The Taylor Trail:
"Fabricated Rumor?"
|
|
The Taylor Trail: |
Kuban has grossly distorted what he calls a "fabricated rumor." I asked the polygraph examiner to include questions about these slanderous charges. He said that it was understood that the general question, "Have you misrepresented Paluxy evidence?" would include any and all situations related to the Paluxy.
The following is the text presently used on our web site that relates the bare facts.
https://www.bible.ca/tracks/taylor-trail.htm
(note: text in blue italics is presently on the website)
This is one of three tracks featured at the 1989 Dayton, TN creation conference that was destroyed the next day.
On August 12, 1989 Dr. Don Patton spoke at a creation conference in Dayton, TN. He presented compelling evidence that both human and dinosaur tracks were present at the Taylor Trail, including the above pictures. Two well known evolutionists were present and at least one was conspicuously disturbed by this presentation. Both flew to Dallas the next morning and went immediately to the Paluxy River. It is reliably reported that they were in the river that afternoon with an "iron bar." Three days before they were in the river the footprint was observed looking like the picture above. Three days after they were in the river, it was observed looking like the picture left. (Clear photography was not possible till the water went down several months later, when this photograph was taken.)
|
 -3B before Glen Kuban was seen in the river with a steel bar. |
|
|
(Click on photo for high resolution) |
|
Kuban is correct when he says the original text was different and did mention him. The following is the text that was originally used on our website.
Saturday, August 1st, 1992 [actually 1989] Don Patton spoke at a creation conference in Dayton, Tennessee. He presented evidence that all the data relating to the Taylor Trail was best explained by both human and dinosaur tracks. He featured -3B. Glen Kuban was conspicuously disturbed by this presentation. Kuban has acknowledged flying to Dallas, Texas and being in the Paluxy River the next day. He was seen in the river with an "iron bar." Three days before he was in the river this beautiful fossil footprint looked like the picture on the left. Three days after he was in the river, it looked like the picture on the right. Of course the track is so well scientifically documented, that whoever did this, accomplished nothing.
Kuban was very unhappy about the relation of these facts and retaliated with a scurrilous attack. I answered his charges with a letter that I have since used when sincere people ask about his charges. (Minor alterations have been made over the years, mostly additions; naming the witnesses.)
Letter to Glen Kuban
Feb. 20 1998
I am amazed at your expression of "conscientious concern" about what you falsely call an unfounded rumor. Your web site has plainly stated outright falsehoods for years. I have been concerned about your propagation of these falsehoods and have made efforts to correct them since 1989. I have seen little or no conscientious concern on your part about misrepresentation. Recall that Jesus had a great deal to say about those who practice what they condemn in others. He called them hypocrites.
With the exception of the date of the conference, the statement on the web to which you object simply states facts. It was 9 years ago instead of 6. It is hard to imagine how even you could ascribe evil motives to the difference, but I have seen you do so with less reason, so we'll see. The statement begins...
Saturday, August 1st, 1992 [actually 1989] Don Patton spoke at a creation conference in Dayton, Tennessee. He presented evidence that all the data relating to the Taylor Trail was best explained by both human and dinosaur tracks. He featured -3B.
Perhaps you object to the next statement.
Glen Kuban was conspicuously disturbed by this presentation.
I personally observed this reaction, as did a number of others. Bob Helfinstein testifies that you kept him up into the wee hours of the night with "irrational raving."
Since you are in print on the next point, you are hardly in a position to object.
Kuban has acknowledged flying to Dallas, Texas and being in the Paluxy River the next day.
I can understand that the following statement would and should cause concern.
He was seen in the river with an "iron bar."
Dorthy McFall was distressed when she saw you and Scott Faust in the river with an iron bar on Sunday afternoon. She called Dr. Baugh and told him what she saw and expressed her concern. Consequently, Dr. Baugh called on Monday and asked me if I could come down and go with him to see if we could tell if damage had been done to the tracks. I was not able to arrange my schedule to make the trip until Wednesday. The reason I returned to the river on Wednesday was the telephone call Dr. Baugh received on Sunday. What we saw confirmed Dorthy's fears. At least three tracks had been bashed.
I personally heard Dorthy McFall say she saw you and Scott Foust in the river with what looked like an iron bar. Her husband, Jacob McFall was not happy she was getting involved (their son is a local politician) but I got the clear impression that he saw the same thing she saw. Later he said to me personally that he thought it was a real shame that Kuban had destroyed the tracks.
Our examination of the tracks verified the implications of their testimony. -3B had been severely damaged as had +1 and the Ryals Track. They were fine one week earlier. Now, freshly broken rock was obvious. These three tracks had been the main focus of my presentation in Dayton and were the only ones bashed. The river was at least three feet deep and muddy. Under those conditions, I would estimate that only four or five people in the world could have found those three specific tracks. I knew you and Scott had been in the river three days earlier. Now let's be honest. It is not diabolically evil to think you might be involved. It would require a complete mental block to avoid such thoughts.
The last statement is absolutely true. I personally saw it. I know it is true.
Three days before he was in the river this beautiful fossil footprint looked like the picture on the left. Three days after he was in the river, it looked like the picture on the right.
Obviously, this picture of the bashed track was not taken when the water was over three feet deep. We did get fair pictures of undamaged tracks one week earlier but it required a team of inventive engineers, many sandbags, and a great deal of work. A week later we did take pictures of the damaged tracks through the bottom of an aquarium which was pressed against the tracks. This allows reasonable examination but not great photography. The freshly broken rock was clearly seen at all three tracks and pictures were taken that showed the fresh breaks. This was nine years ago. I may or may not be able to locate the pictures. No doubt, you will see obvious evil motives in this situation.
The picture of the bashed track on the web was taken later when the river was low enough for sandbags to be effective. It looked virtually the same the last time I saw it, just a few months ago. I am confident that any objective person who examined the track today would have no trouble seeing obvious evidence of bashing.
I can well understand that your seat is getting hot as a result of the relation of these facts. I understand that you don't like it but that doesn't change the facts. I do not know that you or Scott did it. If Scott actually did the dirty work while you stood by, you would remain blameworthy. I don't know who did the deed but I have stated what can be established. It appears that you believe these established facts point to you. If so, that's your conclusion. I have stated no conclusion nor do I need to.
Don R. Patton
Final comment:
April 2007
I have described what Glen needs to do to clear himself from the implications of the facts I have detailed. If he gets a positive result from a qualified examiner (as defined earlier) when asked the questions I specified, then I will consider him cleared of suspicion, reimburse him double for his test and publish the results.
I doubt that Glen Kuban would never be this ethical or fair. If he were, regarding his slanderous indications that I damaged Paluxy tracks and intentionally misrepresented the evidence, he would now owe me $1000 dollars and would publish a retraction of his slanderous misrepresentations.
Don't hold you breath.
Don R. Patton
