In this episode, Eric, once again, trips through a series of silly misrepresentations of observed reality.
He’s off to a great start when he complains that skeptics tend to say that the ‘Great Flood’ was a myth, and then immediately provides what he thinks is evidence to the contrary by mentioning that many cultures have flood legends… Myths, in other words.
What was not included in the video was a reference Eric made to the recession of the Moon. There was just no way to respond to that one reference within the time available in a five minute video while still ridiculing all the other alleged ‘points’ Eric made.
He didn’t go into detail, as he has before, but the reference he was making was that it refutes the scientifically-claimed ~4.6 Billion year age of the Earth.
Here’s why his argument carries no weight whatsoever:
The first refutation of this is not mathematical, or even scientific. It’s just logic. Even if his assertion was accurate (it isn’t), in order for his ‘receding Moon’ argument to be a valid indicator of the age of the Earth, he would have to establish that the Earth-Moon relationship existed on the day of the formation of the Earth. Any other condition removes the Moon as an indicator of the age of the Earth.
It’s as if he is saying ‘The tree in my back yard cannot be more than a hundred years old, therefore, the Earth cannot be older than one hundred years.”
Now… That being said, it turns out that the Moon IS almost as old as the Earth, but Eric makes no such references.
The real refutation lies in the fact that Eric and his Young Earth Creationist buddies do not understand gravity, tidal forces and plate tectonics. Put simply, ‘tidal forces’ are what is making the Moon recede. The rotation of the Earth pushes the water of the oceans forward. This water exerts a force, via gravity, on the Moon. Since the Earth is rotating faster than the Moon’s orbit, the effect of this force is to accelerate the Moon. Acceleration=higher orbit.
Where does plate tectonics come in? Simple… The present configuration of the continents on the surface of the Earth acts as a ‘dam’ to prevent the water of the oceans from being pulled backward by the tidal connection with the Moon. When the continents were in a different configuration in the past, this effect may have differed significantly.
Even if that was not the case, the present rate of recession (3.82±0.07 cm/year) does not mandate that the Moon must have been rolling along the surface of the Earth if the Earth were old, as is claimed by some creationists.
If you watched the video, you’ll notice that at several points Buster the Atheist Pug says ‘What about it?’
Here are the reasons he said that in each case:
- Eric makes reference to the Methuselah Tree
The Methuselah Tree, which was once thought to be the oldest living non-clonal organism. It’s a little under 5,000 years old. (It’s actually the second oldest, as another bristlecone pine in the same area has been shown to be over 5,000 years.) In what way could this possibly be an indicator of the age of the Earth?
- Eric makes reference to the Great Barrier Reef
Then he quickly spits out ‘the Great Barrier Reef’, as if just saying those words makes some kind of point.
Well, it does. It points out that Eric is not even mildly aware of the arguments he uses.
The Great Barrier Reef has been given as an example to disprove all this Young Earth Creationist silliness, as its age greatly exceeds the alleged biblical age of the Earth. This was refuted by the occasional creation ‘scientist’ with the somewhat laughable argument that ‘we don’t know that it didn’t grow really, really quick!’ (It didn’t.)
So, Eric, in his ignorance, was apparently thinking that since ‘we don’t really know the age of Great Barrier Reef’, that proves a young Earth!’
What he fails to comprehend is that the age of the reef can only be used to establish the minimum possible age of the Earth. Again, Eric uses for reference something that is not an indicator of the age of the Earth.
- Eric makes reference to the Sahara Desert
The present-day Sahara Desert is only a few thousand years old. How does this lend anything whatsoever to Eric’s argument that the Earth cannot be ~4.6 billion years old? Again, Eric uses for reference something that is not an indicator of the age of the Earth.