The Creationists
The Creationists. The Evolution of Scientific Creationism is a book by Ronald Numbers published in 1992 on the historical development of creationism . It shows the beginnings of creationism with its origins in the 19th century and traces the main epochs of creationist concepts up to around 1990. In 2006 a new edition was published, which was expanded by a chapter each on the emergence of the intelligent design movement and on the reception of creationism outside the English-speaking world.
Contents overview
In his book Numbers deals with scientific creationism in a broader sense. This means that only contributions from Christian scientists or Christian laypeople interested in natural science from the USA (and partly from Great Britain) were included in the work. Popular, in the narrower sense theological or agnostic contributions and those from Jewish or Muslim traditions were not included.
The main result of the study by Ronald Numbers is the fundamental change in the concepts of creationists over the last 130 years or so. The turning point in the development of so-called scientific creationism is represented by the writings of the Adventist pastor George McCready Price . Price is considered to be the popularizer of a claim by Ellen G. White that the Noachite flood caused the geological formations with their fossils to be found today.
This idea was developed by Price in the 1920s into the concept of so-called flood geology. Their representatives are called "Flooder" for short. Before Price's book was published, the creationists split into two groups:
- One group claimed that the Genesis 1 days were actually very long. The group of "Day Agers" included George F. Wright .
- Another group claimed that there was a historical gap between the first verses of the Bible and the beginning of the first day of creation. This school advocates the so-called gap theory and the notion that numerous disasters and recreations took place in this historical gap. Their representatives are therefore sometimes referred to as "ruinists".
"Ruinists" and "Day Agers" dominated the discussion among American creationists in the period from 1860 to 1920. From 1920 to around 1960 one can delimit the phase of the flood geology dominated by Price and the Adventists. During this time the history of two institutes, the Religion and Science Association (RSA) and the Deluge Geology Society (DGS) falls .
The RSA was founded in 1935 by George McCready Price and Dudley Joseph Whitney and only existed for about two years. It was the first organization of its kind in America. According to Price's presentation, only “Flooder” should be included in the RSA. Proponents of the “day-age” theory and the idea of a pre-Adamite creation should be excluded. With this narrow conception, the RSA broke up very quickly. Exemplary of this situation was the dispute between Byron C. Nelson and Whitney over the question of whether, as Byron claimed, there had been no change in species after creation, or whether, as Whitney assumed, there were major changes (mutations). Among other things, the question was whether all the animal species that exist today were saved in Noah's Ark or whether there was a kind of mini-evolution after the flood to create the species living today. Another position was taken by L. Allen Higley , a PhD chemist from the University of Chicago . Higley hypothesized the existence of two creations and two floods, and assumed that the Chaos Waters from Genesis 1 were the tomb of the dinosaurs. So he was a "ruinist". Already after the first conference initiated by the RSA in March 1936, which Higley had organized, the rifts between the factions deepened, which led to the dissolution of this first creationist society.
The Deluge Geology Society (DGS) was founded by Price, Harold W. Clark and Benjamin Franklin Allen in 1938 as a strongly Adventist successor to the RSA. The DGS survived the Second World War , but disintegrated in 1947 in a dispute over similar problems as the old RSA.
At the end of the DGS, the two Adventist creationists Allen and Burdick founded "Amazing Discoveries, Inc." with the aim of finding more fossil footprints, and they wanted to join a secret enterprise ("Sacred History Research Expedition") to discover Noah's Ark convince the whole world of the flood geology in one fell swoop on “M Day” (Message Day): “Only a Sudden, Pent up, and Spectacular Announcement fully prepared in secret, can gain the full attention of the whole world to our Message . "
With Henry M. Morris ' and John C. Combs With the released and 1960 book The Genesis Flood began an epoch in the history of creationism, which was marked by an anti-Adventist Mood: Morris et al. tried to separate Price's popularized flood geology from his name. During this time the history of two institutes, the Creation Research Society and its institute and the Adventist Geoscience Research Institute , falls .
