Hello I'm Stan Hudson
speaker for In The Beginning.
00:00:12.46\00:00:15.65
Today we begin a series on
a subject of the question of
00:00:15.68\00:00:19.69
where we came from.
00:00:19.72\00:00:21.08
The great theories of
origin that is out there.
00:00:21.11\00:00:23.29
Today we take a
look at In the Beginning.
00:00:23.32\00:00:26.15
God or hydrogen?
00:00:26.18\00:00:28.83
I hope you enjoy the program.
00:00:28.86\00:00:30.85
We are glad that you
have come this evening.
00:00:32.55\00:00:34.04
We are going to talk
about questions that people
00:00:34.07\00:00:36.62
have long wrestled with.
00:00:36.65\00:00:38.48
And it seems like the
atmosphere for talking about
00:00:38.51\00:00:42.67
these things has
gotten tense lately,
00:00:42.70\00:00:45.32
Have you noticed?
00:00:45.35\00:00:46.47
We want to be able to
talk and a nice clear and easy
00:00:46.50\00:00:49.29
atmosphere this evening.
00:00:49.32\00:00:51.06
Today we are going to
talk about, In the Beginning,
00:00:51.09\00:00:54.30
God or hydrogen?
00:00:54.33\00:00:58.10
Some of you made know
that it was the astronomer Carl
00:00:58.13\00:01:02.18
Sagan that posed
that question for us.
00:01:02.21\00:01:05.22
What he said is
what? Harlow Shapley said,
00:01:05.25\00:01:08.66
we are going to be talking
about those things this week.
00:01:21.47\00:01:24.29
It is really the age old
question, what came first?
00:01:24.32\00:01:29.93
Do you have
opinions? I bet you do!
00:01:29.96\00:01:33.13
We all have
opinions of what came first.
00:01:33.16\00:01:35.68
The chicken or the egg
and we will be getting into a
00:01:35.71\00:01:39.20
deeper level than just that.
00:01:39.23\00:01:41.59
It is the same old
issues as to where we came from.
00:01:41.62\00:01:44.43
One of my heroes,
George Harrison, said this:
00:01:44.46\00:01:47.92
Those are good
questions aren't they?
00:02:03.49\00:02:04.87
In this vast universe.
00:02:10.75\00:02:12.30
These are the kind of
questions we will be addressing,
00:02:12.33\00:02:14.62
here in the beginning.
00:02:14.65\00:02:16.33
Now this is a sensitive topic.
00:02:16.36\00:02:18.34
If you months ago I was
invited to write an article
00:02:18.37\00:02:21.00
for the local paper.
00:02:21.03\00:02:22.31
And I did, and it had to
do with cosmology buttons.
00:02:22.34\00:02:26.13
I suggested in the article
that everybody has cosmology.
00:02:26.16\00:02:30.57
Cosmology is simply
this, how we view reality.
00:02:30.60\00:02:34.66
The good guys, the bad guys,
what's wrong, what's right,
00:02:34.69\00:02:38.17
what's out there,
and what isn't out there.
00:02:38.20\00:02:41.57
The forces that are involved
in this real world we live in.
00:02:41.60\00:02:44.71
I suggested that when we talk
about things, we are talking
00:02:44.74\00:02:48.56
about things very near and
dear to each of our hearts.
00:02:48.59\00:02:50.72
It can involve politics,
it can involve all these
00:02:50.75\00:02:54.30
different things, your
sense of the way things are.
00:02:54.33\00:02:57.99
When I suggested in the
article that when science talks
00:02:58.02\00:03:03.14
about these things, also the
scientists are expressing the
00:03:03.17\00:03:05.93
way they feel
things are as well.
00:03:05.96\00:03:07.86
Sometimes we rub each other
the wrong way and push each
00:03:07.89\00:03:11.99
others cosmology
buttons, that was the idea.
00:03:12.02\00:03:15.08
Well I got a letter
back, a letter to the editor.
00:03:15.11\00:03:18.27
It was a little
warm shall we say.
00:03:18.30\00:03:22.14
And then he said this:
00:03:31.52\00:03:32.63
So just a little
bit of shock there.
00:03:40.83\00:03:42.71
We want to be able to talk
this week in a nice cool, calm,
00:03:42.74\00:03:48.13
and collective
manner on these topics.
00:03:48.16\00:03:51.01
We want to be able to respect
each other and take a look
00:03:51.04\00:03:53.48
at some things that may be
different light than you have
00:03:53.51\00:03:56.45
heard talked about before.
00:03:56.48\00:03:58.13
Let's talk about these things,
we do not want to push each
00:03:58.16\00:04:02.00
others cosmetology buttons.
00:04:02.03\00:04:04.25
We all have
buttons and we do not want
00:04:04.28\00:04:06.59
to push them too far.
00:04:06.62\00:04:07.99
It is a shame isn't it,
that it seems so often today,
00:04:08.02\00:04:11.49
science and religion are
found fighting each other.
00:04:11.52\00:04:14.04
Especially in
the areas of origin.
00:04:14.07\00:04:18.08
And sometimes it is not
exactly clear who is winning.
00:04:18.11\00:04:21.08
It is not to fair of a
fight sometimes, is it?
00:04:23.40\00:04:26.02
I love that picture don't
you? That's a great picture.
00:04:26.05\00:04:28.74
Why is this such a loaded
topic, such a sensitive topic?
00:04:28.77\00:04:35.31
I would like to suggest you
that it does have to do with
00:04:35.34\00:04:38.49
our glasses in
which we see reality.
00:04:38.52\00:04:41.50
Depending upon your philosophy
of how we got here and the
00:04:41.53\00:04:46.03
forces that are involved
in the universe and so on.
00:04:46.06\00:04:48.30
It will most definitely affect,
for instance, how you view
00:04:48.33\00:04:51.66
how you look at
suffering and pain in the world.
00:04:51.69\00:04:54.32
Warfare, how you
look at those things.
00:04:54.35\00:04:56.71
It will affect how you
look at science and how
00:04:56.74\00:04:59.26
you look at religion.
00:04:59.29\00:05:00.55
Your world view will shape
how you consider the planet
00:05:00.58\00:05:03.94
Earth that we are living
on, and questions of where
00:05:03.97\00:05:06.35
we came from.
00:05:06.38\00:05:07.77
Because we are also going to
be talking about God in this,
00:05:07.80\00:05:10.63
and how God fits in.
00:05:10.66\00:05:12.46
We are most definitely
going to suggest that your world
00:05:12.49\00:05:14.40
view colors how the
image of God is to you.
00:05:14.43\00:05:19.54
To me that is a
significant issue.
00:05:19.57\00:05:22.57
So we have two, shall we
say, challenging worldviews in
00:05:22.60\00:05:28.75
terms of the subject of
origins and you will notice that
00:05:28.78\00:05:31.96
Darwinist now has this logo
and it is a challenge of the
00:05:31.99\00:05:35.54
Christian view of Jesus.
00:05:35.57\00:05:38.71
There is a little bit of a
challenge, a tension in the air
00:05:38.74\00:05:42.96
right now on these subjects.
00:05:42.99\00:05:44.52
We do not want to
have that tension.
00:05:44.55\00:05:45.83
Let's talk openly, let's
talk about what people think.
00:05:45.86\00:05:48.91
Since 1982 there have been
a number of Gallup polls taken
00:05:48.94\00:05:53.06
on the subject of
where you think we came from?
00:05:53.09\00:05:55.00
How do you think life began?
00:05:55.03\00:05:56.56
How do you think
this world came about?
00:05:56.59\00:05:59.43
Let me just ask you as a
crowd, you have ideas on this.
00:05:59.46\00:06:05.45
Let's see how good you
are at guessing the numbers.
00:06:05.48\00:06:08.53
There has been a little
bit of a variation here and it
00:06:08.56\00:06:12.63
is fairly consistent.
00:06:12.66\00:06:13.97
How many of you think, in
the American a population, a
00:06:14.00\00:06:18.14
percentage believes in a
fairly recent, somewhat Biblical
00:06:18.17\00:06:22.52
view of how we got here?
00:06:22.55\00:06:24.18
A short special
creation by a Creator God?
00:06:24.21\00:06:27.65
Take a guess!
00:06:27.68\00:06:28.68
In the United States
what you think the number is?
00:06:28.71\00:06:30.42
78%, 50%, 32%, okay
we have it all over.
00:06:30.45\00:06:39.27
The range is
somewhere between 44 and 47%.
00:06:39.30\00:06:44.18
It's fairly
consistent that believes this.
00:06:44.21\00:06:47.17
Now Theistic evolution is
the belief, in essence, in a nut
00:06:47.20\00:06:52.33
shell, that Darwin was right
but God is doing it somehow.
00:06:52.36\00:06:55.78
That God is driving evolution.
00:06:55.81\00:06:57.92
How many of you think
believe that? Percentagewise!
00:06:57.95\00:07:01.21
In the United States, and again
there's a little variation.
00:07:01.24\00:07:04.05
Pick a number! 30. 60.
00:07:04.08\00:07:09.25
35 to 40% believe that.
00:07:09.28\00:07:12.03
So please notice the total
number is anywhere from 82 to
00:07:12.06\00:07:15.76
87% that somehow there was
a God who is involved with us
00:07:15.79\00:07:22.24
being here, either through
special creation or evolution.
00:07:22.27\00:07:25.31
Now natural evolution down
at the bottom is in essence what
00:07:25.34\00:07:28.66
is taught in the
school among scientists.
