Stephen E. Jones

Creation/Evolution Quotes: Unclassified quotes: July 2007

[Home] [Updates] [Site map] [Quotes, Unclassified, Classified]

The following are quotes added to my Unclassified Quotes database in July 2007. The date format is dd/mm/yy. See copyright conditions at end.

[Index: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec]

"And when you turn from the New Testament to modern scholars, remember that you go among them as a 
sheep among wolves. Naturalistic assumptions, beggings of the question ... will meet you on every side-
even from the pens of clergymen. This does not mean (as I was once tempted to suspect) that these 
clergymen are disguised apostates who deliberately exploit the position and the livelihood given them by 
the Christian Church to undermine Christianity. It comes partly from what we may call a `hangover.' We all 
have Naturalism in our bones and even conversion does not at once work the infection out of our system. 
Its assumptions rush back upon the mind the moment vigilance is relaxed. And in part the procedure of 
these scholars arises from the feeling which is greatly to their credit-which indeed is honourable to the point 
of being Quixotic. They are anxious to allow to the enemy every advantage he can with any show of fairness 
claim. They thus make it part of their method to eliminate the supernatural wherever it is even remotely 
possible to do so, to strain natural explanation even to the breaking point before they admit the least 
suggestion of miracle. Just in the same spirit some examiners tend to overmark any candidate whose 
opinions and character, as revealed by his work, are revolting to them. We are so afraid of being led into 
unfairness by our instant dislike of the man that we are liable to overshoot the mark and treat him too kindly. 
Many modern scholars overshoot the mark for a similar reason." (Lewis, C.S.*, "Miracles: A Preliminary 
Study," [1947], Fontana: London, Second edition, Reprint, 1963, pp.168-169) 

"In using the books of such people you must therefore be continually on guard. You must develop a nose 
like a bloodhound for those steps in the argument which depend not on historical and linguistic knowledge 
but on the concealed assumption that miracles are impossible, improbable, or improper. And this means that 
you must really yourself: must work hard and consistently to eradicate from your mind the whole type of 
thought in which we have all been brought up. It is the type of thought which, under various disguises, has 
been our adversary throughout this book. It is technically called Monism; but perhaps the unlearned reader 
will understand me best if I call it Everythingism. I mean by this the belief that `everything,' or `the whole 
show,' must be self-existent, must be more important than every particular thing, and must contain all 
particular things in such a way that they cannot be really very different from one another-that they must be 
not merely `at one,' but one. Thus the Everythingist, if he starts from God, becomes a Pantheist; there must 
be nothing that is not God. If he starts from Nature he becomes a Naturalist; there must be nothing that is 
not Nature. ... . This philosophy I believe to be profoundly untrue. .... All things come from One. All things 
are related-related in different and complicated ways. But all things are not one." (Lewis, C.S.*, "Miracles: A 
Preliminary Study," [1947], Fontana: London, Second edition, Reprint, 1963, p.169)

"THE human fossil record is no exception to the general rule that the main lesson to be learned from 
palaeontology is that evolution always takes place somewhere else. Even the best fossil beds preserve 
evidence of about one skeleton per million [Cronin, J.E., et al., "Tempo and mode in hominid evolution," 
Nature Vol. 292, 1981, p.113], and this, combined with problems of dating, means that the pattern of origin 
of modern Homo sapiens remained obscure until recently. It is not surprising that palaeontologists have 
at different times hailed Europe, Africa, Asia and even the Americas as the birthplace of modern man 
[Howell, F.C., in Smith, F.H. & Spencer F., eds., "The Origins of Modern Humans," Liss: New York, 1984, 
p.xiii]. Mankind, however, retains a more complete record of history in its genes, and a paper ... in this issue 
[Wainscoat, J.S. et al., "Evolutionary relationships of human populations from an analysis of nuclear 
DNA polymorphisms," Nature 319, 6 February 1986, pp.491-493] provides new evidence that the origin of 
modern man lies in Africa." (Jones, J.S. & Rouhani, S., "How Small Was the Bottleneck?," Nature, Vol. 
319, 6 February 1986, pp.449-450, p.449)

