Add to Favorites Tell a Friend about The Old Schoolhouse Printer Friendly Version

Free Science e-Newsletter, March 2006
Home
From the Editor
Zoology 101
From the Ark to Australia
Do you ever wonder if you really have what it takes to homeschool?
TOS Survey
e-Newsletter Archive

Ready to subscribe? Come to our subscription page!



 

From the Editor—Steve Walden
Zoology 101—Jeannie Fulbright
From the Ark to Australia—How Did Animals Get to and From Remote Locations? From Answers in Genesis



Welcome to the March edition of the FREE Science e-Newsletter! This month’s theme is animals. How do you tell the difference between a reptile and an amphibian? Why would a dolphin be considered a mammal and not a fish? Jeannie Fulbright returns this month with “Zoology 101” to help sort it all out.

Answers in Genesis continues our theme by answering the question “How did animals get from the Ark to places such as Australia?” Did Noah perform the largest round-up in history by gathering all the animals for the flood? How did the koala migrate from the mountains of Ararat all the way to Australia when all he eats is eucalyptus leaves?

We live in a world that is abundant with animal species with functions far too specialized and unique to be chalked up to chance and chaos. Yet I read in several news reports about the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) urging churches to endorse evolution from the pulpit. Surprisingly, more than 400 churches across America did so on February 12.

We would not see such a counter-offensive if the theories incorporating the concept of intelligent design weren’t meeting with success. Yet why should this concern homeschooling families? Because we are now in a generation whose parents and children both have been taught evolution without any challenge to its veracity. Rather than being explored as one possibility for the origins of mankind, evolution is presented as the only reasonable explanation. Such a presentation contributes to the increasing secularization of our culture and reduces the Bible from being considered a historical text to being ridiculed as a collection of fables. While homeschooling families may not yet be required in all states to teach evolution at all levels, efforts like those of the AAAS propagating cultural ignorance of the facts supporting creationism and widespread acceptance of evolutionary dogma will make it increasingly difficult for any family to educate their children with the values and beliefs arising from the concept of a personal and benevolent Creator.

By the time a child graduates, he should know the Biblical creation theory as well as contemporary evolutionary theory in order to be well-versed in the concepts. Additionally, he should know the difficulties and limitations that science has in addressing both theories. As we give our children these foundations, they will have more ability to make their own decisions about faith, reason, and origins and to defend their faith from a rational, well-considered point of view.

Steve Walden
Senior Editor, Free Science e-Newsletter


Steve Walden lives in Colorado and, together with his wife, homeschools their three children, ages 9, 6, and 2. He is a freelance writer and editor with articles appearing in Focus On Your Child: Discovery Years and Fatherville. When he’s not blogging at Dad’s Corner on Homeschool Blogger, he’s searching for new opportunities to write about homeschooling, parenting, and connecting with God. His dream is to operate a retreat center in Colorado for pastors and families in ministry.



Affiliate Program
Button

TOS magazine

Subscribe to
The Old Schoolhouse
Magazine TODAY!

 

Download Full 192
page Magazine in
PDF format,
size 26 mgs .



Subscribe NOW!


Advertisers:

Click HERE for Rates & Demographics.




 

SUBSCRIBE TO ONE OF The Old Schoolhouse Magazine's FREE e-NEWSLETTERS

Click on any of the below to receive information about homeschooling, news bits, contests and PRIZES for homeschoolers, articles to encourage you, calls for writers, free unit studies and lesson plans, and just a lot of FUN. Bring the community to your inbox – and no worries, we never sell, trade or give your email or any other information out to anyone. Come join the homeschool party!
– TOS Mag





By Jeannie Fulbright

Okay, quick! Name four animals off the top of your head. Chances are, you just named four animals that all have backbones, animals otherwise known as vertebrates. Do you realize that there are five different classes of vertebrates? Can you guess what they are? I know ... that requires you to clear some cobwebs and search out old—seemingly useless—information from the recesses of your brain, and if you weren’t paying attention during your biology class, the answer might not even be there! So, I’ll just tell you: reptiles, amphibians, mammals, birds, and fish. Those are the five classes of vertebrates. Now go and tell your kids so they’ll think you’re really smart. But wait! Read on first, because there is a good chance they may start asking you questions such as, “How do you tell the difference between reptiles and amphibians?” or “Why is a salamander an amphibian and a lizard a reptile?” or “How come a dolphin is a mammal and not a fish?”