00:07:28.69\00:07:32.11
Natural Evolution is what we
would call material evolution or
00:07:32.14\00:07:35.62
without a Creator or a
force with intelligence.
00:07:35.65\00:07:40.38
Natural evolution is
somewhere around 9 to 13% of the
00:07:40.41\00:07:45.30
American population.
00:07:45.33\00:07:46.57
That number has not changed
in approximately 100 years.
00:07:46.60\00:07:50.27
The number that has changed
is the Theistic evolution
00:07:50.30\00:07:53.90
number, and that
number has changed.
00:07:53.93\00:07:55.67
It might represent those
who are struggling with a high
00:07:55.70\00:07:58.96
view of science, and
a high view of religion.
00:07:58.99\00:08:01.66
They're trying to
put two things together.
00:08:01.69\00:08:03.79
So theistic and
natural evolution are the
00:08:03.82\00:08:07.57
2 at the bottom there.
00:08:07.60\00:08:09.09
Now you are probably going
to fall into one of the 7 boxes
00:08:09.12\00:08:14.34
that I'm going to
show you right now.
00:08:14.37\00:08:15.77
There is roughly 7
general ways to looking at
00:08:15.80\00:08:18.34
how we got here.
00:08:18.37\00:08:19.53
First of all by Creation,
the Biblical story, short age.
00:08:19.56\00:08:23.64
God creates in 6 days.
00:08:23.67\00:08:26.39
The Fossil Record is the
record of the Genesis flood.
00:08:26.42\00:08:28.94
That is one group.
00:08:28.97\00:08:30.46
That was the one
that was the 44 to 47%.
00:08:30.49\00:08:33.71
The Gap-Theory is that God
created in six days, but prior
00:08:33.74\00:08:38.82
to that in ages long ago
there were dinosaurs and other
00:08:38.85\00:08:42.45
things that we see
in the fossil record.
00:08:42.48\00:08:44.52
That is a way to try to
harmonize the Biblical record
00:08:44.55\00:08:47.85
with the popular science view.
00:08:47.88\00:08:49.56
So God created long ages
ago, but more recently started
00:08:49.59\00:08:53.68
over again with
his six-day creation.
00:08:53.71\00:08:56.47
That is the Gap Theory.
00:08:56.50\00:08:58.18
There are different forms
of the Gap Theory and different
00:08:58.21\00:08:59.99
forms of the Progressive
Creation Theory were God creates
00:09:00.02\00:09:03.66
but takes long ages to do it.
00:09:03.69\00:09:06.43
That is not quite evolution,
that is special creation
00:09:06.46\00:09:09.03
stretched out
over millions of years.
00:09:09.06\00:09:11.24
Moving down here to a
Theistic Evolution, just as I
00:09:11.27\00:09:14.15
suggested before, basically
God is the mover of evolution
00:09:14.18\00:09:20.75
and solves problems in
evolution by direct acts.
00:09:20.78\00:09:25.58
That's the Theistic-Evolution
00:09:25.61\00:09:28.23
there is Deistic Evolution,
I hope I'm not boring you
00:09:28.26\00:09:31.53
with the technical terms
and we will get into quite a few
00:09:31.56\00:09:34.04
technical terms, sorry.
00:09:34.07\00:09:35.82
I don't know how else to do it.
00:09:35.85\00:09:36.99
Deistic Evolution is that
God may have started with life,
00:09:37.02\00:09:42.47
may have started something at
the very beginning but then let
00:09:42.50\00:09:45.05
natural forces take over
and developed through evolution,
00:09:45.08\00:09:48.50
without His
involvement whatsoever.
00:09:48.53\00:09:50.74
This is catching on lately.
00:09:50.77\00:09:53.72
That is Space Ancestry.
00:09:53.75\00:09:55.47
This is from people like
Francis Crick, a Noble prize
00:09:55.50\00:09:59.17
winner, who believes that
perhaps, because there's not
00:09:59.20\00:10:03.14
enough time in the fossil
record, maybe on planet Earth
00:10:03.17\00:10:06.14
at a planet somewhere else
where it took more billions of
00:10:06.17\00:10:09.64
years life began and somehow
got seated on this planet
00:10:09.67\00:10:14.50
and that solves the
problem of origin of life on
00:10:14.53\00:10:17.02
this planet and then
evolved to what we are now.
00:10:17.05\00:10:20.90
That could be either from
some intelligence, a space
00:10:20.93\00:10:26.25
traveler planting
something here, or even a planet
00:10:26.28\00:10:31.11
exploding and sending a
rock through space that had life
00:10:31.14\00:10:33.53
on it and came here and
somehow generated into evolution
00:10:33.56\00:10:38.74
and life as we have it today.
00:10:38.77\00:10:40.15
That is that one and finally
simply Material Evolution
00:10:40.18\00:10:43.66
that has simply no God
in the picture whatsoever.
00:10:43.69\00:10:46.23
It is all
explained by natural causes.
00:10:46.26\00:10:48.02
So I am guessing that most
of you fall in one of these
00:10:48.05\00:10:50.59
boxes, most people do.
00:10:50.62\00:10:52.54
Now as we talk about the
presence of a God the question
00:10:54.17\00:10:57.34
is, What did God creative if God
did create if God is involved in
00:10:57.37\00:11:00.76
the picture at
all what did He do?
00:11:00.79\00:11:02.19
And this is very much discussed.
00:11:02.22\00:11:04.29
Did He create matter
and let matter takeover?
00:11:04.32\00:11:07.31
Did He create organic molecules
or even life and step back
00:11:07.34\00:11:13.54
at let it develop on its own?
00:11:13.57\00:11:15.46
Did God create a one cell
amoeba and leave to evolve?
00:11:15.49\00:11:20.18
Did He go a step further
and maybe create something from
00:11:20.21\00:11:25.11
monkeys, or create
something closer to man?
00:11:25.14\00:11:27.96
Or did He specifically
create man, as this Michelangelo
00:11:27.99\00:11:32.03
portrait famously depicts?
00:11:32.06\00:11:34.47
Or has God been
uninvolved in the whole process?
00:11:34.50\00:11:37.99
Does He exist at all?
00:11:38.02\00:11:39.51
And trust me there are people
who believe there is a God
00:11:39.54\00:11:44.70
but He is not involved and
so we will take a look at that.
00:11:44.73\00:11:48.34
Now get let's take a look at the
popular belief among scientist.
00:11:48.37\00:11:51.86
This is from a
famous Nature article of
00:11:51.89\00:11:55.33
about 10 years ago.
00:11:55.36\00:11:56.44
These are people in the nation
that have a lot to do with
00:12:02.49\00:12:04.46
what is taught on
the subjects of origins.
00:12:04.49\00:12:08.06
They were asked
their own personal beliefs.
00:12:08.09\00:12:11.55
How many of you
believe in a personal God?
00:12:11.58\00:12:13.77
This is not a rank and file
science professor or scientist
00:12:13.80\00:12:17.78
doing research,
these are science leaders.
00:12:17.81\00:12:20.22
I want you to understand
and separate that out so you
00:12:20.25\00:12:22.36
have an understanding.
00:12:22.39\00:12:23.79
These are people who
direct policy on the subject.
00:12:23.82\00:12:26.08
How many of you
believe, what percentage believe
00:12:26.11\00:12:28.66
in a personal God?
Take a guess on that one?
00:12:28.69\00:12:31.09
Let's see how you are there.
00:12:31.12\00:12:32.35
Oh, you are quite on this one.
00:12:34.85\00:12:36.11
60% believe in a
personal God? How about 7%!
00:12:36.14\00:12:40.28
How many disbelieve, now
this is in the Nature magazine,
00:12:40.31\00:12:44.77
so you may write this down
for a reference if you want.
00:12:44.80\00:12:49.23
Disbelieve in a personal
God, how many of you think it is
00:12:49.26\00:12:53.22
a high number or a low number?
00:12:53.25\00:12:54.64
Disbelieve in a personal God?
00:12:54.67\00:12:56.55
That is the opposite of believe.
00:12:56.58\00:12:58.01
How many disbelieve
that there is a God?
00:12:58.04\00:12:59.90
Who would say I do not
believe there is a personal God?
00:12:59.93\00:13:03.20
72%, that is a very high view.
00:13:03.23\00:13:08.23
Agnostic or doubt,
or simply don't know,
00:13:08.26\00:13:12.17
have doubts about it, it's 21%.
00:13:12.20\00:13:14.14
So if you add the agnostics
along with those who do not
00:13:14.17\00:13:17.32
believe in God, you have a
very high percentage of 93%.
00:13:17.35\00:13:20.82
And you would struggle to
find a higher percent in any
00:13:20.85\00:13:25.56
area in America, I would think.
00:13:25.59\00:13:28.45
In any field and so on.
00:13:28.48\00:13:31.78
So that means, what does
that mean to the whole subject?
00:13:31.81\00:13:35.15
That means when their
cosmologies, their worldviews
00:13:35.18\00:13:38.59
are challenged they get
defensive like you and I do when
00:13:38.62\00:13:42.13
we get ours challenged.
00:13:42.16\00:13:44.22
Science from the Latin
word scientia, is knowledge and
00:13:44.25\00:13:49.71
of course a science method
is how we do science today.
00:13:49.74\00:13:53.19
They are the lucky
ones in our universities.
00:13:59.89\00:14:01.50
The title of their
subject science means knowledge.
