Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical...

32
summer 2020 summer 2020 in this issue: in this issue: • Light • Light • Logical Fallacies • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook • Biology Textbook

Transcript of Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical...

Page 1: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

summer 2020summer 2020

in this issue:in this issue:

• Light • Light • Logical Fallacies• Logical Fallacies• Biology Textbook• Biology Textbook

Page 2: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Bruce Holman, Ph.D. chemistry.

PRESIDENT: Mark Bergemann, B.S. engineering

VICE-PRESIDENT: Patrick Winkler, M.Div. M.S. eng., P.E.

SECRETARY: JeffreyStueber

TREASURER PRO TEM: Patrick Winkler, M.Div. M.S. eng., P.E.

PASTORAL ADVISOR: Troy Schreiner, M.Div.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS PaulHoffmann,B.S.history. Warren Krug, M.Ed. DerekRabbers,B.S.ed. JamesA.Sehloff,B.S.biology,M.S.

TECHNICAL ADVISORS Paul Finke, Ph.D. chemistry. DoyleHolbird,Ph.D.physiology, M. zoology, M.Div. DwightJohnson,Ph.D.business. GaryLocklair,Ph.D.computerscience, B.A. chemistry, B.S. M.S. David Peters, M.Div., S.T.M., A.B.D. Charles Raasch, M.Div., S.T.M., A.B.D. Alan Siggelkow, M.Div., S.T.M., M.S. Steven Thiesfeldt, M.Ed. John Werner, Ph.D. Molecular and Cellular Biology.

LSI Journala forum for diverse views consistent with Scripture

Views expressed are those of the au-thor or editor, not necessarily those of the Lutheran Science Institute.

Published four times a year (winter, spring, summer, and fall) by Lutheran Science Institute, Inc.

ISSN 2572-2816 (print), ISSN 2572-2824 (online)

Editor: Mark Bergemann.Editorial Committee: Patrick Winkler, JeffreyStueber.

Rates: Free in electronic form (pdf). Printsubscription (US $) 1 year $7.99; 3 years$19.99. Includespostage toUSA. Askforquote to other countries. Bulk rates low as 70centspercopy.OrderviaLSIwebsiteorbycontactingtheeditor.

LSI Journal copyright © 2020 LutheranScience Institute, Inc. LSI grants schools and churches permission to reproduce itsarticles for use in their school or church, but LSI must be named and its web ad-dress included in every reproduction. Re-quests by others to reproduce more thanbrief excerpts should be sent to the editor.

Lutheran Science Institute (LSI)13390 W. Edgewood Ave., New Berlin WI 53151-8088www.LutheranScience.org [email protected]

EvolutionEvolution a Lutheran Responsea Lutheran Response

Page 3: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

Lutheran Science Institute, inc. has tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code as a subordinate organiza-tion of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.

Vol. 34, no. 3 (summer 2020)

4 Light How often do we thank God for the wonderful gift of light? Devotion on Genesis 1:3 Scott Bergemann

6 Logical Fallacies —No True Scotsman —Ad Hominem —Begging the Question Mark Bergemann

21 A Biology Textbook —A Biology Textbook Responds to Creationist Claims Mark Bergemann

Front cover photo credit: Pixabay.

Scripture quotations from the Holy Bible, Evangelical Heritage Version® (EHV®) © 2019 Wartburg Project, Inc. All rights reserved. Used by permission.

Page 4: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

4 Light

LightScott Bergemann

Canyouguesswhatthebiggestcomplaintisofthosewhohavebeenput intoadarkprisoncell? Youmight think itwouldbemissingfamily,friends,afavoritefood,ortheircellphone.Butthosewhohavebeenputintoadarkprisoncellsaythattheworstpartisbeingdeprivedoflight. Without light you cannot see what you are doing, or where you are going, or what is in the cell with you. Worse, you soon lose track of time and don’t even know for sure what day it is!

How often do we thank God for the wonderful gift of light?GodcreatedlightontheveryfirstdayofCreation.

God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.(Genesis 1:3, EHV)

Godmadelightforall.Scientistshavebeenfascinatedbylight.Itisanamazingformofenergy―behavingasawaveandasparticlesatthesame time!1Lightenablesustoseeclearly.Lightenableslivingthingstogrowandbearfruit.

In the Bible the Holy Spirit uses “darkness” to bring to mindsin, judgment, ignorance, unbelief, and ultimately hell. “Light,” onthe other hand, calls to mind rescue, forgiveness, faith, God’s revelation of himself, and ultimately salvation.

Wedealwithdarknesseveryday.Ahappydaycanberuinedbyafew dark words from a friend. We can sit in the darkness of our guilt over somethingbadwehavedone.

In these instances,what precious gift havewe been given thatdrivesawaythedarkness?Jesus!

1LPiazzaetal.,“Simultaneousobservationofthequantizationandtheinterfer-encepatternofaplasmonicnear-field,”NatureCommunications,6,6407(March2,2015).https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7407(accessed7-7-20)

Page 5: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

5

Jesus is The real light that shines on everyone.

(John 1:9, EHV)

Wedonotplaceourworthonthewordsofothers,oronwhatwehavedone.Jesus’lightenablesustoseeclearly.Wearehisdearlylovedchildren,basedsolelyonwhatHehasdone.OnthecrossJesusdiedforall our sins. Because of Jesus’ victory over sin and death, we are forgiven! Because of Jesus’ victory, we too are victorious! Because of Jesus’ victo-ry, we are his children who live in the light of salvation.

We Pray:

DearJesus,helpmetobethankfulforthewonderfulgiftofyourLightinmylife.Usemeinanywaythatmywordsandactionsmayreflectyour saving light to those who are in darkness around me. Amen

Scott Bergemann serves as family outreach pastor at Mt. Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church (www.mtzionwi.org), and as pastor at Oasis Youth Cen-ter (www.oyckenosha.net), both in Kenosha, Wisconsin. ___imagecredit:Pixabay

Light

Page 6: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

6 Logical Fallacies

article series

Logical FallaciesMark Bergemann

Logic is the study of reasoning.1 Theproperuseofreasoningisessential inourapologetic―inourdefenseof the faith. Understandinglogiccanhelpusavoidusingincorrectreasoningasweministertoothers.Itcanalsohelpusrecognizewhenothersmakesucherrors.

