Scientists in Ethiopia recently made a discovery that may help redefine our knowledge about the origins of our species, but according to one Creationist, the fossil isn’t proof of evolution — it’s proof of the Biblical Flood in Genesis.
The fossil in question is about 2.8 million years old, and when I first heard about it, I greeted it with excitement and trepidation. I greeted it that way because I know that scientific discoveries are rarely carved in stone.
But how would creationists greet this new discovery?
Good thing Geologist Tas Walker is here. The geologist from Creation Ministries International appeared on Australia’s 693-AM, saying that he doesn’t trust the scientific dating methods,
because the numbers are too big because he thinks researcher are deliberately skewing the results.
Speaking from his position of authority on the matter, Walker said that “Every dating method is based on assumptions about the past, and so you choose the dating method to get the sort of date to fit in with where it is and you select the results that fit in with your research program.”
I can’t make heads or tails of that word salad. That’s the verbal equivalent of the “rabbit with the pancake on their head” meme.
Aside from this, there’s only one scientific authority, according to Walker. And if you guessed “Bible,” congratulations:
The only way to reliably know the age of something is by eyewitness reports. That’s how I know my age, that’s how you know your age, and basically the Bible gives us an eyewitness report — people who were there from the beginning that’s recorded down, and it’s about 6,000 years old.
And Gulliver’s Travels gives us an eyewitness report of multiple journeys around the world. That doesn’t make it real.
His idea that you need eyewitnesses to corroborate something’s age is so stupid it’s painful. Are there any people alive today who were around when Gulliver’s Travels was written? What’s this about letters from the period? Were you there to see those written? How do you know?
While he acknowledges the jawbone’s discovery, he disputes the scientific conclusions about its significance — or, at least, that’s what I think he’s doing here, since this is more word salad:
The argument, or the differences, is over the interpretation – and the evolutionary interpretation is based upon basically a belief system that evolution happened. So it’s just plugged into that belief, it’s a whole framework.
Why yes, I would love some Thousand Island Dressing to go with that, thank you.
Rather than support an evolutionary framework, for which there’s a mountain of evidence, Walker believes that it somehow supports Teh Flud:
These particular fossils, this jawbone in Ethiopia, it’s found there within sediment that’s classified as Pliocene, 2.8 million years old, according to the evolutionary model. But that would be very, very late flood, most likely, and these would be the remains of creatures that perished, and this is just the remains of the carcasses being buried as the floodwaters were receding right toward the very end of that event
I wasn’t aware that creatures died during Teh Flud. I mean, the Bible says all living creatures, two of each “kind” (or was it seven? Funny how the Bible can’t seem to tell the difference). There’s this whole business of “all:” 5 to 50 billion individual species — and that’s an educated guess. There’s an estimated 8.7 million species on Earth now. The Bible also makes a big deal of whether something is “clean” in terms of loading it on the Ark, but someone please tell me whether or not Cyclomedusa and other Ediacaran biota are “clean,” “unclean,” or “divine stop error.”
So, there’s how creationists react to new scientific studies: word salad, presupposition, unsupported claims, and bog standard stupidity. It’s as regular as nature’s metronome, the pulsar.
Someone should introduce this guy to the Dinosaur Hoax Lady. I think they’d be a perfect match.
[h/t and photo credit RS]