If your science education was lacking, don’t feel bad. I’m here to clear up these mysteries and then give you a fun and very challenging quiz at the end.

Generally (and there are always exceptions), scientists determine an animal’s vertebrate class by simply answering the following key questions:

  1. What is its skin covering?
  2. How does it maintain its body temperature?
  3. How does it breathe?
  4. How does it reproduce young?
  5. What do their limbs look like?

Now let’s quickly explore each of the five vertebrate classes. Then you’ll amaze your children and friends with your science savvy. Oh, and just in case you didn’t get the memo, we don’t use words like “cold-blooded” and “warm-blooded” anymore. The word “cold-blooded” has been changed to the word “ectothermic,” and “warm-blooded” is now “endothermic.”

All right, here we go:

It’s a reptile if:

  1. Its skin has scales, always scales: flat scales, horny scales, thick scales, rough scales, or smooth scales, but no hair or feathers.
  2. It is ectothermic (remember, the new word for “cold-blooded”).
  3. It breathes without gills.
  4. It lays leathery eggs on dry land.
  5. It has claws on its toes (except those that don’t have legs, such as snakes).


Scales, like those on this snake, are common to all reptiles.

Fun Fact: True sea snakes actually never come to land because their belly scales are not equipped to grip the ground. So they protect their leathery eggs in a special pouch until they hatch. They come out of their mother, looking like a live birth, swimming away the moment they emerge. Sea snake venom is the most powerful snake venom in the world. One drop of the beaked sea snake’s venom can kill three grown men. It’s quick-acting too. Can you think of why? Hint: beaked sea snakes prey upon fast, slippery fish.

It’s an amphibian if:

  1. Its skin is moist and either smooth like a frog or rough like a toad. It also breathes through its moist skin. Amphibians never have scales, hair, or feathers.
  2. It is ectothermic.
  3. It goes through a metamorphosis from a gill-breathing larva (tadpole) to an adult that will usually breathe air and live on land. There are exceptions here.
  4. It lays jelly-like eggs in water.
  5. It never has claws on its toes.


Though it looks like it might be a lizard, this salamander has moist skin and clawless toes.

Fun Fact: One species of frog in Australia does not lay eggs in water, but instead swallows them. The eggs travel right down into the frog’s stomach. The specialized jelly surrounding the eggs protects them from being digested. (Now, if evolution were true, don’t you think the entire species would have died out when the mothers began swallowing their eggs?) After hatching in this acidic environment, the tadpoles live off the digesting food their mom eats. One day, when they are fully developed, they hop up her throat and out her mouth. And I thought I was overprotective!

It’s a mammal if:

  1. It has hair! All mammals, even dolphins and whales, have a strand of hair or two on their body. Its skin usually has sebaceous (fat-secreting) glands.
  2. It is endothermic.
  3. It breathes oxygen from the air. Every dolphin and whale must come up for a breath of fresh air.
  4. It usually bears live young, which are always fed with the mother’s mammary (milk-secreting) gland. The mammary glands are the key here.
  5. It has some kind of limbs. Most mammals have four limbs, except whales and seals, which have two front flippers.


This seal pup keeps warm with a thick layer of fur and blubber.

Fun Fact: One fictitious mammal, the unicorn, was thought to have existed when animal skulls boasting five- to nine-feet-long twisted horns were found long ago. That’s why unicorns have always been drawn with a twisted horn. We now know that the skulls with the twisted horns actually belonged to another mammal, the narwhal—a horned whale!

It’s a bird if:

  1. It has feathers. Only birds have feathers, and all birds grow feathers.
  2. It is endothermic, which you probably guessed.
  3. It breathes oxygen found in the air.
  4. It lays eggs on land—its claim to fame.
  5. It’s equipped with wings.


These penguins are flightless birds.

Fun Fact: Here’s one question I get all the time: Are penguins birds? The answer is: Yes, indeed, they are. Penguins have feathers, just like every other bird. But a penguin’s feathers are densely packed, bristle-like feathers that look like fur from a distance. Since only birds have feathers, they’re one of our fine feathered friends.

It’s a fish if:

  • It has detachable scales; however, some fish have smooth skin, like catfish.
  • It is ectothermic.
  • It breathes with gills.
  • It develops eggs: some lay them in the water; others keep them inside their body until they hatch.
  • It has fins. Along with gills, this is the primary feature that makes a fish a fish.


This ray breathes with gills and has fins, making it a fish.

