Do Creationists Publish in Notable Refereed Journals?

Author: David Buckna
Subject: Apologetics
Date:

In his book The Monkey Business (1982) paleontologist Niles Eldredge wrote that no author who published in the Creation Research Society Quarterly “has contributed a single article to any reputable scientific journal” (p.83). Apparently Eldredge couldn’t be bothered to glance at the Science Citation Index or any other major science bibliographic source.

Developmental biologist Willem J. Ouweneel, a Dutch creationist and CRSQ contributor, published a classic and widely cited paper on developmental anomalies in fruit flies (“Developmental genetics of homoeosis,” Advances in Genetics, 16 [1976], 179-248). Herpetologist Wayne Frair, a frequent CRSQ contributor, publishes his work on turtle systematics and serology in such journals as Journal of Herpetology, Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Science, and Herpetologica.

In their study of creationist publishing practices (“The Elusive Scientific Basis of Creation ‘Science’ “, Quarterly Review of Biology ,60 (1985): 21-30), Eugenie Scott and Henry Cole surveyed the editors of 68 journals for the period from 1980-1983, looking for creationist submissions. Out of an estimated 135,000 submitted papers, Scott and Cole found only 18 that could be described “as advocating scientific creationism” (p.26).

Scott and Cole were not looking for papers like the following: In 1983, the German creationist and microbiologist Siegfried Scherer published a critique of evolutionary theories of the origin of photosynthesis entitled “Basic Functional States in the Evolution of Light-driven Cyclic Electron Transport”, Journal of Theoretical Biology ,104 [1983]: 289-299, one of the journals Scott and Cole surveyed. Only an editor who had a complete roster of European creationists, and the insight to follow the implications of Scherer’s argument would have flagged the paper as “creationist”.

How many papers did Scott and Cole miss? Let’s look at 1984, one year past the end of their survey. Would Scott and Cole have turned up “Enzymic Editing Mechanisms and the Origin of Biological Information Transfer”, by the creationist biochemist Grant Lambert (Journal of Theoretical Biology, 107 [1984]:387- 403)? Lambert argues that without editing enzymes, primitive DNA replication, transcription, and translation would have been swamped by extremely high error rates. But the editing enzymes are themselves produced by DNA.

It’s a brilliant argument for design. Lambert understandably counts on some subtlety and insight from his readers, however. Lambert doesn’t “explicitly” wave his creationist banner, leaving the dilemma as “an unresolved problem in theoretical biology” (p.401). By Scott and Cole’s criteria, suchpapers don’t really count. By any other reasonable criteria, however, they do.

Dr. D. Russell Humphreys, a physicist working for the prestigious Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico (who is involved with the laboratory’s particle beam fusion project, concerning thermonuclear fusion energy research) is a board member of the Creation Research Society. He has about 30 published articles in mainstream technical journals from 1968 to the present. In the last eight years a lot of his work has been classified, so there has been less of it in the open literature.

His most recent unclassified publication is a multiple-author article in Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 63, Number 10, October 1992, pp. 5068-5071, “Comparison of experimental results and calculated detector responses for PBFAII thermal source experiments.” I understand that a more recent unclassified article will be published in the near future.

Here is just a sampling of some of his earlier articles:

“Inertial confinement fusion with light ion beams,” (Multiple- author) International Atomic Energy Agency, 13th International Conference on Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research, Washington D.C., 1-6 October 1990.

“Progress toward a superconducting opening switch,” (Principal author), Proceedings of 6th IEEE Pulsed Power Conference (Arlington, VA June 29 – July 1, 1987) pp. 279-282.

“Rimfire: a six megavolt laser-triggered gas-filled switch for PBFA II,” (Principal author),Proceedings of 5th IEEE Pulsed Power Conference (Arlington, VA June 10-12, 1985) pp. 262-2265.

“Uranium logging with prompt fission neutrons,” (Principal author) International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes, Vol. 34, Number 1, 1983, pp. 261-268.

