Deposition of Waine Frair - Page 2
Frair 51
Q Could you identify them for me, please?
A A fellow that comes to mind --
MR. WILLIAMS: You can tell him what you
know.
A A name that comes to mind is E. Forbert
Smith. He's done a lot of work on alligators and a
variety of other organisms, thermo regulations.
Q Is there anything that he's discovered
inconsistent with evolution?
A He has serious problems with evolution.
Q What do you mean by serious problems?
A He feels on the basis of his knowledge,
research, that an evolution model is not the best way,
not the best fit for the data.
Q If characters were lost through
time, how were they obtained in the first place?
MR. WILLIAMS: If characters?
Q Characteristics, I should have probably
said.
A They were there when the organism had
its start.
Q Does that show relatedness, a common
ancestry?
A Within the group.
Frair 52
Q Are there any indications or scientific
evidence of relatedness between different groups? First
let me say what is a group to you?
A Are you thinking in terms of modern
scheme of classification that scientists use?
Q Yes.
A The toxonomic scheme that we utilize is
man-made, and continually is being modified. So, to
describe what creationists are calling "kinds" in terms
of the modern classifications system could be to pin
it down more specifically than would be warranted by
the data at this time.
Q What does a creationist mean by a
"kind"?
A He means a group that is genetically
unrelated by continuity from other groups.
Q Are any of the results of your own
research inconsistent with an evolutionary interpre-
tation?
A Evolutionists have used my information
in their schemes.
Q So the results of your research are
consistent with an evolutionary?
A I said that evolutionists have used my
Frair 53
data.
Q Have you ever used your data in an
article in support of the creation model?
A I have used my data within a mental
framework that was consistent with the creation model.
Q But have you ever taken the data that
you have developed through your research, prepared an
article in support of the creation model, submitted it
to a referee journal for publication?
MR. WILLIAMS: I object. That is a
compound question, at least three or four ques-
tions.
Q I will break it down. Have you ever
taken any of the data from your research and prepared
an article?
A Yes.
Q Has that article been in support of the
creation science model?
A It has encouraged investigation into
the possibilities of the creation model.
Q Have you ever written an article in
support of the creation science model using the research
that you have done?
A Our book has some information on that
Frair 54
line.
Q Have you ever written an article in
support of the creation science model and submitted it
to a referee journal?
A Very cautiously I have handled the mate-
rial in a way that would be consistent with creation
model.
Q Which articles are consistent with the
creation model that you have written?
A I think all of them would be.
Q Don't you talk about ancestors and
relatedness in many of your articles?
A Yes.
Q Isn't that inconsistent with the crea-
tion model?
A No.
Q Are there any statements in any of your
articles that directly draw a link between your research
and the creation science model?
A Say that again, please.
Q Is there anything in the articles that
you have published, any of the articles that you have
published, at which you make specific reference to the
creation science model?
Frair 55
A I don't recall whether I have used those
exact terms when dealing with publication of original
data.
Q Have you ever used the term limited
change model in any of your publications?
A Yes.
Q Have those publications been submitted
to referee journals?
A Say that again, please.
MR. LAHIFF: I'm sorry. Could you repeat
the question.
(Question read.)
A These articles have not been dealing with
original laboratory findings. They have been more of a
philosophical nature.
Q Why haven't you used any of your original
data in support of the creation science model or pre-
pared an article based on your original data supportive
of the creation science model?
A I don't think that my data is inconsistent
with a creation science model. I usually haven't been
dealing with material that would require this or point-
ing to an evolution model, either.
Q Why haven't you ever used your original
Frair 56
data to prepare an article in support of the creation
science model?
A Because I am still working on this.
I don't feel that it is solidified solid enough to be
handled with the degree of certainty that I would like
before I could do this.
Q Is there anything in any of the articles
that you have published in a referee journal that would
hold a scientist to an understanding that you support
the creation science model?
MR. WILLIAMS: You are talking now just
from reading the article itself?
Q Just from reading the article.
A It would depend on the background of the
person reading the article.
Q What background would lead a scientist
to believe that you support the creation science or the
limited change model?
A Because in my publications, I don't say
a lot about evolution the way many people writing about
these topics do. I have been more cautious in the way
I have handled the material. And somebody could get
this by careful reading.
Q I am sorry, why haven't you?
Frair 57
A Because I feel it is better science.
Q What is better science?
A To be very cautious in handling the
data.
Q How would you test the assumptions of
the limited change model?
A What assumptions are you referring to?
Q How would you test the limited change
model?
