Hello, I'm Dr. Sven Ostring, and
welcome to Evolution Impossible.
00:00:36.06\00:00:40.24
The question of where
life originally came from
00:00:40.67\00:00:43.00
intrigues everyone,
no matter whether you're
00:00:43.04\00:00:44.97
a seven-year-old girl or
a distinguished professor.
00:00:45.01\00:00:48.01
However, there is quite a
variety of different theories
00:00:48.34\00:00:51.61
about how life
really did come about.
00:00:51.65\00:00:53.92
In this series, we're going to
be exploring the biggest theory
00:00:54.32\00:00:57.32
in the world today: evolution.
00:00:57.35\00:00:58.85
It's taught at universities
and promoted in the media.
00:00:59.09\00:01:01.66
But have you ever
stopped to ask whether evolution
00:01:01.69\00:01:04.83
is even possible?
00:01:04.86\00:01:06.19
According to some experts,
that's the question that should
00:01:06.46\00:01:09.66
not even be raised in schools,
00:01:09.70\00:01:11.70
which is really
quite surprising.
00:01:12.07\00:01:14.17
It makes me even more curious
to explore whether evolution
00:01:14.30\00:01:17.31
really works or not.
00:01:17.34\00:01:19.31
Here with me to explore
this really big topic is
00:01:19.57\00:01:22.08
Dr. John Ashton,
Ellie Turner, Blair Lemke,
00:01:22.11\00:01:25.25
and Stephen Aveling-Rowe.
00:01:25.28\00:01:26.61
Thanks for joining me today.
00:01:26.65\00:01:28.05
Now, John, this is not a
new topic for you, is it?
00:01:28.58\00:01:31.32
It's a topic that you
told me you've been exploring
00:01:31.35\00:01:33.92
for almost 50 years.
00:01:33.96\00:01:36.06
Which is more
than I've been alive.
00:01:36.09\00:01:38.19
And what I want to know is
this: what got you interested
00:01:38.29\00:01:41.43
initially in exploring whether
evolution really works or not?
00:01:41.46\00:01:46.20
Well, I started going to church
in 1970, and at that time I was
00:01:46.23\00:01:51.94
working as a research fellow
at the University of Tasmania.
00:01:51.97\00:01:54.84
And when the church
folk found out that I was a
00:01:55.04\00:01:57.41
research scientist, they
said, "Well, do you believe in
00:01:57.45\00:02:00.28
evolution or do you believe in
the Bible account of creation?"
00:02:00.32\00:02:03.85
Now I had studied geology
at university for a while,
00:02:04.02\00:02:09.12
and so that's when I
began researching the evidence.
00:02:09.26\00:02:13.26
Where did the evidence sit?
00:02:13.29\00:02:15.50
I actually had a friend who
was doing his doctorate as well
00:02:16.33\00:02:20.24
in the area of geochemistry.
00:02:20.27\00:02:22.67
And he was studying a
gold deposit in New Zealand
00:02:22.90\00:02:28.14
and had a prospector's
shovel handle radiocarbon dated,
00:02:28.18\00:02:32.78
and it came back at
6,600 years from the
00:02:32.81\00:02:36.95
radio dating laboratory.
00:02:36.99\00:02:38.35
And we both thought to ourself,
how can this be that old?
00:02:38.39\00:02:42.36
- When did the
mining actually, occur?
00:02:42.56\00:02:44.16
In the 1880s in New Zealand.
00:02:44.19\00:02:46.23
So not 6000 years ago.
00:02:46.26\00:02:48.33
Well, no, we didn't believe that
the tree that it was made from
00:02:48.36\00:02:51.97
would have been that old.
00:02:52.00\00:02:54.74
So since then, I've
been doing a lot of reading.
00:02:54.77\00:02:57.51
And then another time,
I thought, well why don't
00:02:58.31\00:03:01.31
I ask scientists who
do believe in creation
00:03:01.34\00:03:05.75
why they believe in creation.
00:03:05.78\00:03:08.42
And so I wrote to a number
of scientists around the world,
00:03:08.45\00:03:10.89
leading scientists, who I
found out through, you know,
00:03:10.92\00:03:14.76
connections were creationists.
00:03:14.79\00:03:16.79
And they came back...
00:03:16.83\00:03:18.23
- What was the
outcome of that project?
00:03:18.26\00:03:19.76
Well, the outcome was that
I put the articles together
00:03:19.79\00:03:23.26
and it became the
book, In Six Days:
00:03:23.30\00:03:24.87
Why Fifty Scientists
Choose to Believe in Creation.
00:03:24.90\00:03:27.64
And that's been a
best seller on Amazon
00:03:27.84\00:03:29.64
since 1999 when that came out.
00:03:29.67\00:03:32.81
And then it's
interesting, this whole concept
00:03:33.01\00:03:37.65
that life arose
through random mutations.
00:03:37.68\00:03:41.32
Now of course, we
know now that, well, since
00:03:41.35\00:03:44.55
the development and
understanding of DNA
00:03:44.59\00:03:46.92
that we've got
to change the DNA,
00:03:46.96\00:03:48.92
and mutations
can change the DNA.
00:03:49.12\00:03:51.56
I was meeting actually
with some plant breeders
00:03:51.59\00:03:55.30
at the leading
Australian university,
00:03:56.16\00:03:59.07
and we were
talking about a new project
00:03:59.43\00:04:01.54
that we were involved in.