"In their study, Wainscoat et al. [Wainscoat, J.S. et al., "Evolutionary relationships of human 
populations from an analysis of nuclear DNA polymorphisms," Nature 319, 6 February 1986, pp.491-493] 
examine the patterns of relatedness of a small segment of nuclear DNA from five closely linked restriction 
sites in the -globin gene cluster from Europeans, Indians, Asiatics and Africans. A total of 32 haplotypes 
(combinations of alternative sites) can be generated from these 5 variants; but in the event only 14 are found 
among the 601 chromosomes studied, and only 5 of these are common. There is a striking geographical 
pattern in their distribution. Three -globin haplotypes are widespread in all non-African populations (and 
are rare in Africa) whereas the African population is characterized by a high frequency of two haplotypes, 
one of which is rare and the other absent from the rest of the world. For this segment of DNA, mankind can 
be divided into an African and a non-African lineage." (Jones, J.S. & Rouhani, S., "How Small Was the 
Bottleneck?," Nature, Vol. 319, 6 February 1986, pp.449-450, p.449)

"Wainscoat et al. [Wainscoat, J.S. et al., "Evolutionary relationships of human populations from an 
analysis of nuclear DNA polymorphisms," Nature 319, 6 February 1986, pp.491-493] suggest that the 
pattern of distribution of -globin haplotypes is consistent with the rapid spread of modern man from a 
centre of origin in Africa, and that the spread of the species to the rest of the world led to a drastic shift in 
haplotype frequencies because of a population bottleneck and sampling drift in the emigrant population. 
New fossil evidence strongly supports the view that man's origin was indeed Africa. Anatomically modern 
human fossils from 100,000 years ago have been found at the mouth of the Klasies River in South Africa and 
modern man was widespread in Africa by 50,000 years BP ..., at a time when Europe was populated by 
Neanderthals. Studies of blood group and enzyme alleles in Africa and of DNA sequences associated with 
the sickle-cell mutants suggest that African populations are genetically more subdivided than are those from 
other parts of the world [Nei, M. & Roychoudhury, A.K., "Genetic relationship and evolution of human 
races," Evol. Biol., Vol. 14, No. 1, 1982, pp.1-59; Pagnier, J., et al. "Evidence for the Multicentric Origin of the 
Sickle Cell Hemoglobin Gene in Africa," PNAS, Vol. 81, 1984, pp.1771-1773]. This again suggests a longer 
history of evolution in situ in Africa than anywhere else." (Jones, J.S. & Rouhani, S., "How Small Was the 
Bottleneck?," Nature, Vol. 319, 6 February 1986, pp.449-450, p.450)

"When did modern man leave Africa and how small a population emigrated? Although the evidence from 
fossils is sparse, their distribution suggests that the first emigrants had left their continent of birth by 50,000 
BP and were widespread by 30,000 BP. The social structure of modern African hunter-gatherers does 
predispose them to rapid genetic changes resulting from sampling drift [Harpending, H. & Wandsnider, L., 
"Population structure of Ghanzi and Ngamiland !Kung," Curr. Dev. Anthr. Genet., Vol. 2, 1982, pp.29-50] . 
However, the global extent of -globin divergence has at first sight some startling demographic implications 
because the hunter-gatherers who migrated from Africa. Europe and Asia have rather similar haplotype 
frequencies. Hence, the emigrants must have undergone the major change in haplotype frequency in the 
interval between leaving Africa and dispersing throughout the rest of the world. Assuming - and this is little 
more than an informed guess - that this interval was 20,000 years, population-genetics theory tells us that 
the mean effective size of the ancestral population for all non-Africans throughout this period must have 
been 600 individuals; or alternatively that the bottleneck was 6 individuals for 200 years, or even a single 
couple for 60 years. (The expected time for the loss of a neutral gene present in the population at frequency 
p is E(T) = -4N plnp/1-p, where N is the population size [Kimura, M & Ohta, T., "The number of 
heterozygous nucleotide sites maintained in a finite population due to steady flux of mutations," 
Genetics, Vol. 61, 1969, pp.893-903]. We assume a generation interval of 20 years and that the 4 common 
haplotypes were present at equal frequencies in the ancestral African population.) If this is the case, much 
of mankind was an endangered species during an important part of its evolution." (Jones, J.S. & Rouhani, S., 
"How Small Was the Bottleneck?," Nature, Vol. 319, 6 February 1986, pp.449-450, p.450)

