| Volume 12 Number 6 | www.ntskeptics.org | July 1998 |
Our friends at the North Texas Church of Free Thought clued us in. Skeptic Bernard Leikind would be debating neo-creationist Fred Heeren on the McCuistion show on KDTN-TV. We were invited to the taping.
Leikind, of course, is the California skeptic famous for debunking the fire-walk motivational speakers. Heeren is the author of "Show Me God," ostensibly an explanation of modern science for pedestrians, but actually a promotion for the his own creationist views. The McCuistion show is sort of like Jerry Springer but several levels up the food chain. It comes on once a week on PBS and is hosted by Dennis McCuistion.
Two of us from the NTS showed up, hoping we could learn something and perhaps answer some of Heeren's wilder claims. Turns out we weren't needed.
Mike Sullivan had turned out the NTCOF in force for the Tuesday taping, and it was not a safe night out for creationists. I expected to see a few fundamentalists (this is Dallas, right?), and there were some for sure. But talk about a silent majority! Heeren got barely a whisper of support from the largely hostile studio audience when McCuistion started calling for questions. One particularly incensed clergyman noted that he had been around more than fifty years and had been a preacher much of that time, and he did not need any phony scientist trying to justify his Christian faith (healthy round of applause).
Heeren is a queer bird, even for a creationist. He flatly states that the Big Bang really happened, and that it attests to the existence of God, plus the two contradictory accounts of creation in Genesis, plus The Flood, plus the Resurrection, and maybe even justification for the Protestant movement in the Christian church. He stated he had no trouble with the confused order of events in the first story of creation in Genesis. That is what one would expect from science(??). That's my interpretation of what he said. I hope he really didn't say that.
At one point the debaters challenged each other over who was most true to science. The debate got down to "What evidence would you require to renounce your beliefs and to accept the other side?" Leikind allowed that it would take something extraordinary for him. He didn't mention my favorite—to see Heeren walk on water. In turn Heeren did not concede there was anything he could accept. No surprises there.
Dennis McCuistion is a breath of fresh air here in Dallas, and I hope he stays around. His show tackles many thorny issues head on without flinching. In Dallas his show comes on Channel 2 at 1 p.m. on Sundays (maybe other times as well). Check it out.
It's Friday the third of July, it's the first day of my vacation, and I'm expected to write a column that I'm not being paid for. So here it is, and don't expect much:
You'll be happy to hear that skeptics are now as bad as Nazis, for just as Adolph Hitler wanted to kill the Jews, so skeptics want to kill the fairies (that's not a derogatory term for homosexuals; I mean little elfin beings with wings).
This bit of wisdom comes to us courtesy of tremulous rock singer Tori Amos, who told Rolling Stone magazine that she communicates with her imaginary fairy pals while driving around in her 4-Runner, and that people who don't believe in the "imaginary world" are as bad as Hitler because they kill the "little people's dreams." I can find only one flaw in her analogy: the last time I checked, Jews actually existed.
You'll also be interested to hear that in 2001, Earth will be admitted to the Interstellar Federation. By 2310 humans will land on the Planet Yom and meet the local inhabitants, known as Trups. Who, I hear, worship Tori Amos.
The NY Post editors noted some of the other scientific papers generated in the past by the SSE, including such intriguing titles as "Atlantis and the Earth's Shifting Crust," "The Message of the Sphinx," "Reincarnation and...Birthmarks" and "Severe Birth Defects Possibly Due to Cursing." They also declared that the SSE's pronouncement was based on "a big lie" — that reputable investigators were frightened away from investigating UFO sightings by fear of ridicule or an "X-Files" type conspiracy — when in fact, these sightings had been exhaustively investigated over and over again by genuinely open-minded people. Yet, to quote at length, "despite the successful efforts of the UFO industry to convince millions of people otherwise, there is no — repeat no — credible evidence of space aliens visiting the Earth in suspiciously Hollywoodesque flying saucers. And the case for little green men making landings all over the farm belt in order to kidnap and then have unusual sex with random hicks in pickup trucks is even more ridiculous."
