List of quotes appealing to authority used by creationists
| Goddidit! |
| Key claims |
| Science |
| Random articles |
Herein is a list of quotes appealing to authority mined from such sources, and commentary on them.
[edit] Quotes from non-experts
[edit] New Science on Ramapithecus
In its attempt to build a case that humans did not evolve from "ape-men," the Jehovah's Witnesses' publication Life — How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? (hereinafter referred to as Life) presents as evidence this short quote, which it attributes in context only to New Science magazine:
Ramapithecus cannot have been the first member of the human line. (p. 92)
It should be noted that New Scientist is a popular magazine and not a peer-reviewed journal. The article, Jive Talking, was in fact written by John Gribbin, an astrophysicist as admitted by Life in a subsequent unrelated quote (p. 126). Regardless of the validity of this out-of-context quote, and without doubting his knowledge of astrophysics, it is unclear why Gribbin should be considered an expert on human origins.
[edit] New York Times on known human fossil remains
To strengthen its claim of the scarcity of human fossils, Life quotes The New York Times:
The known fossil remains of man's ancestors would fit on a billiard table. That makes a poor platform from which to peer into the mysteries of the last few million years. (p. 86)
Contrary to this statement, paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall, PhD, notes there have been a "huge number" of recent human fossil finds. [1] Notwithstanding the truth of the quoted statement at the time it was made, it is in fact merely the opinion of science writer Nicholas Wade.
Although the meaning of the statement likely does not differ significantly from that intended by the original author, the statement from The New York Times is also quoted out of context. It should read:
In 1978 Mary Leakey discovered at Laetoli in Kenya a fossilized trail of 70 humanlike footprints marked out some 3.7 million years ago. But with this notable exception, the known fossil remains of man's ancestors would fit on a billiard table. That makes a poor platform from which to peer into the mists of the last few million years from which the hominid line suddenly emerged. [2]
Note that the quote in Life is presented without mention of the Laetoli footprints and without ellipses, as if the thought started with "the known fossil remains...."
To further support the claim of the scarcity of human fossils Life additionally quotes Science Digest, Newsweek, Science, New Scientist, and Spectator (University of Iowa), none, as The New York Times, a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The New York Times is quoted several times in Life.
[edit] A scientific journal on radioactive decay
To support its claim that "some scientists" doubt radioactive dating methods, Life reports:
A scientific journal reported on studies showing that "dates determined by radioactive decay may be off -- not only by a few years, but by orders of magnitude." It said: "Man, instead of having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few thousand." (p. 96)
The "scientific journal" quoted is in fact Popular Science, and the ideas expressed were not even those of the author but of one Robert Gentry. In the original context the beginning of the first sentence, which was left off, reads, "Physicist Gentry believes that all of the dates...." Gentry is a Seventh-day Adventist and a young Earth creationist and his ideas do not represent the scientific consensus.
[edit] von Braun on origin of laws of the universe
To advance the anthropic principle, Life quotes Wernher von Braun, a Nazi rocket engineer whose major achievement before working on the US space program was his construction of V1 and V2 rockets for the Third Reich:
The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody. (p. 124)
It is unclear why von Braun, as a consumer of the physical laws, should be an authority on their origin. Additionally, the source of this quote is identified per Life to be the National Enquirer, which is not considered a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
[edit] Hitching on Darwinism in trouble
Also in order to demonstrate that scientists doubt evolution, Life notes:
Francis Hitching, an evolutionist and author of the book The Neck of the Giraffe, stated: "For all its acceptance in the scientific world as the great unifying principle of biology, Darwinism, after a century and a quarter, is in a surprising amount of trouble. (p. 15)
Francis Hitching is inarguably the most important source for Life. He is not a scientist, but rather a sensationalist author and television writer, and as such cannot be considered an authority on evolution.
[edit] Hoyle and Wickramasinghe on the evolutionary theory's foundation
To bolster its claim that life could not have originated by chance, Life offers:
"The problem for biology is to reach a simple beginning," say astronomers Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe. "Fossil residues of ancient life-forms discovered in the rocks do not reveal a simple beginning.... so the evolutionary theory lacks a proper foundation." (p. 40)
As stated in the quote, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are astronomers and should not be considered experts on abiogenesis. They are critical of evolution, promoting instead panspermia, and their ideas do not represent the scientific consensus. They are quoted many times in Life.
