Creation vs Evolution debate 12 April 2013 Tenterfield NSW “Natural process is all you need to explain life. You don’t need a Creator!” Ian Bryce BSc (Physics) BE (Hons) VP, Secular Party of Australia Chief Investigator, Australian Skeptics
Contents Part A. Science Part B. Morality This is a longer version, which includes the slides presented in the debate.
Part A. The “science” of creationism
Creationist record in science? #1. Past errors:
Creationist record in science? #1. Past errors: • Speed of light – Setterfield • Paluxy footprints • Canyons carved in one day – Mt St Helens – Sarfati • Dinosaurs grow in a few months - Sarfati
Creation “Science” Foundation in 1983 presented papers showing the speed of light was slowing down. I showed Setterfield had selected his data from the record – making his conclusions false.
Dinosaur footprints overlaid with human footprints – Paluxy River in Texas. Creation “Science” Foundation (under John Mackay) were selling casts of such footprints for $100 in 1983. They have now retracted that claim!
In fact NONE of past their claims have been verified using scientific methods. Thus the Skeptics campaigned to make them drop the word “science” in Creation Science Foundation In 1997 they changed their name – more later.
Creationist record in science? #2. Age of the earth
Dating and the age of the earth There are many methods of measuring the age of very old material such as minerals and fossils. A. On the earth • Radiocarbon • K-Ar etc • Many more radioactive methods • Fission track • Tree rings • Ocean floor magneetism • Zircon crystals – dated by U-Pb, fission track, more. • Thermoluminescence
Dating and the age of the earth B. Off the earth Solar system formation Moon rocks Meteorites on earth Meteorites from Mars Modelling of every process
Dating and the age of the earth As in all science, there is a process of research and development. The circumstances in which a given method is accurate, need to be established. Thus provisional results may differ from other figures.
Dating and the age of the earth In fact, all established methods of dating agree. The current estimate of the age of the earth is 4.54 +/-0.05 billion years. This means there is 95% confidence that the true age is between 4. 39 and 4.59 billion. That’s 1% accuracy.
Dating and the age of the Universe Now for the universe. Creationisis hold that the universe and the earth were formed simultaneously about 6000 years ago. This they base on deriving a timeline all the way from Adam, through his descendants, to the present, as reported in the Old Testament. However when cross-checked with all science and the historical record, it is completely unreliable.
Dating and the age of the Universe JM has told us he has heard secientists report the age of the universe asjumping between 15, 10 and 13 billion years, to show how unreliable this dating is! Accuracy and reliability are very important in science. Scientists spend several years refining their understanding of statistics.
Dating and the age of the earth That is why things like ages always have a tolerance band. The figures quoted may well have been: 15 +/- 5 10 +/- 4 13 +/- 1 The current estimate is 13.80 ± 0.04 billion years. This process of estimating uncertainty, maximizes confidence in scientific statements – not something the Creationists understand.
These results can be shown in a chart. Note the logarithmic scale – each division represents a factor of 10. Left = 1 year. 1.E+03 = 1 x 10 3 = 1000 years. 1.E+09 = 1 x 10 9 = 1 billion years. The uncertainty for the creationist figures is never given, because they have no way of cross-checking. The uncertainty for the scientific results are actually the width of the lines, which is 1% or less.
Summary on Dating So we have seen zero real evidence from the creationists supporting a young earth or special creation. And a coherent body of scientific knowledge supporting evolution. It is easy to point to millions of lines of evidence supporting science. When the score is a billion to zero, should you consider changing sides?
On Cosmology JM reports (The Reason Why No. 3) that God created the “waters” with three gaps between them. One space includes the surface of the earth and all life. Another space includes the sun and moon. The third space is where God lives. How could a young person go on to study agriculture or weather when indoctrinated with such nonsense?
Garden of Eden? The creationist story is so laughable, it is treated as a joke by serious thinkers.
Garden of Eden? JM has his own theories, as expounded in his radio show the Reason Why: Q: Did Poo did stink in the Garden of Eden? A: No, because everything was perfect, and the bad bugs were not invented until the Fall! Q: How long were Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden? A: We know it was no more than a month, because they would have mated straight away, and the bible has Eve not getting pregnant until they left. Q: Why did Adam have nipples? A: Because God equipped Adam with all physical features Eve (being made in his image) would need later. [John has apparently not heard of the vagina. He needs get out more!]
Noah’s Flood? Q: Where did all that water come from? JM (The Reason Why) explains that the bible says the water came from “the fountains of the deep” (Genesis 8)– ie underground. This would require a layer of water kilometers deep. With rocks floating on top of it! There goes all physics. Students can forget a career in science once they swallow this!
Noah’s Flood? Since there is no real evidence for it, scientists find it a great source of jokes!
Ant
Fish
Cross breeding on ark
Creationist record in science? #2. Current claims
Today’s debate topic is Life. Creationism’s main theme is Special Creation of species. They all say evolution is wrong, and new “kinds” are not being created now.
JM has claimed that the changes we observe are only “devolution”, corruption or loss of characteristics already present in God’s specially created “kinds”. We will focus on that.
Evolution is slow. Yet we can see it in action!
Fruit fly – mutation induced by: chemicals, heat, radiation This one has extra legs growing out of its head. Not a likely survivor…
…but this mutation could be more profitable! Two extra wings – in the passage of time, this mutation could lead to a superior flying ability, like dragonflies. Note this is an added characteristic, not a “mere degradation” or “devolution” as JM claims
Lets look at Dog evolution – something I am familiar with as a breeder. We will compare the claims of creationists with the findings of science.
Creationists claim that genetic change is only “devolution” or loss of information:
DOG COLOR Note the colors of our dogs (looking for the ball). Black, blue, white, red. NOT merely selecting existing characteristics of their ancestors (wolves)
Fossils, extant characteristics and genetic data - all give a coherent picture of how the current animals evolved. Note dogs branching from wolves about 15,000 years ago.
Sources of data about evolutionary paths: A: Observation of extant (current) animals – eg Darwin B: Fossils – give snapshots of the shape and function of creatures, and many fossils can be dated. C: Phylogenetics – by measuring DNA, the “genetic distance” between current species can be measured. Can use: mitochondrial DNA, count by genes, count by base pairs.
Darwin’s first evolutionary tree! Based on observation of extant animals.
Note: 1. No dates – this does not include fossil data. 2. The tiny branch “animals” at top right. 3. This tree is “rooted” contains an estimated first life.
This is an “ unrooted ” phylogenetic tree. It is based entirely on the measured genetic distance between 13 extant species. No “first life” has been estimated. Note human and chimp almost indistinguishable!
Where the creationists think the tree came from – Magic!
This diagram shows Primate relations estimated from extant (currently alive) species…
…and this one shows fossil data. Note how different sources agree!
These two sources can be reliably combined into one tree with dates. Note human’s short history!
Archaeopteryx Fossils showing characteristics of reptile and bird
Archaeopteryx continuity: Top = char. of current birds Bottom = char. of current reptiles
Collarbone – shared by dinosaurs, birds and humans
Canetoads – new ecological niche in Kakadu. In decades we see longer legs evolving. o) Radom variation in leg length a) Longer distance moved in 3 days b) Earlier arrival in Kakadu c) The surviving fittest
Pelvis but no legs?? Did God make a mistake? A python has a vestigial pelvis, indicating its ancestors once had legs
Peppered Moth. The numbers of light and dark ones change as their environment gest darker - for better camoflage
Recommend
More recommend
