Saturday, November 19, 2005
The Age of the Earth, by Dr. Kent Hovind - A Rebuttal
Dr. Hovind has a doctorate in education. He taught high school science classes for 15 years. Dr. Hovind believes the Bible describes the literal truth of creation and the early history of the earth and cosmos.
This is a response to the main points of the first seminar video tape in a series.
Regarding the Bible as the word of God: How do we know the Bible is the word of God, because the Bible says so? This is a circular syllogism. One immediately finds there is no merit to this argument simple by evaluating basic principles of logic. The notion that because Jesus quoted Genesis, therefore either Genesis is right or Jesus is a liar falls under the same category. One possible explanation is that Jesus did not have any other authority to which to refer nor a scientific method of inquiry to test his conclusions. It does not make Genesis right nor does is make Jesus a liar. If someone in the year 1000 B.C. asserted the world was flat, one could not conclude that person was a liar since his statement would be sincere, but one would be wrong to conclude that his sincerity made his statement true. Sincerity is not proof of anything.
Regarding the six-day creation scenario: Quote, “A God that would use evolution to create is cruel, wasteful and retarded." Doesn’t he know what he wants? Can’t he make it right in six days or six seconds for that matter?” Your own words skewer your argument; why would God need any span of time at all! Genesis 2:2-3“And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.” Why would God need to rest? Does it not strike one as anthropocentric?
Regarding conception of Cain, Abel and Seth: If Adam bred with an individual (Eve) who shared his entire genetic code, and therefore had offspring sharing that same code (recombination being impossible under those circumstances), then how does one account for not only surmounting the problems of in-breeding, but also the fact that we all do not look alike? Moreover, if we do not look alike because of genetic drift, mutation or whatever mode of differentiation you may choose, then is that not an argument for, and not against evolution?
Regarding the longevity of the early players in the Bible: The human cell has limitations concerning cell division and metabolism that would inhibit such ages. This is reasonably well understood by microbiologists. Accepting the notion of the “fall” as the basis for disease would lead one logically to conclude the same biological limitations that are present now were present then. The congenital diseases present in the human population now were present then. Alternately, are there different degrees of “downfall”? If so, should there not then be different degrees of salvation?
Regarding mocking those Christians who do not believe as Dr. Hovind: Intolerance of, and the insinuation other Christian denominations are not “true” Christians because they do not believe the Bible literally, not only reveals hubris, but is also hauntingly similar to Osama bin Laden’s condemnation of his co-religionists. Christian fundamentalism has more in common with Islamic fundamentalism, than fundamentalist Christians may care to acknowledge, but the parallels are clear.
Regarding the assertion that continual erosion would have flatten the continents by now if indeed the earth were 4 billion years old, as opposed to the 6000 years claimed by the literal reading of the Bible: Plate tectonics, volcanic and seismic activity, are constantly folding and thrusting the earth upward in some zones while it subducts in others. Californians know this intimately; the San Gabriel Mountains did thrust upward approximately 5 feet during their last major earthquake in 1994.
Regarding the rapid formation of stalagmites and stalactites: Dr. Hovind infers stalagmite and stalactite formation is more rapid than claimed by geologist. He cites documented examples of rapid stalagmite and stalactite formation as evidence that all stalagmites and stalactites with equal rapidity. Not only is this argument flawed on logical grounds (Fallacy of Class, i.e. what is true for one member of a class must also be true of every other member of that class), but he neglects to address the fact that mineral type, concentration, evaporation rates, water volume and temperature all affect formation rates.
Regarding Pangaea: In denying the Pangaea hypothesis, Dr. Hovind is also denying plate tectonics and the spreading of the sea floor, which are well understood and established facts.
Regarding desert growth rate, erosion rates, oil deposits and ice core sedimentation: You make the assumption each one of these phenomenon occur at a constant rates is an unwarranted assumption. Indeed, the evidence is they occur at significantly different rates, in different places and time.