[edit] Heribert-Nilsson on no transitional series
Life quotes geneticist Nils Heribert-Nilsson from his 1953 book The Synthetic Origin of Species:
It is not even possible to make a caricature of evolution out of the palaeobiological facts. The fossil material is now so complete that...the lack of transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled. (p. 59)
Heribert-Nilsson's hypothesis of synthetic speciation has been refuted and his cosmic ice theory has not been well received by the scientific community. His ideas have been criticized by geneticist G. Ledyard Stebbins and do not represent the scientific consensus.
[edit] The author of Darwin Retried on mutations
In order to advance the claim that mutations cannot be the mechanism of evolution, Life offers:
In the book Darwin Retried the author relates the following about the respected geneticist, the late Richard Goldschmidt: "After observing mutations in fruit flies for many years, Goldschmidt fell into despair. The changes, he lamented, were so hopelessly micro [small] that if a thousand mutations were combined in one specimen, there would still be no new species." (p. 105)
Note that this is not a quote from Richard Goldschmidt but is merely the interpretation of the author, attorney Norman Macbeth, of Goldschmidt's work. Goldschmidt was the leading proponent of the "hopeful monsters" hypothesis, which suggests macro-mutation as the mechanism for evolution. Most scientists have rejected the views of Goldschmidt on evolution.
[edit] Quotes from biased sources
[edit] Moore on no transitional forms
To support its claim of the nonexistence of transitional fossils, Life states:
This agrees with the extensive study made by the Geological Society of London and the Palaeontological Association of England. Professor of natural science John N. Moore reported on the results: "Some 120 scientists, all specialists, prepared 30 chapters in a monumental work of over 800 pages to present the fossil record for plants and animals divided into about 2,500 groups. . . . Each major form or kind of plant and animal is shown to have a separate and distinct history from all the other forms or kinds! Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record. . . . Whales, bats, horses, primates, elephants, hares, squirrels, etc., all are as distinct at their first appearance as they are now. There is not a trace of a common ancestor, much less a link with any reptile, the supposed progenitor." Moore added: "No transitional forms have been found in the fossil record very probably because no transitional forms exist in fossil stage at all. Very likely, transitions between animal kinds and/or transitions between plant kinds have never occurred." (p. 65)
Note that this quote is not a statement made by the mentioned organizations but rather is an interpretation of their findings by Moore. Moore was a founding member of the Creation Research Society. One source for this quote was identified to be Should Evolution Be Taught? by Moore. Moore's ideas do not represent the scientific consensus and should not be presented as such.
Life similarly presents Moore as an expert in a chapter titled "Mutations--A Basis for Evolution?":
The truth is as Professor John Moore declared: "Upon rigorous examination and analysis, any dogmatic assertion...that gene mutations are the raw material for any evolutionary process involving natural selection is an utterance of a myth." (p. 111)
[edit] Bethell on Darwinism being on the verge of collapse
In support of the claim that scientists doubt evolution, Life states:
Harper's magazine, writer Tom Bethell commented: "Darwin made a mistake sufficiently serious to undermine his theory. And that mistake has only recently been recognized as such. . . . One organism may indeed be 'fitter' than another . . . This, of course, is not something which helps create the organism, . . . It is clear, I think, that there was something very, very wrong with such an idea." Bethell added: "As I see it the conclusion is pretty staggering: Darwin's theory, I believe, is on the verge of collapse." (p. 23)
Harper's is a general-interest magazine. Bethell is a journalist reporting on fringe science and also a global warming denialist, AIDS denialist, and intelligent design advocate, and his ideas do not represent the scientific consensus. Stephen Jay Gould refuted Bethell's argument that Darwin erred, confirming that "Darwinism is alive and thriving, despite Bethell's obituary." [3]
[edit] Muggeridge on the lack of evidence for evolution
Life states:
When reviewing a book on evolution, English author Malcolm Muggeridge commented on the lack of evidence for evolution....Then he said: “The Genesis account seems, by comparison, sober enough and at least has the merit of being validly related to what we know about human beings and their behavior.” He said that the unfounded claims of millions of years for man’s evolution “and wild leaps from skull to skull, cannot but strike anyone not caught up in the [evolutionary] myth as pure fantasy.” Muggeridge concluded: “Posterity will surely be amazed, and I hope vastly amused, that such slipshod and unconvincing theorizing should have so easily captivated twentieth-century minds and been so widely and recklessly applied.” (p. 98)
Muggeridge is a journalist and Christian convert. It is unclear why his opinion within a book review should be considered authoritative.