“The 1/gamma velocity dependence of nucleon-nucleus optical potentials,” (Only author) Nuclear Physics, Vol. A182, 1972, pp. 580-592.

Creationists such as Humphreys have extensive publications in mainstream journals on non-creationist topics. As mentioned previously, the article by Scott & Cole was a search for articles openly espousing creationism, which is a different matter altogether. Creationists who publish scientific research in mainstream journals have found that they can publish articles with data having creationist implications, but will not get articles with openly creationist conclusions published. When they attempt to do this, their articles are usually rejected. Those who are well-known to evolutionists as creationists have more difficulty even with articles which do not have obvious creationist implications.

In the summer of 1985 Humphreys wrote to the journal Science pointing out that openly creationist articles are suppressed by most journals. He asked if Science had “a hidden policy of suppressing creationist letters.” Christine Gilbert, the letters editor, replied and admitted, “It is true that we are not likely to publish creationist letters.” This admission is particularly significant since Science’s official letters policy is that they represent “the range of opinions received.” e.g., letters must be representative of part of the spectrum of opinions. Yet of all the opinions they receive, Science does not print the creationist ones.

Humphrey’s letter and Ms. Gilbert’s reply are reprinted in the book, Creation’s Tiny Mystery, by physicist Robert V. Gentry (Earth Science Associates, Knoxville, Tennessee, 2nd edition, 1988.)

On May 19, 1992 Humphreys submitted his article * “Compton scattering and the cosmic microwave background bumps” to the Scientific Correspondence section of the British journal Nature. The editorial staff knew Humphreys was a creationist and didn’t want to publish it (even though the article did not contain any glaring creationist implications). The editorial staff didn’t even want to send it through official peer review. Six months later Nature published an article by someone else on the same topic, having the same conclusions. Thus, most creationist researchers realize it is simply a waste of time to send journal editors openly creationist articles. To say that a “slight bias” exists on the part of journal editors would be an understatement.

* The Institute for Creation Research published a laymanized version of Humphrey’s article in their Impact series [No. 233, “Bumps in the Big Bang”, November 1992]. Reference 5 of that article contains information about the Nature submission. See < Link to Web Site >

In the 70’s and early 80’s physicist Robert Gentry had several articles with very significant creationist data published in mainstream journals (Science, Nature, Journal of Geophysical Research, etc.), but found he couldn’t publish openly creationist conclusions. Gentry had discovered that granites contain microscopic coloration halos produced by the radioactive decay of primordial polonium. According to evolutionary theory, polonium halos should not be there. Some believe that the existence of polonium halos is scientific evidence that the Earth was created instantaneously. Polonium Halos Link

When Oak Ridge National Laboratories terminated Gentry’s connection with them as a visiting professor (shortly after it became nationally known he is a creationist) the number of his articles slowed down, but he continues to publish.

Russell Humphreys said in a 1993 interview: “I’m part of a fairly large scientific community in New Mexico, and a good number of these are creationists. Many don’t actively belong to any creationist organization. Based on those proportions and knowing the membership of the Creation Research Society, it’s probably a conservative estimate that there are in the US alone around 10,000 practicing scientists who are biblical creationists.” (“Creation in the Physics Lab”, Creation Ex Nihilo Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 3, pages 20-23).

Additional information on Dr. D. Russell Humphreys:

Dr. Humphreys was awarded his Ph.D. in physics from Louisiana State University in 1972, by which time he was a fully convinced creationist. For the next 6 years he worked in the High Voltage Laboratory of General Electric Company. Since 1979, he has worked for Sandia National Laboratories in nuclear physics, geophysics, pulsed power research, theoretical atomic and nuclear physics, and the Particle Beam Fusion Project. Dr. Humphreys is an adjunct professor of Geophysics and Astrophysics at the Institute for Creation Research in San Diego, a Board member of the Creation Research Society and is president of the Creation Science Fellowship of New Mexico. He is also the author of the book “Starlight and Time: Solving the Puzzle of Distant Starlight in a Young Universe”, Master Books, 1994 (ISBN 0-89051- 202-7) which details his white hole cosmology theory.

