>1. Peppered moths
Only problem with this example is that it still fits with evolution.
Doubts have been raised as to whether the proposed explanation of bird
predation works, but the fact remains that black moths took over in Britain
for a while.
>2. Piltdown man/Nebraska man
Neither of these fit evolutionary patterns. Early hominids are in Africa,
not England or the Americas, and enlargemetn of the brain folloed
improvements in upright walking.
>3. Haekel's (sp.) embryos
>4. National Geographic's bird/dino fossil
Along the lines of Keith's post, it should be noted that these errors have
been spotted and corrected by "evolutionists", not YECs.
Including bad theology, e.g. god of the gaps or random implies no god
claims, would be appropriate.
>Poor YEC evidences - "as taught by your Sunday School teacher"
>
>1. the plesiosaur and the Japanese trawler
>2. moon dust - NASA worries about sinking Apollo astronauts
>3. dating fossils by geologic column and the geologic column by the fossils
>4. earth's dying magnetic field
I have yet to encounter YEC evidence that is not poor.
I would advocate including some of the bogus historical claims, e.g.,
related to 3, there is the claim that the geologic column was created to
support evolutionary views and that purportedly primitive fossils were put
on the bottom. In fact, the fossils that were on the bottom were put on
the bottom. Only later was it realized that the pattern fit an
evolutionary sequence. Try looking up William Smith's work.
Bad theology might be good to include here. Huse, in The Collape of
Evolution, claimed that I Cor. 15:39 supports special creation of distinct
"kinds", yet the whole point of the passage is in verse 51: "we shall not
all sleep, but we shall all be changed." This is not an attempt to scare
off potential volunteers in the Corinthian nursery. Rather, it says that
God will transform our selves, not merely earthly but sinful, into heavenly
natures. To claim that this proves God cannot transform one earthly nature
into another is ridiculous. The advocating of "applied" science only in
the YEC-proposed Kansas standards is another example of bad theology. It
denies a purpose in seeking to understand God's creation, contrary to the
mandate of Gen. 1:26, such as when God commanded Adam to name the animals.
Related to the purportedly dying magnetic field is the denial of magnetic
reversals. The discussion in Huse was apparently built by taking a
description of the bands of reversed and normal magnetism on the sea floor
out of an introductory geology text and attacking it. The most basic flaw
in the argument is that if an actual sample is collected that can be
manipulated in the lab, a reversed magnetic field can be measured (assuming
the magnetic alignment occurred during a periosd of reversed polarity).
Trying to explain the bands on the seafloor as thicker and thinner crust
runs into several problems, including 1) the crust is not thicker or
thinner; 2) it would take some sort of magnetic shielding to decrease the
measured field relative to the earth's field without having magnetic
reversal; 3) the rapid creation of thicker and thinner bands is no easier
to explain by a young earth model than the rapid creation of magnetic
reversals. It is merely an ill-informed attempt to discredit geology.
At least one of the kiddie books purporting to provide the correct YEC
account of dinosaurs features a transitional form on the front cover, as
defined by YECSs who do not understand evolution. The pterosaur has bat
wings. Such a mix and match creature might be created by special creation
of kinds, but not by evolutionary continuity.
David Campbell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 06 2000 - 11:41:57 EST