From 1970 the most serious change in the history of creationism took hold. Until then, the creationists had mainly pointed out the difference between creationism and evolution, but now the comparability of creation and evolution was increasingly asserted due to the decline in the reputation of the Bible and the popularization of creationist theses. So while the Price era was characterized by an attempt to emphasize the moral superiority of the Bible over an immoral science, creationists in the United States since 1970 have increasingly held the view that creationism should be equated as a science with evolution. Since around 1990, creationists in the USA have increasingly represented intelligent design .
Creationism and Science
The relationship between creationism and the natural sciences has also changed dramatically in another respect. Before the epoch dominated by Morris, Whitcomb and the long-time head of the ICR Walter Lammert , creationists had essentially limited themselves to doing “desk work”, for example by repeatedly pointing out alleged errors and deficiencies in the theory of evolution. Since the late 1950s, the creationists' aspiration to do science has been taken more seriously. Above all, this has to do with the fact that the protagonists are increasingly natural scientists and no longer, as in the past, mostly educated lay people.
Although to this day there is not a single scientific publication apart from a work by Steven A. Austin on coal seams that would be suitable to support the theses of flood geology, the claim to be taken seriously as scientists has nonetheless increasingly asserted itself among the creationists and no longer to tolerate fraud and mere assertions in one's own ranks without further ado. However, this claim was thwarted again in the 1970s by Kelly Segrave and Robert E. Kofahl .
Discrimination against creationist scientists
Two books, Henry M. Morris ' History of Modern Creationism (1984) and Gerald R. Bergmann's The Criterion: Religious Discrimination in America (1984), extensively discuss the disadvantages creationists would suffer from themselves as scientists or students would profess their beliefs. Numbers has proven these claims to be false on a number of occasions. The claim by creationists that their work is not printed in scientific journals so that they have no access to the “scientific community” can also be refuted. In 1985, a survey of 135,000 publications submitted to 68 leading academic journals found that only 18 had supported creationist theses. Of these 18 creationist texts, 13 were submitted to educational journals, four to anthropological journals, and only one to a biological journal. None of the papers were accepted for publication, and a review of the referees' justifications for the rejection always showed that the articles submitted were inadequately substantiated.
Seriousness and repression
Numbers explains that Butler's internal criticism of his own society and the ICR's distancing from the deceiver Burdick were important milestones for creationist societies on the way to more seriousness and greater social recognition. The GRI's criticism of the fake giant human footprints from the Paluxy River (the criticism was mainly made by Berney Neufeld in Origins [1975]) and the delimitation from Robert V. Gentry's claims about radioactive isotopes in granite are milestones of creationist self-criticism.
The ideas of Thomas G. Barnes about the instability of the earth's magnetic field, although they are now very serious subject of research, could not improve the reputation of the CRI, as Barnes mixed his idea with speculations about the unification of physics.
However, Numbers' report does not conceal the repressive policy of Robert Pierson , the president of the Adventist Church, towards the GRI and the practical research ban for the scientists of the GRI, who then become - as Numbers says - "Adventist gulag" at Andrews University emigrated. At the same time, Numbers traces Lammert's restrictive personnel policy in the ICR, as a result of which all scientists who did not believe in flood geology were consistently excluded - an attitude that Lammert could not hold out for long without losing his best employees, which mutatis mutandis too applies to the Adventist GRI.
Numbers concludes that the development of creationism did not only suffer from the tutelage of the conservative ecclesiastical administration, which is likely to be the case for the Adventist Church in general. Numbers sees the widespread tendency among creationists of various origins to wear themselves down in harsh mutual criticism as more serious.
Access to sources
In a paragraph in the appendix of the book (page 347) Numbers points out the fact that a number of people and institutions have banned the publication and citation of documents. For example, the documents of the Adventist church about the forced resignation of HM Marsh from the "Geoscience Research Institute" were not released for publication. Attempts to put the author under pressure to present facts in favor of certain people have also occurred, according to Numbers.