00:04:01.57\00:04:03.07
And I asked the lead
plant breeder, you know,
00:04:03.17\00:04:06.98
"Do mutations produce
new genetic information?"
00:04:07.01\00:04:10.95
And he said, "Oh
yea, no worries."
00:04:11.21\00:04:12.75
And so I said, "Well,
can you give me an example?"
00:04:12.78\00:04:15.15
And he paused and he
hesitated, and he said,
00:04:15.65\00:04:18.19
"Hmm, can't think of one."
00:04:18.22\00:04:19.55
But he said, "Ask
our chief geneticist."
00:04:19.59\00:04:21.49
And none of the
other guys at the table,
00:04:21.79\00:04:23.99
we were having lunch
at the time, commented.
00:04:24.03\00:04:25.79
But later that afternoon I
met up with the chief geneticist
00:04:25.99\00:04:29.50
and I asked him
the same question.
00:04:29.53\00:04:30.87
And he said, "No, never."
00:04:30.90\00:04:32.23
He said, "Mutations
destroy the information in DNA."
00:04:32.27\00:04:36.14
He said, "We produce changes,
but we're producing changes
00:04:36.24\00:04:38.87
by destroying DNA,
not making new DNA."
00:04:38.91\00:04:41.94
And this was very relevant,
because really the theory
00:04:42.24\00:04:45.41
claims that the
mutations are producing new DNA.
00:04:45.45\00:04:48.58
Very interesting. And
that you so much, John.
00:04:48.85\00:04:51.59
And I just would
really be interested in
00:04:51.62\00:04:53.15
your perspective as well.
00:04:53.19\00:04:54.52
So, Ellie, why are you
interested in the topic of
00:04:54.56\00:04:57.39
evolution and creation?
00:04:57.43\00:04:59.43
Look, for me it really
began during my schooling years.
00:04:59.83\00:05:03.77
So my oldest sister,
she's two years older than I am,
00:05:03.80\00:05:07.14
she was going through
high school and she started
00:05:07.34\00:05:09.37
being taught
evolution, of course.
00:05:09.94\00:05:12.07
And I just naturally
became interested in it as well.
00:05:12.27\00:05:16.78
She started really researching
the different arguments
00:05:16.81\00:05:20.12
of creation versus evolution.
00:05:20.15\00:05:21.75
Yeah, and ever since then
it's been an interest of mine
00:05:22.78\00:05:25.19
and I've done a lot
of reading on the topic.
00:05:25.22\00:05:26.99
And what about you, Stephen?
00:05:28.42\00:05:29.76
Where did your
interest arise from?
00:05:30.13\00:05:32.19
I guess you can say it started
around the family dinner table
00:05:32.86\00:05:35.46
with Dad being a biochemist
and teacher in many schools.
00:05:35.50\00:05:38.67
It's a topic that's foundational
to the understanding of
00:05:38.70\00:05:41.87
the sciences, and then for me
particularly as I'm into nature
00:05:41.90\00:05:45.81
and wildlife in a big way.
00:05:45.84\00:05:47.64
Understanding the
way speciation occurs
00:05:48.01\00:05:50.58
and the development of
these species over time
00:05:50.78\00:05:54.42
is really fascinating to me.
00:05:54.62\00:05:56.35
So these are
fundamental questions for me.
00:05:56.65\00:05:58.65
What about you, Blair?
00:05:59.09\00:06:00.42
Is there sort of a
family kind of affair as well
00:06:00.46\00:06:03.09
with the whole evolution thing?
00:06:03.12\00:06:04.46
Yeah, look, for me I work
with a lot of young people,
00:06:04.49\00:06:07.33
young people of faith, young
people who are trying to learn
00:06:07.73\00:06:10.20
about faith, and one of the
key things that always comes up
00:06:10.23\00:06:14.40
is the discussion of
evolution and how that fits in
00:06:14.44\00:06:18.11
or doesn't fit in with
the Christian worldview,
00:06:18.14\00:06:20.41
you know, as a
competing worldview.
00:06:20.71\00:06:22.28
And so, in my role
working with young people,
00:06:22.31\00:06:25.51
that's come up often and
it's been a point of interest
00:06:25.71\00:06:28.22
that has kind of
started me asking questions and
00:06:28.25\00:06:31.29
looking at the biblical
account and comparing it against
00:06:31.69\00:06:34.59
theories that are
suggested in science;
00:06:34.62\00:06:37.09
seeing where the
two can fit together
00:06:37.13\00:06:39.13
and where there's disconnect.
00:06:39.16\00:06:40.50
So yeah, it's a big question
of life that more people ask,
00:06:40.60\00:06:44.97
and young people
particularly ask.
00:06:45.00\00:06:46.90
It's interesting
that you should say that,
00:06:46.94\00:06:48.27
Blair, because they've
done research, a small research
00:06:48.30\00:06:51.07
project, and what they
found is that as young people
00:06:51.11\00:06:55.54
accept evolution and
they go to university,
00:06:55.58\00:06:57.48
often their faith is
eroded because of that.
00:06:57.51\00:07:00.22
So it's a big topic in
terms of not only from a science
00:07:00.42\00:07:03.75
point of view, but also from
a faith perspective as well.
00:07:03.79\00:07:07.06
But Stephen, I was
just wondering, you know,
00:07:07.16\00:07:08.96
when you're at school
with your science classes,
00:07:08.99\00:07:12.23
what were you taught
in terms of evolution?
