Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Lucy loses step, we dive into the mailbag and
address allll kinds of questions about glaciers,
airplanes and carbon 14 dating of dinosaur bones.
Coming right up in this episode of Genesis Week.
[music]
And welcome to this episode of Genesis Week, the
weekly program of creationary commentary on
news, views and events pertaining to the origins
controversy, made possible by the supporters of
CORE Ottawa, Citizens for Origins Research and
Education, and now carried on the Christianima
network - christianima.com - Christian cinema at its
finest. We provide some of the best pirate
broadcasting anywhere, coming to you this week
from inside the hyperbaric biosphere at Creation
Evidence Museum, and if you are the first to send us
a note telling us the correct answer as to what
they're building upstairs, we'll send you a free DVD.
The Apostle Paul did not write about "Serving the
Lord with all humility of mindlessness..." But rather
we God gave you an intelligently designed brain for a
reason. Remember if you get lost in cyberspace,
you can just punch in wazooloo.com or
genesisweek.com and you can find us, and also
subscribe to our youtube channel to get extras like
CrEvo rants and full interviews with our guests. I'm
your host, Ian Juby.
The past couple of weeks, we have been
backlogged on some stories, the first headline story
this week is one of them. Some of you will
remember previous discussion about the famous
fossil skeleton, "Lucy." When first found, everything
about "Lucy" screamed "Chimpanzee" - its size, the
bones, everything. However, previous to this find, a
fossil knee had been found 2-1/2 kilometers away
and about 70 meters deeper underground.
Anatomist and forensic scientist, Owen Lovejoy,
said
>> I knew instantly, that was a human knee.
>>So by Lovejoy's analysis, that means we now
have a human knee joint in 3.2 million year old rock,
right? Of course, this is not what was interpreted
from the fossil find. After all, humans hadn't evolved
until around 150 thousand years ago silly! That
fossil is CLEARLY too old - it can't be human,
because we don't find fossils from humans in rocks
that old! And so started the chain of circular
reasoning that led to the fiasco known as "Lucy."
The following year Donald Johanson's team found
multiple bones from the skeleton of an ape. Alleged
to be our ape-like ancestor that walked, everything
about the skeleton was chimp-like. It only had one
upper and lower leg bone from each side, but
Johanson was convinced that the knee found 2-1/2
kilometers away matched those bones closely
enough that he used the first knee to interpret the
Lucy skeleton as walking upright! The problem was,
Lucy's hip matched that of a chimpanzee, rather
than an upright-walking human. But the hip had been
busted into about 40 pieces, which left a convenient
open door for re-interpretation. Lovejoy took
some, shall we say, creative liberties with the hip.
>>Johanson
But all was not lost.
[grinder noises]
Lovejoy decided he could restore the pelvis to its
natural shape.
He didn't want to tamper with the original, so he
made a copy in plaster.
He cut the damaged pieces out and put them back
together the way they were before Lucy died.
It was a tricky job, but after taking the kink out of
the pelvis, it all fit together perfectly, like a three-
dimensional jigsaw puzzle.
As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing like a
chimps, but a lot like ours.
>>"As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing
like a chimps, but a lot like ours!" Really? You
don't say! Now think about this for a second, if a
Creationist did something like this to a fossil
reconstruction, can you imagine what the
anticreationists would say? I can hear it already:
"Lies! Fraud! You broke the ninth commandment!"
You can imagine what the evolutionists would also
say! And their criticism would be appropriate! So
why is it that this evolutionist gets away with it?
Hmmm.????
Lovejoy was a forensic scientist - a Crime Scene
Investigator. Can you imagine what would happen if
he tried to do pull off a stunt like this with evidence in
a court of law???
>>Lawyer: Dr. Lovejoy, could you please tell the
court where did you found this evidence?
>>Lovejoy: We found it buried below about 70
meters (about 230 feet) of undisturbed ground,
roughly 2-1/2 kilometers away from the crime scene.
[boing]
>>Lawyer: And how do you know this ‘evidence’
has anything to do with the crime at hand?
>>Lovejoy: Uhhh because it looks a lot like the
evidence at the crime scene?
[boing]
>>Lawyer: And you did WHAT to the evidence you
found at the crime scene itself?
>>Lovejoy: Well, we know that the defendant is
guilty, see? So even though the evidence didn’t
point to him being the culprit, we felt we were quite
justified in taking a dremel to modify the evidence to
fit what we already knew. So as you can see, after
we scientifically altered the evidence, you’ll see that
it matches exactly what we were looking for at the
crime scene, which proves the defendant is guilty.
[boing]
>>Judge: Uh.... Say again?