"The unity of the human race [monogeneticism] is one of the most important matters in Christian theology. 
The Genesis record implies the unity of the race. and Paul's affirmations in Romans 5:12-17 and 1 Cor. 15:21-
58 clearly teach it. Warfield writes: `So far from being of no concern to theology ... it would be truer to say 
that the whole doctrinal structure of the Bible account of redemption is founded on its assumption that the 
race of man is one organic whole, and may be dealt with as such. It is because all are one in Adam that in the 
matter of sin there is no difference, but all have fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:12f.), and as well that 
in the new man there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, 
bondman, freeman; but Christ is all and in all (Col. 3:11). The unity of the old man in Adam is the postulate of 
the unity of the new man in Christ.' [Warfied, B.B. "On the Antiquity and the Unity of the Human Race," in 
"Biblical and Theological Studies," Presbyterian & Reformed: Philadelphia PA, 1911, p.261] ... The unity of 
the human race is capable of real defence. Anatomically the human body is the same form from pygmies 
to the giant Wattusies and from the fairest Scandinavian to the darkest negroid. Racial differences are 
superficial and are certainly of little survival value. Physiologically the race is one. Tests on pulse rate 
and breathing, show some variations which are not significant. Psychologically speaking, the powers of 
perception, the patterns of reaction, and the function of the central nervous system are similar in all the 
races. Physically the unity of the race is proven by racial interfertility. As far as we understand, the 
modern scientific anthropologists agree that mentally and physically the human race is one. ... Warfield 
asserts: `[The antiquity of the human race] has of itself no theological significance. It is to theology, as 
such, a matter of entire indifference how long man has existed on earth.' (Ibid, p.261) The reason for this 
assertion is obvious. The sin of Adam imputed to humanity depends on the unity of humanity, not on the 
antiquity of humanity. Theology is more concerned with the proof that man is one, rather than the near or far 
antiquity of man. Polygeneticism [multiple origins] is far more damaging to theology than any teaching of 
the vast antiquity of man. In order to clear the atmosphere about the antiquity of man certain notions very 
widespread among evangelicals must be corrected. (Ramm, B.L.*, "The Christian View of Science and 
Scripture," [1954] Paternoster: Exeter UK, Reprinted, 1967, pp.214-216. Emphasis original)

"Preevolutionary justifications for racial ranking proceeded in two modes. The `softer' argument-again using 
some inappropriate definitions from modern perspectives-upheld the scriptural unity of all peoples in tingle 
creation of Adam and Eve. This view was called monogenism-or origin from a single source. Human races 
are a product of degeneration from Eden's perfection. Races have declined to different degrees, whites least 
and blacks most. ... The `harder' argument abandoned scripture as allegorical-and held that human races 
were separate biological species, the descendents of different Adams. As another form of life, blacks need 
not participate in the `equality of man.' Proponents of this argument were called `polygenists.' 
Degenerationism was probably the more popular argument, if only because scripture was not to be 
discarded lightly." (Gould, S.J., "The Mismeasure of Man," W.W. Norton & Co: New York NY, 1981, p.39. 
Emphasis original)