00:07:12.73\00:07:14.36
What comes to mind in terms
of the evolution topic for you?
00:07:14.40\00:07:18.83
Look, for me it was a
slightly different experience
00:07:19.70\00:07:22.30
coming from a home
educated perspective.
00:07:22.34\00:07:24.81
But with that in
mind, nonetheless,
00:07:25.27\00:07:27.18
I've been well
grounded in both perspectives
00:07:27.21\00:07:29.88
and free to make my own mind up.
00:07:30.15\00:07:31.85
And so it's through
much reading, research,
00:07:31.88\00:07:34.85
reading books like
yours, that have helped give me
00:07:34.95\00:07:37.69
a perspective that
I think holds water.
00:07:37.72\00:07:39.89
What about you, Ellie, in terms
of, did you do science classes?
00:07:41.52\00:07:45.63
And what were the things
which were coming through
00:07:45.66\00:07:47.63
in your science education?
00:07:48.13\00:07:49.96
For me, evolution was taught
many times through high school,
00:07:50.00\00:07:54.20
and it came
through even when we were
00:07:54.24\00:07:55.60
learning about other topics.
00:07:55.64\00:07:56.97
It would come
through again and again.
00:07:57.01\00:07:58.34
And it was very much taught as
fact, very much taught as fact.
00:07:59.14\00:08:02.11
There wasn't any question
about whether it was true or not
00:08:02.14\00:08:05.41
in the teacher's eyes, I guess.
00:08:05.95\00:08:07.52
It's interesting that
you should say that, Ellie.
00:08:08.32\00:08:10.52
Because, John, the fact
is, for all of these guys here,
00:08:10.55\00:08:14.89
they didn't
necessarily do science
00:08:15.36\00:08:17.73
in terms of at university.
00:08:17.76\00:08:19.39
But even at the primary school
and even the high school levels
00:08:19.63\00:08:23.57
evolution was really promoted.
00:08:24.07\00:08:26.17
So I want to know, what
is the official position
00:08:26.20\00:08:29.27
with regards to evolution
among the education experts
00:08:29.54\00:08:33.07
that you're aware of?
00:08:33.11\00:08:34.51
Yeah, sure, well evolution
is certainly considered
00:08:34.84\00:08:37.65
as a fact of science now.
00:08:37.68\00:08:39.71
And different science
academies around the world
00:08:39.98\00:08:43.28
have published
statements to that effect,
00:08:44.09\00:08:46.49
that evolution is now
considered a fact of science.
00:08:46.52\00:08:49.82
What I find that's very
interesting is that when you
00:08:50.26\00:08:52.69
read these statements,
they're not supported
00:08:52.73\00:08:55.43
by any scientific evidence.
00:08:55.46\00:08:56.83
They make assertions that there
is a large body of scientific
00:08:56.87\00:09:01.07
evidence
supporting those claims.
00:09:01.10\00:09:03.71
Now the interesting thing
is, since I've been researching
00:09:03.94\00:09:07.41
this, unfortunately the
use of the word, "evolution,"
00:09:07.44\00:09:12.18
is very broad and it can
mean just very small changes.
00:09:12.21\00:09:15.05
And sure, we have
evidence for very small changes.
00:09:15.08\00:09:18.35
But the mechanisms that
underpin these small changes
00:09:18.55\00:09:22.22
are not the same
mechanisms that would produce
00:09:22.32\00:09:25.23
a new type of organism.
00:09:25.26\00:09:26.73
And I think this is
a very important point.
00:09:26.93\00:09:29.40
And when I look
further, there's actually no,
00:09:29.43\00:09:32.57
well, I haven't been able
to find any published paper
00:09:32.60\00:09:35.60
that provides the evidence
for a mechanism that can explain
00:09:35.84\00:09:39.77
how evolution can be a fact, nor
in the geological publications,
00:09:39.81\00:09:46.68
or paleontological publications,
or fossil record, and so forth,
00:09:46.72\00:09:52.22
they don't show this gradual
change of evolution either.
00:09:52.45\00:09:55.59
They show complete species.
00:09:55.62\00:09:57.13
So I find this very interesting.
00:09:57.56\00:09:59.59
So when these organizations
make these statements now,
00:09:59.63\00:10:03.10
they're not supported
by a list of references.
00:10:03.43\00:10:06.00
They're just
assertions that it is a fact.
00:10:06.17\00:10:08.80
Now, one interesting thing
that I noticed in one textbook
00:10:08.84\00:10:12.21
when I was at one of the
universities in Melbourne
00:10:12.24\00:10:15.18
in their library one day was
that they had a big statement,
00:10:15.38\00:10:19.51
a chapter heading,
Evolution is a Fact.
00:10:19.55\00:10:22.72
And then in another
section a little bit further on
00:10:22.85\00:10:26.05
in the chapter it said,
one of the leading areas that
00:10:26.09\00:10:28.79
evolution is working
on is trying to figure out
00:10:29.12\00:10:31.26
how evolution works,
how evolution happens.
00:10:31.29\00:10:34.16
So in one saying, it's
a fact, but then they say,
00:10:34.26\00:10:36.83
"Well, hang on, we actually
don't know how it happens yet."
00:10:36.87\00:10:39.87
And it certainly comes
to mind, you know, books by
00:10:40.14\00:10:41.97
Richard Dawkins, Jerry
Coyne, where they really say,
00:10:42.00\00:10:45.31
"Evolution is a fact,"
right on the very first page.
00:10:45.34\00:10:48.44
It's an amazing coincide.