Regarding the ocean salinity now and in the time of Noah: Dr. Hovind asserts the water covering the earth at the time of Noah’s flood was fresh water or at least considerably less saline than today’s oceans. If all the fish species that exist and have ever existed were in fact created on the sixth day of the Genesis story, then how are we to explain why freshwater fish today cannot survive in the ocean and ocean fish cannot survive in freshwater. How did fish that according to Dr. Hovind lived in freshwater, come to only be able to survive in salt water?
Regarding estimates of human population based on man appearing 3 million years ago: Dr. Hovind claims that if the earth were indeed 4 billion years old and man appeared 3 million years ago, then the population of the earth would be much greater than it is today. The Great Flood, Dr. Hovind alleges, can explain the “missing” population. One should always endeavor to know the claims one is attempting to refute before constructing a rebuttal. No scientist has ever claimed modern man appeared on the scene 3 million years ago. What we had 3 million years ago is a primate ancestor who evolved into several lineages, one lineage Cro-Magnon (modern humans), appearing approximately 40,000 years ago.
Regarding the “special creation” status of humans: If we are specially created, why do we share so much of our DNA with every living thing on Earth and particularly, why do we share so much with other primates? (The DNA sequencing has been done by Celera Genomics. Inc.)
Regarding the moon’s orbital recession: Dr. Hovind points out the moon is getting further away from the earth at the rate of approximately 1 inch per year, a claim indeed verified by the international scientific community. He then claims if the earth were 6000 years old the earth must have then been 6000 inches (500 feet) closer to the earth, but that if the earth were 4 billion years old it must have been 4 billion inches (54,859 miles) closer to the earth at one time, and thus subjecting the earth to unprecedented tidal forces making the development of life impossible. Dr. Hovind assumes the rate of recession has been constant, when it is well known such classical Newtonian motion occurs according to logarithmic progression. In addition, it is in fact, impossible to determine where the moon’s orbit was when it started to recede.
Regarding earth’s rotation speed: This is the same error of logic as with the argument above. Asserting that because the earth is slowing down now at a particular rate, it must have been always slowing down at this rate is an ungrounded assumption. To conclude the earth was rotating 6000 or 4 billion times faster respectively, is unfounded. The fact is, there is no way of knowing the initial rotation speed of the earth formed.
Regarding the order of creation of the sexes: Notwithstanding the sexist crack Dr. Hovind makes that God created man first because otherwise Eve would have been nagging God as to how to create Adam, why does God create Adam first? Might it not be more logically explained by the fact that the Bible is written by a male dominated, nomadic warrior people, who therefore would have a vested interest in male superiority?
Regarding Thermodynamics: Dr. Hovind asserts entropy, the fact all matter tends to disorganize and decay, would inhibit complexity from arising on its own with out divine intervention, again unfounded. Refer to the Game of Life (simulation software) by John Conway and other scientist studying this phenomenon. It is well established that complexity can and does arise from a simpler state without violating entropy.
Regarding chemistry:
a) The creation of urea in the laboratory does indicate a “primal soup” is in fact a possibility.
b) Proton decay is a reliable measure of elapsed time. The most reliable clock's function on this principle.
c) Carbon-14 dating is calibrated to account for the absorption of atmospheric carbon.
Regarding Astronomy and cosmology:
a) Without a ‘Big Bang” the universe would be exactly as God created is, yet it is not in a in a steady state. Everything is moving away from us (or us away from everything else), at tremendous speeds.
b) When the sun stands still for Joshua, we know that if it happened at all it was the earth that stopped rotating and moving through space. The consequences for the earth and every living thing on it would be catastrophic.
Regarding over-population: Dr. Hovind claims the earth is far from overpopulated. To illustrate he asserts Jacksonville, Florida is 25 billion square feet and therefore more than three times the present world population could fit into this space alone! However, this does not equate into the earth sustaining 1,603,176,817,464,745 people, because the earth happens to have approximately 1,603,176,817,464,745 square feet of land surface! The fact is the land area human beings need to sustain themselves has been estimated at between 10 to 20 acres each on the extreme low end. For arguments sake, one can divide the low end by half and say humans only need 5 acres per person to sustain life. By this extremely conservative estimation, the earth could only sustain a billion more people than it does today. Of course, Dr. Hovind conveniently ignores environmental degradation in the Jacksonville example. He also ignores the increasing per capita impact of human activity, i.e. 100 people today have a greater impact on the environment than 100 people 500 years ago.