00:14:01.53\00:14:05.03
That means all of
the departments are not,
00:14:05.06\00:14:06.83
isn't that right?
00:14:06.86\00:14:10.17
Oh well, it is pretty cool.
00:14:10.20\00:14:11.92
Here's the challenge,
look through glasses, religion,
00:14:11.95\00:14:17.11
as the old saying goes religion
is supposed to tell you:
00:14:17.14\00:14:19.88
the idea there is to separate
them, let science stay over
00:14:24.48\00:14:27.22
there and
religion stay over there.
00:14:27.25\00:14:29.82
Keep them separate,
those are separate things.
00:14:29.85\00:14:31.51
Here's the problem: both
have an interest in where does
00:14:31.54\00:14:35.95
Heaven come from? How
did we get the heavens?
00:14:35.98\00:14:39.21
Religion and science both
have a vested interest in trying
00:14:39.24\00:14:44.08
to understand
where things came from.
00:14:44.11\00:14:46.08
When they come up from it in
a different way, come up with
00:14:46.11\00:14:49.54
different conclusions,
there it is going to be some
00:14:49.57\00:14:52.48
conflict and that is
a conflict we see today.
00:14:52.51\00:14:55.13
It has not always been that way.
00:14:55.16\00:14:57.00
The German astronomer and
mathematician Johannes Kepler
00:14:57.03\00:15:00.47
it's said, when he
made discoveries he said:
00:15:00.50\00:15:03.03
many of you know about Sir
Isaac Newton who was considered
00:15:05.47\00:15:09.36
by many to be the
father of modern science.
00:15:09.39\00:15:12.07
It's another way of saying
it used to be that scientists
00:15:15.60\00:15:18.52
had no problem believing in God.
00:15:18.55\00:15:20.09
That God was involved
somehow in us getting here.
00:15:20.12\00:15:23.53
It has changed over the years
and we will talk about what
00:15:23.56\00:15:27.01
were the things
that naturally happened.
00:15:27.04\00:15:29.47
We are going to start with
Galileo Galilee, and of course
00:15:29.50\00:15:32.97
the famous Italian
astronomer who was very good at
00:15:33.00\00:15:37.72
developing the telescope.
00:15:37.75\00:15:39.73
Here's one of
his original works.
00:15:39.76\00:15:41.28
You know some of the stories
involving Galileo and the
00:15:41.31\00:15:44.08
medieval Church, and how
the church seemed to be slow to
00:15:44.11\00:15:48.82
catch on to good
science and actually resisted
00:15:48.85\00:15:51.16
science in his case.
00:15:51.19\00:15:52.61
I just want to give you a
couple more facts about Galileo
00:15:52.64\00:15:56.35
story that people do
not often hear about.
00:15:56.38\00:15:58.58
Galileo of course, was beginning
to believe the Copernican
00:15:58.61\00:16:02.07
Theory of the Earth, excuse
me the Sun was the center of
00:16:02.10\00:16:07.62
the solar system and the
earth circled around the sun.
00:16:07.65\00:16:10.70
The Earth was no longer, in
his opinion, to be considered
00:16:10.73\00:16:13.76
the center of the
universe, or the solar system,
00:16:13.79\00:16:16.39
or anything, it was a
planet revolving around a Sun.
00:16:16.42\00:16:20.12
You may remember that the
medieval Church was unhappy
00:16:20.15\00:16:24.54
with that and resisted him.
00:16:24.57\00:16:26.16
One of the things you don't
hear about is that Galileo's own
00:16:26.19\00:16:28.82
personality clashed with
some of his colleagues in the
00:16:28.85\00:16:33.26
University and was
actually the colleagues in the
00:16:33.29\00:16:35.95
University that were
first unhappy with Galileo.
00:16:35.98\00:16:38.57
Animals which move,
this is a professor:
00:16:38.60\00:16:41.40
and that was a
professor of mathematics,
00:16:48.01\00:16:49.51
Scipio Chiaramonti who
had a problem with Galileo.
00:16:49.54\00:16:54.22
It wasn't until Galileo
steadfastly stuck to his guns
00:16:54.25\00:16:57.54
that they what over his
head and turned him over to the
00:16:57.57\00:17:00.85
church and said he needed
to be quieted down on this.
00:17:00.88\00:17:04.87
This was not only bad
science, it was bad theology.
00:17:04.90\00:17:07.95
Of course he was called in
to the Inquisition and told he
00:17:07.98\00:17:11.90
was not to talk about this.
00:17:11.93\00:17:13.47
Now this is a problem because
this has always used as an
00:17:13.50\00:17:16.54
illustration of how the church
should stay out of science.
00:17:16.57\00:17:19.40
They should not hinder
good scientific effort and
00:17:19.43\00:17:25.94
certainly not
condemn people for doing it.
00:17:25.97\00:17:28.13
So this has been used as
an example and is a little bit
00:17:28.16\00:17:31.33
more complex than
what is usually talk about.
00:17:31.36\00:17:33.41
Washington Irving did not help
the matter when he wrote his
00:17:33.44\00:17:36.75
life and voyages of Christopher
Columbus in the early
00:17:36.78\00:17:39.80
19th century, it was
a very hot selling book.
00:17:39.83\00:17:43.54
It was about Columbus sailing
to the west and discovering
00:17:44.50\00:17:47.46
the United States,
America and the Western world.
00:17:47.49\00:17:49.95
What he did in his story,
it was a novel and wasn't a
00:17:49.98\00:17:53.30
historical writing, it
was a historical novel.
00:17:53.33\00:17:56.73
He said that Christians
were the ones that were
00:17:56.76\00:17:59.65
telling Columbus, don't
go west you will be sailing
00:17:59.68\00:18:02.85
right off the earth, you
will go off the edge because
00:18:02.88\00:18:05.44
it is a flat world.
00:18:05.47\00:18:06.84
So that image of Christians
supposedly telling people
00:18:06.87\00:18:10.17
that they believe in a flat
earth has stuck to this day.
00:18:10.20\00:18:14.67
Even though we know historically
that virtually nobody
00:18:14.70\00:18:18.62
in the Middle Ages, and
certainly nobody that we know
00:18:18.65\00:18:21.56
about or wrote about
particularly actually believed
00:18:21.59\00:18:24.05
in the flat Earth.
00:18:24.08\00:18:25.57
People in those days could
see the mast of a ship coming
00:18:25.60\00:18:28.32
before the rest of the
ship appeared and the only real
00:18:28.35\00:18:31.49
issues in the discussion
of Columbus were we are not
00:18:31.52\00:18:35.87
sure how far
Asia is by going west.
00:18:35.90\00:18:38.44
We do not know
what is out there and
00:18:38.47\00:18:39.90
those type of concerns.
00:18:39.93\00:18:41.25
It's too expensive, whatever,
those type of issues were
00:18:41.28\00:18:43.19
brought up but not
sailing off the planet.
00:18:43.22\00:18:46.82
So again, creation as
Christians we have a tendency to
00:18:46.85\00:18:51.74
be labeled as flat Earthers,
it is pretty much from this
00:18:51.77\00:18:55.60
image that
Washington Irving painted.
00:18:55.63\00:18:57.92
Let me go back even
further, let me go back beyond
00:18:57.95\00:19:01.39
medieval times always back
to the Greeks and Aristotle.
00:19:01.42\00:19:05.44
Right now we are going
to show you three figures in
00:19:05.47\00:19:07.54
science that were
pretty much critical in moving
00:19:07.57\00:19:14.18
science in a different
direction, especially on
00:19:14.21\00:19:16.26
the subject of origins.
00:19:16.29\00:19:17.99
We are going to talk
about Aristotle, Newton,
00:19:18.02\00:19:20.10
and of course, Darwin.
00:19:20.13\00:19:22.39
Now let's talk
first about Aristotle.
00:19:22.42\00:19:24.61
Aristotle in his day, just
like Christians have, had a
00:19:24.64\00:19:30.20
narrative, had a story,
had available to him a story on
00:19:30.23\00:19:35.18
how the gods had created
the world and had been involved.
00:19:35.21\00:19:39.39
He had this story in front
of him, stories plural, on how
00:19:39.42\00:19:44.30
things came about.
00:19:44.33\00:19:46.26
Aristotle was one of the
first people that said forget
00:19:46.29\00:19:49.66
narrative, we are
going to go with observation.
00:19:49.69\00:19:52.80
Observation, now what do we see?
00:19:52.83\00:19:55.02
That will be the basis
of how we will determine
00:19:55.05\00:19:57.05
how we got here.
00:19:57.08\00:19:58.31
The Greeks were great
observers, for philosophers were
00:19:58.34\00:20:01.46
great observers of nature.
00:20:01.49\00:20:03.72
Many of their observations
are still considered
00:20:03.75\00:20:05.43
to be pretty good.
00:20:05.46\00:20:07.12
The one problem day had
with Aristotle and Ptolemy was
00:20:07.15\00:20:11.67
they did come up with,
many of them, not all of them,
00:20:11.70\00:20:14.22
but many of them be
believed in the earth be in the
00:20:14.25\00:20:16.43
center of things.
00:20:16.46\00:20:17.83
That was accepted by
the medieval Church as well
00:20:17.86\00:20:19.95
for many centuries.
00:20:19.98\00:20:21.69
Now when Newton came along,
he had also available to him
00:20:21.72\00:20:25.27
a narrative, he had the Bible,
and the Bible has the story
00:20:25.30\00:20:28.53
of how we got here.