A By looking for ways to establish a
genetic continuity between diverse groups.
Q Do you have any assumptions about what
you might find?
A If we could do this, it would discredit
the limited change model, and anybody who has a model
who is a scientist must be looking for information that
will falsify his position.
Q Am I correct that you have testified you
believe that the Bible, the Biblical account of crea-
tion is literally true?
MR. WILLIAMS: I think that is a mis-
characterization of his testimony.
Q If this is not accurate, please let me
know.
Frair 58
MR. WILLIAMS: Maybe the Reporter could
read it back. It was about a fairly accurate
historical account. I think that is the words
to the effect, though I may be paraphrasing.
Q Do you believe that the Bible is liter-
ally true?
MR. WILLIAMS: You are asking him as
to his personal belief?
MR. LAHIFF: As a scientist.
MR. WILLIAMS: As a scientist, do you
believe the Bible is literally correct?
A Well, I'm a human being. As far as --
and as a person, I accept the Bible as a guide for my
life, what I endeavor to do.
Q But do you believe that the Bible is
literally true?
MR. WILLIAMS: As a scientist?
Q As a scientist.
A You mean based on my scientific studies?
Q Based on your scientific studies.
A I had a belief in the Bible prior to
science, and science has encouraged this belief, rather
than tended to break it down.
Q How has science encouraged your belief?
Frair 59
A There is beauty in studying science,
and there's something there that can point to something
beyond, beyond science. I have had many scientists
say this to me, also.
Q But is the beauty or the elegance of
nature in any way inconsistent with evolution?
A I guess evolutionists don't think so.
Q Evolution is an elegant theory, isn't
it?
A What do you mean by elegant?
MR. LAHIFF: I will withdraw the ques-
tion.
Please read the previous question.
(Question read.)
Q Do you think so?
A Not necessarily.
Q Not necessarily? Could you elaborate on
that for me, please?
A Darwin, himself, spoke about the grandeur
of the evolution scheme that, in addition, there was some-
thing that God breathed into living things.
I think that he, at that time, had a
feeling for --
Q But he didn't think the grandeur of
Frair 60
nature was inconsistent with nature?
A No, he didn't, that's right. But he
also at that time felt -- pointed to God.
Q Could you describe for me what the
scientific method is?
A According to the classic understanding,
scientific method involves making observations, setting
up working hypotheses, testing these hypotheses, modify-
ing these hypotheses, and predicting what you will get
in the future.
Q That is it?
A That is it.
Q Do you accept that?
A Yes.
Q Is that how you undertake your work?
A Yes.
Q Let's try and explore how we would use
the scientific method as you understand it to try and
determine the existence of originally created kinds.
Is there any way to use the scientific
method to determine whether or not there is originally
created kinds?
A Here we face the question of can you
apply the scientific method in history. This is a serious
Frair 61
problem.
Q Is it your testimony that you can't
use the scientific method to determine the existence
of originally created kinds?
A Certainly not with the same rigor that
you can do so with conditions that can be repeated.
Q But do you consider creation science
to be a science?
A It depends on your definition of science.
How do I define science?
Q Can you apply -- I'll ask you that later
but can you apply the scientific method to creation
science?
A Not the repeatability and the verifying
it like we normally think of in science with control
groups, et cetera.
Q Can you please look again at Act 590,
the definition of creation science, and explain to me
which of the elements of that definition can be tested
by the scientific method, as you defined it to me
(handing)?
A Sudden creation -- I am just reading
them over.
Q Why don't you read them to yourself.
Frair 62
A All right.
And make a comment on it.
(Pause.)
MR. WILLIAMS: For the record, let me
interpose an objection. I think that your ques-
tion may mischaracterize the act.
The definition given of creation science
is scientific evidence for creation and infer-
ences therefrom, if I recall correctly.
It then lists some sub-parts, and I
think your question either implies or pre-
supposes that it is an all-inclusive list, and
I am not sure at all that it is.
MR. LAHIFF: I will clear that up. My
question does not imply that that is an all-
inclusive list.
A There are certain aspects of this that
is subject to scientific investigation.
Q Which ones?
A I am looking right now at number 4,
which refers to sufficiency of mutation and natural
selection in bringing about development. We can examine
mutations.
Q Okay. Why don't you just point out those
Frair 63
that you believe the scientific method can be applied to
and then we will explore them in a little detail?
A On the basis of my field and my under-
standing, I would say number 2, in the biological field
we'd have number 2, number 3, and then certain of the
other ones, I think other people would probably feel
could be tested to some degree or another.
