Sid: My guest by way of telephone is Dr. Carl Baugh. He’s founder and director of Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, Texas. He’s the discoverer and excavation director of 2 major dinosaurs. He is blowing, I mean BLOWING the theory of evolution out of the water. I must start with this question Carl, how old is the earth? Because at the beginning of the week you said there was a point where you believed in what is known as the Gap Theory which would account then for the earth being as old as many non-creationist say it is. How old is the earth?
Carl: All…right you’re precisely correct. There was a time for decades when I believed the Gap Theory accommodating the long geologic ages until I found that those geologic ages are all compressed into a single time frame. Sid beginning in what’s termed the Paleozoic, that is the ancient distant past of earth history. Going through the Mesozoic, the time of the dinosaurs that we’re all interested in, to the Cenozoic the age of mammals. In every one of those ages efforts and periods in the book I list human artifacts that have been found in every one of them, but according to evolutionary theory trilobites, that’s little free lobed sea creatures, appeared at the bottom of the geologic column, that long history of living systems on planet earth. Man then appears at the top being the ultimate of living systems, but according to the actual evidence all of these systems existed at the same time got caught in a global flood that we call the flood of Noah. So the question is, how old is the earth if it isn’t long geologic ages like 4.6 – 8 billion years in age? How old is it by scientific analysis? Dr. Thomas Barnes at that time head of the Physics Department University of Texas at El Paso, a world class physicist discovered that the earth’s magnetic field is decaying at a predictable exponential rate. That’s very important, a predictable exponential rate. So Carl Gauss who first measured the strength of the earth’s field back in… about 160 years ago in Germany began the measurement. After he died others continued and in the book I quote technical sources showing that that electromagnetic field continues to decay. Well Dr. Barnes found that it decay at a predictable rate and continues to do so. So he extrapolated backward, he went backward in time and projected it and found that if we approach 10,000 years ago, Sid that’s just a drop in the bucket in evolutionary scale of time. If we approach 10,000 years before present that field would have been so powerful that many of the molecules necessary for living systems could not have held together.
Sid: So you’re saying that the earth could not be over 10,000 years old?
Carl: Could not be over 10,000 years old. If we approach 15, 000 years ago then the earth would have had the energy of a magnetic star and many of the atoms necessary for living systems could not have held together. The earth is young by scientific measurement.
Sid: Now you even point out in your chapter on this that based on the current population of the world you can figure out that the earth is not that old.
Carl: Oh that’s right, let’s see if I can do that in a thumbnail sketch. We accelerate in growth statistics at a predictable rate, then on an average of every 80 years by wars, famine, natural disasters, we lose about a third of the population on an average. We start with the two-thirds and we go from there. That is predictable chronology of population growth statistics. Now with that rate that we have observed in recorded history, with that rate, if you just go back 41,000 years ago the population of planet earth today, using those population growth statistics, would be 2 x1089 (10 to the 89th power), Sid there’s not enough room in universe for that many bodies. On the other hand if you use the Biblical chronology of Noah’s flood and about 4500 years ago, restart the population with 8 people use that predictable growth statistic then you come up to about 6 billion people alive on planet earth today, and that’s precisely what we have today. So the Big Bang scenario and long history of the universe on planet earth are all thrown out the window if you deal with the facts. In fact in the book I deal with the Big Bang concept and show that leading scholars, themselves being evolutionists, admit that the physics of the Big Bang just won’t work. You have to introduce bizarre physics that have never been shown, demonstrated in the physical world, in other words…
Sid: So you really have to demonstrate faith to believe in evolution. Faith not based on science.
Carl: Sid to believe evolution you have to demonstrate faith without evidence. In creation we have faith required because without faith it’s impossible to please God. We have faith required but it is faith based on evidence. Microbiologist as I point out in the book state clearly that not only can they not trace the origin of life from inorganic nonliving chemicals, they can’t even envision how it could have happened knowing the laws of physics and what they find in the laboratory. So they have to base it on faith without any evidence, but the evidence they do find points clearly to design in the structure. In the book I have a 2 page spread of a bacterial flagellum, now that’s a little motor inside the bacteria. With a shaft, a universal joint, a stator, bushings this motor is so tiny that 8 million of them could fit in the dimensions of single human hair. That motor is able to current, it’s an electric motor, (laughing) in a little bacteria it’s able to turn clockwise and propel them forward, or clockwise and pull them out of a jam they might get into. All of that had to be designed, according to evolutionary concept those bacteria evolved 3.5 billion years ago, but they’re some of the most complicated structures in biological nature. So to believe evolution requires blind faith, to believe in creation requires embracing the evidence. So that comes to this question, why do good men believe bad science? Good scientists adopt evolutionary theory, why? On page 144 of the book, and again Sid I wish every single listener in your audience had a copy of this book because it would be an investment of their lives.
Sid: I happen to… I have to state there are 44 pages of full color illustrations and they’re not just nice illustrations, I mean they are works of art. So go on.
Carl: In fact I employed one of the finest graphics illustrators, computer graphics illustrators to do this, and many many thousands of dollars are tied up in just the illustrations alone. But that’s not the point, we’re not even trying to recoup I’m just trying to invest in lives and the illustrations are worth the price of the book alone. Since this is the final program I think maybe we should try to answer “Why do men believe evolution…”
Sid: Please.
Carl: “…against all odds?” On page 144 I list the 6 observable reasons:
- First of all, good men believe bad science, or good men believe evolution because of misinformation about evidence for or against evolution. The published information is often quite slanted and they’re not familiar with all the evidence. They’re trusting someone else and their judgment.
- The second reason people adopt evolution is a desire to appear intellectual to our self or our peers. Peer pressure is extremely important particularly in the academic setting. If you don’t believe evolution then you’re considered to be a little less intellectual and you really didn’t get it when it was taught to you. Well but that’s not really the facts, some of the most brilliant professors I know have abandoned evolution, have adopted creation because of the evidence and because they are intellectual enough to embrace the truth. But there’s a desire for us to appear intellectual in our self-esteem or to our peers.
- The third reason people adopt evolution is often influence by associates or instructors. All major universities including most of the major Christian universities teach evolution and the professor is more often than not an evolutionist, he’s intelligent so we think he has access to all the data but often he does not have access to all the data. Influence by associates or instructors.
- This is quite important, many people adopt evolution as a reaction to restrictive individuals. Quite often because of our convictions, moral ethics, some of us are a little restrictive in that we try to impose those upon others without realizing that it’s a volition and sometime an uncle or even a pastor may be so restrictive that there’s a reaction to that. Well now quite often that person should be restricted but again…
Sid: Oh! I’m so sorry Carl we’re out of time.
