur
A Russian Paluxy
A Report to Natural History Magazine
The Excavations Continue in 1987
The Importance of Finding Human and Dinosaur Footprints Together

Photo Pages:

Page 180 - Modern Human Footprints in series (pic)
Page 181 - Modern Human Footprints in series (detailed pic)
Page 182 - Modern Human Footprints in series (detailed pic)
Page 183 - Direction of travel for prints on following page. (diagram)
Page 184 - Modern Human Footprints in series (pic)
Page 185 - Modern Human Footprints in series (pic)
Page 186 - Modern Human Footprints in series (pic)
Page 187 - Modern Human Footprints in series (pic)
Page 188 - Modern Human Footprints in series (doc)
Page 189 - Bauanthropus I Print-Human (doc)
Page 190 - Bauanthropus I Print-Human (pic)
Page 191 - Bauanthropus I Print-Human (pic)
Page 192 - Bauanthropus I Print-Human (pic)
Page 193-4 - Hinderliter Print-Human (pic)
Page 195-6 - Sir George Print-Human (pic)
Page 197 - Burdick Print Intro (doc)
Page 198 - Burdick Print-Human (doc)
Page 199 - Burdick Print in Cross Section Profile (diagram)
Page 200 - Burdick Print after being sectioned (pic)
Page 201 - Burdick Print Being Cross-Sectioned (pic)
Page 202 - Burdick Print after being sectioned (pic)
Page 203 - Burdick Print (doc)
Page 204 - Burdick Print (doc)
Page 205 - Burdick Print (doc)
Page 206 - Burdick Print After Final Sectioning (pic)
Page 207 - Evidence From a Number of Trails (doc)
Page 208 - Bauanthropus Trail (doc)
Page 209 - Footprints in a Series (diagram)
Page 210 - Footprints in a Series (doc)
Page 211 - Footprints in a Series (doc)
Page 212 - Footprints in a Series (doc)
Page 213 - Footprints in a Series (doc)
Page 214 - Special Feature of Print #6 (diagram)
Page 215 - Footprints in a Series (doc)
Page 216 - Prints #3,6,10 (pic)
Page 217 - Max Trail (doc)
Page 218 - Max Trail (doc)
Page 219 - Max Trail (doc)
Page 220 - Max Trail (pic)
Page 221 - Beverly Trail (doc)
Page 222 - Beverly Trail (doc)
Page 223 - Clark Trail (doc)
Page 224 - Clark Trail (doc)
Page 225 - Clark Trail (doc)
Page 226 - Clark Trail (doc)
Page 227 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 228 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 229 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 230 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 231 - Clark Trail (doc)
Page 232 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 233 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 234 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 235 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 236 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 237 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 238 - Clark Trail (diagram)
Page 239 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 240 - Clark Trail (pic)
Page 241 - Park Ledge Trail (doc)
Page 242 - Park Ledge Trail (pic)
Page 243 - Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 244 - Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 245 - Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 246 - Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 247 - McFall-Taylor-Ryals Trails (map)
Page 248 - Measurements of some of the Taylor Trail Tracks (diagram)
Page 249 - Taylor Trail as seen today (pic)
Page 250 - Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 251 - Taylor Trail (pic)
Page 252 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 253 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 254 - Human print (pic)
Page 255 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print(diagram)
Page 256 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 257 - Human print (pic)
Page 258 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 259 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 260 - -4 Foot Print (pic)
Page 261 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 262 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 263 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (pic)
Page 264 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 265 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 266 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (pic)
Page 267 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 268 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 269 - -3 Foot print (pic)
Page 270 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 271 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 272 - -2 Foot print (pic)
Page 273 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 274 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 275 - -1 Foot print (pic)
Page 276 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 277 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 278 - +1 Foot print (pic)
Page 279 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 280 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 281 - +2 Foot print (pic)
Page 282 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 283 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 284 - +3 Foot Print (pic)
Page 285 - Taylor +3 Print (pic)
Page 286 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 287 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 288 - +4 Foot Print (pic)