[edit] Pratt on origin of the earth
As the sole piece of evidence advancing their claim that the findings of scientists agree with the biblical order of events, Life presents in a panel:
A well-known geologist said this about the Genesis creation account: "If I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral people, such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed, I could hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first chapter of Genesis." This geologist, Wallace Pratt, also noted that the order of events--from the origin of the oceans, to the emergence of land, to the appearance of marine life, and then to birds and mammals--is essentially the sequence of the principle divisions of geologic time. (p. 36)
It should first be noted that science does not in fact agree with the order of events in Genesis. In some cases too little is known about the formation of the Earth for science to say, and in some cases science obviously disagrees.
The source of the quote is identified as The Lamp, "The Worlds of Wallace Pratt," 1971, by W. L. Copithorne. In fact Pratt originally made the statement in a piece titled "Sermons in Stones" in1928, making it one of the oldest quotes in Life.
The Lamp goes on to state:
[Pratt] was undisturbed by the way Genesis compresses millions of geologic years into six days, for "Are we not assured, indeed, that with the Creator, 'a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day?'" [4]
It has been suggested that this is evidence Pratt was a six-literal-day creationist. In any event his ideas do not represent the scientific consensus.
[edit] Gower on absence of intermediate fossils
In a section titled "Life Appears Suddenly" Life quotes biochemist D. B. Gower from the Kentish Times:
The creation account in Genesis and the theory of evolution could not be reconciled. One must be right and the other wrong. The story of the fossils agreed with the account of Genesis. In the oldest rocks we did not find a series of fossils covering the gradual changes from the most primitive creatures to developed forms, but rather in the oldest rocks, developed species suddenly appeared. Between every species there was a complete absence of intermediate fossils. (p. 62)
David Gower is a self-proclaimed creationist and member of creationist organizations, [5] and his ideas do not represent the scientific consensus.
[edit] Coffin on fossil record disagrees with evolution
Concluding a chapter titled "Letting the Fossil Record Speak," Life suggests:
...fossil evidence does lend strong weight to the arguments for creation. As zoologist Coffin stated: "To secular scientists, the fossils, evidences of the life of the past, constitute the ultimate and final court of appeal, because the fossil record is the only authentic history of life available to science. If this fossil history does not agree with evolutionary theory -- and we have seen that it does not -- what does it teach? It tells us that plants and animals were created in their basic forms. The basic facts of the fossil record support creation, not evolution. (p. 70)
The source for the quote is identified as Liberty magazine, a Seventh-day Adventist Church publication. Harold Coffin was a researcher for the Geoscience Research Institute and a witness for the defense in the State of Arkansas' bid to allow the teaching of creation science in school. [6] His ideas do not represent the scientific consensus.
Life again quotes Coffin to support its claim that Cambrian organisms lacked ancestors:
If progressive evolution from simple to complex is correct, the ancestors of these full-blown living creatures in the Cambrian should be found; but they have not been found and scientists admit there is little prospect of their ever being found. On the basis of the facts alone, on the basis of what is actually found in the earth, the theory of a sudden creative act in which the major forms of life were established fits best. (p. 62)
[edit] American Laboratory on the teaching of evolution
On the teaching of evolution Life notes:
In the magazine American Laboratory a doctor wrote this about his children’s schooling: "The child is not presented with evolution as a theory. Subtle statements are made in science texts as early as the second grade (based on my reading of my children’s textbooks). Evolution is presented as reality, not as a concept that can be questioned. The authority of the educational system then compels belief." Regarding evolutionary teaching in higher grades, he said: "A student is not permitted to hold personal beliefs or to state them: if the student does so, he or she is subjected to ridicule and criticism by the instructor. Often the student risks academic loss because his or her views are not 'correct' and the grade is lowered." (p. 179)
The source for this quote is identified as "The Editor's Page" by Professor Donald Calbreath, a signatory of the Discovery Institute's anti-evolution statement. [7] The quote is contrary to statements made by the National Center for Science Education and other scientific organizations.