I am looking at those particularly in
biology that I would know more about. But I wouldn't
want to exclude -- except in the sense that we are talk-
ing about here.
How are you going to look at the number
1 -- I don't see much hope for that. From the stand-
point of scientific method, all we can do would be just
infer that this --
Q What scientific evidence is there that
supports the creation model that "The insufficiency of
mutation and natural selection in bringing about develop-
ment of all living kings from a single organism."?
A If we think about subject of mutations,
virtually all the mutations that we know about today are
harmful.
Q But there are some beneficial mutations,
are there not?
Frair 64
A The beneficial mutations that we talk
about are valid to certain organisms in certain
environmental conditions.
Q Are you finished with your answer?
A Yes.
Q What observations are there that you
could point to that show the insufficiency of muta-
tion and natural selection in bringing about development?
A Most mutations are harmful. That ties
it up in essence.
Q But just because most mutations are
harmful doesn't necessarily mean that there are bene-
ficial mutations?
A There can be mutations which are accepted
by the environment.
Q Is that evolution?
A Yes. It is micro-evolution. It is a
limited change model.
Q Is it a limited change model or merely
a description of evolution?
A It is a phenomenon that we can observe
that fits very well with the limited change model.
Q But is it inconsistent with evolution,
with macro-evolution? In other words, what I am trying
Frair 65
to say is, you would agree that there is such a thing
as micro-evolution?
A Yes.
Q Does the existence of the process of
micro-evolution disprove the existence of the process
of macro-evolution?
A Not necessarily.
Q What is macro-evolution to you?
A Macro-evolution is large change; change
that occurs that would be conceived as occurring between
major groups.
Q Is there any evidence in support of what
you term macro-evolution?
A There are a lot of very respectable
scientists who are macro-evolutionists, and they are
very intelligent people, and I don't deny can see things
that way.
Q Where does micro-evolution end and crea-
tion science begin?
MR. WILLIAMS: I don't understand the
question, I'm sorry.
A I don't either.
Q What you are calling micro-evolution is,
in fact, evolution, is it not?
Frair 66
A Yes.
Q What are the limits on that kind of
evolution?
A How far we can reasonably expect that
there was a genetic continuity among the organisms.
Q How far back can you take that?
A That is really the essence of what we
are talking about. And I think -- I wish I could give
a definite answer, but we'd have to do this in modern
toxonomic terms.
Q What is your working hypothesis about
the insufficiency of mutation and natural selection in
bringing about development of all living kinds from a
single organism?
MR. WILLIAMS: If you have one.
A Repeat it, please.
Q You have testified that you can apply
the scientific method to 4A2 in Act 590. 4A2 states
the insufficiency of mutation and natural selection in
bringing about development of all living kinds from a
single organism.
Do you have a working hypothesis to
explain that insufficiency?
A Well, this working hypothesis would be
Frair 67
that the kinds are not genetically related.
Q How can we test that hypothesis?
A I am looking for good ways to test it
now.
Q Is that hypothesis predictive?
A To the extent that we would anticipate
finding new organisms and -- no, let me change that. I
don't mean to say that. I'd like to think about that a
little bit more.
Q For how long a period of time has micro-
evolution been proceeding?
A Good question. I don't know. I don't
think I can give a definite answer on that.
Q What do you consider to be the age of
the earth?
A I know the ages that have been proposed
by different scientists.
Q What age do you accept?
A I am not willing to commit myself on
that point.
Q Do you have an understanding, a belief,
an idea, a feeling, anything about the age of the earth?
A I'm not willing to make a definitive
comment about that now.
Frair 68
Q Why aren't you willing? Is it because
you don't know or you just don't want to testify about
that?
A Well, there's a certain amount of uncer-
tainty in my mind.
Q What amount of time would be necessary
to explain the diversity of life as it exists today?
MR. WILLIAMS: You mean with respect to
the creation science model or evolution science
model?
Q From your perspective.
A Well, we'd have to understand mutation
rates in the past, and there's some question about that.
Q Do you have any feeling as a scientist
how long it would take to explain the observed diversity
given the concept of micro-evolution?
A That is a very, very good question. I
think I prefer not to speak definitively to that, because
I have to do some more evaluation of information.
Q Is there an age of the earth that crea-
tion scientists usually ascribe?
A Many of them feel that it was relatively
recent.
Q By relatively recent, what do you mean?
Frair 69
More than 10,000, less than 10,000 years?
A Many of them are saying 10,000 to
15,000 years.