00:10:48.48\00:10:50.11
Yes, John, this whole series is
all going to be about evolution.
00:10:50.15\00:10:53.88
So we're going to cover a lot
of different scientific topics.
00:10:53.92\00:10:56.85
But could you just
run through with us
00:10:57.25\00:10:59.75
what is the evidence
which scientists would use
00:11:00.02\00:11:03.86
to say that evolution is a fact?
00:11:03.89\00:11:05.63
What, sort of, are the pillars
that kind of support this idea?
00:11:05.66\00:11:09.26
Well, I think the main pillars
are the belief in the long age
00:11:09.70\00:11:14.04
for life on earth as
being billions of years old.
00:11:14.07\00:11:19.51
So it's somewhere
between 2.5 to 4 billion years,
00:11:19.54\00:11:22.74
maybe 3.8 billion years.
00:11:23.78\00:11:25.71
They say that this gives a
long time life has evolved over,
00:11:25.81\00:11:29.15
this long period of time.
00:11:29.18\00:11:30.52
And I think that
now we have evidence
00:11:30.59\00:11:33.42
to question those long ages.
00:11:33.46\00:11:35.26
We have a whole lot of
data now available to us
00:11:35.29\00:11:38.39
that says, hang on,
this whole Uniformitarian
00:11:38.69\00:11:41.76
Principle has problems.
00:11:41.80\00:11:43.77
The radiometric dating
methods have major problems.
00:11:43.97\00:11:47.84
And one of the things
that people don't realize is,
00:11:47.87\00:11:50.31
that the radiometric
dating methods have actually
00:11:50.64\00:11:54.31
never been validated
for prehistorical dates.
00:11:54.34\00:11:57.51
So, you know, I've
worked as a chief chemist for a
00:11:57.78\00:12:01.05
National Association
of Testing Authorities
00:12:01.08\00:12:03.62
registered laboratory.
00:12:03.95\00:12:05.45
And we had standard methods.
00:12:05.49\00:12:07.49
The methods have
to be validated using
00:12:07.52\00:12:09.32
standard reference materials.
00:12:09.36\00:12:11.23
And this is one of
the interesting facts
00:12:11.53\00:12:14.70
with radiometric dating:
it hasn't been validated.
00:12:14.73\00:12:17.87
And there are a lot of
other evidence that we now have
00:12:17.90\00:12:20.34
that suggest that, hang
on, the biblical picture of
00:12:20.37\00:12:23.24
a young earth, of
young life on earth
00:12:23.27\00:12:25.17
actually fits
the data much better.
00:12:25.21\00:12:27.28
But of course, secular science
doesn't want to go there.
00:12:27.54\00:12:30.15
They don't want to know
anything about the Bible record.
00:12:30.18\00:12:32.58
They want to be able to explain
things in material things.
00:12:32.61\00:12:35.25
But they're running into
major problems in all the areas.
00:12:35.45\00:12:38.82
You know, not only in
biology, but in space science,
00:12:38.92\00:12:42.76
in our understanding of time.
00:12:42.79\00:12:44.43
A whole lot of these areas
are really raising questions,
00:12:44.46\00:12:48.66
particularly on these long ages,
and are pointing all the time
00:12:48.70\00:12:52.50
in the direction of
the biblical picture.
00:12:52.60\00:12:54.40
Which I find is really exciting.
00:12:54.44\00:12:57.11
But the issue is
that this information,
00:12:57.14\00:13:00.11
this new research, isn't
getting out to the young people.
00:13:00.14\00:13:04.88
It's not being
taught in our schools.
00:13:04.98\00:13:07.38
You know, they're still sticking
with this old curricular.
00:13:07.42\00:13:10.69
Now the evidence is
very, very shaky and crumbling.
00:13:10.85\00:13:13.82
Just wanted to ask you
guys, did you have any questions
00:13:14.92\00:13:17.79
for Dr. Ashton, you know,
with regards to this idea that
00:13:17.83\00:13:21.70
evolution is fact and science
really says that this is the
00:13:21.73\00:13:27.14
way that life came about?
00:13:27.17\00:13:28.57
Look, I was actually going
to ask you, just in relation to
00:13:28.87\00:13:33.58
tertiary education for
scientists and, I guess,
00:13:33.61\00:13:36.48
how that's structured,
because I'd always thought that
00:13:36.51\00:13:38.78
scientists were, almost
by definition, taught to
00:13:38.81\00:13:41.95
question that data.
00:13:41.98\00:13:43.32
Yeah, to question theories,
to question conclusions,
00:13:44.09\00:13:47.22
and test things again
and again to prove science.
00:13:47.42\00:13:50.33
So when you're talking
about evolution just being
00:13:50.49\00:13:52.43
taught as a fact
without any references,
00:13:52.46\00:13:54.26
and that kind of thing, I'm
just, yeah, wondering, I guess,
00:13:54.30\00:13:57.97
how they are taught to think.
00:13:58.00\00:13:59.63
Are they taught
to think critically?
00:13:59.67\00:14:01.00
Does this happen with other
theories or is it just evolution
00:14:01.04\00:14:04.24
that you see
this happening with?
00:14:04.44\00:14:06.91
I'm wondering if there's
maybe just an agenda behind
00:14:07.01\00:14:09.48
the teaching of evolution.
00:14:09.68\00:14:11.18
Well, I don't think
there's necessarily an agenda,
00:14:11.21\00:14:14.52
but most scientists are
going to teach evolution
00:14:15.18\00:14:19.22
because that's what
they've been taught.