>>He'd be thrown out of court on his keester, only
slightly faster than his alleged evidence! And yet this
alleged "evidence" is presented to school children as
proof of evolution - as you can see Johanson said
himself in his book "Ancestors:"
You'll also notice that when you see reconstructions
of Lucy in museums, they reconstructed her with
human hands and human feet. Question: Look
carefully at the fossil evidence and tell me how you
would determine what her hands and feet looked
like.
This isn't science, this is imagination. Yet, primarily
because of a HUMAN KNEE, Lucy was
interpreted to be an upright walking creature. So a
few years later, when a trail of obviously human
footprints was uncovered in laetoli, Africa, and dated
by evolutionary speculation as 3.6 million years old,
Johanson of course claimed this was further proof
that Lucy walked upright. Wait a minute - we just
found a human knee, as well as human footprints, in
rocks dated by the evolutionists as 3.2 to 3.6 million
years old - that must mean humans were around
then, right?
We have contended for years that Lucy was nothing
more than a fossil Chimpanzee who could not walk
upright, and that the laetoli footprints are from a
human. So now a new analysis of another baby
fossil of Lucy's type, Australopithecus afarensis, has
had further study performed on it. This fossil,
nicknamed Dikika baby or Selam, had several
footbones that the adult Lucy skeleton did not, and
had intact shoulder bones - which revealed that
*surprise!* the bones were just like those of apes
who swung from the trees, and didn't walk around
like humans. All the actual EVIDENCE points to
Lucy being nothing more than an ape. And humans
have been around since the beginning.
Live Science carried a well named article
"Who DIDN'T have sex with the Neanderthals?"
LiveScience contributor Charles Choi was referring
to a paper that came out in the PlosOne journal,
where the researchers examined the genomes of
North Africans and looked for signatures of
Neanderthal in their DNA. Sure enough, they found
some. Some of you long-time viewers will recall one
of our first ever episodes "Big, fat, white
Neanderthal" where we examined research that
showed that Neanderthal DNA was rampant in
almost all cultures around the world, including us
white skinned folk here in North America. Once
again the conclusion is pretty simple, and I'll
emphasize it again: If we are finding Neanderthal
DNA in modern humans, then obviously they bred
with humans, and had fertile offspring! Therefore, by
definition, Neanderthals WERE HUMAN. There is
no evolution going on here, but rather further proof
that the words of Jesus were correct: "Have you not
read, that he who made them at the beginning made
them male and female" (Matthew 19:4). If the Bible
is right about that, I wonder what else it is right
about?
Stay tuned, we'll be right back after a short break,
and we'll dive into the mailbag that's bursting at the
seams.
[funny music]
Funny, fast and furious! Ian's CrEvo Rants cover a
multitude of topics in an easy to understand, comical
way. Complicated subject that normally make
your brain hurt, hurt a lot less when Ian explains them...
while wearing his anti-government mind reading
equipment. Have questions about Carbon 14 dating?
Natural selection, thermodynamics, or...
what on earth is he doing there?
Three volumes of rants on DVD,
take your pick for $15 each plus S&H or order all
three as a package and save yourself ten bucks!
Order on line today at Ian's bookstore.
[scary, dramatic music]
Wahoo! Mail for me?
Hmmm.....
[scary, dramatic music]
Wow did we ever get a LOT of questions about the
lost squadron and carbon 14 in dinosaur bones.
Several people doubled and tripled questions within
one comment or email, so let me break them up.
For those who missed that episode of Genesis
Week, I was pointing to the "Lost Squadron" of
World War II aircraft which had to ditch on the
Greenland glacier in 1942. The group of B-17 and
P-38 aircraft were found again in the late 80's and
one P-38 was recovered in 1992 - from underneath
over 250 feet of ice that had accumulated on top of
the aircraft in 50 years. The P-38 that was
recovered was named "Glacier girl." A quick google
search for "Glacier girl" or "Lost squadron" reveals
that there is no lack of reading and viewing material.
The entire story was documented in the book "The
Lost Squadron" and on a National geographic DVD
made for the History Channel called "Hunt for the
lost squadron." Or, for a measely $2 on itunes, you
can also download the "Extreme Aircraft Recovery"
episode of "Mega movers".
Remember that the expedition was a historic one and
not scientific (they were retrieving aircraft, not
studying ice cores), there is no formal scientific
write-up that I am aware of, but the facts are clear -
and you can view photographs and video for
yourself and see the HUNDREDS of ice layers
visible in the gopher hole. So the point I was making
was that this clearly shows that the assumptions of
the ice layers representing tens of thousands of years
is falsified. But let's answer the specific questions,
and then take things a step farther to drive the point
home:
The glacier and planes had drifted several miles from
their original location, though the planes were found
in the same configuration in which they had been
left. We know that the planes could not have sunk
into the ice, or fallen into a crevace, because in either
case, the plane would be oriented differently. If you
drop a plane in the air, it will fall nose-down. It's the
same principal in ice or water. As for whether or
not the snow fall was different at that location than
where the Greenland ice cores were drilled, if you
think about it, it's irrelevent: The assumption that an
ice layer represents a year of accumulation has been
clearly falsified.
