Jobe Martin, a native of Bloomsburg, PA, was a biology major at Bucknell University and a 1966 graduate of the University of Pittsburgh Dental School. After spending two years in the Air Force, he established a private dental practice at NASA in Houston. Jobe and his wife, Jenna Dee, moved to Dallas in 1971 when he assumed a teaching post at the Baylor College of Dentistry. In 1982, he made the decision to enroll at Dallas Theological Seminary. He graduated in 1986 with a Masters of Theology in Systematic Theology. Dr. Martin also has an Associates Degree in Business from Eastfield Community College in Dallas.
In other words, Dr. Jobe Martin was conspicuously unqualified to evaluate the evidence for evolution. He hasn't studied evolution, perhaps apart from a class or two in his days as a pre med.
But, he could very well have spent the last twenty years as a serious student of evolution. So did he?
Dr. Jobe Martin has spent the last twenty years studying the topic of Biblical Creation vs. Evolution, and lectures frequently on the subject. He began his scientific career as a dentist, and a believer in Darwinian evolution, as he had been taught in numerous courses in high school, undergraduate school, and dental school. Some of his Christian students at the Baylor College of Dentistry challenged him to prove to them that evolution was a correct, complete and accurate explanation for the origin of the earth and all of its abundance of unique life forms.
Hmmm... Numerous courses in high school and dental school? I know how little evolution is taught nowadays in high school, and how little students care. Could be that high schools were totally focused on evolution in the 1950's. It could be that he loved evolution as a pre med and took lots of courses on evolution, and related subjects. Could it also be that he took numerous evolution classes in dental school? Sounds doubtful. I'd pay good money too see his transcripts.
But studying biblical creation vs. evolution does emphatically not qualify you as an expert, I am sorry to say. It does not mean that he submerged in evolutionary theory, learning all he could, and then years afterward did his best to honestly assess the evidence pro and con. Rather, as a committed creationist, it sounds like he set out from the beginning looking to misrepresent evidence as though it does not support evolution. He certainly wouldn't be the first.