00:14:19.25\00:14:20.92
They've been taught it
in their science class,
00:14:21.26\00:14:23.16
they've had to examine it.
00:14:23.19\00:14:24.53
They haven't actually
been taught to question it.
00:14:24.56\00:14:28.16
And really, in a way
it has become a sacred cow
00:14:28.40\00:14:31.77
by scientists who
are fairly political.
00:14:32.40\00:14:34.67
So we have certain
groups of scientists that are
00:14:34.70\00:14:36.97
fairly political, and
that they are definitely
00:14:37.01\00:14:40.24
pushing an agenda that God must
be kept out of the classroom.
00:14:40.28\00:14:44.48
That all the explanations
of the physical world
00:14:44.51\00:14:47.62
have physical explanations.
00:14:47.65\00:14:49.32
There is no supernatural.
00:14:49.35\00:14:51.92
There is no
non-material existence.
00:14:51.95\00:14:54.19
Now one of the areas that
challenges this, of course,
00:14:54.22\00:14:56.66
is the mind, is consciousness.
00:14:56.69\00:14:58.99
And Thomas Nagal,
professor of philosophy
00:14:59.33\00:15:01.66
at the University of New York,
has questioned this recently
00:15:01.70\00:15:05.93
in the book,
Mind and the Cosmos,
00:15:05.97\00:15:07.50
because that's a
non-material entity.
00:15:07.54\00:15:09.84
And he has actually
begun to question that
00:15:10.04\00:15:13.74
the Darwinian explanation
can actually explain things.
00:15:14.41\00:15:17.85
In fact, now a large number of
scientists, over 1000 scientists
00:15:18.21\00:15:23.32
who have doctorate
qualifications in the area
00:15:23.35\00:15:26.35
related to biology, molecular
biology, zoology, paleontology,
00:15:26.55\00:15:30.33
and so forth, have
signed a statement that they
00:15:30.36\00:15:33.33
are skeptical that Darwin's
theory can actually explain
00:15:33.36\00:15:38.37
the diversity of life on earth.
00:15:38.40\00:15:39.97
And they have set up a website,
dissentfromdarwin.org, one word.
00:15:40.00\00:15:44.51
So over 1000
scientists have signed that now.
00:15:46.31\00:15:48.74
And I think this is what's
happening, is that scientists
00:15:49.04\00:15:52.15
are now feeling a
little bit more freedom now
00:15:52.18\00:15:54.82
and are stepping out.
00:15:54.85\00:15:56.18
Whereas, if you go
back, say, 10 years ago,
00:15:56.22\00:15:58.65
if a scientist
spoke out against this,
00:15:58.82\00:16:00.92
he was likely to lose his job.
00:16:00.96\00:16:02.86
And I think there was
evidence for this, for example,
00:16:02.89\00:16:06.43
when Dr. Avital, who
was the chief scientist
00:16:06.46\00:16:10.70
for the Israeli Ministry of
Health, was newly appointed,
00:16:10.73\00:16:13.84
and one of the things he said
was, "Well, I don't want to ask
00:16:14.17\00:16:17.14
students just being taught
that we evolved from monkeys.
00:16:17.17\00:16:19.64
I don't believe we
evolved from monkeys.
00:16:19.67\00:16:21.64
I want them to be able
to look at other options."
00:16:21.68\00:16:24.41
He was then
immediately asked to resign.
00:16:24.58\00:16:27.55
Sacked, in fact.
00:16:27.72\00:16:29.75
So that's a, you
know, very high level.
00:16:29.78\00:16:31.82
You know, Israel, a very
high standard of education.
00:16:31.85\00:16:34.36
Their chief scientist within
their ministry of education
00:16:34.56\00:16:37.76
questioned evolution, and
there was such a protest by a
00:16:37.96\00:16:41.23
small number of
other scientists.
00:16:41.26\00:16:43.16
And that led to
him being sacked.
00:16:43.37\00:16:45.37
So that's the
background that some scientists
00:16:45.57\00:16:47.77
have been operating in.
00:16:47.80\00:16:49.27
So then following on from that,
I mean, we're often told that
00:16:49.67\00:16:52.54
the mechanism for
evolution is natural selection.
00:16:52.57\00:16:55.11
And that's telling us the
way that everything is able to
00:16:55.38\00:16:58.61
evolve and become what it is.
00:16:58.65\00:17:00.45
You know, from
microbe to microbiologist.
00:17:00.48\00:17:02.98
You know, so
talk us through that.
00:17:03.18\00:17:05.19
Would you explain your
perspective on natural selection
00:17:05.22\00:17:08.76
and actually what that does?
00:17:08.96\00:17:10.93
Well, this is probably an
area that we're going to take
00:17:11.83\00:17:16.93
a lot more time to get into.
00:17:16.97\00:17:21.10
But we do observe
natural selection in nature.
00:17:21.30\00:17:24.27
And that is that, sure, if
you have, say for example, dogs,
00:17:24.37\00:17:29.34
and they happen to find there's
a really cold snap come over,
00:17:29.38\00:17:33.01
then the dogs with longer hair
are going to survive better.
00:17:33.05\00:17:36.25
The others might,
you know, freeze out.
00:17:36.28\00:17:37.75
So they'll breed and preserve
those genes for long hair
00:17:37.79\00:17:41.36
in that particular cold area.