That's why I like New Yorkers: they're so refreshingly blunt. Plus, they managed to work in two of my favorite Mencken era terms: "snake oil" and "claptrap." Now, THAT'S an editorial!
A recent episode profiled Bob Minton, a wealthy philanthropist who has given $1.7 million of his own money to people and groups who he says were destroyed by Scientology. For instance, there was a couple named Vaughn who left the "Church" and spoke out against it. Soon, an anonymous "newsletter" appeared all over their neighborhood, falsely accusing them of promiscuity, criminal activities, and harboring diseased cats in the animal shelter they ran. Just as the city was about to close them down, Minton bought them a $200,000 house to use as a new shelter.
Naturally, this sort of rescue does not go over well with followers of L. Ron Hubbard. Reptilian Scientology official Mike Rinder compared Minton to anti-Semites and to terrorist bomber Timothy McVeigh, and echoed Hubbard's pronouncement that anyone who opposes Scientology must have a criminal background, so it's perfectly all right to inform the public about it.
Bob Minton soon learned that a mysterious "private investigator" was showing up at his relatives' and ex-wives' houses, telling them terrible things about him, and trying to get them to say damaging things about him. He says they upset his mother, who is elderly and ill, and put words in her mouth. Anonymous leaflets began appearing in his neighborhood, accusing him of being in the KKK, beating his wife, supporting a ring of wife-beaters and exploiting Third World labor. When he went on vacation in Hawaii, the leaflets mysteriously appeared there as well. The propaganda campaign caused a rift between him and his son that continues to this day, but Minton refuses to back down. He declared, "This organization is not invulnerable to criticism. They can't destroy everybody."
By this point, you might be heading to your computer to e-mail Washington and demand to know why our State Department is going out of its way to help protect this group, and why our government granted them tax-free religious status. Me, I'm e-mailing the White House to ask why President Clinton is lecturing Jiang Zemin on the meaning of human rights when he should be having that same conversation with John Travolta.
Purdue University professor Glen Sparks thinks there's a connection. He questions test subjects on their beliefs in the paranormal before and after they watch TV shows dealing with the subject, and he says that watching the shows does have an impact on what people end up believing when it's over (unlike the reading of this column). So you might want to cut out the following list and tape it to your TV screen to inoculate yourself and your family:
1. The X-Files is fiction.
2. The people on Star Trek shows are actors.
3. Yoda is a Muppet.
Creationists have long proclaimed that creation science should be taught in the public schools whenever evolution is taught. They say that it's only fair play that other "origin models" receive "equal time." In reality, it would appear that creationists don't want to teach creationism or anything else in the public schools. They don't like the public schools and tend not to send their children to them when they have alternatives. This I get from nearly ten years of attending creationists' lectures.
Still, one wonders, "What would the creationists teach if they did teach creation science in the schools?" What the creationists teach their own children about science gives some idea what a full-blown creation science education would be like. In the MIOS lectures comparatively little is actually said about creationism. Instead the speakers tend to concentrate on evolution and other aspects of mainstream science. They usually talk about what is wrong with both, and they often have unpleasant things to say about prominent scientists. It is not a pleasant picture.
MIOS, the Metroplex Institute of Origin Science, is a local creationist organization that holds monthly meetings. These meetings usually consist of a lecture on creationism, although the subject is seldom creationism. They like to talk about evolution, instead. That and other aspects of mainstream science that contradict their own narrow view of origins.
Don Patton of MIOS usually heads up the meetings. He has a business card that reads, something like "Don Patton, Ph.D., Geologist." More on that later. Don does most of the presentations but there are occasionally guest speakers. Wayne Spencer gave one of the recent talks.