Topics of creationist criticism of the theory of evolution and geology
Although Numbers wrote a principally historiographical work, all important content-related problems are nevertheless repeatedly woven into the text. The only original conception of the creationists comes from HW Clark and has become known as the "Ecological Zonation Theory of Flood Geology". In addition, creationism is limited to questioning some methods or principles of evolutionary theory and geology (C14 dating, Overthrust, geological column, etc.). This is also one of the reasons why some creationists point to completely different criticisms of the theory of evolution. A good example of this is the work of Ritland and Coffin, Roth and Clark. Ritland emphasizes the vitalists' argument that organisms could not have come about by chance. After Marsh retired from the Adventist GRI, these two books by Coffin and Ritland are a document of competing beliefs within Adventist creationism.
Single display
The following sections detail the positions of American creationists from the point of view of their qualifications. The structure essentially follows the presentation in Numbers book.
Scientific creationists with biological or geological qualifications
Louis Agassiz
Main article: Louis Agassiz
Scientists like Louis Agassiz (1807–1873), professor at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University in Boston , and his brief successor to the professorship and student John McCrady (1831–1881) rejected the theory of evolution (Agassiz for scientific reasons, McCrady for religious reasons ), but formed a definite minority among American scientists. In addition, in 1874 the well-known American geologist and editor of the American Journal of Science James Dwight Dana converted to the theory of evolution, so that after the death of Agassiz and the resignation of McCrady, which was forced by the rector of Harvard University, only two scientists were officially Darwinian in all of North America Rejecting theory: John William Dawson (1820–1899) at McGill University, Canada and Arnold Henri Guyot , professor of physical geography and geology (1807–1884) at the College of New Jersey .
Arnold Guyot
In his main work, Guyot took the view that matter, life and man were the result of a specific act of creation by God. There was indeed an evolution of life, but man just did not emerge from it. A special act of creation by God was required for it to come into being. This implies that the earth is very old and that the Noachite Flood is of no special significance for geology, as the Flood geology will later claim.
John William Dawson
Dawson, on the other hand, a student of the British geologist Charles Lyell , represented the aeon interpretation of the Genesis days, the locality of the flood and the short history of man, but did not want to limit the possibilities of divine creative acts. For him, creation meant that all things were created by God's will, but that God could very well use the laws of nature, including evolution.
Summary
In the last quarter of the 19th century, the authors named here advocated academic criticism of Darwin's theory in North America. A representative version of the scientific belief in creation at this time looked something like this:
- Many millions of years ago God created the world.
- The planets and suns were probably formed from rotating gas nebulas, according to the Kant-Laplace theory.
- God called life on earth, which developed according to Darwin's theory.
- Not so long ago God created humans, possibly through directed evolution and possibly from a common ancestor of apes and humans, somewhere in Central Asia.
- Noah's flood was a regionally limited event, universal only for the horizon of those affected.
The moral attitude of this epoch, in which a few Christian-motivated skeptics of the theory of evolution held up the banner of creationism, can be paraphrased with the motto: If you want to clear up all difficulties with reference to a miracle, you don't need science at all.
Scientific creationists from other disciplines
Edward Hitchcock (1793–1864) was a geologist at Amherst College and published in the Bibliotheca Sacra . In 1863 he wrote about Darwin that he made God unnecessary and defended materialism. But the important question is whether evolution is a correct hypothesis and not whether it agrees with our religious ideas.
Enoch Fitch Burr (1818–1907) was a scientifically educated congregational cleric.
George D. Armstrong (1813–1899) was a Princeton graduate, professor of chemistry and geology at Washington College in Virginia, and later pastor of the First Presbytarian Church in Norfolk . Its position was similar to that of Guyot. He thought it possible to think the Bible and evolution in harmony. In his opinion, the rejection of evolution by many Christians was due to the fact that evolution suggested the idea of a world that functions like an automatic machine.