One other ICR Impact article by Humphreys can be viewed at: The Earth’s Magnetic Field is Young

NOTE: A companion video for Creation’s Tiny Mystery is entitled “Fingerprints of Creation”.

Another prominent creationist who publishes in mainstream journals is Dr. Robert A. Herrmann, professor of mathematics at the U. S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. The following curriculum vitae on Dr. Herrmann was compiled by the staff of the Institute for Mathematics and Philosophy:

  1. Education:
  2. a. Ph.,Mathematics, 1973, American University
  3. A., Mathematics, American University
  4. A., Mathematics (minor Physics), Johns Hopkins University
  5. Scholarship to Johns Hopkins University.Graduated with general honors from Johns Hopkins University.Elected to Phi Beta Kappa.

Special individual three year fellowship from the National Science Foundation to be used for graduate study at any university of his choice. Graduated with honors for M. A. and Ph. D. from American University and elected to Phi Kappa Phi. Elected to Sigma Xi.

  1. Professional Experience:
  2. Teaching

(1) August 1987 – present, Professor, Mathematics, U. S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD

(2) January 1981 – August 1987, Associate Professor, Mathematics, U. S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD

(3) August 1968 – January 1981, Assistant Professor, Mathematics, U. S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD

  1. Professional Societies

(1) American Mathematical Society,

(2) Mathematical Association of America

(3) Sigma Xi

(4) Creation Research Society

  1. General Research Accomplishments:
  2. Pure Mathematics

Dr. Herrmann’s original research activity was in nonstandard topology. Portions of his dissertation were published in 1975. He continued his efforts in this general area and established most of the presently known nonstandard properties associated with extensions of maps, monad theory on rings of sets, the relations between nonstandard structures and convergence spaces, perfect maps, closed maps, and showed that almost all of the known standard generalizations for continuous, open, closed and perfect maps are simple corollaries to his nonstandard theories. He also showed that there exists a nonstandard and hence standard hull for semi-uniform spaces in general and applied these results to standard topological groups. In standard topology, Dr. Herrmann constructed the widely used near- compactifications, essentially completed the theory of one-point near-compactifications, and showed that the theory of S-closed spaces is purely topological in character while giving a method to translate standard topological results into results relative to S-closed spaces.

He continued his research into general topology and discovered the pre-convergence spaces. Once again he established much of the presently known mapping theory for pre-convergence spaces and showed that many of the convergence structures of interest to the mathematical community are but trivial examples of his pre-convergence spaces.

Not content with applying nonstandard methods to topological questions, Dr. Herrmann turned his attention to algebraic structures. He established many of the known properties for nonstandard implication algebras, lattices, and Boolean algebras and the like.

Recently, in standard mathematical logic, Dr. Herrmann completed his research on the lattice of finitary consequence operators and showed that this class of logical operators is almost atomic. He also has instituted the new area of nonstandard logic relative to the nonstandard modeling of these classes of consequence operators.

  1. Applied Mathematics, Theoretic Physics, and other areas

In 1981, Dr. Herrmann turned his attention to applied modeling. He rigorously described the methods of infinitesimal reasoning and modeling and then solved the d’Alembert-Euler problem in differential equation derivation. Previously, in about 1979, he had discovered new methods in physical modeling and began in 1982 to apply these methods to various unsolved problems in the philosophy of science, quantum theory, and cosmology as well as other areas. He found a solution to the discreteness problem in quantum theory in 1983.

In 1978, Dr. Herrmann discovered a mathematical method to model discipline language theories that are not necessarily describable by means of numerical quantities. He has applied these methods to various scientific disciplines — in particular he has discovered a mathematical model for a cosmogony. Using ultralogical operators this cosmogony generates the descriptive content of various cosmologies while preserving their inner- logical processes. This cosmogony — the NSP-world model — is consistent with such theory logic as deductive quantum logic, intuitionistic logic, finitary logic, classical logic and the like. This cosmogony leads to a solution of the General Grand Unification problem. Further, this solution satisfies the Wheeler requirements for a pre-geometry and the very restricted conditions required by many groups of scientists who specialize in cosmogony studies. Moreover, the modeling procedures automatically generate the theory of subparticles and subparticle mechanisms that may satisfy the Wheeler requirements for the “substance” of which space itself is composed.