"The leading American polygenists differed in their attitude toward slavery. ... But the identification of 
blacks as a separate and unequal species had obvious appeal as an argument for slavery. Josiah Nott, a 
leading polygenist, encountered particularly receptive audiences in the South for his `lectures on 
niggerology' (as he called them). ... Nonetheless, the polygenist argument did not occupy a primary place in 
the ideology of slavery in mid-nineteenth-century America-and for a good reason. For most Southerners, 
this excellent argument entailed too high a price. The polygenists had railed against ideologues as barriers 
to their pure search for truth, but their targets were parsons more often than abolitionists. Their theory, in 
asserting a plurality of human creations, contradicted the doctrine of a single Adam and contravened the 
literal truth of scripture." (Gould, S.J., "The Mismeasure of Man," W.W. Norton & Co: New York NY, 1981, 

"Saturn's moon Titan belongs to a very select club within the solar system. It is one of only four `terrestrial' 
planets or moons-those with solid bodies, as opposed to those made largely of gas, like Jupiter and Saturn-
that has a substantial atmosphere. The other three that wear blankets of gas are Venus, Mars, and our own 
Earth. Why just these four? Why not also, say, Mercury, Jupiter's biggest moons, our moon? How did those 
lucky four come by their atmospheres? It turns out that getting an atmosphere-and holding on to it-really 
comes down to how big and how close to the sun you are (or, for Titan, how close you are to a really big 
planet).   The story of planetary atmospheres begins back at the beginning of our solar system, when the 
planets were forming. During that period, the so-called inner planets-Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars ... 
had sufficient gravity to draw these two gaseous elements in from the solar nebula, the vast cloud of gas 
and dust that surrounded the sun early in the solar system's history. In that primordial time, the sun was not 
very bright and thus not very hot, and this allowed the four inner planets to hold onto those atmospheres. ... 
This is where the how-close-you-are-to-the-sun part comes in. On Earth, all that water vapor belched out of 
volcanoes condensed in the young atmosphere into liquid water, then fell to the surface as rain. Over eons, 
this formed the oceans. Most of the CO2, meanwhile, became incorporated into the seas and into 
sedimentary rocks. ... As for Mars, its secondary atmosphere had two strikes against it from the start: the 
planet's size (too small) and its distance from the sun (too far). In its first 500 million years or so, the Red 
Planet had a warm atmosphere and liquid-water oceans, just like Earth. But Mars is so small that its internal 
heat engine burned out early on, and it is so far away from the sun that all the water vapor that its once-
active volcanoes had erupted eventually froze out of the atmosphere, becoming trapped beneath the surface 
as ice. .... Mars still has an atmosphere, but its pressure is 100 times less than Earth's and it's almost entirely 
composed of CO2-about the last thing we'd want to breathe. Venus has roughly the same concentration of 
CO2 as Mars, yet its atmosphere went in precisely the opposite direction. Size wasn't an issue: Venus has 
about the same mass as Earth so is plenty hot within. But distance from the sun has made all the difference. 
Venus is near enough to our star that all the water vapor released from its volcanoes burned off long ago, 
and without liquid water, the planet could not form oceans that could absorb the CO2. " (Tyson, P., "How to 
Get an Atmosphere," NOVA, March 2006) 