Q What do most scientists currently
believe the age of the earth to be?
A The vicinity of five billion years.
Q As between those two estimations of
the age of the earth, which would you accept?
A I am not willing to be pinned down on
that at this stage.
Q If the earth were only 10,000 years old,
would it be possible in that period of time for the
observed diversity of life today to have come about?
A That is a very difficult question to
answer.
Q Do you have any belief on that or any
understanding?
A If this was a case, we would have to
know what the mutation, what rate of change there was
at that time. I can't point a data in my own field
that would help to answer that question.
Q What would change the rate of mutation?
A Maybe the cosmic rays coming in might
have an influence.
Frair 70
Q Do you believe that the rate of muta-
tion is variable?
A It could be.
Q Do you believe that there has ever been
any suspension of natural laws?
A What do you mean by that?
Q Well, do you have an understanding of
what suspension of natural laws means?
A What are you trying to ask with that
question? What kind of natural law is he thinking about?
Gravity or --
Q Yes; has there ever been a period of time
when the law of gravity was not in existence?
A Not as far as I know.
MR. LAHIFF: All right. I'd like to take
a break. I have to stretch my legs.
(Recess taken.)
MR. LAHIFF: Let's go back on the record.
BY MR. LAHIFF:
Q Do you recognize any creation science
texts as authoritative?
A There have been some very good pieces
of scientific literature that has been produced.
MR. WILLIAMS: Do you mean authoritative
Frair 71
as under Act 590? My point is that we are
dealing with a lawsuit over the creation
science model as it is defined in Act 590.
There may or may not be similarities between
other writings which purport to discuss crea-
tion science and what Act 590 requires.
MR. LAHIFF: I don't understand.
MR. WILLIAMS: I guess my objection is
that your question may be ambiguous if you are
not talking about the creation science model
as described in Act 590.
MR. LAHIFF: No. I will ask that ques-
tion. I am just asking a general one first.
A My bibliography in this book, Case For
Creation, recite a number of works which I think are
very respectable when it comes to this issue.
Q Are you aware of any textbooks that
would be consistent with the creation science model as
described in Act 590?
A Yes.
Q Could you identify those for me, please?
MR. WILLIAMS: I want just to interject
for the record that as long as you are not ask-
ing for a legal judgment, as to what would be.
Frair 72
MR. LAHIFF: No. Not a legal judgment.
MR. WILLIAMS: As to what would be suf-
ficient under Act 590.
A Scientific Creationism by Henry Morris.
Q Any others?
A You what books that are going to agree
point for point with the 590?
Q No. Books that are consistent with
Article 590. I recognize that it would be difficult to
find a book that is completely consistent in all respects
with 590.
MR. WILLIAMS: I take it implicit in
your question would be books which would not
include any religious references or religious
instruction.
A That is the problem.
Q What is the problem? Do all creation
science books have Biblical references in reference to
the Creator?
A I can give you lots of books that are
consistent with a limited change model. Strictly scien-
tific books, we have mentioned Kerkut. I can give you
a whole list of names.
Q That is not my question. My question
Frair 73
is books that are consistent with the creation science
model as described in Article 590, which I will show
you again (handing).
A I think generally the Zimmerman books
would be consistent with this. Paul Zimmerman is
editor, Creation Evolution, but they do include material
on theology in those books, as well.
But the scientific part of it would
certainly be consistent with this.
Q Is your limited change model equivalent
to the creation science model as described in Act 590?
A Say that again.
Q Is your limited change model, of the
limited change model that we have been talking about
today, equivalent to the creation science model described
in Act 590?
A Are you talking about my personal posi-
tion, what we would put forth here, for instance?
Q Yes, your description for me of the
limited change model, is that consistent with Act 590's
description of the creation sciences?
A It won't go into all of the aspects of
it the way this does.
Q There are differences. Is it possible
Frair 74
to discuss the creation science model as described in
Act 590, without references to a Creator?
MR. WILLIAMS: Is it possible what
again?
MR. LAHIFF: Could you repeat my ques-
tion.
(Question read.)
A Could I ask what you mean by Creator?
Q What do you mean by a Creator?
A Give it back to me.
Q Yes.
A This is the way lawyers do it. I am
learning a lot about lawyers.
Q I said that is what is fun about it.
A I have a lot of respect for lawyers.
MR. WILLIAMS: Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
A I forgot the question.
Q What do you mean by a Creator?
A Okay. Something that got the thing
going. How's that? That something could be a small
s or a capital S. I don't want to volunteer too much
information here.
Something that got the thing going,
Frair 75
period.