Fun Fact: Sharks and rays are fish that don’t have scales, and their skin is smooth only if you rub it from the head to the tail. However, if you attempt to stroke it from tail to head—ouch! What are those prickles? They’re teeth! Teeth-scales, really. They’re called “dermal denticles,” and they look like tiny, sharp incisors poking up through the skin. Since they all face in one direction, you can feel them only if you run your hand down its body in the opposite direction. It gives new meaning to the phrase, “the skin of my teeth.”

Okay, now for the quiz! Are you ready? It’s called Name That Animal Class. If you think about it, the class should be easy. But see if you can actually name the animal too.

  • I breathe with gills my whole life, lay eggs in the water, and have smooth skin, four legs and a long tail. I’m not a fish. What class of vertebrate am I? Do you know?
  • I am endothermic and can truly fly—not just glide—with two wings. I don’t lay eggs, but instead give birth to living young, which I often carry with me wherever I go, but sometimes I’ll leave it in the nursery. What am I?
  • I’m a legless animal that lays eggs. I’m also ectothermic and have scales. I’m not a snake. What am I?
  • I spend most of my life swimming in the water. I’m the only one in my vertebrate class that has a bill and lays eggs. I don’t have feathers, but I have fur. Do you know what I am?
  • Equipped with a long snout, wings and teeth, my body was covered with scales. Though I was very heavy, I could fly at great heights. Though I was mentioned by Isaiah in the Bible (Isaiah 30:60), I’ve not been seen in recent times. I’m thought to be extinct. What am I?
  • I am an aquatic creature. I’m ectothermic and breathe with gills. Because I’m not such a great swimmer, I move more quickly out of the water than in the water—even though I don’t have any arms or legs. I can be seen resting above the water on rocks and marshy grasses. What am I?

How did you do? Check your answers by scrolling down past the next article.

Jeannie Fulbright homeschools her four children, ages 5 to 12, with her husband in Georgia. She is the author of Apologia's Elementary Science Courses: Exploring Creation with Astronomy, Exploring Creation with Botany, Exploring with Zoology I: The Flying Creatures of the Fifth Day, and Exploring Creation with Zoology II: The Aquatic Creatures of the Fifth Day. For information on these science courses and homeschooling tips, visit www.JeannieFulbright.com. To hear the latest happenings, visit her blog at www.HomeschoolBlogger.com/JeannieFulbright.

 
How Did Animals Get to and From Remote Locations?
By Don Batten (editor), Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati, and Carl Wieland

How did the animals get from remote countries to the ark? After the flood, did kangaroos hop all the way to Australia? What did koalas eat on the way?

Let us begin by reaffirming that God's Word does indeed reveal, in the plainest possible terms, that the whole globe was inundated with a violent, watery cataclysm—Noah's flood. All land-dwelling, air-breathing creatures not on the ark perished and the world was repopulated by those surviving on the ark (see Was The Flood Global?).

How Did the Animals Get to the Ark?
Skeptics paint a picture of Noah going to countries remote from the Middle East to gather animals, such as kangaroos and koalas from Australia and kiwis from New Zealand. However, the Bible states that the animals came to Noah; he did not have to round them up (Genesis 6:20). God apparently caused the animals to come to Noah. The Bible does not state how this was done.

We also do not know what the geography of the world was like before the Flood. If there was only one continent at that time (see later in this article), then questions of getting animals from remote regions to the ark are not relevant.

Animal Distribution after the Flood
There are severe practical limitations on our attempts to understand the hows and whys of something that happened once, was not recorded in detail, and cannot be repeated.

Difficulties in our ability to explain every single situation in detail result from our limited understanding. We cannot go back in a time machine to check what happened, and our mental reconstructions of what the world was like after the Flood will inevitably be deficient. Because of this, the patterns of post-Flood animal migration present some problems and research challenges for the biblical creation model. However, there are clues from various sources that suggest answers to the questions.

Clues From Modern Times
When Krakatoa erupted in 1883, the island remnant remained lifeless for some years, but it was eventually recolonized by a surprising variety of creatures, including not only insects and earthworms, but birds, lizards, snakes, and even a few mammals. One would not have expected some of this surprising array of creatures to have crossed the ocean, but they obviously did. Even though these were mostly smaller than some of the creatures we will discuss here, it illustrates the limits of our imaginings on such things.