Wayne Spencer has an MS in physics from Wichita State University and
has published at least one paper in Spencer's Web site [http://www.eaze.net/~wspencer/VITAECRP.HTM] provides
some insight into his perceptions about science. His Web site fairly well
reinforces my original impression from his MIOS appearances. Spencer is
well grounded in the facts about the Solar System, and a person can learn
much about the Solar System from his page on the subject. Also he doesn't
take off on a wild tangent as, for example, Velikovski. There are some
odd twists, however. I quote from Spencer:
A number of observations of different kinds can be explained in a simpler
and more convincing way if 1) the Solar System is young, not 4.6 billion
years in age, 2) there has been some major catastrophe that occurred some
time in the past, and 3) some features are not due to natural processes
but have been designed by a Creator-God. "Design" usually means God intelligently
planned things to be a certain way, for a purpose. It also means that supernatural
processes dominated when God was actually creating in the beginning, then
the orderly natural processes He made "took over" after that. Natural processes,
like gravity or magnetism, preserve the order that God created in the beginning.
This doesn't mean God is not in control or that He cannot do miracles today.
Spencer also explains one aspect of the Solar System he believes shows
the work of a benevolent creator:
If the inclination angles of the planet orbits were not small we would
not be able to see the planets well from earth. The angle one must look
at in the sky to see a planet, such as Mars for instance, depends on the
inclination of Mar's orbit and on the latitude on earth at which the person
is standing. Since the earth is tilted it also depends on where the earth
is in its orbit at the time. All this means that if the planet orbits were
inclined at high angles, the planets would only be visible to us rarely
and perhaps only for people at certain latitudes on earth. Individuals
living near the equator might seldom or never see a planet if it's orbit
were inclined a great deal. It would not serve God's purpose for it to
be so hard to see the planets, because Genesis 1:14-18 says the lights
we see in the sky are to mark seasons and days. The light of the stars
and planets give order and beauty to the night and twilight times. Since
the planet orbits are inclined small angles, most people, wherever they
live are able to see the planets much of the year, each planet at its own
times and dates.
I have to say that Wayne Spencer is the best creation science lecturer
I have encountered so far.
Another case is David Bassett. I reported previously on Bassett's take
on modern dinosaurs.[1] David heads up the science department at the Ovilla
Christian School south of Dallas. His talk on the night I was there centered
on recent or even living dinosaurs.
If it can be demonstrated that dinosaurs existed recently or still exist
today, then that fairly much blows away the contention by mainstream science
that the Earth is billions of years old and that dinosaurs vanished millions
of years before our own species populated the planet. David's argument
seemed to derive more from literature than from real science. Quoting from
The Skeptic:
David Bassett presented a number of cases he said argued for the existence
of dinosaurs in recent times. Winged dinosaurs, he said, are evidenced
by many instances in literature. He exhibited an illustration of the hilt
of Beowulf's sword, which showed a winged serpent-like critter, an obvious
reference to a pterodactyl or a pterosaur. Beowulf, who lived from 495
slew Grendel, who was likely a modern dinosaur-like beast. He also cited
many references to "flying snakes," which were surely sightings of the
same animals. Further, the February 8, 1856 He has some strange concepts about science, as well:
Additionally, there is the remarkable evidence of living dinosaurs in
the Congo region. ... The high atmospheric pressure in this region accounts
for the viability of these ancient species. The pressure there is 1.3 to
1.5 times normal atmospheric pressure. This is because of the dense vegetation,
which keeps the air quite humid. Of course, water vapor is denser than
dry air, David Bassett told the audience.
Carl Baugh's Creation Evidence Museum is another matter. This showplace
for young-Earth creationism is located near Glen Rose, Texas, just a few
meters from the entrance to Texas' Dinosaur Valley State Park. Carl Baugh
set up operation here back in the 1980s to capitalize on what creationists
then claimed were human prints adjacent to dinosaur prints in the limestone
bed of the nearby Paluxy River. The idea, once again, is that if it can
be demonstrated that dinosaurs and people lived contemporaneously, then
the preachings of the evolutionists must be all wet. Baugh takes the matter
a little further than that. His museum exhibit details the story of genesis
in a series of wall panels illuminated by spotlights in turn as his recorded
voice tells the story. It goes something like this:
Day 1: Electrolysis by the spirit of God moving on the waters separates
water into its components, oxygen and hydrogen.