There is a saying in software engineering, “Garbage in , garbage out”, meaning one cannot expect to arrive at reliable knowledge if one starts with bad data and faulty premises. Perhaps a doctorate in education and years of teaching high school, have not prepared Dr. Hovind for the rigors of peer-reviewed journals in biology, chemistry, physics and all the other disciplines in which he claims expertise. This may explain why he has not submitted even one scientific paper purporting his views, to any peer-reviewed journal, but instead lectures individuals lacking the expertise to analyze his assertions. When one sees so many flagrant abuses and distortions of scientific methods, one can only conclude it is purposeful. A person with intellectual integrity would point out even data that does not support their position. What Dr. Hovind engages in is no different that a District Attorney withholding exculpatory evidence in order to get a conviction. And by the way, a Theory is not a hunch. Equating a scientific theory with a hunch, with a guess, is the kind misdirection he must rely on to bolster his position. Ironically, the public K-12 educational system Christian fundamentalists berate, through incompetence and government neglect, has produced a ready audience for these absurd statements to go unchallenged. The fundamental error every emotionally invested religious person makes, is mistaking sincerity for evidence. Copernicus won his day in court because he brought data and rigor - the church had neither.
“American Pastoral Protestantism” has always been ill at ease with science, ever since its first experience of science in the form of early 19th century industrialization. It is not by accident that Evangelical Christianity (EC) evolves into a uniquely American expression of an imagined idyllic Christian past, when in fact we know early Christianity almost immediately splinter, even shattered, into myriad interpretations as soon as it became a universalist gentile religion. Historically, EC has been joined at the hip with that other uniquely American phenomena, Mormonism in that they are both agrarian reactions to the social dislocations caused by early industrialization, of which present globalization is an extension. As for an idyllic past, it certainly was not idyllic if one were born Native American, African, Polish, Jewish, Irish, Spanish, Italian... need I gone on? It was, in fact, only idyllic if one happened to be born White Anglo-Saxon and Protestant.
Religion has not been assaulted by Godless atheism; it has been assaulted by freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of inquiry. European culture left the hope of a theocratic state in the ash heap of history precisely due to these freedoms that every American, indeed, every human being should cherish. It is exactly what threatens fundamentalists of every ilk, be they Christian, Muslims, Hindus, etc. We look around the would today and we see people entrenching themselves in outdated ideas, sticking their heads in the sand or worse, attempting to put those who disagree with them under the sand, hoping modernity and knowledge goes away, and no further inquiry is made. Why would one inquire further if all truth were contained in the Bible, Qu’ran, Torah. When we saw the Taliban blow up the statues of Buddha a few years ago, one could not help but wonder what Bible-literalists would be blowing if they had the chance; abortion clinics for one. The intolerance and hubris of monotheism knows no bounds.universalist gentile religion. Historically, EC has been joined at the hip with that other uniquely American phenomena, Mormonism in that they are both agrarian reactions to the social dislocations caused by early industrialization, of which present globalization is an extension. As for an idyllic past, it certainly was not idyllic if one were born Native American, African, Polish, Jewish, Irish, Spanish, Italian... need I gone on? It was, in fact, only idyllic if one happened to be born White Anglo-Saxon and Protestant.
Religion has not been assaulted by Godless atheism; it has been assaulted by freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of inquiry. European culture left the hope of a theocratic state in the ash heap of history precisely due to these freedoms that every American, indeed, every human being should cherish. It is exactly what threatens fundamentalists of every ilk, be they Christian, Muslims, Hindus, etc. We look around the would today and we see people entrenching themselves in outdated ideas, sticking their heads in the sand or worse, attempting to put those who disagree with them under the sand, hoping modernity and knowledge goes away, and no further inquiry is made. Why would one inquire further if all truth were contained in the Bible, Qu’ran, Torah. When we saw the Taliban blow up the statues of Buddha a few years ago, one could not help but wonder what Bible-literalists would be blowing if they had the chance; abortion clinics for one. The intolerance and hubris of monotheism knows no bounds.