Q You did say small s or capital S.
What did you mean by small s or capital S?
A I didn't mean to say that. I mean
usually we write God with a capital G.
Q So when you said capital S. small s,
you meant a G?
A I think what I am trying to say is that
creation model certainly implies something there other
than what is resident within matter itself. That is
what I am trying to say.
Q Can you describe for me the fundamental
difference between creation science and evolution
science?
MR. WILLIAMS: Assuming there is one
fundamental difference.
Q Assuming there is.
A Well, the creation science points to a
time of beginning.
Q What does the creation science model
say about the beginning?
A For the time of beginning -- I am try-
ing to give it something that would encompass the whole
business, and I find it very difficult.
Frair 76
I am thinking in terms of living things,
but I realize that this creation model has the whole
universe in it, which I don't object to, including
that in the creation model. but it is not easy for me
right now to make a brief statement about the essence
of the whole thing.
It's taken them six points to get it
across.
Q Is there more than one kind or one type
of turtle?
A What do you mean by type of turtle?
Q What do you understand type of turtle
to mean?
A Here we go again. If you are talking
about species, there are many species of turtles. If
you are talking about genus, there are many of them,
as well.
If you are talking about family, there
are a number of them. If you are talking about super-
family -- I'll let it go at family.
We can get into families and super-
families and that. I don't mean to belabor it.
Q Are the types of turtles that you have
just described consistent with the notion of kind in the
Frair 77
Bible?
A I am thinking about that?
Q What are you thinking about it?
A You mean are you asking if I am putting
my scientific information together with the Bible at
this point?
Q Yes.
A I don't think I can -- it could be
consistent with it, I could say that. I think, at this
stage. I don't see an inconsistency, let me put it that
way.
Q Is it inconsistent with evolution?
A Is?
Q Is it inconsistent with evolution?
A You mean macro-evolution?
Q Yes.
A Many people feel it isn't.
Q Would most scientists consider that
the different families, species and genus of turtles
to be consistent with an evolutionary model?
A Most scientists would.
MR. LAHIFF: I'd like to mark as Plain-
tiff's Exhibit 3, an article contributed by you
to the Creation Research Quarterly, entitled
Frair 78
The Protostomia-Deuterostomia Theory.
(Above document marked Plaintiffs'
Exhibit 3 for identification, this date.)
BY MR. LAHIFF:
Q Is that your article, Doctor?
A Yes.
Q Do you draw any conclusions from that
article which support the creation science model?
A The purpose of this article was to point
out a difficulty with the evolution model and to
encourage scholarship involved in re-evaluating the
evolution model.
Q You make a reference in this article to
Soren Lovtrup. He is an evolutionist, is he not?
A Yes.
Q Why did you choose to publish this in
Creation Research Society Quarterly and not in the
referee journal, if the purpose was to encourage
research?
A The purpose is that in the hopes that
some who are operating with the evolution model and
who read this journal would note this material, because
Lovtrup published the original data in a regular scien-
tific journal.
Frair 79
Q And you didn't think that was sufficient
to create any interest?
A No. This is just a news, a comment.
It is just a comment on his paper. It is in the recent
events section of the journal, what is going on in
science today, I think, kind of a thing.
MR. LAHIFF: I'd like to mark as Plain-
tiff's Exhibit 4, a copy of your curriculum
vitae.
(Copy of Dr. Wayne Frair's curriculum
vitae marked Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 for identi-
fication, this date.)
BY MR. LAHIFF:
Q I'd like to flush out some of the details
if I might. Did you have any sub-specialty within the
field of zoology when you received your AB degree from
Houghton College?
A No.
Q Did you have any sub-specialty when you
received your MA in embryology from the University of
Massachusetts?
A Embryology.
Q No sub-specialty within the field of
embryology?
Frair 80
A Embryology would be a sub-specialty
within the field of zoology. That was a broadly-based
Master's degree, and embryology was the specialty.
Q Could you describe for me what serology
is?
A Studies of the blood serum of any
organism.
Q Is it possible to have a sub-specialty
within the field of serology?
A Serology is a tool for studying various
organisms biochemically, and I am studying primarily
reptiles, using that tool.
Q The only sub-specialty within serology
would be with reference to a particular kind of organism
then?
A That's right. Applying the methodology.
Q Have you received any honors that are
not listed on your curriculum vitae?
A No.
Q Have you had any continuing education
that is not listed on your curriculum vitae?
Frair 81
A This is quite excellent. Anything would
be of minor nature, like evening courses or something
like that.