Obviously this evidence hit a nerve, as some critics
were so desperate to discredit what I said that they
questioned whether or not the planes were actually
buried under that deep of ice. Still other youtubers
were again flinging around the "L" word, saying that
other atheistic youtubers had shown that I was
"lying" about the ice cores. Yes, we've seen just how
reliable the YouTube critics are. When will you guys
learn that trying to portray me as a "liar" discredits
you far more than I? I mean, if you want to disagree
or say that I'm wrong, then please do! But flinging
around accusations of "liar" shows your own
incredible presumption on so many levels. Let's
examine the greenland ice cores a little more deeply,
complete with references as usual, and see if I am
lying, or if this is another accusation hurled in
desperation.
For those of you who missed the previous show, the
Greenland ice cores are samples taken from the huge
glacier on Greenland - which is up to 10,000 feet
thick. They get these samples by drilling a cylinder
into the ice, then pulling out the core sample. I'm not
entirely sure how the one viewer was confused by
the size of the cores - this may be because in my
slide, I had the one core shown vertically, with the
other shown horizontally, but nevertheless you can
see in this photo here that the cores are typically only
a few inches across.
The ice is composed of layers, which were
interpreted by various means to represent years -
typically one layer per year, and the research team
has claimed an alleged ice history of over 100,000
years - Obviously a problem for the Biblical
timescale of 6,000 years. As you can see by photos
from the excavations of the lost squadron, there
were hundreds of layers that formed in 50 years.
Layers of ice can be formed in multiple ways,
sometimes in a single day. But there's more to the
Greenland ice core interpretation than just counting
the layers.
The layers are interpreted using other methods such
as oxygen isotope, volcanic dust, etc..., based on the
ASSUMPTION of deep time. So the circularity
begins to come round: They ASSUME the layers
represent tens to hundreds of thousands of years,
they then INTERPRET the layers as representing
tens to hundreds of thousands of years, they then
show this as proof of hundreds of thousands of
years!
As far as volcanos, there are typically 20 to 30
explosive volcanic eruptions PER YEAR. We only
have a few hundred years of documented eruption
history, so now you want to take volcanic ash in
amongst the ice core layers, and try to match the ash
in a specific layer with a specific volcanic eruption,
when you have between 20 and 30 THOUSAND
eruptions every one thousand years? This is just
plain not feasible, let alone reliable.
Let's talk about oxygen isotope ratios. If you caught
the "What a blast" episode, we talked about
isotopes. If we have an atom of oxygen, normally it
has an atomic weight of 16 - it has 8 neutrons and 8
protons. Then there are oxygen atoms with 8
protons and 9 neutrons, which is oxygen 17. Oxygen
18 has 8 protons and 10 neutrons. Oxygen 17 and
oxygen 18 are ISOTOPES of oxygen. Because
oxygen 16 evaporates ever so slightly easier than the
heavier isotopes, it takes more HEAT to evaporate
water with Oxygen 18 in it. Thus, during the summer
months, the snow and ice accumulation will,
theoretically, have more Oxygen 18 in it, because
there's more heat available. Thus, if you look in a
layer, it's assumed you could measure this Oxygen16
to 18 ratio and identify the summer portion of the
ice layer. But there's a problem there that's been
known for decades: Those who believe in deep time
believe it takes hundreds to thousands of years to
compress snow and ice granules into solid ice, and
during that whole time these oxygen molecules can
diffuse - move around. The longer it takes for the
snow to compact, the more time there is to move
around the Oxygen 18, and thus, as Fred Hall wrote
way back in 1989:
But yet when we head on over to Northern Siberia,
at the same latitudes from which the Greenland ice
cores were retrieved, we find the partial, frozen
carcasses of numerous animals like the Mammoths.
The Mammoths alone were estimated to number in
the MILLIONS in Siberia, and whenever we see
modern reconstructions of the Mammoths, they are
always portrayed as living in snowy, icy conditions -
which is flat-out impossible for multiple reasons:
Using figures from the modern elephant, the
Mammoths probably needed upwards around 250
kilograms of food and 150 litres of water per day! If
they're munching snow for water, they have to melt
that snow, which consumes body heat and energy,
which they would have to make up for by eating
MORE food. Where would they find all this required
vegetation during snowy times? Consider that
Siberia today gets down to -20 to -50 Celcius each
VERY LONG winter, and the summer growing
season really doesn't start until about mid-July. That
coat of fur the mammoths have? They don't have oil
glands that you and I have, and thus their hair would
actually absorb water and further rob the mammoth
of needed body heat.
But it's not just Mammoths that are found there.