Herbert W. Morris (1818-1897) was temporarily professor of mathematics at the Newington Collegiate Institution . He represented the conception of a miraculous creation in six literal and natural days. He considered evolution and the Bible to be incompatible, but believed in a historical gap between the first and second verses of Genesis (gap theory). He considered this necessary on the basis of the findings of geology and said that the flood was only universal in the sense that it killed all people who were not in the ark.
Clerical creationists in the late 19th century
In the USA at the end of the 19th century there were also a number of church critics of the theory of evolution; Numbers calls them "clerical creationists". Their motto can be paraphrased with a sentence from T. De Witt Talmage : "Whoever interprets the miracles away, betrays the Bible." These creationists also represented the eon theory of the Genesis days. Among them were Charles Hodge (1797–1878) from Princeton Theological Seminary and his student Robert Lewis Dabney (1820–1898), who were at least reluctant to judge the pre-Adamite world, but in principle Guyot and Dana's interpretation of the epochs (Day- Age) of the days of creation agreed.
Dwight L. Moody
The same applies to Dwight Lyman Moody and his students HL Hastings , Luther Tracy Townsend and Alexander Patterson . Hastings also published a series of four creationist treatises in his series "The Anti-Faithful Library", which Robert Patterson published as a book in 1885 under the title The Errors of Evolution .
HL Hastings
Hastings (1833? –1899) made a polemical statement on the question of the “ape descent” of humans. He believed in a pre-Adamite earth that was so old that "it would have had time enough to create in its mud all the problems with which geologists struggle today".
Luther Tracy Townsend
One of the most famous ecclesiastical critics of evolution was the Presbyterian pastor Luther Tracy Townsend (1838-1922), from 1868 to 1893 professor of Hebrew and New Testament Greek at the Boston Theological Seminary and later since the founding of the Bible League of North America in 1903 temporarily in their directory Board . In his books, he stated that Genesis was a simple, straightforward narration of the facts as they actually happened. Nevertheless, Townsend tried to bring the account of the Bible in line with the theories of geologists and indirectly used the rule "one day equals a thousand years". Townsend said he was open to corrections of his views if paleontological research made it necessary.
Alexander Patterson
Alexander Patterson was a personal friend of Moody and taught at the Moody Bible Institute (MBI) for many years . His book The Other Side of Evolution (1903) was widely especially through the initiative of Rev. AC Dixon , who is the forerunner of Moody Press , published the "Bible Institute colportage Association" so that MBI students it from the Gospel Wagon from could sell. Similar to Hastings and Townsend, Patterson believed in a "hiatus historicus" between the first and second verse of the Bible: Everything that geology tells us about, here is the place where the fossil creatures lived and died, lies in this interval the biblical account passed this over in silence. Whether or not God used pre-Adamite beings to create the Garden of Eden was not as important to Patterson as the question of whether man came from non-human beings. Patterson claimed a say in science on points of general interest. The theory of evolution must justify itself before the court seat of Christian common sense, in that a clever non-scientific mind is the best jury. In the event that evolution prevails, he predicted a general decline in morals and damage to the Christian faith.
Conservative creationists in the mid-19th century: Lord and Lord
The works of the Lord Brothers are unique in that, for many years, they were the only journalistically well-articulated voice for a widespread popular attitude, which, however, was hardly reflected in the academic climate: the belief in the Ussher version of a world history of approx. 6000 years. Eleazar Lord (1788–1871) and David Nevins Lord (1792–1880) were active lay Christians, Eleazar in the Presbyterian and David in the Congregational Church. Eleazar was first president of the Manhattan Fire Insurance Company and later chairman of the New York and Erie Railroad , while his brother was in the haberdashery trade.