Q What kind of evening courses have you
taken?
A I took an evening course in nutrition.
Q Anything else?
A Nothing of significance to compare with
these formal -- these are all formalized courses in
these schools, professional courses. There hasn't been --
well, my church, we have Sunday school type courses, that
kind of thing.
Q What kind of courses have you taken for
your church?
THE WITNESS: I don't know; should I?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes.
A I'm not sure how this ties in, but we
have Bible courses there.
Q Have you ever taken a course at your
church dealing with creation science?
A Yes.
Q And who taught that course?
A Another professor.
Q What is his or her name?
Frair 82
A Dr. Ault.
Q Is that the only course that you have
taken through your church that dealt with creation
science?
A There have been courses that referred
to the subject. Another fellow named Slingo was teach-
ing the course.
Q I'm sorry. Could you spell that?
A Roy Slingo, S-l-i-n-g-o.
Q And what was the title of his course?
A I don't remember. Current science or
creation. Something along that line, because it covered
the subject.
Q Were there any other courses you are
aware of relating to current science or creation science?
A That I have taken, I don't recall any
right now.
Q Could you describe for me the substance
of Professor Ault's course on creation science?
A This was a Bible course. This is a
Sunday school class for adults we have every Sunday
morning; the adults in my church go to classes, and
he was teaching a course dealing with the book of
Genesis, and so it was necessary to discuss this to
Frair 83
some extent when he was covering the early chapters of
Genesis.
Q And what did he say about Genesis?
A Oh, I don't remember the details, but
he considered the various views regarding the origin
of living things.
Q Did he discuss evolution?
A Yes.
Q What did he say about evolution?
A I don't remember the details, but he did
indicate some of the views that are held by people
today.
Q Was it scientifically accurate?
A Oh, yes; yes.
Q What did Professor Slingo -- is he a
professor, Professor Slingo?
A He is a public school teacher. Ault
isn't a profession; he's a doctor.
Q He is a doctor of what?
A Geology.
Q And Mr. Slingo?
A Is a biology teacher in high school.
Q And what did his course cover?
A He talked about some of the issues, and
Frair 84
there was some information pertaining to his situation
in the public school.
Q What do you mean his situation in the
public school?
A He teaches in a public school, and he
presents creation science and evolution science there
in his high school routinely.
Q Have you received any grants?
A Yes.
Q What have these grants been for?
A My research.
Q How many grants have you received?
A Close to ten, I suppose.
Q And from whom have you received these
grants?
A Research Corporation -- well, the col-
lege has received some money that has gone toward my
research from National Science Foundation and buying
equipment, and paying student help.
Sigma Xi, that's a research organiza-
tion. The faculty advancement fund for our college was
given this.
Q Any others?
A That is all I can think of right now.
Frair 85
Q And what topics -- is that a correct
word -- have you been researching?
A Mostly biochemical toxonomy.
Q Have you ever received a grant from a
creations science organization?
A No.
Q Have you ever made an application for
a grant that wasn't funded?
A Yes.
Q And what were the topics of those pro-
posals?
A I had only one grant that was turned
down, when the national science -- you asked for the
topics, not who. It dealt with soft-shell turtles.
Q What about soft-shell turtles?
A Biochemical toxonomy of soft-shell
turtles.
Q Have you ever had a grant from any
foundation or institution supporting research into the
limited change model?
A No.
Q What was your PhD thesis on?
A Reptiles. Mostly turtles.
Q Was that published?
Frair 86
A No.
Q And --
A Not as a whole.
Q Have you done any other research other
than those that you have described so far?
A Everything is on that list.
Q Do you hold any other teaching posi-
tions other than are described in your curriculum vitae?
A No.
Q Are you the member of the adjunct faculty
of any institution?
A No.
Q Do you serve as a consultant to any
institution?
A No.
Q Or any organization, any creation science
organization?
A No.
Q Have you ever taught at any symposia?
A Taught at a symposium? I am trying to
think. I have participated in symposiums.
Q I'm sorry. Taught is a wrong term. Have
you ever participated in a symposium?
A Yes.
Frair 87
Q What have these symposia dealt with?
A Well, I was in one some years ago that
was dealing with the ecological crisis.
Q And who sponsored that symposium?
A This is the American Scientific Affilia-
tion.
Q Have you ever participated in a
symposium sponsored by a creation science organization?
A Another one on sea turtles/
Q Who sponsored that?
A The American Society of Zoologists.
Q Do you consider yourself to have a par-
ticular field of expertise?