This is a response to the main points of the first seminar video tape in a series.
Regarding the Bible as the word of God: How do we know the Bible is the word of God, because the Bible says so? This is a circular syllogism. One immediately finds there is no merit to this argument simple by evaluating basic principles of logic. The notion that because Jesus quoted Genesis, therefore either Genesis is right or Jesus is a liar falls under the same category. One possible explanation is that Jesus did not have any other authority to which to refer nor a scientific method of inquiry to test his conclusions. It does not make Genesis right nor does is make Jesus a liar. If someone in the year 1000 B.C. asserted the world was flat, one could not conclude that person was a liar since his statement would be sincere, but one would be wrong to conclude that his sincerity made his statement true. Sincerity is not proof of anything.
Regarding the six-day creation scenario: Quote, “A God that would use evolution to create is cruel, wasteful and retarded." Doesn’t he know what he wants? Can’t he make it right in six days or six seconds for that matter?” Your own words skewer your argument; why would God need any span of time at all! Genesis 2:2-3“And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.” Why would God need to rest? Does it not strike one as anthropocentric?
Regarding conception of Cain, Abel and Seth: If Adam bred with an individual (Eve) who shared his entire genetic code, and therefore had offspring sharing that same code (recombination being impossible under those circumstances), then how does one account for not only surmounting the problems of in-breeding, but also the fact that we all do not look alike? Moreover, if we do not look alike because of genetic drift, mutation or whatever mode of differentiation you may choose, then is that not an argument for, and not against evolution?
Regarding the longevity of the early players in the Bible: The human cell has limitations concerning cell division and metabolism that would inhibit such ages. This is reasonably well understood by microbiologists. Accepting the notion of the “fall” as the basis for disease would lead one logically to conclude the same biological limitations that are present now were present then. The congenital diseases present in the human population now were present then. Alternately, are there different degrees of “downfall”? If so, should there not then be different degrees of salvation?
Regarding mocking those Christians who do not believe as Dr. Hovind: Intolerance of, and the insinuation other Christian denominations are not “true” Christians because they do not believe the Bible literally, not only reveals hubris, but is also hauntingly similar to Osama bin Laden’s condemnation of his co-religionists. Christian fundamentalism has more in common with Islamic fundamentalism, than fundamentalist Christians may care to acknowledge, but the parallels are clear.
Regarding the assertion that continual erosion would have flatten the continents by now if indeed the earth were 4 billion years old, as opposed to the 6000 years claimed by the literal reading of the Bible: Plate tectonics, volcanic and seismic activity, are constantly folding and thrusting the earth upward in some zones while it subducts in others. Californians know this intimately; the San Gabriel Mountains did thrust upward approximately 5 feet during their last major earthquake in 1994.
Regarding the rapid formation of stalagmites and stalactites: Dr. Hovind infers stalagmite and stalactite formation is more rapid than claimed by geologist. He cites documented examples of rapid stalagmite and stalactite formation as evidence that all stalagmites and stalactites with equal rapidity. Not only is this argument flawed on logical grounds (Fallacy of Class, i.e. what is true for one member of a class must also be true of every other member of that class), but he neglects to address the fact that mineral type, concentration, evaporation rates, water volume and temperature all affect formation rates.
Regarding Pangaea: In denying the Pangaea hypothesis, Dr. Hovind is also denying plate tectonics and the spreading of the sea floor, which are well understood and established facts.
Regarding desert growth rate, erosion rates, oil deposits and ice core sedimentation: You make the assumption each one of these phenomenon occur at a constant rates is an unwarranted assumption. Indeed, the evidence is they occur at significantly different rates, in different places and time.
Regarding the ocean salinity now and in the time of Noah: Dr. Hovind asserts the water covering the earth at the time of Noah’s flood was fresh water or at least considerably less saline than today’s oceans. If all the fish species that exist and have ever existed were in fact created on the sixth day of the Genesis story, then how are we to explain why freshwater fish today cannot survive in the ocean and ocean fish cannot survive in freshwater. How did fish that according to Dr. Hovind lived in freshwater, come to only be able to survive in salt water?