Land Bridges
Evolutionists acknowledge that men and animals could once freely cross the Bering Strait, which separates Asia and the Americas.1 Before the idea of continental drift became popular, evolutionists depended entirely upon a lowering of the sea level during an ice age (which locked up water in the ice) to create land bridges, enabling dry-land passage from Europe most of the way to Australia, for example.

The existence of some deep-water stretches along the route to Australia is still consistent with this explanation. Evolutionist geologists themselves believe there have been major tectonic upheavals, accompanied by substantial rising and falling of sea floors, in the time period with which they associate an ice age. For instance, parts of California are believed to have been raised many thousands of feet from what was the sea floor during this ice age period, which they call “Pleistocene” (one of the most recent of the supposed geological periods). Creationist geologists generally regard Pleistocene sediments as post-Flood, the period in which these major migrations took place.

In the same way, other dry land areas, including parts of these land bridges, subsided to become submerged at around the same time.2

There is a widespread, but mistaken, belief that marsupials are found only in Australia, thus supporting the idea that they must have evolved there. However, living marsupials, opossums, are found also in North and South America, and fossil marsupials have been found on every continent. Likewise, monotremes were once thought to be unique to Australia, but the discovery in 1991 of a fossil platypus tooth in South America stunned the scientific community.3 Therefore, since evolutionists believe all organisms came from a common ancestor, migration between Australia and other areas must be conceded as possible by all scientists, whether evolutionist or creationist.

Creationists generally believe there was only one Ice Age after, and as a consequence of, the Flood (see What about the Ice Age?). The lowered sea level at this time made it possible for animals to migrate over land bridges for centuries. Some creationists propose a form of continental break-up after the Flood, in the days of Peleg. This again would mean several centuries for animals to disperse, in this instance without the necessity of land bridges. However, continental break-up in the time of Peleg is not widely accepted in creationist circles (see What about continental drift?).

Did The Kangaroo Hop All The Way To Australia?
How did animals make the long journey from the Ararat region? Even though there have been isolated reports of individual animals making startling journeys of hundreds of miles, such abilities are not even necessary. Early settlers released a very small number of rabbits in Australia. Wild rabbits are now found at the very opposite corner (in fact, every corner) of this vast continent. Does that mean that an individual rabbit had to be capable of crossing the whole of Australia? Of course not. Creation speakers are sometimes asked mockingly, “Did the kangaroo hop all the way to Australia?” We see by the rabbit example that this is a somewhat foolish question.

Populations of animals may have had centuries to migrate, relatively slowly, over many generations. Incidentally, the opposite question (also common), as to whether the two kangaroos hopped all the way from Australia to the ark, is also easily answered. The continents we now have, with their load of Flood-deposited sedimentary rock, are not the same as whatever continent or continents there may have been in the pre-Flood world.

We also lack information as to how animals were distributed before the Flood. Kangaroos (as is true for any other creature) may not have been on any isolated landmass. Genesis 1:9 suggests that there may have been only one landmass.
“Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” For all we know, kangaroos might have been feeding within a stone's throw of Noah while he was building the Ark.

It may be asked, if creatures were migrating to Australia over a long time (which journey would have included such places as Indonesia, presumably) why do we not find their fossils en route in such countries?

Fossilization is a rare event, requiring, as a rule, sudden burial (as in the Flood) to prevent decomposition. Lions lived in Israel until relatively recently. We don't find lion fossils in Israel, yet this doesn't prevent us believing the many historical reports of their presence. The millions of bison that once roamed the United States of America have left virtually no fossils. So why should it be a surprise that small populations, presumably under migration pressure from competitors and/or predators, and thus living in only one area for a few generations at most, should leave no fossils?

Unique Organisms
Another issue is why certain animals (and plants) are uniquely found in only one place. Why is species x found only in Madagascar and species y only in the Seychelles? Many times, questions on this are phrased to indicate that the questioner believes that this means that species y headed only in that one direction and never migrated anywhere else. While that is possible, it is not necessarily the case at all. All that the present situation indicates is that these are now the only places where x or y still survive.

The ancestors of present-day kangaroos may have established daughter populations in different parts of the world, but most of these populations subsequently became extinct. Perhaps those marsupials survived only in Australia because they migrated there ahead of the placental mammals (we are not suggesting anything other than “random” processes in choice of destination) and were subsequently isolated from the placentals and so protected from competition and predation.