A logicalargument―aclaim―maybefalseduetooneofmanycommonerrorsinreasoningcalled“logicalfallacies.”These“fallaciousclaims”are inourdaily lives: in socialmedia, everydayconversations,TVnews,advertisements,books,andevenclassrooms. Sucherrorsarefrequentlymade by both creationists and evolutionists. Some users ofthese fallacious claims are even aware that they are using a logical fallacy. Theyuseitanyway,sinceusingalogicalfallacyisoftenveryeffectiveinconvincing others that your claim is true.

It is very important to learn someof themorecommon logicalfallacies for three reasons:

1)Toavoidmakingtheseerrorsinyourownapologetic.2)Tonoticetheseerrorswhenusedbyothercreationists.3)Tonoticetheseerrorswhenusedbyevolutionists.

Youmaybeamazedtofindoutthatafallaciousargument(anerrorinreasoning)mayhaveaconclusionthatistrue.Afallaciousargumentissimplyconsideredtobeaninvalidargument—evenaworthlessargument,as it may have a true or a false conclusion.

1A college textbook on logic states, “Logic is the study of the methods and prin-ciples used to distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning. ...Using the methods and techniques of logic—the subject matter of this book—we can distinguish reli-ably between sound and faulty reasoning.” IrvingM.Copi andCarlCohen, Introduction to Logic, 13th ed. (UpperSaddleRiverNJ:PearsonPrenticeHall,2009),4.

Page 7: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

7Logical Fallacies

This article seriesbegan in the spring2018LSI Journal with a four page discussion of logic (www.LutheranScience.org/2018spring).Consider rereading that article. That issue of the LSI Journal also had an articleonthestraw-manfallacy.Wecontinuethisseriesbyexaminingad-ditionallogicalfallaciescommonlyusedbycreationistsandevolutionists.Someofthesefallacieshavemultiplenames,whichyoumayfindusedinother sources.

Themostimportantskilltoacquirebystudyinglogicalfallacies,istorecognizethatafallaciousclaimisbeingmade.Itisusefultoalsoknow theexact fallacybeingused,but that is far less important. Mostimportantly,rememberthatyouareministeringtoothers.Show the love of Christ in your apologetic.

No True ScotsmanUsing a biased definition to make

your claim seem to be true.

ThenotrueScotsmanfallacyiseasytorememberonceyouhaveheardthestorybehindthename.Abookonlogicrelatesthatstory.JasonLisleexplains,

Theexamplefromwhichthenameofthisfallacyistakenisthis:PersonAassertsthatnoScotsmanputssugaronhisporridge.Per-sonBrefutesthisclaimbyprovidingacounter-example:“AngusisaScotsman—andheputssugaronhisporridge.”ButPersonArespondsbysaying,“Ah,butnotrueScotsmanputssugaronhisporridge.”Hehasessentiallyrefinedtheterm“Scotsman”insuchawaythathisoriginalclaimcannotbewrong.Butsincethedefi-nitionisfallacious,soishisargument.Thiscomesupinoriginsdebatesquitefrequently:

Evolutionist:“NoscientistbelievesthatGodcreatedeverythinginsixdays.”

Page 8: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

8 Logical Fallacies

Creationist:“ThescientistsatAnswers inGenesisbelieve thatGodcreatedinsixdays.”

Evolutionist:“Well,noreal scientistbelieves thatGodcreatedinsixdays.”2

Watchoutforevolutionistsdefiningtermsinabiasedwaytosup-porttheirclaimsbothforevolutionandagainstcreation.Itisextremelycommon.WeChristiansalsoneedtobecarefulnottousebiasedtermstodefendourfaithintheCreatorGodofScripture,whichsadly,isalsofartoo common.

Evolutionists using the “No True Scotsman” fallacyThere is no dissent among serious biologists about the major claims of evolutionary theory.3

No serious biologist doubts these propositions [the common descent of species by natural selection].4

There is no debate within the scientific community over whether evolution occurred.5

But there is no controversy within the scientific community over whether evolution occurred.6

Thefirsttwoclaimsabovedefine“seriousbiologists”asbiologistswhodonotquestionthemajorclaimsofevolution.Therearemanybiol-ogistswhorejectmillionsofyears,butoneonlyneedsasingleexampletodisprovesuchabroadclaim.Herearetwoexamples:AnswersinGenesis

2 JasonLisle,Discerning Truth –Exposing Errors in Evolutionary Arguments (GreenForest:MasterBooks,2010),78.3JerryA.Coyne,Why Evolution is True,(NY:PenguinGroup,2009),223.4Coyne,223.5WorkinggrouponTeachingEvolution,Teaching About Evolution and the Na-ture of Science (WashingtonD.C.:TheNationalAcademiesPress,1998),4.Freepdfathttp://nap.edu/5787(accessed7-1-20)6 Committee on revising science and creationism:A view from the National Academy of Sciences, Science, Evolution, and Creationism (Washington D.C.: TheNationalAcademiesPress,2008),xiii.Freepdfat(accessed7-1-20)https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11876/science-evolution-and-creationism

Page 9: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

9Logical Fallacies

hasseveralbiologistsontheirstaff.“Dr.NathanielJeansonholdsaPhDincellanddevelopmentalbiologyfromHarvardUniversity.”“Dr.DavidMentonholdsaPhDinbiologyfromBrownUniversityandservedasanaward-winningprofessoratWashingtonUniversitySchoolofMedicineinSt.Louisfor34years.”7Similarly,thelasttwoclaimsdefine“scientificcommunity”astheportionofthatcommunitythatdoesnotquestionevo-lution.

No unbiased reader will close the book doubting [evolution].8

Thisclaimdefinesan“unbiasedreader”asareaderofDawkins’bookwhodoesnotdoubtevolution.Allreaderswhodonotacceptevolu-tionastruearedeclaredtobebiased.

There is no evidence that evolution has not occurred.9

Despite the lack of scientific evidence for creationist positions…10

Nor is there any evidence that the entire geological record, with its orderly succession of fossils, is the product of a single uni-versal flood that occurred a few thousand years ago, lasted a little longer than a year, and covered the highest mountains to a depth of several meters.11

Some evolutionists claim there is no evidence (not even weak ev-idence)showingevolutiontobefalseorcreationtobetrue.Theirbiaseddefinitionfortheword“evidence”arbitrarilyrejectsallevidenceagainstevolutionorforcreation.Ifthestandardandwidelyuseddefinitionforevidence is used, then there is evidence for creation and against evolution.