00:20:28.56\00:20:30.13
People that had lived before
transferred their story down
00:20:30.16\00:20:33.69
through the ages
with this information.
00:20:33.72\00:20:35.79
He had narrative, but
he also had observation.
00:20:35.82\00:20:38.40
He accepted narrative
is being a good source of
00:20:38.43\00:20:41.24
information and nevertheless
he added to it observation,
00:20:41.27\00:20:45.10
and combined the two.
00:20:45.13\00:20:46.60
When Darwin came along, Darwin
and also had narrative the
00:20:46.63\00:20:50.02
Bible was available to him,
but he like Aristotle rejected
00:20:50.05\00:20:53.39
narrative and went back to
using strictly observation for
00:20:53.42\00:20:57.93
understanding how we got here.
00:20:57.96\00:21:00.15
Rightly or wrongly, I'm
not casting any other comments
00:21:00.18\00:21:03.52
other than that, but that is
pretty much some of the major
00:21:03.55\00:21:06.20
events on the subject of origin.
00:21:06.23\00:21:08.96
It's very simplified,
but there is something there.
00:21:08.99\00:21:11.96
The Greeks also has some
ideas about how, we might
00:21:11.99\00:21:14.45
consider, to be evolution.
00:21:14.48\00:21:16.38
Anaximander said:
00:21:16.41\00:21:18.73
it was Aristotle who developed
the Scala Natura, which was
00:21:21.36\00:21:26.00
a stair step up of nature.
00:21:26.03\00:21:28.52
A way of classifying things
in nature starting with dirt
00:21:28.55\00:21:31.78
and moving up to men and
actually moving up to God.
00:21:31.81\00:21:34.97
I think I could classify
it this way, dirt doesn't ever
00:21:35.00\00:21:41.72
think, man thinks the
most and that is the closest to
00:21:41.75\00:21:45.16
being divine, because the
Greeks were big into thinking.
00:21:45.19\00:21:47.81
So if you could think
you were really developed.
00:21:47.84\00:21:49.61
They had this
hierarchy thing of development.
00:21:49.64\00:21:53.58
Then Lucretius also said:
00:21:53.61\00:21:55.03
What does that sound like?
00:21:59.40\00:22:00.82
Pretty close to
Darwin, wouldn't you say?
00:22:00.85\00:22:03.79
The fittest of biological
mutations survive, of course
00:22:03.82\00:22:06.63
that is a paraphrase but
that is what he believed.
00:22:06.66\00:22:09.30
The Greeks were
actually think along the
00:22:09.33\00:22:11.24
lines of evolution.
00:22:11.27\00:22:13.77
What change the scientific
world from accepting narrative,
00:22:13.80\00:22:17.42
like Newton did, and moving
away from accepting the Bible,
00:22:17.45\00:22:22.56
and the witnesses in the
Bible as being a reasonable
00:22:22.59\00:22:25.68
source of information,
What moved them away?
00:22:25.71\00:22:27.96
What was going
on in Darwin's day?
00:22:27.99\00:22:30.65
The subject can be best
illustrated by humanism.
00:22:30.68\00:22:35.31
What is humanism?
00:22:35.34\00:22:37.21
This is straight
out of Wikipedia:
00:22:37.24\00:22:38.58
So humanism is truth sought
through human investigation
00:23:00.74\00:23:03.71
and it rejects belief in
God, or anything like God.
00:23:03.74\00:23:08.27
Texts that
supposedly come from God.
00:23:08.30\00:23:11.00
Now that is humanism and
humanism was sweeping Europe in
00:23:11.03\00:23:14.43
the time of Darwin.
00:23:14.46\00:23:16.35
It actually predates
Darwin by maybe a century.
00:23:16.38\00:23:19.98
in Europe, take a look at
the French revolution that
00:23:20.01\00:23:21.62
see humanism.
00:23:21.65\00:23:23.11
Let's talk about Charles
Darwin for a minute because we
00:23:23.14\00:23:25.91
are coming up on the 200th
anniversary, in just a couple
00:23:25.94\00:23:28.86
months, of Darwin's birth.
00:23:28.89\00:23:30.65
And the hundred and 50th
anniversary of the publishing of
00:23:30.68\00:23:34.05
origin of the species.
00:23:34.08\00:23:35.29
So next year is going to
be a big year for Darwin.
00:23:35.32\00:23:37.37
So let's talk about Darwin.
00:23:37.40\00:23:39.80
You know that in 1831
through 36 he set sail on the
00:23:39.83\00:23:44.32
HMS Beagle to the Galapagos
Island and it was there he
00:23:44.35\00:23:47.89
saw things that led him to
his theory of natural selection
00:23:47.92\00:23:52.19
as being the engine
for pushing evolution.
00:23:52.22\00:23:55.11
He wrote on the origin
of species and published
00:23:55.14\00:23:58.44
it in 1859.
00:23:58.47\00:24:00.45
Here's a few facts about
Darwin because I find him an
00:24:00.48\00:24:02.74
interesting fellow.
00:24:02.77\00:24:03.95
Now this is a picture
of the Galapagos Islands.
00:24:03.98\00:24:07.86
What he saw there is first
of all he was on a map making
00:24:07.89\00:24:12.22
research journey with
the Beagle for the British.
00:24:12.25\00:24:16.16
When he got to the marketplace,
one of the marketplaces in
00:24:16.19\00:24:19.56
the Galapagos Islands, he
noted that the natives could
00:24:19.59\00:24:23.58
tell what island
tortoises were from by the shape
00:24:23.61\00:24:27.86
of their shells.
00:24:27.89\00:24:30.09
He thought that was interesting.
00:24:30.12\00:24:31.68
He collected some birds, he
thought there were different
00:24:31.71\00:24:34.04
kinds of birds like
mockingbirds and blackbirds.
00:24:34.07\00:24:36.35
When he took them back to
England a bird expert looked
00:24:36.38\00:24:39.77
at them and said
these are all finches.
00:24:39.80\00:24:41.68
These are all finches,
are there this much variety?
00:24:41.71\00:24:43.77
Yes they are all finches.
00:24:43.80\00:24:45.29
From that he began to
deduce that they had a common
00:24:45.32\00:24:49.27
ancestor and they developed
into different kinds of finches
00:24:49.30\00:24:52.64
based on the
habitats they were living in.
00:24:52.67\00:24:55.88
They had adapted to it.
00:24:55.91\00:24:57.67
What he really saw, and these
are very loaded definitions
00:24:57.70\00:25:01.97
but they are
definitions I'm going to use.
00:25:02.00\00:25:04.32
Microevolution,
what he saw was a:
00:25:04.35\00:25:06.71
Birds changing
in to other birds.
00:25:16.95\00:25:19.36
What he proposed from that:
00:25:19.39\00:25:22.53
Which is basically way
different kinds of animals.
00:25:30.83\00:25:33.34
Way different kinds!
00:25:33.37\00:25:34.90
So he assumed that if you
go back far enough in time,
00:25:34.93\00:25:37.75
there are animals
changing a little bit over time,
00:25:37.78\00:25:40.17
by their habitats
helping them to survive
00:25:40.20\00:25:42.82
in different changes.
00:25:42.85\00:25:44.28
If you just wind the clock
back, maybe they get simple
00:25:44.31\00:25:47.37
all the way back to
the beginnings of life.
00:25:47.40\00:25:50.86
This is what he proposed.
00:25:50.89\00:25:52.64
Now I find Charles Darwin
a very fascinating person:
00:25:54.07\00:25:57.68
his grandfather was an
evolutionist, his father was a
00:25:57.71\00:26:01.99
big guy named Robert
Darwin, a doctor, a physician.
00:26:02.02\00:26:07.76
His mother, who he was very
attached to, was a Wedgwood.
00:26:07.79\00:26:11.64
You heard of the
Wedgwood China making company?
00:26:11.67\00:26:15.44
That was her father
that was in charge of that.
00:26:15.47\00:26:19.01
She died in 1817 and
Darwin was barely 8 years old,
00:26:19.04\00:26:26.32
tremendous lost to Darwin
personally, when his mother
00:26:26.35\00:26:29.22
died when he was eight.
00:26:29.25\00:26:30.65
He was born in 1809 and
trained to be a minister.
00:26:30.68\00:26:33.54
What I tell people is
watch out for guys trained to be
00:26:33.57\00:26:36.52
ministers who talk on
the subject of science.
00:26:36.55\00:26:39.53
He signed up for mapmaking
and science projects on the
00:26:39.56\00:26:44.15
HMS Beagle, that is
an interesting story.
00:26:44.18\00:26:46.38
We won't get into a lot about
that, but it was basically this,
00:26:46.41\00:26:49.22
the HMS Beagle had a
maiden voyage prior to this.
00:26:49.25\00:26:53.90
This was the second voyage.
00:26:53.93\00:26:55.12
The first voyage the
captain committed suicide.
00:26:55.15\00:26:57.35
They looked at the history
of him and thought the next
00:26:57.38\00:27:01.24
time we said the ship
out and it goes for years,
00:27:01.27\00:27:03.75
a long voyage, we need to
have a companion for the captain
00:27:03.78\00:27:07.43
so he has a friend that
can talk with him and he won't
00:27:07.46\00:27:10.49
he won't get so lonely.
00:27:10.52\00:27:11.87
Then they start working
this job description and said
00:27:11.90\00:27:15.19
maybe he ought to be a
naturalist that can do some
00:27:15.22\00:27:16.78
research and Darwin
was just out of college.
