Remember that creationist book that was being sold by the National Park Service, the one titled Grand Canyon: a Different View? There are now some excerpts online. It's ghastly.

Fossils tell a story, but the story we “read” depends on the “glasses” we are wearing when we do the examination. If we wear our evolutionary glasses, we will get one story. But if we have on our biblical glasses, which allow us to see biblical truth, we will get a very different story. So what kind of story do fossils tell and why is it significant? The first and most significant issue is that fossils represent death! With our biblical glasses on, death comes into the world as the result of man’s sin against God. If fossils are in layers millions of years old, then how do we account for all the death, disease, and destruction found in the fossil record if those fossils were formed before the Fall? Genesis 3:18 says that thorns and thistles were a direct consequence of sin. How do we account for the fossils of thorns found deep within the geologic record if they are a result of man’s sin? If God declared the world very good, which He did at the end of the creation week, could that have included such things as cancer and arthritis, which we also find in the fossil record? As Dr. Duane Gish’s book title says, Evolution: The Fossils STILL Say No!

That's remarkably incoherent, but it seems to be arguing that 1) fossils are dead, 2) Genesis describes how death came into the world, 3) therefore the Bible is true.

I haven't quite puzzled out the logic of the last bit. 1) The fossil record includes evidence of thorns, cancer, and arthritis. 2) Would God have put such things in a good world? 3) Duane Gish says the fossils say "No!". It kinda leave the question of accounting for the fossils hanging, don't you think? Are they arguing that the fossil evidences doesn't exist, or less likely, that the Bible account must therefore be false? 'Cause that's how I interpret it.

(via Bookslut)