In this article, we will deal with the claims of a flat-earth advocate named Jeff. Jeff is a friend of a friend of mine, who objected to some of the proofs I gave that demonstrate the earth is spherical. Since Jeff’s claims have been refuted elsewhere, I agreed to answer them but only if I could post them publicly on this website so that others may benefit. Jeff graciously agreed.
Previously, we examined some unusual claims made by Troy, who asserted that the days before the global flood were four to six hours shorter than days today. We found that Troy gave no biblical or quantitative scientific evidence to support his claim….
Today we will examine Troy’s claims that asteroid impacts and/or lunar recession have reduced earth’s rotation period by 4-6 hours per day since creation.
We here examine some assertions made by Troy, a young earth creationist who has made some very unorthodox claims about conditions before the Genesis flood. He believes that the length of a day was much shorter before the flood, only 18 to 20 hours per day, and that the flood somehow changed this. As errors go, this is a fairly mild one, and there is nothing heretical or theologically damaging about such a speculation. But the way in which Troy attempted to defend his conjectures involved serious errors in reasoning, in science, and in biblical interpretation.
We previously explored the differences between the inverted retina of the human eye, and the verted retina of cephalopods. We found that each system was well-designed for the typical environment in which the creature lives. This prompt us to ask what other types of eyes the Lord has created. From a biblical creation perspective, we expect to find both similarities (due to having a common Creator who is a God of order) and differences (due to the Lord’s creativity) in the eyes of different varieties of animals. Furthermore, we would expect each type of eye to be well-suited for the organism in its environment, and irreducibly complex. And this is indeed exactly what we find.
Having examined some of the remarkable design features of the human eye, we here look at a feature that is sometimes claimed to support evolution: the inverted retina. Evolutionists claim this is a backward system that resulted from chance mutations. Far from being evidence of evolution, the inverted retina is extremely well planned. Furthermore, not all creatures have an inverted retina. Rather, each creature has a vision system that is well-designed for its environment.
The human eye is a marvel of design. All the parts work together to provide us with a vivid and colorful mental picture of our surroundings. As an astronomer, one aspect of human vision that I find particularly amazing and useful is the ability of the eye to adapt to extremely different lighting conditions. At night, the eye adjusts to be able to see stars that are 12 trillion times fainter than the sun. The way this mechanism works is ingenious and is merely one example of the cleverness of the Lord and of His grace toward us.
Our eyes and brain provide us with a nearly instantaneous mental picture of our immediate surroundings. This in itself is amazing and should prompt us to thank and worship our Creator. But the Lord has enhanced our visual experience with a wonderful feature: color. What exactly is color, and how do our eyes and brain process it?
I recently had the opportunity to ride in one of the newer Tesla electric cars. The dashboard had a single touchscreen which displayed a perspective view of the vehicle itself – as if seen by a bird following the vehicle by 300 feet at about 100 feet in altitude. The screen also displayed grayscale model representations of all surrounding vehicles, along with the markings on the road, the speed limit, nearby traffic lights, and other driving information. In principle, you could drive the car without ever looking out the window by looking only at the screen. Apparently, cameras surrounding the vehicle feed images into a computer which constructs a 3D virtual model of its environment, which is then displayed on the screen. In other words, it does in a very limited way what your eyes and brain do with much higher fidelity every second of your conscious life.
Advancements in digital photography over the last several decades are truly amazing. Cameras of high quality and resolution now come standard in most smartphones. But there is an extremely versatile and innovative camera that is far superior to anything else on the market. This amazing device can capture both still images and video with unprecedented clarity and unrivaled color-depth. It has the capacity to automatically adjust its focus from infinity down to an inch in less than one second. This camera has a night-vision (greyscale) mode capable of detecting light from galaxies over two million lightyears away. But it can also be used during the day in conditions that are trillions of times brighter. It is highly portable, being less than one inch in size, and weighing only 28 grams.
One of the many scientific lines of evidence against neo-Darwinian evolution involves the concept of irreducible complexity. Microbes, plants, fungi, animals, and human beings all have bodies that are composed of extremely complex microscopic machinery. The different parts of a biological cell are interdependent. Hence, neo-Darwinian evolution is incompatible with irreducible complexity.
Carl Sagan once said, “Evolution is a fact, not a theory.” And he was partly right; evolution is not a theory. He’s not right about evolution being a fact of course…. This is the idea that all life on earth is descended from a common microbial ancestor: that the information in our DNA is entirely the result of mutations over time that happened to convey survival advantage. It is this version of evolution that is neither a fact nor a theory.
In our final segment on this topic, we continue to debunk some of the claims made about biblical creation. This is in response to a recent podcast by Phil Vischer with co-hosts Skye Jethani, Christian Taylor, and Jason Rugg. We have seen that Phil misrepresented both the history of the Church’s position on biblical creation, and also the teaching of modern biblical creationists.
We have been examining the errors in history and theology being promoted by Phil Vischer. In his podcast on this issue, he was joined by Skye Jethani, Christian Taylor, and Jason Rugg. We will continue to examine their claims here.
We continue to explore the comments made by Phil Vischer and his friends, Skye Jethani, Christian Taylor, and Jason Rugg, on their recent podcast. Recall that Phil had claimed that the young earth creation taught by Ken Ham is a surprisingly young movement that had sprung from the visions of Ellen G. White in the mid-1800s. We have seen that this is wrong. In reality, young earth creation had been the consistent position of the church until the last few centuries.
We have been reviewing a recent podcast by VeggieTales creator Phil Vischer, and his co-hosts. Recall, Phil had made a number of false claims about Ken Ham and the history of biblical creation. We will continue our analysis of his claims here. The comments of Phil and other co-hosts are in purple text, with my response in black.