Day 2: Oxygen and hydrogen crystallize into a spherical "canopy" around
the Earth. The canopy glows a magenta color under sunlight [producing a
light that is very beneficial to things living on the planet].
Day 3: Robert Gentry has previously demonstrated that granite was created
in about 0.164 seconds. The evidence for this is the presence of pleochroic
halos [which indicate the prior existence of short-lived radioactive isotopes
in the stone at the time it was formed].
Day 4: God stretched out the heavens. The fabric of the universe was
stretched out in a manner which, according to Einstein's equations and
the equations of quantum mechanics, caused a few hours time to give the
appearance of millions of years. Russell Humphreys, a Ph.D. physicist working
at Sandia National Laboratory has published equations that demonstrate
that if the dimensions of the universe were stretched in this manner, then
millions of years in outer space would be equivalent to only thousands
of years on Earth.
Day 5: There is still a pinkish glow on the Earth. The canopy 10 miles
above the Earth's surface has compressed the air to produce this effect.
Also, the Earth's electromagnetic energy is stronger and there is no UV
radiation [because of the canopy] to cause free radical damage, allowing
living organisms to express their optimal genetic information.
Day 6: The fabric of the universe continued to stretch out.
Hundreds of years later: From science we know that the thought processes
of man in discord can affect nuclear decay. The discord and violence in
man during this time would disrupt the nuclear reactions within the Earth,
causing enormous heating and causing 70-mile-high fountains of water to
burst through the granite crust and to penetrate and disrupt the canopy
above the Earth. This would result in the rain that drowned all but Noah's
family and the animals on his ark. Also during this time the Creator bowed
the heavens, further stretching the fabric of the universe. [There is some
mention of the Moon bringing the waters into resonance, but I could not
follow the explanation.] Baugh also reminds the audience of the quantum
interconnection between all parts of the universe.
About 200 years after the flood was the Peleg episode during which the
Earth expanded and divided. There was a 10% expansion in the Earth's radius
due to internal thermonuclear reactions. During the original creation and
during the Peleg episode the continental land masses were thrust upon each
other producing the ice ages, which lasted hundreds of years instead of
thousands. This and the previous episode of thermonuclear expansion are
confirmed by geophysics. Since the canopy was gone, the Earth's electromagnetic
field could not be contained, and it dissipated into space. Likewise a
portion of the Earth's gravitational attraction was lost, and there was
[and has been since] a smaller oxygen ratio resulting in compromised and
shorter-lived life forms. Also, the spring 1995 issue of Finally, there will be in the future a millennial sphere in which people
will live in utopia. Music will play in the heads of the inhabitants.
Baugh claims to have a Ph.D., and bills himself as Dr. Carl Baugh whenever
he appears on various network TV pseudoscience programs. More on this later.
No, actually, let's deal with evolutionists' degrees right now.
Although many real scientists are religious and some believe in the
literal truth of Genesis, there are others. The problem is that in the
last 200 years real science has obtained such a good reputation due in
part to the benefits we have obtained from scientific discoveries and also
due to the recognition that science is producing a factual account of how
the universe works. Some of the creationists we studied tend to inflate
their real academic achievements, and there are others who, lacking any
formal training in science, still feel the need to bask in the glow of
legitimate scientists. When you are spinning tall tales it helps if you
have a Ph.D. after your name.
Patton and Baugh are our own local examples. Harold Slusher, Ph.D., is one of the authors of Thomas G. Barnes is another creationist who flaunts a Ph.D. when arguing
his young-Earth views. The record shows that Barnes earned an A.B. degree
in physics from Hardin-Simmons College, Abilene, Texas, in 1933, and an
MS degree from Brown University in 1936. In 1950, the re-named Hardin-Simmons
University awarded Barnes the honorary D.Sc. He is emeritus professor of
physics at UTEP, where he joined the faculty in 1936.
