Glenn Morton (
Wed, 05 Jun 1996 22:21:25

> Robinson Crusoe saw a single footprint on the sand, and it totally
> changed his "world view". We don't need a lot of evidence in order to
>falsify a wide range of theories, and narrow them down to a smaller
>number of possibilities. The database of hominid fossils is thin, and
>any significant new find often changes the story. But there is enough
>evidence already to indicate the presence of anatomically modern humans
>older than 100,000 years. It's true, as James Houston (I Believe in the
>Creator) said, that dead bones do not say much about the living creature.
> But they say enough to refute the young-earth chronology, for instance.
>They have to resort to the desperate defenses of either refuting
>radiometric dating or invoking apparent age.

I agree with your main point but there have been nearly 4000 fossilized
individuals found between 1969-1976 (see Lubenow, Bones of Contention, p.
29. The record is not as thin as we are often told.

Foundation,Fall and Flood