00:27:16.81\00:27:19.52
So he signed up for it and
became a gentleman companion
00:27:19.55\00:27:22.50
of Captain Fitz Roy.
00:27:22.53\00:27:24.80
Captain Fitz Roy gave him
a book called principles of
00:27:24.83\00:27:26.93
theology by Charles Lyle.
00:27:26.96\00:27:28.83
That suggested a long age
and he studied it and started to
00:27:28.86\00:27:32.65
think even more
along those lines.
00:27:32.68\00:27:34.90
He came back and wrote
the origin of species in 1844.
00:27:34.93\00:27:38.08
It published 15 years
later, and the reason he did it
00:27:38.11\00:27:40.05
15 years later, two
reasons, 1. He thought it was
00:27:40.08\00:27:43.57
controversial, wasn't sure
he had all his science there
00:27:43.60\00:27:46.85
to support it,
so he was careful.
00:27:46.88\00:27:48.34
2. Another fellow was
about ready to publish a similar
00:27:48.37\00:27:51.64
theory and so he decided,
he was urged by his friends to
00:27:51.67\00:27:55.05
publish it, so he did.
00:27:55.08\00:27:56.66
His religion was, he
started out as a Christian.
00:27:56.69\00:27:58.94
He became a Deist,
believe in God but God wasn't
00:27:58.97\00:28:02.33
involved with the world.
00:28:02.36\00:28:03.75
Finally he became an
agnostic later in his life.
00:28:03.78\00:28:06.68
I know there is a legend
out there that he recanted,
00:28:06.71\00:28:12.89
or converted on his
deathbed and that is actually
00:28:12.92\00:28:15.45
not true, it didn't happen.
00:28:15.48\00:28:17.28
He never did recant although
we think we know about the
00:28:17.31\00:28:19.74
story of what
was going on there.
00:28:19.77\00:28:21.51
His wife have
remained a steadfast Christian
00:28:21.54\00:28:23.74
all of her life.
00:28:23.77\00:28:24.96
He suffer from panic disorders
and they were beginning
00:28:24.99\00:28:27.95
to think that it had to do
with his mother's death and
00:28:27.98\00:28:30.80
separation anxiety, but
he dealt with severe anxiety
00:28:30.83\00:28:34.21
attacks much of his life.
00:28:34.24\00:28:35.91
He died in 1882 and was
buried in Westminster Abbey not
00:28:35.94\00:28:39.50
far from Isaac Newton's place.
00:28:39.53\00:28:42.74
This is the cover page,
interior page for his book.
00:28:42.77\00:28:46.95
This is the full title:
00:28:46.98\00:28:48.26
There has been few books
that have changed the world
00:28:56.30\00:28:59.93
as much as this book.
00:28:59.96\00:29:01.74
Here is something that he
proposes in the book, he says:
00:29:01.77\00:29:06.66
He was depended upon
their being slight changes over
00:29:19.13\00:29:22.42
time and he felt the
fossil record in his day,
00:29:22.45\00:29:26.35
the 1800's was not complete
and assumed the fossil record
00:29:26.38\00:29:28.89
would be fleshed out with
news discovery's that they would
00:29:28.92\00:29:32.44
find those successive
little modifications that would
00:29:32.47\00:29:35.67
support his theory.
00:29:35.70\00:29:37.38
And here's the famous tree
of life, Evolutions Tree of
00:29:37.41\00:29:41.15
Life, and you will notice
that down at the bottom there is
00:29:41.18\00:29:43.99
a simple single cell,
organism of some kind.
00:29:44.02\00:29:46.84
Through that an early
on it breaks into plants.
00:29:46.87\00:29:49.12
Then soon after from vertebrate
to invertebrate and so on
00:29:49.15\00:29:52.82
and up the scale.
00:29:52.85\00:29:54.31
Some people talk about maybe
plants ought to be a separate
00:29:54.34\00:29:58.52
thing, maybe they
started by themselves.
00:29:58.55\00:30:01.09
But anyway this is
evolutions tree of life.
00:30:01.12\00:30:03.97
The complexity we see in the
world today, via all of these
00:30:04.00\00:30:07.17
evolutionary changes and
breaking off into taxonomic
00:30:07.20\00:30:12.10
groups, microevolution.
00:30:12.13\00:30:14.08
Something that I propose
to people on this subject, and
00:30:14.11\00:30:18.14
yeah you have to
think about this.
00:30:18.17\00:30:20.51
Not everybody will except it.
00:30:20.54\00:30:21.92
Here is one way to look at it.
00:30:21.95\00:30:23.89
The humanist of the 19th
century, there were three great
00:30:23.92\00:30:26.60
figures, Sigmund Freud,
Charles Darwin and Karl Marx.
00:30:26.63\00:30:30.16
Sigmund Freud was one who
came along and said forget about
00:30:30.19\00:30:33.46
this God business, let me
tell you what makes a human
00:30:33.49\00:30:36.58
being tick, what moves
and motivates a human being.
00:30:36.61\00:30:41.25
Forget the God part.
00:30:41.28\00:30:42.78
The question I ask people
is Sigmund Freud considered as
00:30:42.81\00:30:45.95
influential today as
he did back in the day?
00:30:45.98\00:30:49.59
Are his theories still
top shelf or are he considered
00:30:49.62\00:30:52.82
somewhat passé
in psychology today?
00:30:52.85\00:30:55.87
Interestingly, historically
but not necessarily referred
00:30:55.90\00:31:01.48
to a lot today.
00:31:01.51\00:31:02.62
The answer to that is Freud
pretty much out in terms of
00:31:02.65\00:31:06.60
being thought of
as a source today.
00:31:06.63\00:31:09.80
Karl Marx, let's go
over to the right hand side.
00:31:13.14\00:31:16.80
Karl Marx like wise said,
forget God and I will tell you
00:31:16.83\00:31:22.15
how human societies act, forget
God, let's remove God from
00:31:22.18\00:31:26.35
the picture and talk
about how society should be
00:31:26.38\00:31:28.01
formed and operated.
00:31:28.04\00:31:30.01
Once again I asked the
same question, Karl Marx's
00:31:30.04\00:31:34.70
been tried, is he up
there top shelf now or a
00:31:34.73\00:31:38.91
little bit passé?
00:31:38.94\00:31:40.89
It is a little bit of a
passé side, a little bit out not
00:31:40.92\00:31:43.96
as many, father of communism,
not a lot of communist going
00:31:43.99\00:31:48.34
on today, at least new nations.
00:31:48.37\00:31:51.14
Darwin is pretty
much it for humanism.
00:31:51.17\00:31:56.29
It is like the last
Castle of humanism in some ways.
00:31:56.32\00:31:59.67
It is still existing
and that is where you go if
00:31:59.70\00:32:03.38
you are humanist.
00:32:03.41\00:32:04.79
One of the things that Darwin
had a problem with and that
00:32:07.46\00:32:10.09
is the eye, when he looked
at the complexity of the eye he
00:32:10.12\00:32:14.07
admitted that it
is hard to explain.
00:32:14.10\00:32:17.23
It is hard to explain
from evolution minute changes.
00:32:17.26\00:32:20.89
These are his words:
00:32:20.92\00:32:22.04
He believed it incidentally,
He did believed that it evolved.
00:32:39.58\00:32:41.90
but he admitted that the
00:32:41.93\00:32:43.13
complexity of eyes seem
hard to imagine what would be
00:32:43.16\00:32:46.70
a halfway eye, or a
third of and eye and so on.
00:32:46.73\00:32:49.91
Now if I can make this comment
about science, I will give
00:32:49.94\00:32:54.00
my story briefly
here in a little bit.
00:32:54.03\00:32:56.18
On my journey in science.
00:32:56.21\00:32:58.56
If I can make this observation
for science, I'm speaking
00:32:58.59\00:33:03.10
with good friends here
that are scientists and I may
00:33:03.13\00:33:06.33
hear about this later.
00:33:06.36\00:33:07.76
But my observation is that
if science has regularly made
00:33:07.79\00:33:12.91
a mistake in its observations,
it would be in the area of
00:33:12.94\00:33:16.17
oversimplifying
what it looks at.
00:33:16.20\00:33:19.59
Now what I mean is erring
on the side of assuming that
00:33:19.62\00:33:23.15
things are more
simple than they really are.
00:33:23.18\00:33:25.70
Missing the complexity.
00:33:25.73\00:33:27.63
For instance in alchemy,
alchemy being a proto-science of
00:33:27.66\00:33:33.71
Europe in the 12th
century, 14th century.
00:33:33.74\00:33:38.93
Alchemy, almost every
king had an alchemist on staff.
00:33:38.96\00:33:42.43
Fully paid for and could
have his laboratory, why?
00:33:42.46\00:33:45.27
Because alchemist thought
among other things it would be a
00:33:45.30\00:33:48.44
simple matter to
change lead into gold.
00:33:48.47\00:33:51.85
Wouldn't that be an
economically good thing to do?
00:33:51.88\00:33:55.16
Right now you and I would
like that very much, to be able
00:33:55.19\00:33:57.44
to take a big bar of
lead and turn it into gold.
00:33:57.47\00:34:00.70
So people tried to do that
and people were on staff for
00:34:00.73\00:34:04.93
centuries, Royal staffs for
centuries and yet it was never
00:34:04.96\00:34:08.07
done, there were no
evidence you could do it.