Page 289 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 290 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 291 - +5 Foot Print (pic)
Page 292 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 293 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 294 - +6 Foot Print (pic)
Page 295 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 296 - Dinosaur print with Secondary print (diagram)
Page 297 - Foot Print +5,6 (pic)
Page 298 - Human-Taylor Prints (doc)
Page 299 - Human-Taylor Prints (doc)
PART 3 - Academic Justification for Voluntary Inclusion of Scientific Creation in Public Classroom Curricula,
Supported by Evidence that Man and Dinosaurs were Comtemporary

Page 300 - Purpose statement for part three (doc)
Page 301 - Secondary Impressions on Taylor Trail (pic)
Page 302 - Human Prints at Taylor Site (pic)
Page 303 - Becky Trail Cover (doc)
Page 304 - Becky Trail (doc)
Page 305 - Becky Trail Prints (pic)
Page 306 - Dimorphodon Profile-possible prints on Taylor Trail (doc)
Page 307 - Ryals Trail cover(doc)
Page 308 - Human Prints on Ryals Trail (pic)
Page 309 - Human Prints on Ryals Trail (pic)
Page 310 - Ryals Trail (doc)
Page 311 - Comparison of Some Trails Cover (doc)
Page 312 - Comparison of Some Trails (doc)
Page 313 - Comparison of Some Trails (doc)
Page 314 - Survey of Excavation Results on Photographic Documentation cover (doc)
Page 315 - Rock Substrate (pic)
Page 316 - Enlarged Cast of Human Prints (pic)
Page 317 - Human Prints-Dinosaur Valley State Park Lookout Compared to Taylor Trail (pic)
Page 318 - Human Prints-Dinosaur State Park Compared to McFall Site (pic)
Page 319 - Human Footprint Overlapping a Dinosaur Print, also a Human Hand Print (pic)
Page 320 - Human Print and Dinosaur Print Closely Placed Together (pic)
Page 321 - Four Various Prints (pic)
Page 322 - Prints Compared to modern Foot and Stride (pic)
Page 323 - Cretaceous Tooth and Finger cover (doc)
Page 324 - Human Like Tooth (doc)
Page 325 - Human Like Tooth Article (pic)
Page 326 - Human Like Tooth Compared to Modern Tooth (pic)
Page 327 - Various Teeth (pic)
Page 328 - Human Like Tooth Compared to Fossil Fish Tooth (pic)
Page 329 - Ancient Tooth compared to Modern Tooth (diagram)
Page 330 - Human Tooth (doc)
Page 331 - Human Tooth & Human Finger (doc)
Page 332 - Human Finger (doc)
Page 333 - Human Finger (pic)
Page 334 - Human Finger X-ray next Mordern Finger (pic)
Page 335 - Human Finger Measured and Sectioned (pic)
Page 336 - One Section of Human Finger(pic)
Page 337 - Human Finger (pic)
Page 338 - Fossilized Worm (pic)
Page 339 - Human Hand (diagram)
Page 340 - Model Restructure of Dinosaur Velocity and Carnivorous Habit cover (doc)
Page 341 - Model Restructure of Dinosaur Velocity and Carnivorous Habit (doc)
Page 342 - Model Restructure of Dinosaur Velocity and Carnivorous Habit (doc)
Page 343 - Standard Formula for Dinosaur Velocity (doc)
Page 344 - Dinosaur Trackway Removed From Paluxy River Compared to the Tracks at Glenn Rose (Diagram)
Page 345 - Tracks Showing Dinosaurs Movement (pic)
Page 346 - Tracks Showing Dinosaurs Movement (pic)
Page 347 - Measuring Dinosaur Tracks (pic)
Page 348 - Baugh Field Notes (doc)
Page 349 - Baugh Field Notes (doc)
Page 350 - Baugh Field Notes (doc)
Page 351 - Baugh Field Notes (doc)
Page 352 - Baugh Field Notes (doc)
Page 353 - C. Douglas Coffey Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 354 - C. Douglas Coffey Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 355 - C. Douglas Coffey Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 356 - C. Douglas Coffey Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 357 - C. Douglas Coffey Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 358 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 359 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 360 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 361 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 362 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 363 - Robert F. Halfenstine Formulae Notes (doc)
Page 364 - A Challenge to the Geological Column as a Dating Index cover (doc)
Page 365 - A Challenge to the Geological Column as a Dating Index (doc)
Page 366 - McFall Site II (pic)
Page 367 - Conclusion (doc)
Page 368 - Conslusion (doc)
Page 369 - References (doc)
Page 370 - References (doc)
Page 371 - References (doc)
Page 372 - References (doc)
Page 373 - Epilogue (doc)
Page 374 - Epilogue (doc)
Page 375 - References (doc)
Appendix Contents (doc)

Page 377 - Appendage A (doc)
Page 378 - Appendage B (doc)
Page 379 - Appendage C (doc)
Page 380 - Appendage C (cont.) (doc)
Page 381 - Appendage C (cont.) (doc)
Page 382 - Appendage C (cont.) (doc)
Page 383 - Appendage D (diagram)
Page 384 - Appendage D (cont.) (diagram)
Page 385 - Appendage E (diagram)
Page 386 - Appendage E (cont.) (diagram)
Page 387 - Appendage F (doc)
Page 388 - Appendage G (doc)
Page 389 - Appendage G (cont.) (doc)
Page 390 - Appendage G (cont.) (pic)
Page 391 - Appendage H (doc)