Palm Valley in central Australia is host to a unique species of palm, Livingstonia mariae, found nowhere else in the world. Does this necessarily mean that the seeds for this species floated only to this one little spot? Not at all. Current models of post-Flood climate indicate that the world is much drier now than it was in the early post-Flood centuries. Evolutionists themselves agree that in recent times (by evolutionary standards) the Sahara was lush and green and central Australia had a moist, tropical climate. For all we know, the Livingstonia mariae palm may have been widespread over much of Australia, perhaps even in other places that are now dry, such as parts of Africa.

The palm has survived in Palm Valley because there it happens to be protected from the drying that affected the rest of its vast central Australian surroundings. Everywhere else, it died out.

Incidentally, this concept of changing vegetation with changing climate should be kept in mind when considering post-Flood animal migration—especially because of the objections (and caricatures) which may be presented. For instance, how could creatures that today need a rain forest environment trudge across thousands of kilometers of parched desert on the way to where they now live? The answer is that it wasn't desert then!

The Koala and Other Specialized Types
Some problems are more difficult to solve. For instance, there are creatures that require special conditions or a very specialized diet, such as the giant panda of China or Australia's koala. We don't know, of course, that bamboo shoots or blue gum leaves4 were not then flourishing all along their eventual respective migratory paths. In fact, this may have influenced the direction they took.

But, in any case, there is another possibility. A need for unique or special conditions to survive may be a result of specialization, a downhill change in some populations. That is, it may result from a loss in genetic information, from thinning out of the gene pool or by degenerative mutation. A good example is the many modern breeds of dog, selected by man (although natural conditions can do likewise), which are much less hardy in the wild than their “mongrel” ancestors. For example, the St. Bernard carries a mutational defect, an overactive thyroid, which means it needs to live in a cold environment to avoid overheating.

This suggests that the ancestors of such creatures, when they came off the Ark, were not as specialized. Thus they were hardier than their descendants, who carry only a portion of that original gene pool of information.5 In other words, the koala's ancestor may have been able to survive on a much greater range of vegetation. Such an explanation has been made possible only with modern biological insights. Perhaps as knowledge increases some of the remaining difficulties will become less so.

Such changes do not require a long time for animals under migratory pressure. The first small population that formed would tend to break up rapidly into daughter populations, going in different directions, each carrying only a portion of the gene pool of the original pair that came off the ark.

Sometimes all of a population will eventually become extinct; sometimes all but one specialized type. Where all the sub-types survive and proliferate, we find some of the tremendous diversity seen among some groups of creatures which are apparently derived from one created kind. This explains why some very obviously related species are found far apart from each other.

The sloth, a very slow-moving creature, may seem to require much more time than Scripture allows for it to make the journey from Ararat to its present home. Perhaps its present condition is also explicable by a similar evolutionary process. However, to account for today's animal distribution, evolutionists themselves have had to propose that certain primates have traveled across hundreds of miles of open ocean on huge rafts of matted vegetation torn off in storms.6 Indeed, iguanas have recently been documented traveling hundreds of kilometers in this manner between islands in the Caribbean.7

The Bible suggests a pattern of post-Flood dispersal of animals and humans that accounts for fossil distribution of apes and humans, for example. In post-Flood deposits in Africa, ape fossils are found below human fossils. Evolutionists claim that this arose because humans evolved from the apes, but there is another explanation. Animals, including apes, would have begun spreading out over the earth straight after the flood, whereas the Bible indicates that people refused to do this (Genesis 9:1, 11:1-9). Human dispersal did not start until Babel, some hundreds of years after the Flood. Such a delay would have meant that some ape fossils would be found consistently below human fossils, since people would have arrived in Africa after the apes.8

We may never know the exact answer to every one of such questions, but certainly one can see that the problems are far less formidable than they may at first appear.9 Coupled with all the biblical, geological, and anthropological evidence for Noah's Flood, one is justified in regarding the Genesis account of the animals dispersing from a central point as perfectly reasonable.10 Not only that, but the biblical model provides an excellent framework for the scientific study of these questions.

Reprinted with permission from Answers in Genesis. Footnotes link to the Answers in Genesis website.

 

1. Amphibian – Mudpuppy: A fully aquatic salamander, these creatures never lose their gills even when they become adults. They live all over world, but can be found in abundance in the rivers, creeks, and streams all over America.

2. Mammal – Bats: Bats are the only mammal with the ability to truly fly. Flying squirrels and such can glide but don’t have true flight. Many bats in America form colonies of nursing mothers. When the pup gets too big, they leave their baby in a group of nursing bats, called a nursery. Some nurseries might contain millions of pups all hollering for their mother. The mother can easily find her baby even among the millions of pups clinging to the ceiling of the cave.