00:34:08.10\00:34:10.13
But they assumed you
could because it was simple,
00:34:10.16\00:34:12.35
Lead was soft, heavy
and gold was soft and heavy.
00:34:12.38\00:34:15.39
We were just talking about
changing the color pretty much.
00:34:15.42\00:34:18.31
Not an awful lot more so
they assumed it was simple.
00:34:18.34\00:34:21.86
Of course we know
now that it is much more
00:34:21.89\00:34:24.11
complicated than that.
00:34:24.14\00:34:25.96
If science traditionally
does that, I would have to say
00:34:25.99\00:34:28.60
that is a consistent
problem I think with science.
00:34:28.63\00:34:31.77
Again, if you assume things
come by natural law, you are
00:34:31.80\00:34:36.79
going to assume that
at some level they should
00:34:36.82\00:34:38.68
be easy to explain.
00:34:38.71\00:34:40.38
Now into this mix came a
controversial figure by the name
00:34:40.41\00:34:44.99
of Dr. Thomas Kuhn.
00:34:45.02\00:34:46.89
In the middle of the 20th
century, 1960s right in there,
00:34:46.92\00:34:50.66
he wrote a book
called the Structure of
00:34:50.69\00:34:53.42
Scientific Revolution.
00:34:53.45\00:34:54.93
He was a Harvard
trained physicist.
00:34:54.96\00:34:57.22
In his mind in studying
physics, he wanted to study the
00:34:57.25\00:35:01.19
history of physics so
he went all the way back to
00:35:01.22\00:35:03.56
Aristotle and made a
certain quest in his mind.
00:35:03.59\00:35:06.83
He said, I am going to learn
how Aristotle saw his world
00:35:06.86\00:35:10.92
if it kills me, I'm going
to get into his head and see
00:35:10.95\00:35:13.18
things like he saw it.
00:35:13.21\00:35:14.52
He had a big quest to
try and do that, he spent
00:35:14.55\00:35:16.92
a lot of time and finally
figured out that he now sees
00:35:16.95\00:35:19.82
how Aristotle saw.
00:35:19.85\00:35:21.69
Well that led him in another
journey which was like, How do
00:35:21.72\00:35:25.66
we change our models
through the years in science?
00:35:25.69\00:35:29.15
He came to the conclusion
that it is not easy for science
00:35:29.18\00:35:32.90
to change their basic models.
00:35:32.93\00:35:35.46
He finds it operates, in
fact he came up with a term that
00:35:35.49\00:35:39.30
if was used in grammar school,
for grammar illustrations.
00:35:39.33\00:35:43.52
He used it in a scientific
way and called it a paradigm,
00:35:43.55\00:35:47.42
it is now a model.
00:35:47.45\00:35:48.84
He said that science uses
paradigm shifts, models to
00:35:48.87\00:35:52.19
explain things,
theories are models to
00:35:52.22\00:35:56.23
explain how things work.
00:35:56.26\00:35:57.93
He says, generally speaking,
historically it has taken a
00:35:57.96\00:36:01.67
huge, he called them scientific
revolutions, to change
00:36:01.70\00:36:05.97
basic models or basic views.
00:36:06.00\00:36:08.64
I can use alchemy is an
example and that went on for
00:36:08.67\00:36:11.29
centuries before
they figured that
00:36:11.32\00:36:13.29
wasn't a good model.
00:36:13.32\00:36:14.96
So science is slow in changing
models and maybe it should
00:36:14.99\00:36:18.13
be, maybe that's the nature
science, it takes and over
00:36:18.16\00:36:20.18
whelming amount of
evidence to change a model.
00:36:20.21\00:36:22.70
But nevertheless
that is the case.
00:36:22.73\00:36:24.48
And Kuhn even went so far
to say, and here's where he
00:36:24.51\00:36:28.06
rubbed scientists the wrong
way, or a least stirred the
00:36:28.09\00:36:31.04
pot, shall we
say on the subject.
00:36:31.07\00:36:32.75
Especially the way scientists
think it is not as rational,
00:36:32.78\00:36:41.66
or objective as sciences
had a tendency to view itself.
00:36:41.69\00:36:46.38
He said we are not as
unemotional creatures as perhaps
00:36:46.41\00:36:53.07
we like to think we are.
00:36:53.10\00:36:54.47
We bring with ourselves
presuppositions, models and we
00:36:54.50\00:36:59.24
don't have a tendency to
challenge those models as
00:36:59.27\00:37:01.89
rapidly as we think we do.
00:37:01.92\00:37:03.31
We actually look for data,
more or less, that supports
00:37:03.34\00:37:06.75
our existing model.
00:37:06.78\00:37:08.63
He says it takes a scientific
revolution to change those
00:37:08.66\00:37:12.04
models and of course this
has been a controversial thing.
00:37:12.07\00:37:15.64
I read one place where
this book is considered,
00:37:15.67\00:37:18.34
his second, or third.
00:37:18.37\00:37:19.58
I would be curious to
know what the first one was,
00:37:19.61\00:37:21.54
the second or third most
important philosophical book
00:37:21.57\00:37:24.28
of the 20th century because it
challenged, and as I read more,
00:37:24.31\00:37:27.76
I think science more or
less begrudgingly admits that at
00:37:27.79\00:37:31.82
least something to what he says.
00:37:31.85\00:37:33.85
Paradigm shift, you
have heard that term before.
00:37:33.88\00:37:37.69
He is the one that coined that.
00:37:37.72\00:37:39.76
Talk about paradigms, you
have a intelligent design or
00:37:39.79\00:37:44.21
undirected forces
pushing us, or pushing things
00:37:44.24\00:37:47.74
to were we are today.
00:37:47.77\00:37:49.36
That is really a worldview.
00:37:49.39\00:37:51.07
In the beginning,
let's talk about chances.
00:37:51.10\00:37:53.29
Chance in math, it is a
known fact among scientists that
00:37:53.32\00:37:58.63
the highest proportion of
scientists believe in God are
00:37:58.66\00:38:02.38
mathematicians, I
often joke it is because they
00:38:02.41\00:38:05.32
crunch the numbers.
00:38:05.35\00:38:06.93
But anyway, excuse me
I just had to say that.
00:38:06.96\00:38:08.70
Let me crunch
some numbers with you.
00:38:08.73\00:38:11.18
In the beginning God, what
are the chances in front of
00:38:11.21\00:38:14.24
your laptop you
type this out perfectly
00:38:14.27\00:38:16.52
without any mistakes.
00:38:16.55\00:38:18.77
Now there are 20 letters,
What is a sequence probability?
00:38:18.80\00:38:22.71
There are 20 letters and spaces
in "in the beginning God".
00:38:22.74\00:38:26.79
Now if you 26 possible
alphabets at a space making it
00:38:26.82\00:38:32.11
the 27th, you have a 1
in 27 chance for the first
00:38:32.14\00:38:35.10
letter to the "I".
00:38:35.13\00:38:36.78
What are the chance to
type all of those letters in
00:38:43.95\00:38:47.94
exactly that way
with those spaces?
00:38:47.97\00:38:50.12
I will give you
another way of illustrating it.
00:39:04.57\00:39:06.21
If you were able to try it
one billion times a second,
00:39:06.24\00:39:10.07
to change it every second to
another 2nd billion times and
00:39:10.10\00:39:14.08
try to type that out in order,
we haven't had enough time
00:39:14.11\00:39:18.51
in the universe
in 14 billion years.
00:39:18.54\00:39:21.36
There has not been enough
seconds yet to have gotten to
00:39:21.39\00:39:23.72
"in the beginning God".
00:39:23.75\00:39:25.28
That gives you
probability chances?
00:39:25.31\00:39:27.39
Now you and I can
recognize random forces.
00:39:27.42\00:39:31.21
Your mind in my mind is
trained to recognize that this
00:39:31.24\00:39:35.22
Mountain was
shaped by random erosion.
00:39:35.25\00:39:38.05
Wind, rain, what ever,
it has a random shape there.
00:39:38.08\00:39:41.52
But when we see something
like this, can we account for
00:39:41.55\00:39:45.56
this in randomness?
00:39:45.59\00:39:47.47
What are the chances?
00:39:47.50\00:39:48.68
You might say we have a
bazillion universes with a
00:39:48.71\00:39:51.37
bazillion Mountains and
maybe there is a chance it
00:39:51.40\00:39:54.51
would look like this.
00:39:54.54\00:39:55.55
Our mind automatically
recognizes organization and that
00:39:55.58\00:39:59.84
somebody has been here.
00:39:59.87\00:40:01.52
Those are some of the issues.
00:40:01.55\00:40:03.24
Now Francis Crick said this:
00:40:03.27\00:40:05.38
My question would be
is why would you have to
00:40:11.74\00:40:13.04
constantly do that?
00:40:13.07\00:40:14.43
Why not go with the evidence?
00:40:14.46\00:40:16.91
Those are some of the things
that I asked questions about.
00:40:16.94\00:40:19.07
Let's give another
example, another illustration.
00:40:19.10\00:40:22.32
This is in Marble Colorado.
00:40:22.35\00:40:25.05
Have any of you
been to Marble Colorado?
00:40:25.08\00:40:26.82
What is the famous for? Marble!
00:40:26.85\00:40:29.80
These big chunks are
from a quarry there in
00:40:31.98\00:40:34.17
Marble Colorado and I
took a picture there of them.