There's horses, camels, rhinocerus, lion, leapoard,
bear, tiger, reindeer, giant beaver, musk sheep, musk
ox, donkey, and a wack of other animals that
NObody is claiming lived in arctic conditions. In fact,
Mike Oard spelled it out nicely with one sentence
There is every reason to conclude that the time these
mammoths lived in Siberia, it was considerably
warmer than it is now. Please also note that the
Mammoths were found at the same latitudes, and
sometimes FARTHER NORTH than the Greenland
ice cores.
Allow me to pursue a rabbit trail for a moment to
answer some other questions that were sent in:
First of all, apparently Mr. Witts, you missed the
previous week's show where I provided multiple
references to technical journals and books regarding
the excess Carbon 14 in not only dinosaur bones,
but a host of other biomatter from deep within the
rock record. Last week I provided Hugh Miller's
website as corrolary information.
Secondly, apparently you folks are unaware that
most dinosaur bones are permineralized - not
petrified. In other words, the bone is still there, but
coated with, and permeated by, minerals. Currie
and Kopplehus co-authored the book "101 Questions about
Dinosaurs" Currie was the former
curator of the Royal Tyrell Museum, and is current
president of the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology,
and even he said it in print:
Thirdly, let's say you're correct and there was no
original bone left - how will you explain the coalified
wood fragments from the dinosaur layers which also
had carbon 14 content similar to the dinosaur bones
in the same layer?
Fourthly, and this brings us back the Mammoths and
the Greenland ice cores, notice that the carbon 14
dates on dinosaur bones came back with ages
YOUNGER than carbon 14 dates the Neanderthal
man skeletons!
Brock Lee put together an excellent summary of the
carbon dating of dinosaurs, humans, mammoths,
etc., in his commentary here:
Notice that Vartanyan, et al, Carbon 14 dated
mammoth remains on Wrangel Island from 4,000
years ago to 7,400 years ago.
Several mammoths are closer to the North Pole than
the GRIP and NGRIP cores were, which have ice
alleged to go back over 100,000 years!
Well wait a minute - are you going to claim that four
thousand years ago, it was so warm - for
THOUSANDS of years, in the extreme north - so
warm that it had diversity of animals similar to the
Serengeti of East Africa, yet somehow the glacier at
Greenland did not melt? Remember - I'm using the
information provided by those who assume deep
time. Using THEIR numbers, it's pretty clear that
Greenland would not have had an ice sheet AT
ALL, a mere 4,000 years ago, and thus, the
Greenland ice cores do not represent 100,000
years.
So to summarize it all; the evidence actually matches
a recent ice age of the last 4,000 years - which fits in
quite well the Biblical account, and the assumption
that the ice age started shortly after the world wide
flood of Noah. Whereas even force-fitting the
evidence does not support the interpretation of deep
time. you can read more about the ice core
interpretations in several articles and papers here:
I'll try to deal with this in more detail on a future
show as the question has come up a few times. In
the meantime, may I suggest you head on over to the
Ask John Mackay webpage, where he got asked
that very same question.
Thanks for writing in, and I hear what you're saying.
I could be wrong about it being a bird - but so
could the evolutionists. I'm saying it really doesn't
matter. Similar things could be said about modern
apes and humans. They are remarkably the same -
but so what? They are still apes, and humans are still
humans. We do not see apes building rocket ships
and flying to the moon. The differences are far more
than the structural. But the evolutionary camp will
interpret the similarity of structures in light of
evolution, we would interpret it in light of a common
designer. Notice my main point: it's interpretation
within evolution, not evidence FOR evolution.
Thanks to the oh-so-many people who wrote in,
especially those of you who took the time to write in
kind and complimentary comments, I wish I could
read them all, but alas, we are out of time. I'm your
host, Ian Juby, thanks for joining me I hope you'll
join me again next Genesis Week. Next week's
program will be a special episode on the age of the
earth - a provocative subject. I'll be in Ottawa this
weekend along with Laurence Tisdall, giving lectures
at Bethel Pentecostal Church, Friday Saturday and
Sunday - you can head on over to the "Events" page
on their website for more details, I'll be sharing
some first hand research on the profound evidence
for Noah's flood on Saturday. Remember you can
send in your comments, questions to us in a number
of ways: you can email us at
comments@genesisweek.com, or you can send us a
tweet @genesisweek, or you can head on over to
genesisweek.com which is our youtube channel, find
the latest show, and leave a comment there. Let us
remember those words of warning from our saviour
and creator, the Lord Jesus Christ who said "I am
the way, the truth, and the life - no man comes to the
Father but through me" We'll see you next time.
[music]
We need your support to help keep this program on
the air. You can help by making a tax-deductible
donation to CORE Ottawa.
You can also sign up for Ian's newsletter, detailing
current news and research at ianjuby.org
[music]