7https://answersingenesis.org/bios/(accessed7-1-20)8Dr.AliceRobertsquotingDawkinsonthecoverjacketof:RichardDawkins,The Greatest Show on Earth –The Evidence for Evolution(NY:FreePress,2009).9WorkinggrouponTeachingEvolution,4.10Committeeonrevisingscienceandcreationism,43.11SteeringCommitteeonScienceandCreationism,Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences,2nded.(WashingtonD.C.:TheNationalAcademiesPress,1999),8.Freepdfat(accessed7-1-20)https://www.nap.edu/download/6024

Page 10: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

10 Logical Fallacies

Creationists using the “No True Scotsman” fallacyIn summing up an examination of prehistory, the literature shows many attempts to deal with the past, from serious scien-tists who report honestly, to evolutionists whose first loyalty is to their theory despite the evidence, and to those who are often called the lunatic fringe.12

This creationist defines “serious scientists” as thosewho rejectevolution, and in doing so, uses the no true Scotsman fallacy. These seri-ousscientists(creationists)practicescience“honestly”whilenon-seriousscientists(evolutionists)practicesciencedishonestly.

a supposedly scientific enterprise13

Anacceptedscientificmethodfordatingseafloordrillingstoevo-lutionarytimescalesiscalled“asupposedlyscientificenterprise”inacre-ationistmagazine.Nowthiscreationistmaybecorrectinpointingoutthataparticulardetailusedinthiscalculationmethodisinerror,orhemaybeincorrect.Eitherway,heisclaimingthatanacceptedandwidelyusedsci-entificmethodisnotscientificbecauseheisusingabiaseddefinitionfor“science.”Ifthestandardandwidelyuseddefinitionforscienceisused,thenthemethodisscientific.

There Is No Evidence Evolution Took Place in the Past.14

Evolution…without a shred of scientific evidence supporting it.15

Some creationists commonly claim that there is no evidence for evolution. They claim evolution has no evidence at all, not even weak ev-idence.Thisclaimcommitsthe“notrueScotsman”errorinreasoning,be-causeitusesabiaseddefinitionfortheword“evidence.”Suchcreationists

12ErichA.VonFange,In SEARCH of the GENESIS World -DEBUNKING THE EVOLUTION MYTH,(St.Louis,ConcordiaPublishingHouse:2006),359.13BrianThomas,TheGospelandICR,in Acts & Facts,December2017,6.14Episodetitleofa13-minuteradioprogrambyInstituteofCreationResearch(ICR)CEOHenryMorrisIII,June9,2016.https://www.icr.org/article/no-evidence-evolution-past(accessed7-1-20)15HenryM.Morris,“Pseudo-Science,”inDays of Praise,(Oct.5,1996).https://www.icr.org/article/pseudo-science/(accessed7-1-20)

Page 11: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

11Logical Fallacies

define“evidence”inthiscontextasbeingcertainsolidproof.Theyclaimweakevidence,orevidencethatseemstosupportbothsides,isreallynotevidenceatall.Ifthestandardandwidelyuseddefinitionforevidenceisused, then evolution does have evidence. Creationists tend to see most oftheevidenceforcommondescentandmillionsofyearsasbeingratherweak,butitisstillevidence,andeventhatweakevidencehasconvincedmany that evolution is true.

True science always supports the Scriptures.16

True science has always affirmed the teaching of Scripture.17

True science demonstrates the truth of the biblical record.18

But real science shows that comets are not that old.19

In reality, there is harmony between science and religion.20

True science always lines up with God’s Word when properly understood.21

[Evolution is] pseudoscience.22

SomecreationistsclaimthatscienceandtheBiblearealwaysinharmonywhenbothareproperlyunderstood.Somecreationistscommon-lyuse the term“truescience”or“realscience” todescribescience thatagreeswithScripture,and“falsescience,”“pseudoscience,”or“sciencefalsely so-called” to describe science that disagreeswith Scripture. In

16HenryM.Morris,“TrueScience,”Days of Praise(Oct10,1995).https://www.icr.org/article/true-science/(accessed7-1-20)17 JohnMacArthur,THE BATTLE FOR BEGINNING: The Bible on Creation and the Fall of Adam,(JohnMacArthur:2001),28.18TimothyClarey,“Stromatolites:EvidenceofPre-FloodHydrology,”Acts&Facts,47no.5(May2018):12.19TimothyClarey,Carved in Stone —Geological Evidence of the Worldwide Flood,(DallasTX,InstituteforCreationResearch:2020),452.20MichaelL.McCoy,A Christian Perspective on Creation vs. Evolution, (St. Louis,ConcordiaPublishingHouse:1996),27.21 JaySeegert, “Faith isnota4-Letterword,”presentedFeb26,2013 to theCreationScienceSocietyofMilwaukee(CSSM)annualbusinessmeeting,atMil-waukee Lutheran High School. Quote is from the meeting advertisement on the CSSMwebsiteatthattime.22VonFange,265.

Page 12: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

12 Logical Fallacies

making this claim, they have removed from science everything that dis-agreeswithScripture.TheresultofthisbiaseddefinitionisthatsciencealwaysagreeswithScripture,becausethatishowtheyhaveredefinedtheword“science.”

Conclusion

Sadly,itiscommonforbothcreationistsandevolutioniststode-finetermsinabiasedwayinanattempttomaketheirclaimsseemtobetrue.Lookoutforthesebiaseddefinitionsasyoureadaboutevolutionandaboutcreation.Bydoingso,youmightavoidbeingmisledbythosewhoresorttousingthenotrueScotsmanfallacy.Moreimportantly,worktoavoidusingbiased,nonstandarddefinitionsinyourownapologetic.

Ad HominemInstead of critiquing a person’s claim, you insult that person or question his

motives, background, or qualifications.

Ad hominem isLatinfor“totheman.”Thoseusingthiserrorinreasoningattackthepersoninsteadofhisclaim.

Whetherapersonisagoodpersonorabadperson,highlyeducat-edoragradeschooldropout,iswellrespectedorreviled,hasnothingtodowithwhetherthatperson’sclaimistrueorfalse.Goodpeoplecanmakefalseclaims,andbadpeoplecanmaketrueclaims.

Page 13: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

13Logical Fallacies

Evolutionists using the ad hominem fallacyIf the history-deniers who doubt the fact of evolution are igno-rant of biology, those who think the world began less than ten thousand years ago are worse than ignorant, they are deluded to the point of perversity.23

During the filming of this series I developed a deep irritation with the intellectual vacuity of those who actively seek to deny the reality of evolution and the science of biology in general. So empty is such a position, in the face of evidence collected over the centuries, that it can only be politically motivated: there is not a hint of reason in it.24

Anybody who doesn’t believe in evolution is stupid, insane, or hasn’t read Jerry Coyne.25

Creationists using the ad hominem fallacyBill Nye does not know what he is talking about, since he only has a bachelor’s degree.