Eleazar Lord pleaded for a literal interpretation of Genesis and considered the Noachite flood to be the cause of the stratigraphic order of fossil finds. His brother David claimed that the Mosaic account and geological theories were mutually exclusive. In the Theological and Literary Journal , which he edited between 1848 and 1861 , he wrote many attacks on historical geology and evolutionary theory. In it he also rejected the diluvial solution (sedimentation by the flood) of his brother and believed in a stratification before and after the flood. He also shared the idea that animals were created not as pairs but as groups.
George Frederick Wright and Fundamentalism
Based on the personal development of George Frederick Wright (1838–1921), R. Numbers traces the changes in the intellectual and scientific climate between 1860 and 1910. Wright graduated from Oberlin College in 1863 as a chaplain and served as a pastor for the Congregationalists in Bakersfield, Vermont . He dealt with geology, studied terrain formations on his own, and gained a solid understanding of the problem by reading Darwin's Origin and Charles Lyell's Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man (1863). During this time he shared the opinion of the orthodox-religious American botanist Asa Gray (1810-1888), who represented a theistic interpretation of Darwinism . According to this opinion, evolution took a course willed by God.
George Frederick Wright
George Frederick Wright's biography demonstrates very well the conflicts between theology and science that shaped all of American creationism in the 19th century. Following this chapter, Numbers gives an analysis of the connection between the advancement of creationist thought and the emergence of modern Christian fundamentalism in the USA, which AC Dixon initiated with his series The Fundamentals (1910–1915).
Harry Rimmer
A whole chapter is dedicated to Harry Rimmer , who was the creationist attraction of the twenties and thirties in the United States because of his furious performances and competitions. Rimmer's career began as a blacksmith , lumberjack , sawmill and dock worker and eventually led him from mining engineer , soldier and prize boxer directly to homeopathic medicine and from there via the office of a Quaker clergyman and then a Presbyterian to a “research scientist”, book author and war speaker. His “institute laboratory”, which he set up in a garage, housed a collection of monkey skulls and preparations from human embryos.
In the following, Numbers mainly describes the development of modern "creation science", i.e. the history of creationism since George McCready Price and the cataclysmic theory and the so-called flood geology, which he revived , which was then further developed by John C. Withcomb and Henry M. Morris.
Final theses
In the final chapters Numbers presents four theses on the question of why creationist issues in the United States since 1961 have fueled public debates in a similar way to the question of abortion . First Numbers suspects that creationism could represent a convincing worldview for conservative Christians because it "gives meaning to the Bible"; then he suspects a connection between apocalyptic Christian conceptions and creationism, because creationist theses provided an image of history that fits apocalyptic. Consistent with the theses of Robert Wuthnow, Numbers suggests that the American government's interference in education and curriculum issues in schools since the 1960s has provoked various forms of protests, one of which is creationism. Finally, Numbers claims that the creationists in the US have made themselves the mouthpiece of a populist criticism of the intellectual elite. The interplay of these factors has led to the unexpected popularity of creationist theses among the American public in recent decades.
Further research since the book was published
Numbers and a number of American historians of science have carried out numerous follow-up studies since the book was first published and received unusually positive feedback in the scientific world as well as in church circles.
Completed work
In addition to publishing sources and various lexicon articles, Numbers focused primarily on the question of how various social groups in the English-speaking world reacted in the second half of the 19th century in the USA and outside the USA to the increasing popularity of Darwin's theses . Numbers and John Stenhouse compiled the results of these studies in the anthology Disseminating Darwinism . David Livingstone examined the situation in England and Ireland in comparison to the USA. Barry Butcher investigated the situation in Australia, John Stenhouse in New Zealand and Suzanne Zeller in Canada. While Numbers and Lester Stephens examined the particular situation of the American South, other authors examined the reactions of denominational groups such as Protestants, Catholics, and Jewish authors. Our own studies were devoted to the opinions of colored authors and women.