"At equilibrium, what is the probability that this system will, in fact, be a living cell? ... Suppose we were to 
grow a very large batch of cells of a bacterium such as Escherichia coli. We then centrifuge the cells into 
a tightly packed pellet of volume V containing N cells; transfer the pellet into a container of fixed volume V, 
and raise the temperature to some very high value (on the order of 10,000C) so as to destroy any traces of 
the original chemical state of the system. Now slowly cool the system to 300C and allow it to age 
indefinitely at this temperature. ... At this point, we can place an upper bound on pL by applying our 
knowledge of the chemical bonds found in actual living systems compared to the bonds found in the normal 
equilibrium state. ... From a thermodynamic argument, it is possible to compute the difference between the 
heat of formation of a group of biochemical compounds and the heat of formation of the lowest energy state 
possible for a system of the same atomic composition, volume, and temperature; hence, on the basis of 
gross molecular composition, we can estimate the energy difference between biological systems and their 
corresponding equilibrium systems. ... we shall set up a model system that will permit the calculation of 
pLmax. For the moment, we may anticipate the results of that calculation which shows that pLmax is the 
order of magnitude of 10-10^11 for a typical bacterial cell. The reason for pLmax having such an 
infinitesimally small value is that a living cell represents a configuration showing a very large amount of 
energy as configurational or electronic bond energy relative to the amount of thermal energy when 
compared with the equivalent equilibrium system. The living state has a very unlikely distribution of 
covalent bonds compared with the equivalent equilibrium state either at the same total energy or at the same 
temperature. ... Next, let us return to the number 10-10^11 which requires some discussion as many people 
are not accustomed to dealing with such infinitesimally small numbers. The number may be written 10-
100000000000 or as a decimal; it may be written as a decimal point followed by 99,999,999,999 zeros followed 
by a 1. The number occurred as the maximum probability of a given ensemble member being alive. Suppose 
we have an ensemble of W members and we sample it at the rate of X times per second for Y seconds. We 
may then ask the question: what will be the probability of a living member having occurred once? This will 
be pLWXY. To place our argument in the context of terrestrial biology, let us assume the maximum possible 
values of W, X, and Y for the surface of the earth. (a) Wmax = 10100. This is a very generous estimate of 
the number of atoms in the universe and must, therefore, represent an outside upper limit to the numbers of 
members of the ensemble. (b) Xmax = 1016 sec-1. Since we are dealing with atomic processes, sampling 
times cannot be appreciably shorter than times for atomic processes which have a lower limit of about 10-16 
sec. (c) Ymax = 1011 sec. Assume that the age of the universe is ten billion years, which appears to be an 
upper limit from current estimates. Utilizing these estimates, WmaxXmaxYmax is equal to 10134. Note, 
however, that pLmax ... ~ 10-10^11 ... When we encounter such small numbers as pLmax, no amount of 
ordinary manipulation or arguing about the age of the universe or the size of the system can suffice to make 
it plausible that such a fluctuation would have occurred in an equilibrium system. It is always possible to 
argue that any unique event would have occurred. This is outside the range of probabilistic considerations, 
and really, outside of science. ... We may sum up by stating that on energy considerations alone, the 
possibility of a living cell occurring in an equilibrium ensemble is vanishingly small. It is important to 
reiterate this point as a number of authors on the origin of life have missed the significance of vanishingly 
small probabilities. They have assumed that the final probability will be reasonably large by virtue of the size 
and age of the system. The previous paragraph shows that this is not so: calculable values of the 
probability of spontaneous origin are so low that the final probabilities are still vanishingly small." 
(Morowitz, H.J., "Energy Flow in Biology: Biological Organization as a Problem in Thermal Physics," [1968], 
Academic Press: New York NY, Second printing, 1969, pp.5-7,11-12)

"The ancestry of angiosperms is still uncertain, but recent cladistic analysis of homologous features points 
to the gymnosperms of division Gnetophyta as the closest living relatives of flowering plants. The oldest 
fossils that are widely accepted as angiosperms are found in rocks of the early Cretaceous period that are 
about 130 million years old. Fossilized angiosperms are sparsely represented among a much greater 
abundance of ferns and gymnosperms. By the end of the Cretaceous, 65 million years ago, the angiosperms 
had radiated and become the dominant plants on Earth, as they are today. Just as the end of the Permian 
period almost 200 million years earlier featured mass extinctions, the end of the Cretaceous was a crisis 
period when many old groups of organisms were replaced by new ones. Cooler climates may have 
contributed to the changeover. Again, the frequency of extinctions was greatest in the seas, but significant 
changes in terrestrial fauna and flora also occurred. The dinosaurs disappeared, as did many of the cycads 
and conifers that had thrived during the Mesozoic era. They were replaced by mammals and flowering 
plants. The change in fossils during the late Cretaceous is so extreme that geologists use the end of that 
period as the boundary between the Mesozoic and Cenozoic eras." (Campbell, N.A., Reece, J.B. & Mitchell, 
L.G., "Biology," [1987], Benjamin/Cummings: Menlo Park CA, Fifth Edition, 1999, pp.569-570)