Regarding estimates of human population based on man appearing 3 million years ago: Dr. Hovind claims that if the earth were indeed 4 billion years old and man appeared 3 million years ago, then the population of the earth would be much greater than it is today. The Great Flood, Dr. Hovind alleges, can explain the “missing” population. One should always endeavor to know the claims one is attempting to refute before constructing a rebuttal. No scientist has ever claimed modern man appeared on the scene 3 million years ago. What we had 3 million years ago is a primate ancestor who evolved into several lineages, one lineage Cro-Magnon (modern humans), appearing approximately 40,000 years ago.
Regarding the “special creation” status of humans: If we are specially created, why do we share so much of our DNA with every living thing on Earth and particularly, why do we share so much with other primates? (The DNA sequencing has been done by Celera Genomics. Inc.)
Regarding the moon’s orbital recession: Dr. Hovind points out the moon is getting further away from the earth at the rate of approximately 1 inch per year, a claim indeed verified by the international scientific community. He then claims if the earth were 6000 years old the earth must have then been 6000 inches (500 feet) closer to the earth, but that if the earth were 4 billion years old it must have been 4 billion inches (54,859 miles) closer to the earth at one time, and thus subjecting the earth to unprecedented tidal forces making the development of life impossible. Dr. Hovind assumes the rate of recession has been constant, when it is well known such classical Newtonian motion occurs according to logarithmic progression. In addition, it is in fact, impossible to determine where the moon’s orbit was when it started to recede.
Regarding earth’s rotation speed: This is the same error of logic as with the argument above. Asserting that because the earth is slowing down now at a particular rate, it must have been always slowing down at this rate is an ungrounded assumption. To conclude the earth was rotating 6000 or 4 billion times faster respectively, is unfounded. The fact is, there is no way of knowing the initial rotation speed of the earth formed.
Regarding the order of creation of the sexes: Notwithstanding the sexist crack Dr. Hovind makes that God created man first because otherwise Eve would have been nagging God as to how to create Adam, why does God create Adam first? Might it not be more logically explained by the fact that the Bible is written by a male dominated, nomadic warrior people, who therefore would have a vested interest in male superiority?
Regarding Thermodynamics: Dr. Hovind asserts entropy, the fact all matter tends to disorganize and decay, would inhibit complexity from arising on its own with out divine intervention, again unfounded. Refer to the Game of Life (simulation software) by John Conway and other scientist studying this phenomenon. It is well established that complexity can and does arise from a simpler state without violating entropy.
Regarding chemistry:
a) The creation of urea in the laboratory does indicate a “primal soup” is in fact a possibility.
b) Proton decay is a reliable measure of elapsed time. The most reliable clock's function on this principle.
c) Carbon-14 dating is calibrated to account for the absorption of atmospheric carbon.
Regarding Astronomy and cosmology:
a) Without a ‘Big Bang” the universe would be exactly as God created is, yet it is not in a in a steady state. Everything is moving away from us (or us away from everything else), at tremendous speeds.
b) When the sun stands still for Joshua, we know that if it happened at all it was the earth that stopped rotating and moving through space. The consequences for the earth and every living thing on it would be catastrophic.
Regarding over-population: Dr. Hovind claims the earth is far from overpopulated. To illustrate he asserts Jacksonville, Florida is 25 billion square feet and therefore more than three times the present world population could fit into this space alone! However, this does not equate into the earth sustaining 1,603,176,817,464,745 people, because the earth happens to have approximately 1,603,176,817,464,745 square feet of land surface! The fact is the land area human beings need to sustain themselves has been estimated at between 10 to 20 acres each on the extreme low end. For arguments sake, one can divide the low end by half and say humans only need 5 acres per person to sustain life. By this extremely conservative estimation, the earth could only sustain a billion more people than it does today. Of course, Dr. Hovind conveniently ignores environmental degradation in the Jacksonville example. He also ignores the increasing per capita impact of human activity, i.e. 100 people today have a greater impact on the environment than 100 people 500 years ago.
