Reducibly Complex

“The belief that all things are created solely for the utility of man has stained with many errors that most noble part of physics which deals with the ends of things.”

-Franz Maria Ulrich Theodor Hoch Aepinus, born on this day in 1724. Aepius was a Dutch physicist whose Tentamen theoriae electricitatis et magnetismi (”An Attempt at a Theory of Electricity and Magnetism”) was the first work to apply mathematics to the theory of electricity and magnetism. Aepinus’ experiments led to the design of the parallel-platecapacitor, a device used to store  energy in an electric field.

This is Part 7 of the ten part blog debunking the claims made on CreationEvidence.org’s “Evidence for Creation.” This blog examines point #7.

STATEMENT: “Physicist Melvin Cook, found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.”

RESPONSE: Admittedly, the scientific data regarding this argument is a bit complicated, but Dave E. Matson has written a paper titled “How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments?” and addresses the subject of atmospheric helium-4 amounts. Matson goes into great detail, and I shall summarize as best I can:

Helium-4 is the result of radioactive alpha decay. (definition: alpha decay occurs “because the nucleus [of an atom] has too many protons which cause excessive repulsion. In an attempt to reduce the repulsion, a Helium nucleus is emitted” (“Three Types of Radioactive Decay”, thinkquest.org).) Helium-4 is “produced” as it escapes from within the earth to the atmosphere. It is hypothesized that a small amount of helium-4 is lost as it is heated and escapes the atmosphere altogether. However, the “most probable mechanism for helium loss is photoionization of helium by the polar wind and its escape along open lines of the Earth’s magnetic field” (Matson). Polar wind accounts for an escape of helium-4 that is nearly identical to the estimated production. Similarly, helium-4 may escape from the atmosphere through a “direct interaction of the solar wind [...] during the short periods of lower magnetic-field intensity while the field is reversing. Sheldon and Kern (1972) estimated that 20 geomagnetic-field reversals over the past 3.5 million years would have assured a balance between helium production and loss” (Matson).

CONCLUSION: What’s missing from creationevidence.org’s argument (aka what is implied by their argument) is that if helium-4 is being produced at the rate that it is, the amount of helium-4 observed in the atmosphere indicates a young earth. As has been shown, however, there are several mechanisms that account for the loss of helium-4 in the atmosphere. “Thus,” Matson states, “the helium balance calculations provided by creationist Melvin Cook [...] cannot provide a reliable minimum estimate of the earth’s age. [The creationists' argument from helium-4 production] is a fatal oversimplification of a complex problem” (Matson).

Please visit our advertisers!

(the views expressed by our sponsors are property of the individual sponsor alone, and do not reflect the opinion of ReduciblyComplex.com)

“Let it be so.”

-Guglielmo Marconi, in the first Morse message sent across the Bristol Channel, 1897 (not on this day).  Marconi was an Italian inventor and physicist who invented the wireless telegraph in 1935 known today as radio. On this day in 1896, Marconi gave the first public demonstration of his radio equipment at Toynbee Hall, East London. Also on this day five years later (1901), Marconi sent the first transatlantic radio signal from Poldhu in Cornwall, which was recieved by Percy Wright Pae in St. John’s, Newfoundland.

There is nothing particularly special about this quote other than its simplicity, and I find that amusing.

For those of you skeptics and scientists in the Madison, Wisconsin, area:

There is a new meetup.com group for Madison Skeptics. Anyone interested in skepticism or scientiic advocacy should join the group and add yourself to the mailing list. There is a meeting THIS SUNDAY, December 14th, at the Panera Bread restaurant at 3416 University Ave in Madison. I will be there, along with my two-month old son and probably my fiance. There is also a meetup scheduled for December 27th, although I will be out of town and unable to attend. Come out and enjoy some Panera bread and lively skepticism with other skeptics from the Madison area.

“A mere inference or theory must give way to a truth revealed; but a scientific truth must be maintained, however contradictory it may appear to the most cherished doctrines of religion.”

-Sir David Brewster, physicist noted for his experimental work in optics and polarized light (light in which all waves lie in the same plane.) He is known for Brewster’s Law, which relates the refractive index of a material to its polarizing angle (which is the incident angle at which reflected light becomes completely polarized). He patented the kaleidoscope in 1817.