In the book Darwin Comes to America , Numbers compiled the responses and reactions of scholars, academic and church organizations in the United States to Darwinism in the early 1900s. Numbers shows in this book that representatives of both groups viewed the respective concepts as controversial.
In the study When Science and Christianity Meet , co-authored with David Lindbergh, Numbers examines the relationship between religious thought and science since Galileo. Numbers had already examined the prehistory of cosmological thought in his dissertation Creation by Natural Law: Laplace's Nebular Hypothesis in American Thought .
In the expanded edition of The Creationists , Numbers summarizes studies and documentations that deal with the worldwide spread of creationism in the final chapter “Creationism goes Global”. The situation in the former Commonwealth of Nations , first examined in Disseminating Darwinism in the 1990s, has been updated. Studies on the situation in Europe, in third world countries, in Islamic countries, in Israel and on so-called identity creationism were also added .
The anthology Science and Christianity in Pulpit and Pew , published in 2007 and edited by Numbers, investigates the attitudes of various Christian thinkers towards the natural sciences since the 17th century.
Ongoing studies and book series
For the studies on The Creationists , Numbers had received permission from over 75 different people and institutions to examine the estates. On this basis, Numbers and other scientists at Garland Publishing Inc. published the series Creationism in Twentieth-Century America , in which the estates of various creationists are processed. Volumes on early anti-evolutionist publications prior to World War I and documentaries on Arthur I. Brown, Harold W. Clark, and Frank Lewis Marsh have appeared so far .
Numbers has been working with David C. Lindberg for years on the eight-volume Cambridge History of Science , four of which have been published to date.
Work in planning
Numbers is currently working on a book on American history of science, which will be published by Basic Books under the title Science and the Americans: A History .
Comments on the book
Numbers' book has received praise in the press, scholars, and church writers alike. Martin Gardner said: “Now at least we have a detailed, objective, accurate, carefully documented history of modern creationism”. Darwin biographer James R. Moore commented: "A riveting expose based on prodigious research and written with verve and tact." Frank M. Turner of Yale University called the book “a major and lasting contribution to American intellectual, religious and scientific history”. Robert Wuthnow of Princeton University commented simply: “A major achievement”. Edward J. Larson of the University of Georgia stated, "Historians of science and religion have long recognized The Creationists as the finest historical examination of the intellectual origins and developement of anti-evolutionism in America." Michael Ruse, a Numbers colleague at Florida State University , put it succinctly: “Ronald Numbers' book The Creationists is a modern classic”. Steve Paulson wrote in The Salon : " The Creationists , which Harvard University Press has just reissued in an expanded edition, is probably the most definitive history of anti-evolutionism." Ian Hacking called the book “A great reference work” in the left-wing liberal magazine The Nation . Alan Cane wrote in the Financial Times : “A classic text, now updated and expanded”. Pius Charles Murray stated in the Library Journal : “An informative, well-researched intellectual history of the origins of the contemporary creation science movement”. Francis B. Harrold wrote in the Reports of the National Center for Science Education : “This book is an intellectual history of religiously inspired anti-evolutionism, primarily in the US, since the latter 19th century. It is a meticulous work by a distinguished historian ”, and Elliott Sober, Hans Reichenbach Professor of Philosophy and Numbers colleague at the University of Wisconsin , Madison, said of the book:“ Numbers tells the fascinating story of how Creationism has mutated, adapted, and evolved in a changing social and scientific environment. Those who wish to understand current opposition to Darwinism, and the larger question of how science and religion interact, must read this book. "
Honors
Numbers has received various awards in the United States for his work on creationism. For the book The Creationists he received the Albert C. Outler Prize for Ecumenical Church History, for the book Darwin Comes to America 1999 the "Templeton Foundation Prize for Outstanding Books in Theology and the Natural Sciences". He last held one of the Terry Lectures in 2006 at the celebration of the “100th anniversary of the Terry Lectures” at Yale University .