00:40:34.20\00:40:36.54
I noticed some of the work
and thought okay, wait a minute.
00:40:36.57\00:40:41.03
What are the chances that
at the base of this hill there
00:40:45.34\00:40:48.54
is a nice
rectangular chunk of marble.
00:40:48.58\00:40:53.04
Through time little
chunks roll down the hill,
00:40:53.07\00:40:56.34
earthquakes, wind, and
whatever, little shakes.
00:40:56.38\00:40:59.58
Little rocks come along and
they come down and knock off
00:40:59.61\00:41:02.32
a piece off this rectangle.
00:41:02.35\00:41:06.03
Over time, how many
times would you take to get
00:41:06.06\00:41:08.17
something like that?
00:41:08.20\00:41:10.77
Again you might
say, it could happen.
00:41:10.81\00:41:13.34
You know maybe, but when
we see organization like that
00:41:13.37\00:41:17.50
symmetry and everything, we
would suggest, we would guess
00:41:17.53\00:41:21.39
that somebody was behind a
hammer and chisel making that
00:41:21.43\00:41:25.25
and not rocks
coming down the hill.
00:41:25.28\00:41:27.00
No less than the person
of Sherlock Holmes said that.
00:41:40.88\00:41:44.04
Well through time, the last
century or so, George McCready
00:41:44.08\00:41:49.33
Price led, I don't know if you
heard of George McCready Price,
00:41:49.36\00:41:53.38
a well-known geologist,
in the early 20th century
00:41:53.41\00:41:57.52
began to challenge
evolution on science basis.
00:41:57.56\00:42:01.64
He wrote some things and a
fellow by the name of Henry
00:42:01.68\00:42:04.83
Morris read some of
his work and was impressed.
00:42:04.86\00:42:07.20
Henry Morris was a hydrologist,
a water expert on the
00:42:07.23\00:42:11.74
forces of what water does.
00:42:11.78\00:42:13.29
He wrote the book entitled
The Genesis Flood which became
00:42:13.33\00:42:16.80
something of a standard for
what would become a field that
00:42:16.83\00:42:20.27
we call Scientific Creationism.
00:42:20.30\00:42:23.00
A lot of people
feel that is an oxymoron,
00:42:23.03\00:42:25.62
and I understand that.
00:42:25.66\00:42:27.14
Michael Denton also
wrote, and this fellow was very
00:42:27.17\00:42:31.09
bright, wrote, and he is
not a creationist, wrote a book
00:42:31.13\00:42:34.05
entitled,
Evolution A Theory in Crisis.
00:42:34.08\00:42:36.37
Others have written
books including Philip Johnson,
00:42:36.41\00:42:38.71
Darwin On Trial,
there are a lot of books.
00:42:38.75\00:42:40.85
Philip Johnson is the
father of Intelligent Design.
00:42:40.88\00:42:44.65
These people are not
creationists as such, believing
00:42:44.69\00:42:48.39
in a short age creation, but
they do believe that facts and
00:42:48.42\00:42:51.83
numbers and crunching the
data seem to suggest there is
00:42:51.87\00:42:55.24
an intelligent
designer out there.
00:42:55.28\00:42:57.15
Now you can do good science
and accomplish some things
00:42:57.19\00:43:02.18
even in modern eras.
00:43:02.21\00:43:03.68
Werner von Braun and you
wonder who Werner von Braun was?
00:43:03.72\00:43:08.17
If there was a man responsible
for putting us on the moon,
00:43:08.21\00:43:12.62
it would have been
Dr. Werner von Braun.
00:43:12.66\00:43:15.22
He didn't quite have
the same worldview as modern
00:43:15.25\00:43:19.14
scientists tends to have.
00:43:19.17\00:43:20.70
I want to tell you a
little bit about my journey in
00:43:20.74\00:43:22.32
science, just briefly here.
00:43:22.35\00:43:23.55
I grew up in Los Angeles,
California, don't hold that
00:43:23.58\00:43:26.63
against me, but I grew up
in Los Angeles, California.
00:43:26.67\00:43:29.38
A place where movies are
everything, and I grew up
00:43:29.41\00:43:32.05
as a kid on movies, I loved
science movies, science fiction
00:43:32.09\00:43:34.92
movies I can't help it.
00:43:34.96\00:43:36.38
Early science movies,
now I don't go back that far!
00:43:36.41\00:43:38.96
Early science fiction
movies tended to show scientists
00:43:40.51\00:43:45.00
as what? Mad scientists,
a little bit out there.
00:43:45.04\00:43:49.78
This is fairly impertinent
to some of our events around.
00:43:49.81\00:43:54.78
Science images in
Hollywood is greatly improved,
00:43:54.82\00:43:59.61
Wouldn't you say? Greatly
improved, very positive now.
00:43:59.64\00:44:04.03
From a mad scientist days I
was carried into a belief that
00:44:04.06\00:44:08.42
science is everything.
00:44:08.45\00:44:09.87
I wanted to be a
scientist and let me show you
00:44:09.91\00:44:11.63
now a clip from a movie.
00:44:11.67\00:44:14.05
We are going to show a
clip right now from a movie,
00:44:14.09\00:44:17.41
that for me at least,
illustrated what I wanted to be
00:44:17.44\00:44:20.73
when I grew up.
00:44:20.77\00:44:22.15
Let's take a look, we are
going to take you to a movie,
00:44:22.19\00:44:26.18
to a clip right now from
"The Day the World Stood Still".
00:44:26.22\00:44:30.18
So he is walking around
with this boy, take a look!
00:44:49.17\00:44:51.03
"That's a man I
would like to talk to. "
00:44:51.07\00:44:52.95
"Bobby, who is the
greatest man in America today?"
00:44:55.28\00:44:57.60
"Well I don't
know, spaceman I guess. "
00:44:57.63\00:45:01.14
"No, I was speaking of
earth men, I mean the greatest"
00:45:01.18\00:45:04.40
"philosopher, the
greatest thinker. "
00:45:04.44\00:45:06.42
"You mean the smartest
man in the whole world?"
00:45:06.46\00:45:08.11
"Yes that would do nicely. "
00:45:08.15\00:45:09.67
"Mr. Barnhart I guess,
he's the greatest scientist "
00:45:09.71\00:45:12.78
"in the whole world. "
00:45:12.81\00:45:13.78
"He lives here in
Washington, doesn't he?"
00:45:13.79\00:45:15.69
That kid is me, except he
has a Yankees hat on and I would
00:45:15.72\00:45:21.70
have had a Dodgers hat on.
00:45:21.74\00:45:22.80
But that kid is me, the smartest
man in the world would be
00:45:22.83\00:45:25.84
Professor Barnhart.
00:45:25.87\00:45:27.02
What happens next:
00:45:27.05\00:45:28.17
The problem he's stuck on
something, this brightest man.
00:45:42.81\00:45:45.72
And this is what happens next:
00:46:00.08\00:46:01.93
"Oh come in, the
professor is in his study. "
00:46:01.96\00:46:05.27
Knock, knock, knock, knock,
"this is the man you wanted"
00:46:11.55\00:46:16.82
"to see Professor. "
00:46:16.86\00:46:18.28
"Thank you Captain.
" "I'll wait outside. "
00:46:18.32\00:46:21.57
"You wrote this?"
00:46:23.99\00:46:25.47
"It was a clumsy way
to introduce myself. "
00:46:25.51\00:46:27.65
"I understand you are
a difficult man to see"
00:46:27.69\00:46:29.76
"I thought you would have
the solution by this time. "
00:46:29.80\00:46:32.98
"Not yet, that is why
I wanted to see you. "
00:46:33.02\00:46:35.21
"All you have to do now is
substitute this expression,"
00:46:35.24\00:46:38.51
"at this point. "
00:46:38.55\00:46:39.91
"Yes that would
reproduce the first term?"
00:46:39.95\00:46:41.65
"But what about the
effect of the other terms?"
00:46:41.68\00:46:44.19
"Almost negligible with the
a variation of parameters this"
00:46:44.23\00:46:47.26
"is your answer. "
00:46:47.29\00:46:48.26
"How can you be so sure?
Have you tested this theory?"
00:46:48.27\00:46:51.91
"I find it works well
enough to get me from one"
00:46:51.94\00:46:55.52
"planet to another. "
00:46:55.55\00:46:57.36
"I am Klaatu. "
00:46:57.40\00:47:01.55
"I spent two days at your
Walter Reed Hospital room 309."
00:47:01.59\00:47:07.78
"My doctor's name
was Major White. "
00:47:07.82\00:47:10.45
"If you are not interested or
if you intend to turn me over"
00:47:10.48\00:47:14.90
"to your army, we
needn't waste anymore time. "
00:47:14.93\00:47:17.86
"You may go now Captain
please thank General Cutter,"
00:47:27.98\00:47:30.89
"tell him I know
this gentleman. "
00:47:30.93\00:47:34.01
"You have faith
Professor Barnhart. "
00:47:37.53\00:47:39.23
"It isn't faith that
makes good science Mr. Klaatu,"
00:47:39.27\00:47:41.76
"it's curiosity. "
00:47:41.79\00:47:43.39
"Sit down please, there
are several thousand questions"
00:47:43.42\00:47:47.79
"I'd like to ask you. "
00:47:47.83\00:47:50.30
Don't you love that?
Several thousand questions.
00:47:50.33\00:47:53.57
You can understand a
superior being like that
00:47:53.60\00:47:56.80
to be able to ask.