There is a saying in software engineering, “Garbage in , garbage out”, meaning one cannot expect to arrive at reliable knowledge if one starts with bad data and faulty premises. Perhaps a doctorate in education and years of teaching high school, have not prepared Dr. Hovind for the rigors of peer-reviewed journals in biology, chemistry, physics and all the other disciplines in which he claims expertise. This may explain why he has not submitted even one scientific paper purporting his views, to any peer-reviewed journal, but instead lectures individuals lacking the expertise to analyze his assertions. When one sees so many flagrant abuses and distortions of scientific methods, one can only conclude it is purposeful. A person with intellectual integrity would point out even data that does not support their position. What Dr. Hovind engages in is no different that a District Attorney withholding exculpatory evidence in order to get a conviction. And by the way, a Theory is not a hunch. Equating a scientific theory with a hunch, with a guess, is the kind misdirection he must rely on to bolster his position. Ironically, the public K-12 educational system Christian fundamentalists berate, through incompetence and government neglect, has produced a ready audience for these absurd statements to go unchallenged. The fundamental error every emotionally invested religious person makes, is mistaking sincerity for evidence. Copernicus won his day in court because he brought data and rigor - the church had neither.
“American Pastoral Protestantism” has always been ill at ease with science, ever since its first experience of science in the form of early 19th century industrialization. It is not by accident that Evangelical Christianity (EC) evolves into a uniquely American expression of an imagined idyllic Christian past, when in fact we know early Christianity almost immediately splinter, even shattered, into myriad interpretations as soon as it became a universalist gentile religion. Historically, EC has been joined at the hip with that other uniquely American phenomena, Mormonism in that they are both agrarian reactions to the social dislocations caused by early industrialization, of which present globalization is an extension. As for an idyllic past, it certainly was not idyllic if one were born Native American, African, Polish, Jewish, Irish, Spanish, Italian... need I gone on? It was, in fact, only idyllic if one happened to be born White Anglo-Saxon and Protestant.
Religion has not been assaulted by Godless atheism; it has been assaulted by freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of inquiry. European culture left the hope of a theocratic state in the ash heap of history precisely due to these freedoms that every American, indeed, every human being should cherish. It is exactly what threatens fundamentalists of every ilk, be they Christian, Muslims, Hindus, etc. We look around the would today and we see people entrenching themselves in outdated ideas, sticking their heads in the sand or worse, attempting to put those who disagree with them under the sand, hoping modernity and knowledge goes away, and no further inquiry is made. Why would one inquire further if all truth were contained in the Bible, Qu’ran, Torah. When we saw the Taliban blow up the statues of Buddha a few years ago, one could not help but wonder what Bible-literalists would be blowing if they had the chance; abortion clinics for one. The intolerance and hubris of monotheism knows no bounds.universalist gentile religion. Historically, EC has been joined at the hip with that other uniquely American phenomena, Mormonism in that they are both agrarian reactions to the social dislocations caused by early industrialization, of which present globalization is an extension. As for an idyllic past, it certainly was not idyllic if one were born Native American, African, Polish, Jewish, Irish, Spanish, Italian... need I gone on? It was, in fact, only idyllic if one happened to be born White Anglo-Saxon and Protestant.
Religion has not been assaulted by Godless atheism; it has been assaulted by freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of inquiry. European culture left the hope of a theocratic state in the ash heap of history precisely due to these freedoms that every American, indeed, every human being should cherish. It is exactly what threatens fundamentalists of every ilk, be they Christian, Muslims, Hindus, etc. We look around the would today and we see people entrenching themselves in outdated ideas, sticking their heads in the sand or worse, attempting to put those who disagree with them under the sand, hoping modernity and knowledge goes away, and no further inquiry is made. Why would one inquire further if all truth were contained in the Bible, Qu’ran, Torah. When we saw the Taliban blow up the statues of Buddha a few years ago, one could not help but wonder what Bible-literalists would be blowing if they had the chance; abortion clinics for one. The intolerance and hubris of monotheism knows no bounds.