[edit] Outdated quotes
[edit] Sullivan on the development of life
Life quotes science writer J. W. N. Sullivan in a panel in a chapter titled "Could life originate by chance?":
The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith. (p. 52)
This statement was made in 1933, and, even as of Life's publication date of 1985, much progress had been made on theories of abiogenesis. Life often resorts to out-of-date quotes.
[edit] Du Nuoy on the origin of birds
To support its claim that birds did not evolve from reptiles, Life presents:
Lecomte du Nouy, the French evolutionist, said concerning the belief that warm-blooded birds came from cold-blooded reptiles: "This stands out today as one of the greatest puzzles of evolution." He also made the admission that birds have "all the unsatisfactory characteristics of absolute creation"-unsatisfactory, that is, to the theory of evolution.
The source for this quote is identified as biophysicist Pierre Lecomte du Nouy's Human Destiny, 1947. However, the idea that dinosaurs were warm-blooded has been seriously considered since at least 1968, making the quote outdated even at the printing of Life in 1985.
[edit] Encylopedia Britannica on Australopithecine limb bones
Reference the claim that Homo erectus is identical to Homo sapiens, Life cites the 1976 Encyclopædia Britannica:
the limb bones thus far discovered have been indistinguishable from those of H[omo] sapiens. (p. 95)
Note that Life does not mention known differences between the species, primarily that Homo erectus was more robust than Homo sapiens. It has been suggested that the reason Life did not instead quote the 1984 Encyclopedia Britannica was that that edition no longer supports the claim that the species are identical. That edition states in place of the quoted passage that:
the limb bones thus far discovered have been similar to (although more robust than) those of H. sapiens. [8]
Regardless of any intent to deceive, the updated information makes the quote outdated.
[edit] Zuckerman on Australopithecine skull
To further support its position that Australopithecus was an ape and not a human ancestor, Life quotes anatomist Lord Solly Zuckerman:
When compared with human and simian [ape] skulls, the Australopithecine skull is in appearance overwhelmingly simian-not human. The contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white. (p.94)
The source for the quote is identified as the Journal of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, January, 1966. Thus Zuckerman made this observation before significant Australopithecine discoveries such as the "Lucy" skeleton found in 1974. In fact Zuckerman's claim had been successfully refuted long before Lucy. [9]
[edit] Nonsensical quotes
This section is for quotes that are presented as if they were evidence against evolution, when in fact they are not.
[edit] New Scientist on fossil species not connected
To support the claim that there are no examples of transitional species in the fossil record, Life quotes New Scientist magazine:
Unfortunately, the fossil record does not meet this expectation [of showing gradual change], for individual species of fossils are rarely connected to one another by known intermediate forms.... known fossil species do indeed appear not to evolve even over millions of years. (p. 65)
This quote is from a book review of The New Evolutionary Timetable by science writer Tom Kemp. Note the observations that fossil species are "rarely" connected and "appear" not to evolve do not in fact support the claim that these events never occur. As such this quote is not actually a criticism of evolution.
[edit] Discover on horseshoe crab virtually unchanged
To support its claim that the ancestors of extant organisms "were much like their living counterparts," Life quotes Discover magazine:
The horseshoe crab . . . has existed on earth virtually unchanged for 200 million years. (p. 64)
Note that "virtually" unchanged does not mean the same as completely and absolutely unchanged. Also the theory of evolution predicts that organisms can change but not that they must. This quote is not actually a criticism of evolution.
[edit] Gould on no change in brain size
To support its assertion that man appeared suddenly in the fossil record, Life presents:
Modern-type humans, with the capacity to reason, plan, invent, build on previous knowledge and use complex languages, appear suddenly in the fossil record. Gould, in his book The Mismeasure of Man, notes: "We have no evidence for biological change in brain size or structure since Homo sapiens appeared in the fossil record some fifty thousand years ago." (p. 86)
Note that the quote of Stephen Jay Gould does not in fact support the claim that man appeared suddenly in the fossil record. Additionally, given the short time interval of 50,000 years and that evolution does not predict that organisms must change, the quote is not actually a criticism of evolution. Given Gould's reputation as a supporter of evolution, it does not make sense to suggest that he would make a statement intended to provide evidence against evolution.