"A secondary product particularly important in the evolutionary move of plants onto land was 
sporopollenin, a polymer that is resistant to almost all kinds of environmental damage. In fact, the fossil 
record of plants is due mainly to the durability of sporopollenin, lignin, and the materials of cuticles. 
Sporopollenin did not originate in plants, for it is also found in the walls of resistant zygotes of some algae. 
But this toughest of all substances was co-opted by plants in a way that enhances reproduction on land, 
where resistance to harsh environments is a crucial challenge. Plants have sporopollenin in the walls of their 
spores and, in plants that have pollen, in the textured coats of pollen grains (hence the name, 
sporopollenin). Here we see an interplay among structural, chemical, and reproductive adaptations for 
terrestrial living." (Campbell, N.A., Reece, J.B. & Mitchell, L.G., "Biology," [1987], Benjamin/Cummings: 
Menlo Park CA, Fifth Edition, 1999, p.547. Emphasis original)

"Bryophyte spores, like those of all other plants, are encased in a substantial wall impregnated with the most 
decay- and chemical-resistant biopolymer known, sporopollenin. The sporopollenin walls enable bryophyte 
spores to survive dispersal through the air from one moist site to another. The spores of charophytes, which 
are typically dispersed in water, are not enclosed by a sporopollenin wall. Charophyte zygotes, however, are 
lined with sporopollenin and can therefore tolerate exposure and microbial attack, remaining viable for long 
periods. The sporopollenin-walled spores of plants are thought to have originated from charophyte zygotes 
by change in the timing of sporopollenin deposition." (Raven, P.H., Evert, R.F. & Eichhorn, S.E., "Biology of 
Plants," [1971], W.H. Freeman & Co/Worth Publishers: New York NY, Sixth Edition, 1999, pp.406-407)

"The pollen grains develop a resistant outer wall, the exine, and an inner wall, the intine. The exine is 
composed of the resistant substance sporopollenin ... which apparently is derived primarily from the 
tapetum. This polymer is present in the spore walls of all plants. The intine, which is composed of cellulose 
and pectin, is laid down by the microspore protoplasts." (Raven, P.H., Evert, R.F. & Eichhorn, S.E., "Biology 
of Plants," [1971], W.H. Freeman & Co/Worth Publishers: New York NY, Sixth Edition, 1999, pp.406-407. 
Emphasis original)

"Pollen grains, like the spores of seedless plants, vary considerably in size and shape, ranging from less 
than 20 micrometers to more than 250 micrometers in diameter. They also differ in the number and 
arrangement of the apertures through which the pollen tubes ultimately grow. These apertures can be 
elongate (furrows), circular (pores), or a combination of the two. Nearly all families, many genera, and a fair 
number of species of flowering plants can be identified solely by their pollen grains, on the basis of such 
characteristics as size, number, and type of apertures, and exine sculpturing. In contrast to larger pieces of 
plants-such as leaves, flowers, and fruits-pollen grains, because of their tough, highly resistant exine, are 
very widely represented in the fossil record." (Raven, P.H., Evert, R.F. & Eichhorn, S.E., "Biology of Plants," 
[1971], W.H. Freeman & Co/Worth Publishers: New York NY, Sixth Edition, 1999, pp.504,506)