The methods and results that Dr. Herrmann has discovered for mathematically generating models for philosophical concepts and cosmologies have helped explain and solve certain perplexing and long standing problems. When these methods become more widely known they may revolutionize modeling techniques for the physical sciences. Due to the apparent significance of the NSP- world model and nonstandard logic he intends to concentrate his efforts in the area of their application to scientific and philosophic problems while continuing to do a minor amount of research in analysis, standard logic and the modeling of philosophic structures.

  1. Biographical Listings

(1) “American Men & Women of Science” (Bowker)

(2) “Who’s Who in Theology and Science” (Center for Theological Inquiry,Templeton Foundation)

(3) “Who’s Who”, published by the Marquis group

  1. Publications:

[Note: In each of the following listings, the notation [CS] signifies that the material has been applied to topics in the area of creation/science. The list does not include papers that have appeared in creationist publications]

  1. Research articles in refereed journals

Nonstandard and Infinitesimal Analysis

(1) [CS] “A special isomorphism between superstructures,” Kobe J. Math., 10(2)(1993), 125-129.

(2) “Consecutive points and nonstandard analysis,” Math. Japonica 36(1991), 317-322.

(3) [CS] “Nonstandard consequence operators,” Kobe J. Math., 4 (1)(1987), 1- 14.

(4) [CS] “Supernear functions,” Math. Japanica, 30(2) (1985), 169-185.

(5) “A nonstandard approach to pseudotopological compactifications,” Z. Math. Logik Grundlagen Math., 26(1980), 361-384.

(6) “Generalized continuity and generalized closed graphs,” Casopis Pest. Mat., 105(1980), 192-198.

(7) “Nonstandard implication algebras,” Matematicki Vesnik, 3 (16)(31)(1979), 403-411.

(8) “Convergence spaces and nonstandard compactifications,” Math. Rep. Academy of Science of Canada, 1(1979), 187-190.

(9) “Point monads and P-closed spaces,”Notre Dame J. of Formal Logic, 20(1979), 395-400.

(10) “Perfect maps and remoteness,”Bull. Cacutta Math. Soc., 70(1978), 413-419.

(11) “Nonstandard implication algebras,” Bulletin Mathematique dela Societe des Math., 2(15) (30)(1978), 351-358.

(12) “A nonstandard approach to S-closed spaces,” Topology Proceedings, 3(1)(1978), 123-138.

(13) “Theta-rigidity and the idempotent theta-closure,” Math. Seminar Notes, 6(1978), 217-220.

(14) “The nonstandard theory of semi-uniform spaces,” Z. Math. Logik Grudlagen Math., 24(3)(1978), 237-256.

(15) “Nonstandard quasi-Hausdorff, Urysohn, regular-closed extensions,” Bull. Institute of Math., Academia Sinica, 5(1977), 13-25.

(16) “A nonstandard generalization for perfect maps,” Z. Math. Logik Grundlagen Math., 23(1977), 223-236.

(17) “The productivity of generalized perfect maps,” J. of the Indian Math. Soc., 41(1977), 375-386.

(18) “The theta and alpha monads in general topology,” Kyungpook Math. J., 16(1976), 231-241.

(19) “The Q-topology, Whyburn type filters and the cluster set map,” Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 59(1976), 161-166.

(20) “Nonstandard topological extensions,” Bull. Australian Math. Soc., 13(1975), 260-290.

(21) “A note on weakly-theta-continuous extensions,” Glasnik Mat., 10(1975), 329-339.

General Topology

(1) “Preconvergence compactness and P-closed spaces,” International J. of Math. and Math. Sciences, 7((2)(1984), 303- 310.