I often hear creationists make this charge against Nye. If we must haveanadvancedcollegedegreeinsomethingtomakeclaimsaboutthatthing,thenmostofuswouldbeunabletodiscussscience,history,art,ath-letics,cooking,cars,pets,religion,orothercommontopics.Thisshowshowridiculousitistoattackthepersoninsteadofthatperson’sclaim.

23RichardDawkins,The Greatest Show on Earth –The Evidence for Evolution, (NewYork:FreePress,2009),page85.24BrianCoxandAndrewCohen,Wonders of Life―Exploring the Most Extraor-dinary Force in the Universe,(NewYork:HarperCollinsPubishers,2013),9.25RichardDawkins,inJerryA.Coyne,Why Evolution is True, (NY: Penguin Group,2009),back-sideofbookjacket.

Page 14: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

14 Logical Fallacies

Begging the QuestionWhen one claims something is true,

because it is true.

JasonLisledescribesbeggingthequestionthisway,Thisfallacyiscommittedwhenapersonmerelyassumeswhatheorsheisattemptingtoprove,orwhenthepremiseofanargumentactuallydependsonitsconclusion.26

Beggingthequestionisconsideredtobealogicalfallacybecausesuchaclaimdoesnothavelogicalreasoningassupport. Itisatypeofcircularreasoning.Inaddition,itisbasedonsubjectivepersonalchoiceinsteadof logic, so it isconsidered tobearbitrary. Lisleexplains thatsuchclaimscanbeturnedaroundtoasserttheexactopposite,

“Evolutionmust be truebecause it is a fact,”while technicallyvalid,isfallaciousbecausethearguerhasmerelyassumedwhatheistryingtoprove.Arbitraryassumptionsarenottobeusedinlogicalreasoningbecausewecouldequallywellassumetheexactopposite.Itwouldbejustaslegitimatetoargue,“Evolutioncan-notbetruebecauseitisfalse.”27

Acollegetextbookonlogicdescribesbeggingthequestionas,...the mistakeofassumingthetruthofwhatoneseekstoprove.The“question”inaformaldebateistheissuethatisindispute;to“beg”thequestionistoask,ortosuppose,thattheverymatterincontroversybeconceded.Thisisanargumentwithnomeritatall,ofcourse,andonewhomakessuchasassumptioncommitsagross fallacy.28

26Lisle,Discerning Truth,23.27Lisle,Discerning Truth,26.28Copi,152-153.

Page 15: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

15Logical Fallacies

Beggingthequestionclaimsaretechnically“valid”statementsoflogicbecausetheconclusionfollowsthepremise.Theyarestillconsid-ered tobe fallacious (an error in reasoning), because they are arbitraryclaims.

It isperfectlyfinetosimplystateyourposition:“Ibelieveevolutionistrue,”or“Ibelieveevolutionisfalse.”Whenyouaretryingtoexplainwhy your claim is true, then you should include a logical reason for its truth.

Bothcreationistsandevolutionistscommitthisfallacy,butIfindevolutionists doing so more frequently. Many evolutionists, even highly educatedandaccomplishedevolutionists,seemtohavedifficultyavoid-ing this fallacy. They are so ingrained in naturalism (everything has a physical cause) that they endupbasing their claimson the assumptionofnaturalism(thatmiraclesareimpossible).Theyoftenbasetheirclaimthat evolution is true, on the assumption that there are no miracles (the as-sumptionthatnaturalismistrue).Thatistheverydefinitionofbeggingthequestion:“Evolutionistruebecauseeverythinghasanatural(non-super-natural)cause.”Whenthediscussionisaboutwhetherornoteverythinghasaphysicalcause,onecannotclaimtheanswer is“No”becauseoneassumesit’s“No.”

Evolutionists using the “Begging the Question” fallacyConvergent evolution involves independent adaptations that result in analogous structures because organisms have evolved in similar environments. (Figure 23.8)29

Homologous structures are similar to each other because they are derived from a common ancestral structure. The set of bones in the forearms of vertebrates is one example. (Figure 23.12)30

29RobertJ.Brookeretal.,Biology,2nd ed.(NewYork:McGraw-Hill,2011),488.30Brooker,488.

Page 16: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

16 Logical Fallacies

Whentwodifferentanimalshaveasimilarbodypart,evolution-ists assume it is the result of either:1) Those body parts evolving independently in two different animals(“convergent evolution”of“analogous structures”),or2)Thosetwoanimalsdescendedfromacommonancestor(inheriting“ho-mologous structures”).

Thetwoprecedingexamplequotesthatbegthequestionarefromacollegebiologytextbook(secondfrombottomonpage31). Thefirstquotereferstofigure23.8wheretwodifferentanimalshavelongsnoutsandlongtonguesallowingthemtoeatants,twodifferentvineshaveaerialrootsallowingthemtoclimbtrees,andtwodifferentfish“haveantifreezeproteins thatenablethemtosurvivefrigidwaters.”31 The second quote referstofigure23.12whichshowsthesimilarityofhumanarmbonestothebonesinaturtleleg,batwing,andwhaleflipper.32

These two quotes from the textbook could be summarized as,“Thesimilarbodyparts(analogousandhomologousstructures)intheseplants and animals evolvedbecause they evolved. That is begging thequestion.

Thesetwoquotesarefromthetextbookchapter,“AnIntroductiontoEvolution,”whichisdevotedtodescribingevolutiontheoryandwhy it is true.Thechapterendswithfivepointstodiscuss,threeofwhichaskthe student to explain how thematerial presented supports the truth ofevolution. Oneofthefivediscussionpointsis,“Howdoes[convergentevolution]supportevolution?” Asecond is,“Explainhowhomologousforelimbsofvertebratessupportthetheoryofevolution.”33

Since this textbook chapter is about showingwhy evolution is true—andbyimplicationwhythealternative,creation,isfalse—theover-allquestionbeingconsideredis,“Arethesesimilarbodypartsduetoevo-lutionorduetocreation(commondesign)?”Thetextbookbegstheques-tionby,inessence,claimingthatevolutionistruebecauseevolutionistrue.

31Brooker,481.32Brooker483.33Brooker,489.

Page 17: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

17

Nevertheless, all organisms share some common traits because they all share common ancestors at some point in the past.34

Different kinds of organisms share so many characteristics of structure and function because they are related to one another.35

A bat wing, a mouse forelimb, and a human arm serve very different purposes, but they have the same basic components. The similarities arise because all three species share a common four-limbed vertebrate ancestor.36

The bones in the forelimbs of terrestrial and some aquatic ver-tebrates are remarkably similar because they have all evolved from the forelimbs of a common ancestor.37 [Thislastquoteisusedtodescribethefigurebelow.]