"The pollen grain wall The primexine is a wall laid down external to the microspore plasma membrane but 
within the callose wall ... . It is a matrix within which the intricate pattern of the future pollen wall, the 
exine, is initiated. This pattern is due to the outer exine wall and the number and location of germinal 
apertures, which form slits or circular openings (pores) in the exine ... . The exine is made of sporopollenin, 
a polymer that is tough and plastic-like and extraordinarily resistant to biodegradation. There is no known 
enzyme in flowering plants that can degrade sporopollenin. Chemically, sporopollenin resembles lignin ... 
and is found only in exines and spore walls of certain algae and fungi. The exines preserved in fossil 
deposits provide valuable clues to the history of plant life in past geological eras ... ." (Knox, B., Ladiges, P. 
& Evans, B., eds., "Biology," [1994], McGraw-Hill: Sydney NSW, Australia, Reprinted, 1995, p.309. Emphasis 

"Flowering plants evolved from gymnosperms. By the middle of the Jurassic period, approximately 180 
million years ago, a number of gymnosperm lines had evolved with advanced features reminiscent of 
flowering plants. Among other features, these derived gymnosperms possessed leaves with broad, 
expanded blades and the first carpels. It is also evident that beetles were visiting these plants; perhaps this 
was the beginning of coevolution between plants and their pollinators. The main task facing paleobotanists 
(scientists who study fossil plants) today is determining which of the ancient gymnosperms with advanced 
features were in the direct line of evolution to the flowering plants. Most botanists think that flowering 
plants arose only once; that is, that there is only one line of evolution from the gymnosperms to the 
flowering plants. The earfossils of flowering plants are in Cretaceous rocks approximately 130 million 
years old. About 50 million years later, during the late Cretaceous period, fossils of flowering plants 
outnumber those of gymnosperms and ferns, indicating their rapid success once they appeared. The first 
flowering plants were dicots that were probably weedy shrubs rather than trees or herbaceous plants. 
Monocots originated from the dicots, possibly along several lines of descent." (Solomon, E.P., Berg, L.R., 
Martin, D.W. & Villee, C.A., "Biology," [1985], Harcourt Brace: Orlando FL, Third Edition, 1993, p.593)

"Sclerenchyma cells have thick secondary cell walls ... usually impregnated with lignin, which is 
an organic substance that makes the walls tough and hard. Most sclerenchyma cells are nonliving; their 
primary function is to support mature regions of a plant. Two types of sclerenchyma cells are fibers and 
sclereids. Although fibers do occasionally occur in ground tissue, most are found in vascular tissue to be 
discussed next. Fibers are long and slender and may occur in bundles that are sometimes commercially 
important. Hemp fibers can be used to make rope, and flax fibers can be woven into linen. However, flax 
fibers are not dignified and that is why linen is soft. Sclereids, which are shorter than fibers with more varied 
shapes, occur in seed coats and nut shells. They also give pears their characteristic gritty texture." (Mader, 
S.S., "Biology," [1985], Wm. C. Brown Co: Dubuque IA, Third Edition, 1990, p.447. Emphasis original)

"The usefulness of pollen as a forensic tool results from their small size, their resistance to mechanical, 
biological, and chemical degradation allowing them to be preserved on and within a variety of media, 
their abundance in the environment, and in their morphology which allows, within limits, identification 
to specific plant taxa." (Mildenhall, D.C., Wiltshire, P.E.J. & Bryant, V.M., "Forensic palynology: Why 
do it and how it works," Forensic Science International, Vol. 163, No. 3, 22 November 2006, pp.163-
172, p.164)

* Authors with an asterisk against their name are believed not to be evolutionists. However, lack of an asterisk
does not necessarily mean that an author is an evolutionist.


Copyright © 2006-2010, by Stephen E. Jones. All rights reserved. These my quotes may be used for
non-commercial purposes only and may not be used in a book, ebook, CD, DVD, or any other medium
except the Internet, without my written permission. If used on the Internet, a link back to my home page
at would be appreciated.
Created: 23 December, 2006. Updated: 4 April, 2010.