A Yes.
Q And what field is that?
A biochemical toxonomy or biochemical
systematics. One or the other. Systematics is a little
broader.
Q Do you concentrate on any particular
organism?
A Turtles.
Q Do you consider yourself to be an expert
on turtles?
A Yes.
Frair 88
Q You are currently employed at the King's
College?
A The King's College, yes.
Q What courses do you teach at King's
College?
A I'm teaching a course in concepts of
biology now. I'm teaching a course in introduction to
research. Science methods, that's what I'm teaching
now.
Q Does the King's College grant graduate
degrees?
A No.
Q Do you supervise any research?
A Yes.
Q What kind of research do you supervise?
A Whatever our students may be interested
in, within the limits of my capabilities. as offering
some helpful guidance.
Q In order to teach at the King's college,
were you required to sign a statement of belief or a
statement of doctrine?
A Yes.
Q What is that statement of belief or
statement of doctrine?
Frair 89
A It includes the fact that I am a
Christian.
Q Does it include any reference to your
acceptance of the literal truth of the Bible?
A There is a statement in there about
believing the Bible, yes.
Q What is the statement in there?
A I would have to get the exact wording;
I don't know it right offhand.
MR. LAHIFF: Excuse me. Mr. Williams,
could we be provided with a copy of that state-
ment?
MR. WILLIAMS: Certainly. You will
provide a copy of that to me and I will forward
it up to you.
Q Is there any statement in that statement
of doctrine that talks about the inerrancy of the Bible?
A Yes.
Q Do you personally believe in that state-
ment of doctrine?
A Yes.
Q Does that statement of doctrine have
any impact on your scientific research?
A Yes.
Frair 90
Q What kind of an impact does it have?
A I think it makes me a better researcher.
Q How does it make you a better researcher?
A Because I look at nature as part of
God's handiwork.
Q How does that make you a better
researcher, though? Is it necessary to look at or to
understand nature to be God's handiwork to do research?
A No.
Q Did you speak to anyone at the King's
College about your testimony here, and about your testimony
at the deposition today?
A Some people there know I am hers.
Q Did they encourage you to attend today?
A I said that I was going.
Q Well, did they encourage you to attend?
A Well, they really have nothing to say
about it. My secretary knows. She's taking the day
off.
Q Is there anyone at the King's College
who encouraged you to testify in this case?
A I think another member of our department
told me he hoped it went well.
Q Did anyone at the King's College tell
Frair 91
you that they thought it would be advisable for you
to testify?
A Not that I remember, no.
Q Did you discuss what your testimony
might be with anyone at the King's College?
A I didn't know what I was in for.
Q Did you discuss what you might be in
for with anyone at the King's College?
A Well, perhaps I mentioned the fact that
I was down here for a deposition, whatever that was.
Q But that is the extent of it?
A Yes. I'm just finding out now what
depositions are all about.
Q What is the Creation Research Society
of which your curriculum vitae indicates that you were
a board member and a secretary?
A It is a scientific society.
Q And what is its purpose?
A To do scientific research and to pub-
lish this research.
MR. LAHIFF: I'd like to mark as plain-
tiffs' exhibit, an application for for admission
to the Creation Research Society.
Frair 92
(Application marked Plaintiffs'
Exhibit 5 for identification, this date.)
(Document handed to witness.)
BY MR. LAHIFF:
Q Do you recall filling out a membership
blank like that?
A Yes.
Q Are you a voting member of the Creation
Research Society?
A Yes.
Q Did you sign the oath or do you sub-
scribe to the statement of belief, I should say?
A Yes.
Q What does statement of belief number
one mean, that the Bible is scientifically true in all
of its original autographs?
A I'm not a theologian, but my understand-
ing is that it was without error in the original draft.
Q Have you read the original autographs?
A I would if they were available in trans-
lation.
Q Then how can you say that the original
autographs are scientifically true, if you have never
read them?
Frair 93
A This is consistent with the inerrancy
statement of conservative Biblical scholars.
Q Do you believe that the account of
origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple
historical truths?
A Yes.
Q Are you aware of any scientific evidence
that is true?
A We are back to the scientific method
again. It is not easy to investigate historic events
by the scientific manner.
Q Is there any evidence, though?
A I see no conflict between what I know
of science and the way I understand Genesis.
Q Do you believe that all basic types of
living things, including man, were made by direct
Creator acts of God during creation week?
A Yes.
Q Do you believe that whatever biological
changes have occurred since creation have accomplished
only changes within the original created kinds?
A Yes.