See also
literature
- Ronald L. Numbers: The Creationists. The Evolution of Scientific Creationism. Alfred A. Knopf. New York 1992. ISBN 0-679-40104-0 .
- Ronald L. Numbers: Darwinism Comes to America , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998. ISBN 0-674-19312-1 [1] .
- Ronalds L. Numbers and John Stenhouse: Disseminating Darwinism: The Role of Place, Race, Religion, and Gender , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-521-01105-1 .
- David C. Lindberg, Ronald L. Numbers: When Science and Christianity Meet . University of Chicago Press 2003. ISBN 0-226-48214-6 .
- Ronald L. Numbers: The Creationists. From scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design , Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2006 ISBN 0-674-02339-0 [2] .
- Ronald L. Numbers: Science and Christianity in Pulpit and Pew Oxford University Press 2007. ISBN 0-19-532038-7 .
- Roy Porter, David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers: The Cambridge History of Science. Cambridge University Press 2003. ISBN 0-521-57244-4 .
- Ronald L. Numbers, William Vance Trollinger, Jr., Paul Nelson, Edward B. Davis, Mark A. Kalthoff: Creationism in Twentieth-Century America: A Ten-Volume Anthology of Documents, 1903-1961 Routledge ISBN 978-0-8153 -1801-9 .
Individual evidence
- ↑ George McCrady Price: The New Geology (1923)
- ↑ Kelly Segrave: Sons of God return. 1975
- ^ Robert E. Kofahl: Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter 1977
- ↑ Ritland: A search for Meaning in Nature: A new look at Creation and Evolution. 1970
- ^ Coffin, Roth and Clark: Creation: Accident or Design.
- ^ Arnold Guyot: Creation; or, The Biblical Cosmogony in the Light of Modern Science. 1884
- ↑ Enoch Fitch Burr: Father Mundi. or, Doctrine of Evolution. 1873
- ↑ George D. Armstrong: The Two Books of Nature and Revelation Collated. 1886
- ^ Herbert W. Morris: Science and the Bible; or, The Mosaic Creation and Modern Discoveries. 1871
- ^ HL Hastings: What did Moses mistaken? or, Creation and Evolution. 1896
- ^ Luther Tracy Townsend: Evolution or Creation. 1896
- ^ Luther Tracy Townsend: Adam and Eve. 1904
- ↑ Luther Tracy Townsend: Collapse of Evolution. 1905
- ↑ Eleazar Lord: The Epoch of Creation. 1851
- ↑ David Lord: Geognosy. 1855
- ^ David N. Livingstone: Science, region and religion: the reception of Darwinism in Princeton, Belfast and Edinburgh. In: David N. Livingstone, DG Hart and Mark A. Noll eds: Evangelicals and Science in historical Perspektive New York, Oxford University Press, 1999.
- ↑ Barry W. Butcher: Darwin down under: science religion and evolution in Australia. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ John Stenhouse: Darwinism in New Zealand, 1859-1900. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ Suzanne Zeller: Environment, culture and the reception of Darwin in Canada, 1859-1909. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ Ronald L. Numbers and Lester D. Stephens: Darwinism in the American South. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ Jon H. Roberts: Darwinism, American Protestant thinkers and the puzzle of motivation. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ R. Scott Appleby: Exposing Darwin's “hidden agenda”: Roman Catholic responses to evolution, 1875-1925. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ↑ Marc Swetlitz: American Jewish responses to Darwin and evolutionary theory, 1860-1890. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ↑ Eric D. Anderson: Black responses to Darwinism, 1859-1915. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ^ Sally Gregory Kohlstedt , Mark R. Jorgenson: “The irrepressible women question”: women's responses to the evolutionary ideology. In: Disseminating Darwinism
- ↑ Archived copy ( Memento from April 11, 2010 in the Internet Archive )