Again, the question here is whether creatures are similar due to commondescentorcommondesign.Theauthorsareattemptingtoprovethatcommondescentistrue,andcommondesign(acreatorgod)isfalse.Theirargumentis:“Commondescentistruebecausecommondescentistrue.”TheNationalAcademyofSciencesmadeallfouroftheprecedingfallacious statements in threeof thebooks itwrote todefendevolution

34Committeeonrevisingscienceandcreationism,24.35WorkinggrouponTeachingEvolution,2.36SteeringCommitteeonScienceandCreationism,14.37Committeeonrevisingscienceandcreationism,26.

Logical Fallacies

Page 18: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

18 Logical Fallacies

againstcreationistclaims.Thesebookswerereviewedonpages8-22inthe winter 2017 LSI Journal at www.LutheranScience.org/2017winter. TheNationalAcademyofSciencesisagroupofover2,000leadingscien-tistsformedbyactofCongress,agroupthatadvisestheUSpresident.

Even if thesequotedclaimsweresurroundedbysentencescon-taininggood logical reasonsof support, the claimswould still be falla-cious.Itwouldbebesttorewritetheclaimstoeliminatethefallacy,pos-siblybysimplyadding“aswewillseeinthenextparagraph.”

TheAcademywrotethesebookstodefendevolutionagainstcre-ationistclaims,especially to show thatcommondescent is trueand thecreationist claim of common design is false. The overall argument of these booksistolistsimilaritiesbetweencreatures(bothlivingandfossilized)andhowtheyeachfittheirecosystem,thenclaimthatasproofofcommondescent. The overall argument of these books begs the question. TheAcademy claims common descent is true, and common design is false, becausethat’sthewayitis.

WhattheNationalAcademydoesinitsbooksiscommonpracticewhendefendingevolution.Forexample:Fivegeneralbiologycollegetext-booksareshownonthebottomofpage31.Theevolutionstoryiswoventhroughouteachbook.Eachalsodedicatesasectionof16-22pagespresent-ing evidence that evolution is true. These sections all include a drawing com-paringhumanarmbonestoanimalbones,similartowhattheAcademydid.

The textand thegraphicon thenextpageare fromoneof thesetextbooks38(thirdbookfromthebottomofpage31).Thetextclaimsthattheforelimbsofmammalsaresimilarbecauseeachdescendedfromacommonancestor.Thatbegsthequestion.

Thetextmentionsariddle.TheanswertothatriddleisthatGodusedacommondesign. Evolutionists imposea“nocreator”assumptionontheirscience,sotheydonottakeintoaccountthepossibilityofcommondesignbyacreator.

38PeterH.Ravenetal.,Biology,8thed.(NewYork:McGraw-Hill,2008),426.

Page 19: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

19Logical Fallacies

Page 20: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

20 Logical Fallacies

Creationists using the “Begging the Question” fallacy

The Big Bang never happened. It is simply wrong.

If the creationist making this statement only intends to convey thathebelievestheBigBangisfalse,andnotexplainwhyhethinksso,thenitwouldbebestifhechosewordstomakethatclearer.Ifheistryingtoconvinceothersthatevolutioniswrong,thenheshouldprovidesomereason why it is wrong. As it stands, this statement is fallacious, unless he adds some evidence or reasoning for his claim.

The bodies of people, cats, and dogs are similar in many ways because God used a common design in creating them.

This exampleof begging thequestion is the creationist versionof what we criticized evolutionists for doing. I admit that I have made a fewsimilarclaimsinthepast.Itwouldbebesttostatethesamethinginawaythatavoidsusingalogicalfallacy.Howabout:“People,cats,anddogsliveinacommonenvironment(Earth)anddigestsimilarfood(car-bohydrates,proteins,andfats),soitisnotsurprisingthatwefindsomanysimilaritiesbetweenthem.ThesesimilaritiesareevidencethatGodusedasimilardesignincreatingpeopleandanimals.”

Your Ministry

Avoidinglogicalfallaciesinyourapologeticcanbechallenging,butitisaworthygoal.Inaddition,gainingtheabilitytonoticelogicalfal-laciescommittedbyothersisausefulskillinseeingthroughfalseclaims.

Finally, remember to show the love of Christ as you talkwithothersabouttheirSavior.Useapologeticsasneededtoremovebarrierstothatgospelmessage.

Mark Bergemann is a retired electrical engineer with a B.S. from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. He serves as president of the Lutheran Science Institute and as Martin Luther College adjunct instructor for the online courses Creation Apol-ogetics 101 and 102. He is a member of Good Shepherd’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in West Allis, Wisconsin.

Page 21: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

21Biology Textbook

A Biology Textbook —Responds to Creationist Claims

Mark Bergemann

Apopularcollegebiology“textbookforstudentsmajoringinbi-ology”statesits “primary goal” is to teach evolution.Shouldn’tthepri-marygoalofabiologytextbookbetoteachbiology?So,ifstudentsinaclassroomusingthistextbookgain“acomprehensiveunderstandingofevolutionarytheory,”butaminimalunderstandingofbiology,thenthepri-marygoalofthis1,300-pagetextbookwasachieved.Thebook’sprefaceproclaimsthatthenew8theditionofthistextbook,

...maintains the clear, accessible, and engagingwriting style ofpasteditionsandthepervasiveemphasisonevolutionandscien-tificinquirythathavemadethisa leadingtextbookforstudentsmajoringinbiology.…Thisbeginswiththeprimarygoalofthistextbooktoprovideacomprehensiveunderstandingofevolution-arytheoryandthescientificbasisforthisview.[Thefirstedition]presentedbiology…astheproductofevolution.Muchasallbiol-ogy“onlymakessenseinlightofevolution,”thistextisenhancedbyaconsistentevolutionarythemethatiswoventhroughoutthetext,andwehaveenhancedthisthemeintheeighthedition.1

Collegebiologytextbookstendtodevoteextensivespacetoevo-lutionandweaveitintomostchapters.Itisalsocommontodevoteoneormorechapterstopresentingevidencetoshowthatevolutionistrue.Itisless common to include a section which critiques creationist claims. The biologytextbookweareevaluating(shownthirdfrombottomonpage31)hasasection titled,“Darwin’sCritics.” Onpages429–431 theauthors“discusssevenprincipleobjectionsthatcriticsraisetotheteachingofevo-lutionasabiologicalfact.”