(2) “Closed graphs on convergence spaces,” Glasnik Mat., 17 (37)(1983), 461- 465.

(3) “Extension of maps defined on a convergence space,” Rocky Mt. J. Math., 12(1)(1982), 23-37.

(4) “Convergence spaces and closed graphs,” Math. Rep. Academy of Science of Canada, 2(4)(1980), 203-208.

(5) “A note on convergence spaces and closed graphs,” Proceedings of the Conference on Convergence Structures, Cameron University, (1980), 72-77.

(6) “RC convergence,” Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 75(1979), 311- 317.

(7) “Perfect maps on convergence spaces,” Bull. Australian Math. Soc., 20(1979), 447-466.

(8) “Convergence spaces and extensions of maps,” Math. Rep. Academy of Science of Canada, 1(1979), 265-268.

(9) “Convergence spaces and perfect maps,” Math. Rep. Academy of Science of Canada, 1(1979), 145-148.

(10) “Maximum one-point near-compactifications,” Boll. Un. Mat. Italiana, (5) 16A, (1979), 284-290.

(11) “One point near-compactifications,” Boll. Un. Mat. Italiana, (5) 14A, (1977), 25-33.

(12) “Nearly-compact Hausdorff extensions,” Glasnik Mat., 12 (32)(1977), 125-132.

Nonstandard and Infinitesimal Modeling/ Mathematical and Theoretical Physics

(1) [CS] “A hypercontinuous hypersmooth Schwarzschild line element transformation,” Internat. J. Math. and Math. Sci., (to appear)

(2) [CS] “An Operator equation, and relativistic alternations in the time for radioactive decay,” Internat. J. Math. and Math. Sci., 19(2)(1996):397-402

(3) [CS] “Operator equations, separation of variables and relativistic alterations,” Internat. J. Math. and Math. Sci., 18 (1)(1995):59-62

(4) [CS] “Special Relativity and a nonstandard substratum,” Speculations in Science and Technology, 17(1)(1994):2-10.

(5) [CS] “Fractals and ultrasmooth microeffects,” J. Math. Physics, 30(4), April 1989, 805-808.

(6) [CS] “Physics is legislated by a cosmogony,” Speculations in Science and Technology, 11(1) (1988), 17-24.

(7) [CS] “Rigorous infinitesimal modelling,” Math. Japonica, 26(4)(1981), 461- 465. Natural Systems and Cosmologies

(1) [CS] “Mathematical philosophy and developmental processes,” Nature and System, 5(1/2)(1983), 17-36.

Philosophy of Science

  1. Books

(1) [CS] “Einstein Corrected,” (1995) IMP, P. O. Box 3268, Annapolis, MD 21403-0268.

(2) [CS] “Ultralogics and More,” (1993) IMP , P. O. Box 3268, Annapolis, MD 21403-0268.

(3) “Some Applications of Nonstandard Analysis to Undergraduate Mathematics — Infinitesimal Modeling, Elementary Physics,” (1991) Instructional Development Project, Math. Dept., U. S. Naval Academy, Annapolis MD 21402-5002

Reports published by the American Mathematical Society

Herrmann has had 41 abstracts published by the American Mathematical Society.

Of this amount, 10 have been related to creation/science.

To conclude, it is quite apparent that creationists DO publish in notable refereed journals, much to the surprise of many evolutionists. Russell Humphreys said in a 1993 interview: “I’m part of a fairly large scientific community in New Mexico, and a good number of these are creationists. Many don’t actively belong to any creationist organization. Based on those proportions and knowing the membership of the Creation Research Society, it’s probably a conservative estimate that there are in the US alone around 10,000 practicing scientists who are biblical creationists.”

(“Creation in the Physics Lab”, Creation Ex Nihilo Magazine, Vol. 15, No. 3, pages 20-23)

Postscript: If you are a creationist who publishes in mainstream journals, and would like to be included in further updates of this article, please send your curriculum vitae to:

David Buckna