Page 392 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 393 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 394 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 395 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 396 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 397 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 398 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 399 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 400 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 401 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 402 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 403 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 404 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 405 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 406 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 407 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 408 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 409 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 410 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 411 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 412 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 413 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 414 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 415 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 416 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 417 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 418 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 419 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 420 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 421 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 422 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 423 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 424 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 425 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 426 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 427 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 428 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 429 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 430 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 431 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 432 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 433 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 434 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 435 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 436 - Appendage H (cont.) (doc)
Page 437 - Appendage I (doc)
Page 438 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 439 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 440 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 441 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 442 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 443 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 444 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 445 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 446 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 447 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 448 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 449 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 450 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 451 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 452 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 453 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 454 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 455 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 456 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 457 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 458 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 459 - Appendage I (cont.) (doc)
Page 460 - Appendage J (doc)
Page 461 - Appendage J (cont.) (pic)
Page 462 - Appendage J (cont.) (pic)
Page 463 - Appendage J (cont.) (pic)
Page 464 - Appendage K (doc)
Page 465 - Appendage L (doc)
Page 466 - Appendage L (cont.) (doc)
Page 467 - Appendage M (doc)
Page 468 - Appendage N (doc)
Page 469 - Appendage O (doc)
Page 470 - Appendage P (doc)
Page 471 - Appendage Q (doc)
Page 472 - Appendage R (doc)
Page 473 - Appendage S (doc)
Page 474 - Appendage S (cont.) (doc)
Page 475 - Appendage T (doc)
Page 476 - Appendage U (doc)
Page 477 - Appendage U (cont.) (doc)
Page 478 - Appendage V (doc)
Page 479 - Appendage V (cont.) (doc)
Page 480 - Appendage V (cont.) (doc)
Page 481 - Appendage W (doc)
Page 482 - Appendage X (doc)
Page 483 - Appendage X (cont.) (doc)
Page 484 - Appendage X (cont.) (doc)
Page 485 - Appendage X (cont.) (doc)
Page 486 - Appendage Y (doc)
Page 487 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 488 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 489 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 490 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 491 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 492 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 493 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 494 - Appendage Y (cont.) (doc)
Page 495 - Appendage Z (doc)
Page 496 - Dr. Baugh's Diploma From the Pacific College of Graduate Studies (doc)