3. Reptile - Legless lizard: Though it looks almost identical to a snake, the legless lizard doesn’t have the features of a snake. Lizards have external ears and eyelids. Snakes don’t. The legless lizard can also lose its tail and grow a new one.

4. Mammal - Duck-billed platypus: this one stumped the scientists for a long time, but the hair and mammary glands convinced them.

5. Reptile – Pterosaur: These flying reptiles are mentioned not only in the Bible but also by such reliable scholars as Herodotus and Josephus in their historic writings. They were thought to have the ability to glow, like a firefly. Reports coming out of Africa, as recently as 1925, described a creature that looked like a flying lizard and resembled the creatures mentioned by these ancient writers.

6. Fish – Mudskipper: These fish prefer to trot around on their thick fins—underwater they walk along the bottom of the sea. They can even be seen scuttling across mud flats at low tide, looking for food. They move by both walking on their fins and lying on their side, moving their body from side to side in such a way that they skip across the mud flat. This is how they got their name.


 


Paul and Gena Suarez, publishers of The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, just released a brand-new e-book, Secrets of Successful Homeschooling, to show you that “Yes! You CAN homeschool!” Whether you are a new parent thinking ahead to your family’s educational years, a homeschooler in the trenches, or a veteran who has “been there, done that,” this e-book holds something for everyone.

“You will cry, laugh, and feel inspired at the different stories ... I think that this book will springboard a new homeschooler to venture out into the unknown and inspire veteran moms to hang in there and keep going.” —Karen Flores, homeschool mom of two boys

Affordable and instantly downloadable, this e-book would be perfect to help you start out the new year inspired, motivated, and encouraged in your homeschooling journey.

To purchase your copy of Secrets to Successful Homeschooling, visit
www.TheHomeschoolMagazine.com/subscribe/secrets.php

Looking for a way to earn extra money?
Sign up for our affiliate program and you can earn 66% of each sale by telling your friends about our e-book.

Sign up here:
www.TheHomeschoolMagazine.com/subscribe/affiliate.php


 
TOS is conducting a small survey to learn more about its magazine and website readers. On May 1, 2006 each respondent will be entered in a drawing for a free $100 shopping spree at Treasure Box Press. Only one entry per person. Winner will be notified by email. Privacy policy: TOS will never sell, rent or give away your information. Please enter your answers to the following questions:

Name
E-mail
How many students ages 5-18 are you homeschooling?
For the homeschooling mom in your family, what is your highest level of education?
What is your favorite subject to teach?
Do you plan to homeschool all the way through high school?

How did you hear about TOS Magazine and/or the TOS Website?

Do you blog? Yes NO
When you buy homeschool products, how do you purchase them (online, mail order, walk into store)?
Why do you homeschool?
Why did you start homeschooling?


 

Disclaimer and Warning: Activities, projects and experiments presented or contained in this newsletter (“Activities”) are intended for educational and entertainment purposes only. Some Activities may involve health risks or other hazards, including a risk of serious injury. Responsible adults should investigate and evaluate all potential health risks and other hazards prior to engaging in Activities alone or with minor children. Please exercise caution and take appropriate safety measures to avoid or lessen the risk of injury to people or property. Activities are not appropriate for children and teens of all ages. Children and teenagers should attempt Activities only under direct, appropriate parental supervision. The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, LLC accepts no responsibility or liability, express or implied, for injury, loss or damage of any kind resulting from the use or misuse of Activities or other information contained in this newsletter.

 

Thank you for reading the TOS Free Science e-Newsletter this month. We’ll have more exciting science articles for you next month, including whether kangaroos hopped all the way from Noah’s ark to Australia.

You may forward this e-Newsletter to your friends in its entirety. If you have any comments, email me at FreeScience@TheHomeschoolMagazine.com with your feedback. Don’t forget to look for the Winter issue of The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, now in stores and mailboxes! Right now, 19 free gifts to the first 3,000 new subscribers!

Subscribe to this or other free TOS e-Newsletters.
Subscribe to The Old Schoolhouse Magazine.
Advertise in this newsletter: email Sales@TheHomeschoolMagazine.com.

Copyright © 2006 The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, LLC
PO Box 1701, Dandridge, TN 37725
All rights reserved.
Publisher@TheHomeschoolMagazine.com