Let’sexamineeachofthesesevenobjectionstobiologicalevolu-tion.Thefirstobjectionis,

1PeterH.Ravenetal.,Biology,8thed.(NewYork:McGraw-Hill,2008),v-vi.

Page 22: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

22 Biology Textbook

1. “Evolution is just a theory,” Darwin’s critics point out, as though theory meant a lack of knowledge, or some kind of guess.2

A strong case can bemade thatmost evidence for evolution isratherweak.Thatsaid,thetextbookauthorscorrectly call out a glaring erroronthepartofmanycreationists.Creationistsoftenmaketheclaim,“Evolutionisonlyatheory―itisnotproven.”Thesecreationistsdam-agetheircredibility,andmayindirectlydamagetheirgospelmessagetoo.Many articles in the LSI Journal have warned creationists to never say “Evolutionisonlyatheory,”sinceitshowstheyknowlittleaboutbasicscientificterminology.Scientifictheoriesdonotbecomelawswhentheyaccumulate additional evidence. Both the laws and the theories of science arescientificfacts,sincethoselawsandtheoriesareoverwhelminglyac-ceptedassuchbythescientificcommunity.Inscience,theterms“theory,”“law,”and“fact”aretreatedastemporarytruth,whichcanbeoverturnedat any time when falsified, and then replaced with another temporarytruth.3,4

2. There are no fossil intermediates.5

Inresponsetothisclaimofcreationists,theauthorsrespond:“Aclear lineof fossilsnow traces the transitionbetweenhoofedmammalsandwhales,betweenreptilesandmammals,betweendinosaursandbirds,andbetweenapesandhumans.Thefossilevidencebetweenmajorformsiscompelling.”6

2Raven,429.3“Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as ‘true.’ Truth in science, however, is never final, and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.” Steering Committee on Science and Creationism, Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences,2nd ed. (Washington, DC: National AcademyPress,1999),2.[pdfpage13.]http://nap.edu/6024(accessed4-27-20)4 For an explanation why laws and theories of science (facts of science) are temporary truth, see:MarkBergemann,“HowCanALieLikeEvolutionHaveScientificEvidence?”,LSI Journal vol.29no.1(2015).www.LutheranScience.org/2015lie(accessedApril17.2020)5Raven,429.6Raven,429.

Page 23: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

23Biology Textbook

Yet, the lack of fossil evidence between major forms is whypunctuated equilibriumhasbecomeanacceptedpartofevolutiontheory.Punctuatedequilibriumis theclaimthatbiologicalevolutionoftenhap-pensveryrapidlybetweenlongperiodsofstability.Onekindofplantoranimal evolved into another kind so fast that it left no fossil evidence (or sofewfossilsthatwehavenotyetfoundany).Punctuatedequilibriumistaughtonpages447-448ofthebiologytextbookwearediscussing.

FamedHarvardevolutionistStephenJayGouldexplainedwhyheandNilesEldredgeinventedpunctuatedequilibrium,

Thecardinalanddominantfactofthefossilrecord…[isthat]thegreatmajorityofspeciesappearwithgeologicalabruptnessinthefossilrecordandthenpersistinstasisuntiltheirextinction.7

BillNyewrites,“Someoflife’sbiggesttransitionsseemtohavehappenedsorapidlythattheydisappearedbetweenthegrooves(ordigitalbits)ofthefossilrecord.”8Nyeliststhetransitionfromdinosaurstobirds,andfromlandanimalstowhales,asplaceswhereexpectedfossilevidenceismissing. Theseare twoof thesame transitionsour textbookauthorsclaimhave“compelling”fossilevidence.Thatcompellingfossilevidenceturnsouttobethatthefossilsaremissing,afactthatNyesaysis“proofofevolution.”9 Yes, Nye claims that if the fossils remain missing, or if thefossilsarefound,bothcasesareproofofevolution.Itistorturedlogictoclaimthatwhateverevidencewefind(fossilsornofossils),isproofofevolution.Foramorecompletediscussionofpunctuatedequilibrium,andforextensivequotesfromGouldandNye,seepages28-30inthespring2018LSI Journal at www.LutheranScience.org/2018spring.

3. “The organs of living creatures are too complex for a ran-dom process to have produced―the existence of a clock is evidence of the existence of a clockmaker.”10

7StephenJayGould,The Structure of Evolutionary Theory(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2002),749.8BillNye,Undeniable ―Evolution and the Science of Creation (New York: St. Martin’sPress,2014),121.9Nye,123.10Raven,430.

Page 24: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

24 Biology Textbook

Theauthorsrespondtoeachpartofthis2-partclaim.First,theauthors correctlystatethatnaturalselectionisnotarandomprocess.TheLSI Journal hasrepeatedlywarneditsreaderstoneversay,“Evolutionisarandomprocess.”11Whilesomeaspectsofevolutionarerandom,bio-logical evolution through natural selection is not random. Claiming that evolutionisrandomisastraw-manargument,wherepeopleinaccuratelystate someone else’s claim so they can easily knock down that fake claim instead of the real claim.

Second,theauthorsclaimthatorgansareproducedinincremen-talsteps.Earlyeyesweresimplylightdetectorsthatinmanyadditionalstepsdevelopedintocomplexeyesforcolorsight.Ifindthatexplanationwantingbecause they fail toexplainhowwego fromnoeye toaneyethatsimplydetectslight.Onamolecularlevelthattransitionisextremelycomplex.

Finally, inasinglesentence,theauthorsmention“vestigial”or-gansand“inefficientdesignssuchasthevertebrateeye.”Ifindbothofthesecommonclaimsbyevolutioniststobeextremelyweak.The“inef-ficientdesigns”evolutionistscommonlymentionareactuallyveryamaz-ingdesignswhichperformtheirpurposeextremelywell.Afunctionhasbeen found fornearlyallhuman“vestigial”organs (supposedlyuselessand non-functional human organs leftover from our evolutionary past).Functionsfor“vestigial”organsinanimalsarealsobeingdiscovered,butsuchscientificworkisextremelyslow,sinceevolutionistsseenoreasontosearch for the function of organs that they assume have no function. This isanexampleofhowevolutionarythoughtstiflestheadvancementofsci-ence.Evenifafunctionisneverfoundforsome“vestigial”organs,thatdoesnotmeanthattheseareleftoverorgansfromanevolutionarypast.

4. Evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.12

Theauthors’shorttwo-sentenceresponseisthattheEarthisnotaclosedsystem.Thisresponseshowstheyarethinkingonlyofbiological

11Forexample:seepages30-31ofthesummer2016LSI Journal at www.LutheranScience.org/2016summer(accessed04-17-20).12Raven,430.