00:17:41.39\00:17:43.46
So we know, for example,
there were ice ages in the past,
00:17:43.63\00:17:46.36
and these sort of
things, so any dogs like that
00:17:46.39\00:17:49.63
caught in that sort of
environment, they're going to,
00:17:49.66\00:17:52.67
with the short
hair, they'll die.
00:17:52.70\00:17:54.70
Another classic example
cited on the Smithsonian sight
00:17:54.90\00:17:58.54
is that you've got the
example of, say, mice out in a
00:17:58.77\00:18:04.15
desert area, mice
migrating to a desert area
00:18:04.25\00:18:09.25
where there's sort of
yellow sand, the dark mice are
00:18:09.28\00:18:11.82
going to be more easily
picked off by the birds.
00:18:11.85\00:18:14.89
And so, only the pale
furred mice are going to breed.
00:18:15.06\00:18:19.13
And so you're going to
have a selection which improves
00:18:19.16\00:18:21.46
survival in that area.
00:18:21.50\00:18:22.96
The important aspect of
that is, that's not new code.
00:18:23.37\00:18:27.84
That's loss of code.
00:18:28.04\00:18:29.97
It's loss of that
genetic information.
00:18:30.21\00:18:32.64
Now this is a
very important aspect
00:18:32.81\00:18:34.68
where Darwin's
theory proposed two things:
00:18:34.88\00:18:37.85
that you have mutations, and
then you have natural selection.
00:18:37.88\00:18:42.48
It's the mutations that's
suppose to produce new code.
00:18:42.72\00:18:46.12
The natural selections
then, out of all the supposed
00:18:46.25\00:18:50.09
random, you know, out
of all the different types
00:18:50.13\00:18:53.29
of new organisms that
were supposed to arise,
00:18:53.33\00:18:56.16
natural selection would
then select for the best ones,
00:18:56.20\00:18:59.80
because the environment
would destroy the others.
00:18:59.83\00:19:02.00
They wouldn't survive very well.
00:19:02.04\00:19:03.64
And so, natural selection
is not a way of producing
00:19:03.87\00:19:06.78
new organisms.
00:19:06.81\00:19:08.41
It's a way of just eliminating
the ones that aren't surviving.
00:19:08.51\00:19:11.81
So the whole theory of
evolution powerfully depends
00:19:12.01\00:19:15.92
on the mechanism of
mutations being able
00:19:15.95\00:19:18.95
to produce new organisms.
00:19:18.99\00:19:20.62
And that's its weak point.
00:19:20.66\00:19:22.12
To date, there's no
evidence that happens.
00:19:22.29\00:19:24.73
- Yeah, Dr. John,
I have a question.
00:19:26.46\00:19:28.66
I was wondering,
earlier on you talked about this
00:19:28.70\00:19:31.63
theory of evolution
where assertions are made,
00:19:31.67\00:19:34.67
but there's no real
scientific data or papers
00:19:34.70\00:19:37.61
to support the underlying
mechanisms to make it happen.
00:19:37.64\00:19:40.68
I guess the
question that I'm having...
00:19:41.41\00:19:42.74
I mean, there's
even papers that disprove
00:19:42.78\00:19:45.18
those mechanisms,
and things like this.
00:19:45.21\00:19:46.88
So, the question I'm wondering
is why, in the scientific world,
00:19:46.92\00:19:51.45
do people, do scientists
just not know about this?
00:19:51.49\00:19:55.62
Are they disingenuous in not,
you know, dealing with this data
00:19:55.66\00:19:59.03
and this new information, or
you know, is it something else?
00:19:59.06\00:20:02.70
Why is there so much
skepticism or lack of acceptance
00:20:02.73\00:20:09.67
of some of these, or
questioning of evolution?
00:20:09.70\00:20:12.81
Well, let me give you
a personal experience.
00:20:12.84\00:20:15.64
Back in about 2006, the
Discovery Institute in America
00:20:17.11\00:20:23.18
which promotes
intelligent design circulated
00:20:23.22\00:20:26.19
DVDs on the evidence for
intelligent design in nature
00:20:26.22\00:20:31.03
to all the high
schools in Australia.
00:20:31.76\00:20:33.80
And the biology teacher's
association of Australia
00:20:33.83\00:20:37.03
put in full page advertisements
saying, "Don't show this DVD.
00:20:37.33\00:20:42.57
We think that it's not
scientific," and so forth.
00:20:42.60\00:20:45.74
And there were quite a
few discussion articles
00:20:45.97\00:20:48.41
about this in
scientific journals.
00:20:48.44\00:20:50.88
And one of those
articles was published in,
00:20:51.05\00:20:54.72
Chemistry in Australia,
which is the Royal Australian
00:20:54.95\00:20:57.65
Chemical Institute journal.
00:20:57.69\00:20:59.02
And in that, there was a
professor who spoke up and said,
00:20:59.32\00:21:02.19
"Well, look, if we
taught intelligent design,
00:21:02.22\00:21:04.26
we would need to teach
spoon bending, alien abduction,
00:21:04.29\00:21:08.06
you know, astrology."
00:21:08.46\00:21:10.10
All these crazy things.
00:21:10.13\00:21:11.47
And I thought, this is so wrong.
00:21:11.50\00:21:13.37
They are highly educated
scientists, such as myself,
00:21:13.40\00:21:16.20
who recognize the
overwhelming evidence
00:21:16.47\00:21:19.07
for creation as
opposed to evolution.