I have decided to change things up a little bit with the Quote of the Day. From now on the quote will be from someone in science who was born, died, or did something awesome in science on this particular date.

Sir David Brewster was born on this day in 1781.

I love this quote because of it seems to be an explicit argument for evolution vs. religion, but it was spoken by Sir David Brewster three years before Darwin published his famous On the Origin of Species.

Dr. Steven Novella, neurologist at Yale and president of the New England Skeptical Society (and host of the Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe, blogger at Neurologica, blogger at Skepticblog, and blogger at The Rogue’s Gallery) has put together an excellent blog about the battle against creation science as a part of his multi-part blog on the Skeptical Battlegrounds. It is an excellent read that I highly recommend.

“I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.”

-Wilson Mizner

Education has kept me very busy lately. Faith never does.

I realize that I haven’t written a post for well over a week, now. The are a few reasons for this, but the most important reason would be that I am coming down toward the end of the semester and I have been very busy with my studies and writing papers and tests. This trend is going to continue through until the end of next week; after the 19th of the month I should be able to start writing posts frequently again. In the meantime, look for a few “Quote of the Day” posts, even if these don’t come daily. (After all, Quote of the Day is not a daily post, just that those particular days that there is a quote for - there is a quote for.)

This is Part 6 of the ten part blog debunking the claims made on CreationEvidence.org’s “Evidence for Creation.” This blog examines point #6.

STATEMENT: ”Human Artifacts throughout the Geologic Column…Man-made artifacts - such as the hammer in Cretaceous rock, a human sandal print with trilobite in Cambrian rock, human footprints and a handprint in Cretaceous rock – point to the fact that all the supposed geologic periods actually occurred at the same time in the recent past.”

RESPONSE: The work cited for this claim is Carl Baugh’s Why Do Men Believe Evolution Against All Odds?. However, this claim has been disproved by scientists and, more importantly, criticized by creationists. Many creationists, including the creationist organization Answers in Genisis (AIG), have criticized Baugh, claiming that he has “muddied the water for many christian.” Don Batten, of Creation Ministries International wrote: “Some Christians will try to use Baugh’s ‘evidences’ in witnessing and get ’shot down’ by someone who is scientifically literate. The ones witnessed to will thereafter be wary of all creation evidences and even more inclined to dismiss Christians as nut cases not worth listening to.”

As to Baugh’s “artifacts,” his evidence is lacking. “In 1982-1984, several scientists, including J.R. Cole, L.R. Godfrey, R.J. Hastings, and S.D. Schafersman, examined Baugh’s purported ‘mantracks’ as well as others provided by creationists in the Glen Rose Formation. In the course of the examination ‘Baugh contradicted his own earlier reports of the locations of key discoveries’ and many of the supposed prints ‘lacked human characteristics.’ After a three year investigation of the tracks and Baugh’s specimens, the scientists concluded there was no evidence of any of Baugh’s claims or any ‘dinosaur-man tracks’” (quoted from Wikipedia page on Carl Baugh).

CONCLUSION: It is important to note that Carl Baugh is the founder of the Creation Evidence museum, the organization that has compiled this list of “evidences” for creation. Baugh’s own work has been scientifically debunked, and Baugh himself is considered to be a detriment to the creationist cause by his contemporaries. This fact alone should be enough to convince the masses not to believe in his argument for creation based on human artifacts found “throughout the geologic column.”

(Note: The geologic column in itself is a faulty argument. See Part 1 of this blog for more information.)

Please visit our advertisers!

(the views expressed by our sponsors are property of the individual sponsor alone, and do not reflect the opinion of ReduciblyComplex.com)

“I believe there is no source of deception in the investigation of nature which can compare with a fixed belief that certain kinds of phenomena are IMPOSSIBLE.”

-William James

Anything is possible in science, but the degree to which a hypothesis is accepted or denied is directly proportional to the amount of evidence in support of it or detracting from it, as well as to the amount of evidence supporting or detracting from an alternate hypothesis. Creation science and intelligent design are not impossible hypotheses, but the evidence supporting them is lacking, and the evidence supporting an alternate hypothesis (i.e. evolution) is overwhelming.

Please visit our advertisers!

(the views expressed by our sponsors are property of the individual sponsor alone, and do not reflect the opinion of ReduciblyComplex.com)