In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

This is the online edition of In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
(7th Edition) by Dr. Walt Brown. The online version of the book is designed to be read online.
A PDF version or hardbound print version may be ordered.
Copyright © 1995–2008, Center for Scientific Creation. All rights reserved.

Click here to order the hardbound print edition of this online book.

[ The Fountains of the Great Deep > Frozen Mammoths > Evaluation of Evidence vs. Theories ]

Evaluation of Evidence vs. Theories

Table 11 summarizes how well each theory explains the many strange things associated with frozen mammoths. Each column corresponds to a theory, and each row represents a strange detail that requires an explanation. A green circle means that, in my opinion, the column’s theory provides a reasonable explanation for the detail represented by that row. Yellow and red circles indicate moderate and serious problems, respectively. Table 11 shows both details and the broad perspective—“the trees and the forest.” Numbers in the table refer to amplifying explanations below.

Readers may make their own judgments and independently assess each theory’s plausibility. For example, if you feel that a detail or theory has been omitted or misstated, modify the table. This approach focuses future discussions on areas of critical disagreement. It also helps keep all details and competing theories in mind, encouraging balance and thoroughness. Often a disagreement becomes moot when one realizes that other facts oppose some theory. When a theory is proposed, usually only the details supporting it and opposing competing theories are mentioned. Table 11 contrasts all published theories with all known diagnostic details.

In seeking the cause of many strange and related details, one is tempted to use a separate explanation for each detail. Throughout the history of science, experience has shown that the simplest theory explaining the most details is probably correct. For example, a sudden rash of fires in a city may all be unrelated. However, most investigators would instinctively look for a common explanation. Centuries ago, each newly discovered detail of planetary motion required, in effect, a new theory. Later, one theory (Newton’s Law of Gravitation) provided a simple explanation for all these motions.

Table 11. Evidence vs. Theories: Frozen Mammoths
		Theories
		Hydroplate		Lake Drowning		Crevasse		Mud Burial		River Transport		Extinction by Man		Bering Barrier		Mild Ice Age		Shifting Crust		Meteorite
Evidence to Be Explained	Abundant Food		1		12		20						56		70		79				99
	Warm Climate				13		21								70		79				99
	Away from Rivers								33		45
	Yedomas and Loess		2		14		22		34		45		57		71		80		93		100
	Elevated Burial		3				23		33		46		58
	Multi-Continental				14		22		34		45				72		79
	Rock Ice		4		15		24		35		47		59		73		81		94		101
	Frozen Muck		3		14		25		34		45		60		74		82		95		100
	Sudden Freezing				16		26		36								83
	Suffocation		5				22						61		75		84				100
	Dirty Lungs		6		17		27		37		48		62		76
	-150°F		7		16		28		34		45		57		72		85		93		102
	Large Animals		7				29				45		57		77		86		93
	Summer-Fall Deaths		8								49						87		96
	Animal Mixes		3		18		30		38				63								103
	Upright		9		14		31		39		50		64
	Vertical Compression		9		19		22		40		45		57		72		88		93		100
	Other		10–11				32		41–44		51–55		65–69		78		89–92		97–98		104



Key:		Theory explains this detail.
		Theory has moderate problem with this detail.
		Theory has serious problems with this detail.
Numbers in this table refer to amplifying explanations on pages 245–254.