Page 25: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

25Biology Textbook

evolution and ignoring the Big Bang and cosmic evolution.

Using second law arguments can become lengthy and detailed,dependingonthescientificknowledgeofthoseinvolvedoneachsideofthediscussion.Mypersonalopinionisthattherearemorefruitfulapolo-geticoptionsavailabletothecreationist.

5. Proteins are too improbable.13

Thecreationistclaimaddressedherebytheauthors,isthathemo-globin(aproteininredbloodcells)originatingbychanceisimpossible,since141aminoacidsmustlinktogetherinanexactorder.Theprobabil-ityofthishappeningbychanceis(1/20)141.Itiscommonlyacceptedthatthingswithsuchalowprobabilitywillneverhappen.

Amazingly,theauthorsrespondbymakinganerrorinreasoning(bycommittingalogicalfallacy).Theirargumentseemsverycompellinguntil you realize the error they made. See if you can catch their mistake. Hereiseverywordoftheirresponse,includingthewordstheyuseinthesection review,

This argument illustrates a lackofunderstandingofprobabilityand statistics―probability cannot be used to argue backwards.Theprobabilitythatastudentinaclassroomhasaparticularbirth-dateis1/365;arguingthisway,theprobabilitythateveryoneinaclassof50wouldhavethebirthdatesthattheydois(1/365)50, and yettheretheclasssits,allwiththeiractualbirthdates.14 Evolutioncannotbediscountedbyusingstatisticsinreverse.15

The authors are correctwhentheysayyoucannotargueproba-bilitybackwards.Intheirbirthdateexample,thereisa100%probabilitythatthestudentswerebornonthedatetheywereborn,soeverytimethatexperimentisdone,therewillbea100%chanceofan“impossible”eventhappening.

13Raven,430.14Raven,430.15Raven,“conceptreview”page431.

Page 26: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

26 Biology Textbook

One in a Million―Every Time Thisconceptmaybeeasier tonotice in the followingexample:Larry says, “I canmake something happen that has a one-in-a-millionchanceofhappening.”Larrygathershisfriends,takesadie,androllsa5.Thenherollsa4,theninsuccessionrollsa2,5,6,6,1,andfinally2.ThenLarrysays,“Thereisaprobabilityofonlyonein1.7millionofthisexactnumericalsequencecomingup,but itdidcomeup[(1/6)8]. I made the improbablehappen.”Hisfriendsarenotimpressed.Therewasa100%chancethathewouldrolloneofthe1.7millionnumbercombinations. So, Larry was not demonstrating a low chance event, he was demonstrating something guaranteedtohappen.Itisthesamefortheclassroomexam-ple.So,theauthorsarecorrect:Youcannotargueprobabilitybackwardsin situations like theclassroomanddiceexamples,whereoneofmanypossibleeventshadtohappen,becausewesetuptheexperimenttoguar-antee that outcome.

Then the authors make a mistake. They charge creationists with arguingprobabilitybackwards,eventhoughthecreationistsarenotdoingthat.Thecreationistsareessentiallysaying,“Atonepointintimetherewasnohemoglobin.Theprobabilityofitcomingintoexistencebychanceissolowthatitisimpossible.Sincehemoglobindidnotcomeintoexis-tencebychance,itmusthavebeencreated by God.”Thisisnotarguingprobabilitybackwardsfromaneventthatalreadyhappened.The authors incorrectly andblindly see it as arguingbackwards, because to them itdefinitely did happen by chance, because they reject the alternative―acreator god.

True Because It’s True The authors are in essence claiming: “It is true that141 aminoacidsassembledintohemoglobinbychance,becausetheyassembledintohemoglobin by chance.” This claimby the authors is fallacious, sincetheycommitthe“beggingthequestion”logicalfallacy,whereoneclaimssomething is true because it is true. The question under discussion is whether hemoglobin came into existence by chance or through creation by God. These authors declare it happened by chance, because they assume it happened by chance. Thisisanerrorontheirpart.

Page 27: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

27

Evolution Faces Impossible Odds Parts of evolution include random chance, and the origin of he-moglobinisoneofthoseplaces. Therandomself-assemblyofnon-liv-ingchemicalsintothefirstlivingthingisalsosuchaplace.Larry’sdicedemonstrationhadaonein1.7millionchanceofhappening.Thepossibil-ityofhemoglobinassemblingbychanceisonein2,788,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000[aprobabilityof(1/20)141].

The theory of evolution assumes that a very long chain of such unlikelyeventsallhappenedbychancetoproducethefirstlivingthing.Someevolutionistsattempttoaddressthisproblemwiththeamazingclaimthattheuniverseexistsinawaythatsteerschemicalstocometogethertoformlivingthings.BillNyestates,“Moleculesjusthappen....Somehow,probablywithenergyfromthesun,thesemoleculeshookedtogetherandaccidentallyfoundwaystoreproducethemselvesthesamewaycrystalsreproducethemselves.”16 We should never claim that evolution is random, sincenaturalselectionisnotrandom,butasillustratedhere,wecancor-rectlyclaimthatsomepartsofevolutionarerandom.Someoftherandompartsofevolutionfaceimpossibleodds.

6. “No scientist has come up with an experiment in which fish evolve into frogs and leap away from predators.”17

Letmerestatethiscommoncreationistclaimanotherway:“Theevidencethatonebiblicalkinddescendedfromanotherbiblicalkindis,overall, rather weak.” Clearly, the objection is about change betweenkinds, or as the authors state it, “transition” fromone “major form” toanother. Mostof theauthors’responsedoesnotaddressthiscreationistclaimatall.Theauthorssimplytalkabouthownaturalselectionproduceschangewithinspeciesandproducesnewspecies(withinkind).Finally,the authorsprovidea two-sentence response towhat the creationist ac-

16BillNye,www.LutheranScience.org/Bill(accessed7-1-20)17Raven,430.

Biology Textbook

Page 28: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

28 Biology Textbook

tuallywantsdiscussed:changeoutsideof thebiblicalkind. Hereis theauthors’entireresponsetochangeoutsideofkind:

Toobjectthatevolutiondoesnotexplainreallymajordifferences,suchasthosebetweenfishandamphibians,simplytakesusbacktopoint2[nofossilintermediates].Thesechangestakemillionsof years, and they are clearly seen in the fossil record.18

So,theonlyresponsetheauthorsprovideisthatone“majorform”(onebiblicalkind)descending fromanother is“clearly seen in the fos-silrecord.”Yet,aswediscussedpreviously,the evolutionist community has embraced “punctuated equilibrium” to address the problem that such transitions are not seen in the fossil record. If, as the authors contend, transitionsbetweenmajorformsare“clearlyseeninthefossilrecord”andthisevidenceis“compelling,”thenwhydidtheevolutionistcommunityembracepunctuatedequilibriumwhichstatestheopposite,thatthefossilsaremissing?Theauthorsmakeanextremelyweakargument.