Dr. Kent Hovind spoke a few years back at a local church. He is a former
science teacher who has some unusual perceptions of science. I previously
reported on Hovind's talk and will only recap his explanation of carbon-14
dating.[5] Keep in mind that archeologists use carbon-14 dating extensively
to determine the age of artifacts up to 100,000 years old. What Hovind
had to say about the process was startling:
Radioactive carbon-14 is initially a small portion of the carbon in
an organic sample [true]. Radiation counters are used to measure the amount
of C-14 remaining and thus to deduce the age of the sample. Totally a ridiculous
concept, according to Hovind, and unfortunately for him he is right. The
problem is that the C-14 dating process does not use the process Hovind
described. It really uses a method that counts individual C-14 and C-12
atoms, allowing the precise ratio to be determined.
How come Dr. Hovind does not know this?
Three years ago local creationists tried to introduce the book The usual line of this argument is that the differences between silkworms
and pigs through carps are essentially the same, even though carps are
"lower" on the evolutionary scale than pigs. The problem with the argument
is that the differences in the table are much what would be expected from
evolution. Since silkworms are invertebrates, their line of decent branched
off from all the vertebrates at the same time. Note that the difference
for wheat are large, as one might expect, since wheat is a plant. I can't
account for the extra differences with human cytochrome c unless that's
within the natural spread.
Of course there is no guarantee that creationists will try to teach
this kind of stuff in public schools if they ever manage to convince the
voters, and the Supreme Court, that they should be allowed to. In his decision
on the McLean vs Board of Education trial in Arkansas Judge, William Overton
noted that teachers who had been ordered to teach creationism in the science
classes had been unable to find anything to teach.
The real issue seems to be that creationists don't want to teach creationism.
They just don't want evolution to be taught.
References
1. Blanton, John, "Living Dinosaurs at MIOS" in 2. Hastings, Ronnie, Rick Neeley, and John Thomas, "A Critical Look
at Creationist Credentials" in 3. Kuban, Glen J., "A Follow-Up on Carl Baugh's Science Degrees" in 4. Glen Kuban's Web page on creationists' degrees is at http://members.aol.com/Paluxy2/degrees.htm.
5. Blanton, John, "Traveling Creationism" in 1. UFOS: CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE WORST KIND.
Caution! If you're the sort who lies awake at night worrying about whether
you might be whisked away by an alien spaceship for an examination of your
erogenous zones, read no further! Things "out there" have gotten so bad
that Lawrence S. Rockefeller funded a group of scientific experts in alien
abductions, psychokinesis, remote viewing, zero-point energy and other
advanced concepts to examine the evidence and tell us what should be done.
The panel boldly concluded that "At least some of these phenomena are not
easily explainable.... there always exists the possibility that investigation
of an unexplained phenomenon may lead to an advance in scientific knowledge."
That is, if the government would provide research funds for serious-minded
scientists—like those on the panel.
2. EMF: HEALTH PANEL EXHUMES REMAINS OF POWER-LINE CONTROVERSY.
Exactly one year ago the National Cancer Institute released the results
of an exhaustive seven-year study that found no link between exposure to
EMF and childhood leukemia (WN 4 Jul 97). An editorial in 3. SCIENCE LITERACY: NOT SURE ABOUT THE HELIOCENTRIC MODEL?
Well, you're not alone. According to the 1998 Science and Engineering
Indicators, released this week by NSF, 27% of adults surveyed believe the
sun goes around the earth, and more than half believe atoms are smaller
than electrons. The WN staff tried to contact Copernicus and Rutherford
for comment, but James Van Praagh was not available — he may have been
on the UFO panel. The good news is that, although we still have Ptolemaics,
understanding of basic scientific concepts is higher among Americans than
it is in other industrialized nations. Interest in science and belief in
its promise is also higher among Americans: 79% of those surveyed agreed
that scientific research is necessary and should be funded by the Government,
even if it brings no immediate benefits.
THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (Note: Opinions are the author's and
are not necessarily shared by the APS, but they should be.)
Human
29
Pig
25
Turtle
26
Carp
25
Wheat
40
What's New
By Robert L. Park