00:21:19.11\00:21:21.38
So I sent in an article
to, Chemistry in Australia,
00:21:21.54\00:21:25.35
titled, A Creationist's View of
the Intelligent Design Debate.
00:21:25.81\00:21:31.12
And I listed my evidence
and I cited my references.
00:21:31.55\00:21:35.09
About ten references
referring to the historical and
00:21:35.12\00:21:38.76
peer review literature
supporting my position.
00:21:38.79\00:21:41.26
As soon as that journal came
out, which was the April 2007
00:21:41.93\00:21:46.77
issue of Chemistry in Australia,
a number of scientists
00:21:46.80\00:21:49.97
in Australia wrote to the Royal
Australian Chemical Institute
00:21:50.01\00:21:52.47
and said, "Professor
Ashton made up arguments."
00:21:52.51\00:21:56.41
"Professor Ashton has
used debunked arguments."
00:21:56.44\00:22:00.58
Essentially called
me a liar and said,
00:22:00.62\00:22:02.52
"This is going to
damage your reputation."
00:22:02.55\00:22:04.55
So they pulled that
article, even though it was a
00:22:04.59\00:22:07.92
feature article in the journal
and it had been peer reviewed,
00:22:07.96\00:22:12.06
and I had made the corrections
according to the reviewers.
00:22:12.09\00:22:14.76
And so, of course, they
couldn't recall the journal,
00:22:15.03\00:22:16.90
but the online
issue deleted that.
00:22:16.93\00:22:19.77
And so, in the following
issue, the May issue 2007
00:22:20.17\00:22:27.64
of, Chemistry in Australia,
they published the letters
00:22:27.68\00:22:31.48
by those three scientists.
00:22:31.51\00:22:33.38
And that's essentially
how I know what they said.
00:22:33.68\00:22:37.09
Now what I decided
to do was ring them up
00:22:37.12\00:22:39.32
and have a talk to them.
00:22:39.59\00:22:40.92
Because, you
know, I'm a scientist.
00:22:40.96\00:22:42.36
If you have a
problem with what I'm saying,
00:22:42.39\00:22:44.13
show me where I'm wrong.
00:22:44.16\00:22:45.49
I'm interesting in learning.
00:22:45.53\00:22:46.86
Now a couple of them I
couldn't get through to,
00:22:46.90\00:22:48.26
but one guy I
did get through to.
00:22:48.30\00:22:50.70
And I spoke to him and I said,
"Look, I'm Dr. John Ashton.
00:22:50.90\00:22:54.40
I understand you weren't
very happy with my article in,
00:22:54.44\00:22:56.44
Chemistry in Australia."
00:22:56.47\00:22:57.81
And he, you know, he
sort of changed his tact,
00:22:58.14\00:23:02.91
and I said, you know,
"You claim that I'm wrong."
00:23:02.94\00:23:05.35
And I said, "Where's the
evidence that I'm wrong?"
00:23:05.38\00:23:07.55
And his reply was, "Well,
we don't have the evidence
00:23:07.72\00:23:11.12
at the moment, but we will."
00:23:11.15\00:23:13.05
I mean, what sort of
evidence is that, you know?
00:23:14.06\00:23:17.26
Jesus is coming
again, and He will.
00:23:17.56\00:23:20.53
You know, I'm going
to put my faith in Jesus
00:23:20.56\00:23:22.50
coming again, you know.
00:23:22.53\00:23:23.87
Not in a crazy theory that they
don't actually have evidence.
00:23:23.90\00:23:28.00
But this gives you an
idea of the political oomph
00:23:28.04\00:23:30.71
that some of the people have.
00:23:30.74\00:23:33.38
And what they're trying to
do was, at that stage, was to
00:23:33.41\00:23:36.54
stop scientists from publishing
in reputable journals.
00:23:36.58\00:23:39.55
I had a reputable reputation.
00:23:39.58\00:23:41.65
And this censorship has
been occurring for some time,
00:23:41.98\00:23:44.62
but it's being broken down
now as more leading scientists
00:23:44.65\00:23:48.52
are speaking out and
saying, "Hang on, guys."
00:23:48.62\00:23:51.29
Like Jerry Fodor,
professor of philosophy at
00:23:51.33\00:23:54.96
Rutgers University in the U.S.
00:23:55.00\00:23:56.77
He couldn't get his paper,
"Why Pigs Don't Have Wings,"
00:23:56.97\00:24:00.50
published in the
science journals, so he had to
00:24:00.97\00:24:03.00
publish it the London
Review of Books, or whatever.
00:24:03.04\00:24:06.17
So, John, I would be really
interested, I mean, the whole
00:24:06.21\00:24:08.98
series we'll be looking
at this topic, but could you
00:24:09.01\00:24:11.18
just summarize, you
know, since the 1990's,
00:24:11.21\00:24:13.95
which is quite a while
ago, scientists and philosophers
00:24:13.98\00:24:17.95
have been identifying reasons
why evolution doesn't work.
00:24:17.99\00:24:22.82
Why we should be
skeptical about it.
00:24:22.86\00:24:24.73
Could you just maybe
give us a bird's eye view,
00:24:24.76\00:24:27.06
a quick skim over, what's the
evidence which has been found?
00:24:27.10\00:24:30.43
Well, I think that as
we learn more about DNA,
00:24:30.47\00:24:34.07
the structure of DNA,
and the molecular machines
00:24:34.17\00:24:36.97
that exist in the simplest
cells are just so complex
00:24:37.01\00:24:40.98
they can't arise by chance.
00:24:41.04\00:24:42.41
Even the probability of
a simple gene arising by
00:24:42.44\00:24:45.31
the orders of different
amino acids coming together,
00:24:45.35\00:24:48.55
mathematicians have
looked at it and shown that it's
00:24:48.75\00:24:51.42
astronomically impossible.
00:24:51.45\00:24:53.22
You know, like the
probability is less than finding
00:24:53.25\00:24:57.83
a particular atom in a universe,
if there was as many universes
00:24:57.99\00:25:03.53
as there are
atoms in the universe,
00:25:03.57\00:25:05.67
finding a particular atom
in one of those universes.
00:25:05.90\00:25:08.90
It would take a very long time.
00:25:08.94\00:25:10.27
So we know
mathematically it's impossible.
00:25:10.94\00:25:13.64
But biologists for some
reason don't seem to be able to
00:25:13.68\00:25:16.71
accept that, hang
on, these reactions are
00:25:16.75\00:25:19.95
random chemical reactions.
00:25:19.98\00:25:21.55
Therefore, the probabilistic
evidence really applies
00:25:21.58\00:25:25.49
to this sort of scenario.
00:25:25.52\00:25:26.86
And it doesn't work.
It's absolutely impossible.
00:25:27.06\00:25:29.49
That's the main reason.
00:25:29.52\00:25:30.86
Plus, we're not
finding the evidence.
00:25:30.89\00:25:32.63
There's no mechanism yet.
00:25:32.66\00:25:34.20
And you also mentioned in
your book that there's not only
00:25:34.40\00:25:36.90
sociological reasons to
believe in evolution now,
00:25:36.93\00:25:40.77
but there were sociological
reasons to accept evolution
00:25:40.80\00:25:46.01
back in Darwin's time.
00:25:46.04\00:25:47.38
There was this social kind
of situation which led them
00:25:47.41\00:25:51.05
to really want to accept it.
00:25:51.08\00:25:53.48
Could you just, what
was it in Darwin's time,
00:25:53.52\00:25:55.52
what were they thinking about
00:25:55.55\00:25:56.89
that made them want
to accept evolution?
00:25:56.92\00:25:58.49
Yeah, sure, well that
was the development of the
00:25:58.52\00:26:00.96
mechanical worldview.
00:26:00.99\00:26:02.32
Machines had just been developed
and they were really taking off
00:26:02.36\00:26:06.36
in the 1800's; the steam engine
and all these sort of things.
00:26:06.39\00:26:09.36
That was a massive scientific
development of machines.
00:26:09.40\00:26:12.63
And Darwin's theory provided
a mechanical model for life.
00:26:12.83\00:26:16.87
That was the clinch.
00:26:17.31\00:26:18.64
It was a mechanical
model that showed evolution.
00:26:18.67\00:26:20.81
They saw the evolution of
machines, and now they had a
00:26:20.84\00:26:24.51
mechanical model for life.
00:26:24.55\00:26:25.88
And that just took off.
00:26:25.91\00:26:27.62
I guess a question
for you guy's panel,
00:26:28.45\00:26:31.29
how do you feel when you
hear about top scientists
00:26:31.32\00:26:34.39
like the chief scientist in
the Israeli state government
00:26:34.42\00:26:38.63
being sacked because they
simply questioned evolution?
00:26:39.23\00:26:42.56
Just seems very unscientific.
00:26:42.60\00:26:44.20
Science is the pursuit
of knowledge and information
00:26:44.50\00:26:46.94
and testing, and it
just seems very emotional.
00:26:46.97\00:26:50.04
And yeah, it
just doesn't seem...
00:26:50.07\00:26:52.77
- It's very
unscientific, yeah? - Yeah.
00:26:52.81\00:26:55.01
I think it's quite outrageous
when you consider that
00:26:55.41\00:26:57.71
in the very recent past,
you know, scientists believed in
00:26:57.75\00:27:00.68
things like spontaneous
generation, and they believed in
00:27:00.72\00:27:03.82
things like a
flat earth, you know.
00:27:03.85\00:27:05.72
To have a theory
that can't be questioned,
00:27:05.75\00:27:08.49
and you'll be
sacked if you question it,
00:27:08.52\00:27:09.92
I think is quite outrageous.
00:27:09.96\00:27:11.63
Without protecting
freedom of speech, we cannot
00:27:11.66\00:27:14.00
have a development
and further understanding
00:27:14.03\00:27:16.70
of these critical issues.
00:27:16.90\00:27:18.23
As you can see, this is a
really, really important topic.
00:27:19.27\00:27:21.94
And I can imagine that you wish
you were actually here with us.
00:27:21.97\00:27:24.87
Well, the good news is,
you can join us by getting
00:27:24.91\00:27:28.91
Dr. John Ashton's
book, Evolution Impossible.
00:27:28.94\00:27:31.98
You can order it through a
number of online book stores
00:27:32.38\00:27:35.52
right around the
world, which is really good.
00:27:35.95\00:27:37.92
What a fascinating discussion!
00:27:38.22\00:27:39.72
We're only just
getting into the topic.
00:27:39.75\00:27:41.96
We will be back next time
to dig deeper into the theory
00:27:42.26\00:27:46.03
that Darwin developed which
literally changed the world.
00:27:46.06\00:27:50.07
We look forward to
seeing you next time.
00:27:50.30\00:27:52.37