7. The irreducible complexity argument. Because each part of a complex cellular mechanism such as blood clotting is essential to the overall process, the intricate machinery of the cell cannot be explained by evolution from simpler stages.19

Theauthorsdevote40%of theirwords to this lastobjection toevolution. They discuss how blood clotting in lamprey eels is a sim-plerclottingsystem,whichtheyseeasrepresenting“primitive”clottingmethodsfrom500millionyearsago.Ifoundseveralscientificpapersonthis research such as this one20.Ofcourse,these“primitive”andsimplerclottingschemesarestillextremelycomplex,soatbestevolutionistscanusethemtoclaimthesesimplersystemsevolvedintocomplexclottinginmammals and then humans. In general, evolutionists assume that similari-

18Raven,430.19Raven,430.20YongJiang,RussellF.Doolittle,“Theevolutionofvertebratebloodcoagu-lationasviewedfromacomparisonofpufferfishandseasquirtgenomes,”Pro-ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,Jun2003,100(13)https://www.pnas.org/content/100/13/7527(accessed7-1-20)

Page 29: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

29Biology Textbook

tiesbetweenvariousbiblicalkindsofanimalsaredueto1)thosetwokindsdescendingfromacommonancestor(divergentevolution),or2)thatfea-ture evolving independently two ormore times (convergent evolution).So,whenevolutionistsseesimilarities(likecommonproteinsbeingused)betweentheclottingsystemsoftwodifferentcreatures,theirfirstthoughtisthatmaybethosecreaturesdescendedfromacommonancestor.

In this case, the authors are claiming that humans and lampreyeelsdescendedfromacommonancestorbecausetheyhavesomesimilar-ityintheirbloodclottingsystems.ThethoughtthatGodusedasimilarclottingdesignrepeatedlyisnotevenapossibilitytoanevolutionist.Godcreatedallplantsandanimalstoexistonthesameplanet,soweneedtobeabletoprocesssomeofthesamefood,air,water,etc.inourbodies.ItisreasonabletoexpectthatGodusedsimilarfeaturesinvariouscreaturestoaccomplishthis.Itisalsopossiblethatsimilarmutationsoccurredinun-relatedcreaturesorthatGodplacedsimilar“errors”inthegenesofmanycreaturesasapartofthecurseresultingfromthefallintosinofAdamandEve. Therefore, the authors’ arguments do not seem all that strong to me.

Irarelyuseirreduciblecomplexityargumentsinmypersonalapol-ogetic,asIseemanyotherargumentsasstrongerandmoreeffective.Thatsaid, inmyopinion, theauthorsdonotmakeastrongargumentagainstirreduciblecomplexity. Theygiveweakevidence that simpler (“primi-tive”), yet still extremely complex, clotting systemsmay have evolvedinto the clotting system of mammals. They do not even address (give zeroevidence)abouthowthestillverycomplexclottingsystemofthese“primitive”creaturesevolvedfromnoclottingatall.

Summary Wemust takenote that the authors correctlybring to light twoplaces where many creationists are wrong. Creationists are wrong toclaim that “Evolution is only a theory―it is not proven.” Creationistsarewrongtoclaimthat“Evolutionisrandom.”Whencreationistsmakethoseclaims,theyhelpevolutionistsmaketheircasethatcreationistsdonotknowwhattheyaretalkingabout.Itisnotsurprisingthattheauthorsinclude these twopoints, sincebookswritten to defend evolution fromcreationist claims commonly do so.

Page 30: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

30 Biology Textbook

Theauthorsmadefairlyweakclaimsonmostotherpoints.For“proteinsaretooimprobable,”theirentirecaserestedonthelogicalfalla-cyofbeggingthequestion.Theauthorsclosewithahighlightedcalloutboxsummary,

Darwin’s theory of evolution has proven controversial amongsomeofthegeneralpublic,althoughthecommonlyraisedobjec-tionsarewithoutscientificmerit.21

Ina2014PewpolloftheUSA,34%said“humansalwaysexistedin[their]presentform,”while62%said“humansevolvedover time.”22 So,ourauthorsthinkthat1outof3peopleisonly“some”ofthepeople.

Theauthorsalso imply thatonly the“generalpublic”questionsthe truth of evolution, even though many thousands with science degrees alsoquestionevolution,includingasignificantnumberholdingaPh.D.inbiology.Finally,theauthorsclaimthese“objectionsarewithoutscientificmerit,”eventhough,aswehaveseen,theauthorsareunabletomakeasoundscientificresponsetomostofthesevenobjectionswhichtheycher-ry-pickedtoaddressintheirtextbook.

Veryweak,highlybiased,andsometimesevenfallaciousclaimsarebeingusedtodestroystudents’faithintheirCreatorGod.Thiseven-tually leads some of those students to deny Jesus as their Savior. We need toteachourstudentscreationapologeticsstartingasearlyaspreschool.Evolutionists start that early, and we must also.

Mark Bergemann is a retired electrical engineer with a B.S. from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. He serves as president of the Lutheran Science Institute and as Martin Luther College adjunct instructor for the online courses Creation Apol-ogetics 101 and 102. He is a member of Good Shepherd’s Evangelical Lutheran Church in West Allis, Wisconsin.

Textbook photo: Most of these textbooks have been quoted over the past five years in the LSI Journal. Photo credit: 2020 by Mark Bergemann.

21Raven,430.22 PewResearchCenter,“Chapter4:SocialandPoliticalAttitudes,”11-3-15.https://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/chapter-4-social-and-political-attitudes/(accessed7-1-20)

Page 31: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

31

Page 32: Light • Logical Fallacies • Biology Textbook...6 Logical Fallacies article series Logical Fallacies Mark Bergemann 1Logic is the study of reasoning. The proper use of reasoning

32

Luth

eran

Sci

ence

Inst

itute

, inc

.13

390

W. E

dgew

ood

Ave

New

Ber

lin W

I 531

51

addr

ess s

ervic

e re

ques

ted

Evol

utio

nEv

olut

ion

a Lu

ther

an R

espo

nse

a Lu

ther

an R

espo

nse