Q How many original created kinds were
there?
Frair 94
A I don't know.
Q Does anyone know?
A I do not know that.
Q Do you know what an originally created
kind is?
A Yes.
Q What is an originally created kind?
A It constitutes a group of organisms
genetically disconnected by line of descent from other
groups of organisms.
Q Isn't there a body of scientific evi-
dence that demonstrates that all organisms are genetic-
ally connected?
A No. There are some people who believe
this.
Q But isn't there a body of scientific
data that supports that belief?
A There are many scientists who believe
that the data which is available does support that
belief.
Q Do you have any scientific data which
does not support that belief?
A Yes.
Q And what is that data?
Frair 95
A This is information which makes it
very difficult to make a line of genetic continuity
between groups of organisms.
Q How do evolutionary scientists deal
with that data?
A They assume that there's a genetic
continuity.
Q Is that an assumption or a conclusion
drawn from observation?
A An assumption.
Q Is there any scientific evidence for
the great flood described in Genesis?
A There are geologists who feel that there
is.
Q And who are those geologists?
A There's a man named Steve Austin.
Q Is that view generally held within the
scientific community?
A No.
Q What evidence does Mr. Austin put forth
to support his belief in a Genesis flood?
A Noachian deluge is a better way to say
it. I don't think I am in a position to evaluate what
he says about this situation.
Frair 96
Q What is the Missouri Association for
Creation?
A It is a group which believes in a crea-
tion model.
Q Do they have any statement of belief
or statement of purpose?
A I'd have to check this. I get a
publication from them periodically. That is mostly
what I know about the organization.
Q Do they do anything in addition to pub-
lish journals?
A Hold meetings.
Q Have you ever attended any of their
meetings?
A No.
Q What kind of articles appear in their
journals?
A Usually professors there will write
articles dealing with this, the creation model.
Q What is the Victoria Institute?
A It is an organization in England.
Q And what is the purpose of the organi-
zation?
A To understand the relationships between
Frair 97
science and the Bible.
Q Are you an active member of the Vic-
toria Institute?
A Only in that I receive their publica-
tion periodically.
Q Have you ever written anything for
publication in their journal?
A No.
Q What is the creation science movement?
A This is another European -- it is a
Scotch, Scottish based, I think it is Glascow based
organization promoting creations.
Q How did you become to be aware of the
Victoria Institute?
A I have known about it for maybe 20
years.
Q Do you recall how you first came to be
aware of it?
A Not particularly.
Q Do you recall how you first became aware
of the creation science movement?
A I think I saw an advertisement.
Q In what publication?
A I think it was the Bible Science News
Frair 98
Letter, but I am not certain or that.
Q What is the Creation Social Science
and Humanities Society?
A That is an organization run by social
scientists who were concerned about or who believe in
a creation model.
Q What is the Evangelical Theological
Society?
A This is an organization primarily of
theologians who have a -- primarily have conservative
theologians.
Q How did you come to be a member of the
Evangelical Society?
A I wanted to see what they were think-
ing.
Q Did they include non-theologians as
members?
A Usually not.
Q How were you able to become a member,
then?
A I joined many years ago, and I think
at that time they deemed my background and my training
strong enough to permit me to become a member.
Q What is there in your background or
Frair 99
training?
A I have had some undergraduate educa-
tion in Biblical studies.
Q What kind of training?
A Formal courses as part of my degree
work.
Q Does the King's College have any
religious affiliation?
A No.
Q Would the King's College be considered
a Christian school?
A Yes.
Q In what sense is it a Christian school?
A In that the program is Christian.
Q What do you mean by the program is
Christian?
A There is an emphasis in the whole pro-
gram of the college upon Christian living.
Q What is the National Association of
Evangelicals?
A This is an umbrella organization for
many Christian groups.
Q What is its function?
A To provide unity.
Frair 100
Q Does either the Evangelical Theological
Society or the National Association of Evangelicals
take a position on the validity of the creation science
model?
A I don't think so.
Q Apart from your position as board mem-
ber and secretary of the Creation Research Society,
have you ever held an office in any of these creation
or Evangelical organizations?
A Only as is indicated on the sheet you
have there.
Q That only indicates that you were
secretary of the Creation Research Society. Have you
been an officer of any other organization?
A Just what is there. That's all.
Q What is your religion?
A Christian.
Q Do you belong to a particular church?
A I attend a Baptist church.
Q How long have you attended a Baptist
church?
A The particular church that I attend now
I have been attending for about 12 years.
Q Have you ever held any office in the