00:47:56.83\00:47:58.09
This idea of I just want
answers, this curiosity and
00:47:58.13\00:48:02.78
openness to new
sources of information.
00:48:02.81\00:48:05.34
In my minds eye, that
is what I wanted to be.
00:48:05.38\00:48:08.61
I wanted to be a scientist.
00:48:08.64\00:48:10.20
So I enrolled at the University
of California at Riverside
00:48:10.24\00:48:14.15
way back in the day and
into this classroom I went as a
00:48:14.18\00:48:18.06
geology major a lover
of scientists and still do.
00:48:18.10\00:48:20.91
For those of you who have
seen me I just want to throw
00:48:20.95\00:48:23.99
that picture in.
00:48:24.03\00:48:25.16
I was going for what you
would call suburban hippy, nerd
00:48:25.19\00:48:30.51
look, or something like that.
00:48:30.54\00:48:32.79
That also dates the picture.
00:48:32.83\00:48:35.01
I went there and wanted to
know, I had questions about
00:48:35.04\00:48:38.33
science, but I also had
this image that science would be
00:48:38.36\00:48:41.60
very open and be willing
to discuss any theory about
00:48:41.64\00:48:44.84
any subject more or
less if there was some
00:48:44.88\00:48:47.01
scientific validity.
00:48:47.04\00:48:48.60
Instead what I found was a
very disturbing thing for me.
00:48:48.64\00:48:51.58
Instead I found a very
subtle worldview that is
00:48:51.61\00:48:55.90
illustrated by this
quotation from Richard Lewontin,
00:48:55.93\00:48:58.39
the Harvard Professor:
00:48:58.43\00:49:00.73
I found this pretty much
the subtle thinking on the
00:49:32.99\00:49:39.91
subjects of science.
00:49:39.94\00:49:41.31
I was not a Christian, I
wasn't a practicing Christian.
00:49:41.34\00:49:44.56
I think I had a belief
that there was probably somebody
00:49:44.59\00:49:47.15
out there, but I had this
image that we could talk about
00:49:47.18\00:49:49.70
it and I found out it
was difficult to talk about.
00:49:49.74\00:49:53.07
Not impossible, and not in
all settings, but difficult.
00:49:53.11\00:49:57.62
I found it
discouraging for me frankly.
00:49:57.65\00:50:00.02
When we talk about materialism
it is interesting that the
00:50:00.05\00:50:04.37
Bible has totally
opposite view of materialism.
00:50:04.40\00:50:07.21
Of how we got here:
00:50:07.25\00:50:08.33
so there is an anti-materialism
statement in the Bible.
00:50:16.10\00:50:19.02
What you see is
not all that there is.
00:50:19.06\00:50:22.52
Where as materialism believes
everything you see comes
00:50:22.56\00:50:25.40
from everything that you see.
00:50:25.44\00:50:26.98
That is materialism.
00:50:27.02\00:50:29.27
To show you how world
views have changed, here is a
00:50:29.30\00:50:33.13
famous campus and one of
their mission statements.
00:50:33.17\00:50:36.97
Where do you think that
mission statement comes from?
00:50:51.00\00:50:53.24
If you know the
picture there, that is Harvard.
00:50:53.27\00:50:55.75
That's were Richard
Lewontin does his work today.
00:50:55.78\00:50:58.50
So you can see
there's been a huge worldview,
00:50:58.54\00:51:02.02
our glasses shift,
cosmology shifted over time.
00:51:02.05\00:51:05.46
Now I would like to conclude
with a little story I found
00:51:05.50\00:51:10.77
in the Bible where the
apostle Paul actually travels to
00:51:10.81\00:51:15.30
Athens, which at the time
was the center of scientific
00:51:15.34\00:51:19.56
observation, and I might
even say of proto-evolution.
00:51:19.60\00:51:23.79
Some ideas leading to evolution.
00:51:23.82\00:51:25.89
Now Epicureans and Stoics, now
Epicureans come from Epicurus.
00:51:48.87\00:51:52.25
That is what Epicurus believed.
00:52:04.37\00:52:06.30
Now the Stoics, that was a
belief system founded by Zeno.
00:52:06.33\00:52:10.68
Their belief system was
that God is in nature and not
00:52:10.72\00:52:15.03
above it, He is in nature.
00:52:15.07\00:52:16.56
I wouldn't say of force
but something like that.
00:52:16.60\00:52:19.00
Now this is where Paul
comes into talk about his
00:52:30.73\00:52:34.76
view of origins.
00:52:34.80\00:52:36.67
The Areopagus is the hill
next to the Acropolis in Athens
00:52:49.70\00:52:53.55
still there today, and
you can go out and walk
00:52:53.59\00:52:56.06
around the same area.
00:52:56.09\00:52:57.77
Now Paul was a brilliant
man and in his day he had the
00:52:57.80\00:53:01.52
rough equivalent of a Ph.
D. so much so that when he was
00:53:01.55\00:53:04.77
speaking in front of
Kings and Governors he will get
00:53:04.80\00:53:07.99
comments like this:
00:53:08.02\00:53:09.23
so students if you ever feel
that way you understand that
00:53:13.56\00:53:15.47
there were others
that felt that way too.
00:53:15.51\00:53:17.94
This is what Paul said
as he addresses group of
00:53:17.97\00:53:21.89
philosophers, he said:
00:53:21.92\00:53:23.34
now what ever your view
of a resurrection and how
00:54:19.65\00:54:22.36
scientifically possible
it is, can I say one thing?
00:54:22.39\00:54:24.89
I don't think anybody
should disagree about it.
00:54:24.92\00:54:27.35
That is there were people
that lived in the first century
00:54:27.38\00:54:30.05
that were willing to die
for it, they were that sure
00:54:30.09\00:54:33.50
that it happened.
00:54:33.54\00:54:35.22
Whether you take that
as evidence or not there
00:54:35.25\00:54:37.76
is no question that the
people of that day believed
00:54:37.80\00:54:40.27
it did happen.
00:54:40.31\00:54:41.88
He is sharing this as evidence,
a narrative of evidence.
00:54:41.91\00:54:46.15
Now he is suggesting this,
and they're thinking about this.
00:54:46.18\00:54:50.38
Like a resurrection,
this was difficult so:
00:55:13.65\00:55:16.72
It was too challenging,
it was pushing the button of
00:55:21.29\00:55:23.58
their cosmology, their
worldview was being challenged.
00:55:23.62\00:55:26.82
They rejected it as insufficient
evidence, so some mocked.
00:55:26.85\00:55:31.13
But interestingly some believed,
they believe the evidence
00:55:31.16\00:55:35.33
was sufficient and their
paradigm experienced a shift.
00:55:35.36\00:55:39.49
It's possible to
shift your paradigm.
00:55:39.53\00:55:41.75
Alister McGrath also at
Oxford with Richard Dawkins,
00:55:41.78\00:55:46.53
a famous atheist said this:
00:55:46.56\00:55:48.80
And of course this is
making news still to this day,
00:56:05.56\00:56:08.75
the famous British
atheist Anthony Flew
00:56:08.78\00:56:11.35
He had an experience of
a change of his paradigm,
00:56:11.39\00:56:14.41
a change in his
worldview. He said:
00:56:14.45\00:56:16.89
He had an experience of
shifting his paradigm in his
00:56:35.37\00:56:38.75
worldview into looking
at it in a different way.
00:56:38.79\00:56:42.14
I have had that
experience in my own life.
00:56:42.17\00:56:44.51
As we present these
subjects this week, I want to
00:56:44.55\00:56:47.56
encourage you to keep it
as open-minded as you can.
00:56:47.59\00:56:50.57
Look at the
evidence pro and con.
00:56:50.60\00:56:52.14
I want you to know that by
the end this week, if you are
00:56:52.18\00:56:55.08
still here, and
you can still stand me.
00:56:55.12\00:56:57.05
If you are still here I am
going to be sharing with you
00:56:57.08\00:57:00.79
what I consider to be a
challenges of my worldview.
00:57:00.83\00:57:03.82
I will be very honest
with the things we still don't
00:57:03.85\00:57:06.81
know about and have a
hard time talking about.
00:57:06.84\00:57:09.68
I will try to do it
calmly and we will have a good
00:57:09.72\00:57:12.52
time talking about it.
00:57:12.55\00:57:13.78
Please come and visit us
this week and be here for these
00:57:13.82\00:57:17.33
talks and we are going to
open up to you some new things,
00:57:17.36\00:57:21.25
both science and narrative
on the subjects of origin.
00:57:21.28\00:57:25.14
I hope you will
find it interesting.
00:57:25.17\00:57:26.63
I'm going to deal with
what I consider to be the very
00:57:26.67\00:57:29.46
best question that
anybody ever asked,
00:57:29.50\00:57:31.97
somebody of my persuasion.
00:57:32.01\00:57:33.60
That is if you believe
that God really is around, or He
00:57:33.63\00:57:40.37
had something to
do with us being here,
00:57:40.41\00:57:41.90
Where did that He go?
00:57:41.93\00:57:43.47
To show you that I'm not
scared so much that I won't
00:57:43.51\00:57:48.32
tackle a big one, that is
a big one and I will try to
00:57:48.35\00:57:53.13
tackle that with you here.
00:57:53.17\00:57:54.45
Thank you very much for
coming and hope you enjoyed what
00:57:54.48\00:57:56.52
we had to share.
00:57:56.55\00:57:57.96