[edit] Jastrow on the appearance of many-celled creatures
To support its claim that life appeared suddenly, Life quotes astronomer Robert Jastrow:
The record of the rocks contains very little, other than bacteria and one-celled plants until, about a billion years ago, after some three billion years of invisible progress, a major breakthrough occurred. The first many-celled creatures appeared on earth. (p. 60)
Life indicates that the quote refers to the sudden appearance of living things at "the start of what is called the Cambrian period." However, since the Cambrian period began about 542 million years ago, this leaves unexplained what progress was made since the "billion years ago" that Jastrow mentioned. Additionally, it is difficult to see how "invisible progress" and "very little" besides "bacteria and one-celled plants" can be interpreted as indicating that there was no life at all before this time. The quote fails to support the claim that life appeared suddenly and is not actually a criticism of evolution.
Life quotes Jastrow on several occasions.
[edit] The Biology of Race on what we don't know about prehistoric men
In support of its assertion that "ape-men" did not exist, Life indicates that we have no idea what they looked like. The author quotes James C. King:
The book The Biology of Race answers: "The flesh and hair on such reconstructions have to be filled in by resorting to the imagination." It adds: "Skin color; the color, form, and distribution of the hair; the formof the features; and the aspect of the face--of these characters we know absolutely nothing for any prehistoric men." (p. 89)
It should be obvious that human precursors' placements in the evolutionary tree are not based on their external features, and therefore this is not actually a criticism of evolution.
[edit] Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on early theories of human evolution
After posing the question of whether it was the fossil evidence that encouraged Darwin to formulate his theory "that humans evolved from apelike creatures," Life presents:
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists informs us: "The early theories of human evolution are really very odd, if one stops to look at them. David Pilbeam has described the early theories as 'fossil-free.' That is, here were theories about human evolution that one would think would require some fossil evidence, but in fact there were either so few fossils that they exerted no influence on the theory, or there were no fossils at all. So between man's supposed closest relatives and the early human fossils, there was only the imagination of nineteenth century scientists." This scientific publication shows why: "People wanted to believe in evolution, human evolution, and this affected the results of their work." (p. 85)
In reality Darwin's only comment on human evolution was his prediction, "Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history." [10] Since Darwin did not articulate his ideas on human evolution, the quote is not a criticism of such a theory.
Note the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is a magazine primarily concerned with informing the public about the threat of nuclear weapons. [11]
[edit] Dickerson on inconvenient facts
In a section that attempts to demonstrate the unlikelihood that the genetic code could have arisen by chance, Life presents:
Chemist Dickerson also made this interesting comment: "The evolution of the genetic machinery is the step for which there are no laboratory models; hence one can speculate endlessly, unfettered by inconvenient facts." But is it good scientific procedure to brush aside the avalanches of "inconvenient facts" so easily? (p. 46)
In this context, the quote is made to appear as if it were suggesting that evidence previously presented against abiogenesis should be ignored. However, examination of the quote itself indicates that Richard Dickerson does not believe the facts exist, and therefore they cannot be considered.
[edit] Footnotes
- ↑ Expert Interview Transcripts, Rediscovering Biology
- ↑ Nicholas Wade. The Editorial Notebook; How Old Is Man? The New York Times. October 4, 1982. p. A18.
- ↑ Darwin's untimely burial, Stephen Jay Gould.
- ↑ Jehovah's Witnesses and Young Earth Creationists, Alan Feuerbacher
- ↑ David Gower, British Centre for Science Education
- ↑ McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, The Encyclopedia of Arkansas History & Culture
- ↑ A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
- ↑ What the Creation Book Says About the Evolution of Man, Alan Feuerbacher
- ↑ Johanson, Donald; Edey, Maitland (1981). Lucy, The Beginnings of Humankind. Simon and Schuster. New York. pp. 75-77
- ↑ Darwin, Charles (1859). The Origin of Species. p. 488
- ↑ Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists