‘Big Daddy’

Big Daddy  "A student proves evolution is full of holes".  Clicking on the link should open a new window. You can then compare the analysis with the online version if you wish.

If you would like a second opinion, see this site.

How about a third opinion?

An interesting comparison showing how Chick’s enemy has changed from “hippies” into “liberals”.

 

Panel 1

Professor: "How many of you believe in evolution?"

Well, that's realistic!  If this is an American university, a more likely question would be "How many of you learnt anything about evolution in your science classes?".  Notice the picture of the banana holding ape labeled "Our Father".

Panel 3

Professor:  "Anyone disagree?"
Student: "I do, sir!"

Panel 4

Professor:  "You can GET OUT of MY class!! [sic] After you have apologized to everyone for your rudeness and ignorance we MIGHT let you back in!"

Chick couldn't possibly be trying to demonize anybody?  Notice also, the relatively unattractive appearance of the Professor.

Panel 6

Professor:  What makes you think evolution is untrue?
Student:  Because the Bible says that each kind ...
Professor:  HOLD IT, YOU FANATIC!! [sic]

Does that student look like a young Kent Hovind?

Panel 7

Professor: I could have you jailed for that!! [sic] * How dare you mention the word Bible in this school. You know it's unscientific?? [sic] -- If you talk to me, it will ONLY be in scientific terms!  Do you understand?
Footnote:  * It has never been against the law to teach the Bible or creation in public schools.  See Public School Presentation video from Christian [sic] Science Evangelism www.drdino.com

This is our first introduction to Kent Hovind material.  What is not mentioned is that it has never been illegal to use the Bible in comparative religion and social studies classes.  It has, however, been illegal in the United States to teach Young Earth Creation Science in science classes.

Panel 8

Professor:  Young man, the evidence is overwhelming.  ALL of the schools teach it.  It's accepted everywhere.  DNA proves it!  Science proves it!  Carbon-14 proves it!

Carbon-14?  Looks like someone is building a straw man argument.  Carbon dating is only usable over relatively short periods of time.  Its application to evolution theory is very limited.

Panel 10

Student:  Are there not six basic concepts of evolution?
Professor: Yes!

These, so called, six definitions, come from Kent Hovind.  Hovind uses them in his $250,000 Challenge.  Even though the definitions are shown as written by the Professor you can spot the Young Earth Creationist influence with the use of words like "kind" in the biological evolution areas.  Why the Professor would agree to these definitions is rather puzzling.

Panel 11

Student:  Only the last one has been observed and can be called science.  The first five are believed by faith.
Professor:  I don't like you attitude!  Lets discuss prehistoric man

Panel 12

Professor: Here is the first and most famous clue to earth man.  The Neanderthal [sic] skullcap!  Modern dating methods show its older than Darwin could have imagined!

Panel 13

Professor: Lucy the oldest ancestor of humans, is 2.9 million years old

Panel 14

Student: Only 2.9 million? Richard Leakey found a normal skull under a layer of rock dated at 212 million years ... Im sorry sir, but most experts now agree that Lucy was an unusual chimpanzee not a missing link. *
Footnote: * For details watch Video Seminar Part 7 by Dr. [sic] Kent Hovind available from Chick Publications.

Leakey found all of Lucy under a volcanic tuft which was thought to be around 200 million years old.  Further dating showed the age to be much younger.  There was no "normal skull".  Those "experts" who now agree that Lucy isn't a hominid ancestor are conspicuous by their absence.

On the issue of what Kent Hovind did say, see my analysis of Hovind's comments on Lucy

Panel 16

Student: I have in my possession a similar chart showing some amazing findings which are rarely made public! May I show it?
Professor: This should be interesting!  Yes let's see it -- science always has the answers!

Panels 17 and 18

LUCY Nearly all experts agree Lucy was just a 3 foot tall chimpanzee. *
Footnote: * For details watch Part 2 of the Creation Seminars Series video by Dr. [sic] Kent Hovind.

Repeat of the errors from Panel 14.

HEIDELBERG MAN Built from a jaw bone that was conceded to be quite human.

Also known as the "Mauer Jaw".  The specimen is either homo erectus or an early homo sapian. What is Chick's point?  See Heidelberg Man for more detail

NEBRASKA MAN Scientifically built up from one tooth, later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig.

Nebraska Man was not "built up" the scientific community, this was done by the media.  The error in identification of the tooth was discovered by the same person who made the original find.  See Nebraska Man for more details.

PILTDOWN MAN  The jawbone turned out to belong to a modern ape.

Piltdown Man was a hoax exposed in the 1950's.  Piltdown was a hindrance to the evidence that other hominid specimens were indicating.  Piltdown appeared to indicate a European branch of hominid history while all other specimens pointed towards Africa.  Exposure of this hoax cleared away the contradiction.  See Piltdown Man for more details.

PEKING MAN Supposedly 500,000 years old, but all the evidence has disappeared.

No, the original specimen has been "lost" but not before accurate replica's were made.  See Peking Man for more details.

NEANDERTHAL MAN At the Int'l Congress of Zoology (1958) Dr. A.J.E. Cave said his examination showed this famous skeleton found in France over 50 years ago is that of an old man who suffered from arthritis.

To take the above claim at face value, we have a Neanderthal that had arthritis, so what?  See Neanderthals for more details of erroneous Creationist claims.

NEW GUINEA MAN Dates way back to 1970.  This species has been found in the region just north of Australia.

I'm having trouble tracking down any references to this critter.  If anybody knows any details, please email.

CRO-MAGNON MAN  One of the earliest and best established fossils is at best equal in physique and brain capacity to modern man ... so what's the difference?

Physically, nothing significant but ....  See Encyclopedia.com for details

MODERN MAN This genius thinks we came from a monkey.

No one thinks anybody came from a monkey, humans simply share a common ancestry with other apes.

"Professing themselves to be wise they become fools" Romans 1:22

Oh the irony!  See here for the genuine scientific position.

Panel 19

Professor:  (thought bubble) He's killing me.  I've gotta play it cool!

Why?  The student hasn't yet said anything of substance.

Professor:  All of these layers of the earth [sic] are millions of years different in age.  We can tell the age of these layers from the fossils they contain.
Student: But sir, how do we date the fossils?

Panel 20

Professor:  That is a good question.  We can tell the age of the fossils since we know the age of the layer of rock where they were found.
Student:  Isn't that circular reasoning?

No, because Panel 19 is a misrepresentation of index fossils.  This exchange also fails to mention index fossils are cross checked with other dating techniques.

Panel 21

Student: How can you say the layers are different ages?  Petrified trees * are often found going through many of the layers. Some are even upside down running through "millions of years" worth of rock.
Footnote: * See pictures of these on www.drdino.com

Polystrate fossils have a very simple explanation.

Panel 22

Professor: Well, here is proof of evolution. Human embryo's have gill slits proving man evolved through the fish stage millions of years ago!

Hold the phone!  Why is the Professor talking about Recapitulation Theory?  That idea has been dead for about 100 years.

Student: Sir, Earnst Haeckel made up those drawings in 1869 and they were proven wrong in 1874.  Those folds of skin are not gills.  They grow into bones in the ear and glands in the throat. **
Footnote: See video #4 Creation Seminar series for more.  Also New Scientist Sept. 6 1999 pg. 23.

Correct.  Probably the first factual statement the student has made.

Professor: (thought bubble) I hate him!
Girl in class: Wow! Wrong for 125 years and still in our book!

Recapitulation Theory is not still in textbooks.  What should still be in textbooks on the subject of embryo homology, which is fully compatible with common decent, but we digress.

Panel 23

Professor: (thought bubble) He's destroying me!
Professor: Vestigial * organs like the human tail bone prove we evolved from animals with tails!
Footnote: * Vestigial - a shrunken part of the body which is no longer used.

Right here is where Chick builds a lovely straw man argument.  Vestigial organs are argued to be the adaptation of previous organs.  There is no requirement that they be nonfunctional.  In fact, an organ evolving to a new function is, well, evolution.

Panel 24

Student: Sir, there are nine muscles which attach to the tail bone .... it is not "vestigial"

Straw men are so easy to knock down aren't they?

Panel 25 and 26

Professor: Whales have a vestigial pelvis.  This proves they evolved from a land dwelling creature
Student: I'm sorry sir, but those bones serve as anchor points for muscles.  Without them whales cannot reproduce. They have nothing to do with walking on land.  Even if they were "vestigial" organs isn't losing something the opposite of evolution.

Again attacking the false premise from Panel 23.  These last few panels are taken almost directly from Kent Hovind's sermons.  "Losing something" is not the opposite of evolution.

Panel 27

Student:  What is the binding force of the atom?
Professor: It's gluons! (thought bubble) Gotcha!
Student: Wrong sir! Gluons are a made up dream. No one has ever seen or even measured them ... they don't exist!  It's a desperate theory to explain away the truth!
Footnote: See www.drdino.com for details

Hello! What on Earth is Chick talking about now?  Since when has Quantum Theory been an issue?  What "truth" does quantum mechanics explain away?  As for details, it appears the even Hovind has ditched this harebrained tangent because he does not mention this (to the best of my knowledge).

Panel 28

Student:  We know that the electrons of the atom whirl around the nucleus billions of times every millionth of a second ... and the nucleus of the atom contains particles called neutrons and protons.  Neutrons have no electrical charge and are therefor neutral - BUT -

Panel 29

Student:  (cont.) Protons have positive charges. One law of electricity is:  LIKE CHARGES REPEL EACH OTHER!  Since all the protons of the nucleus are positively charged, they should repel each other and scatter into space.  If gluons aren't the answer what ... is?

Its a good thing we aren't dealing with the "laws of electricity", rather the principles of quantum mechanics.

Panel 30

Professor:  I don't know
Student:  I'm sorry sir, I can't hear you.
Professor: I said - I don't know.  You tell me

Panel 31

Student:  May I quote from the Bible?
Professor:  YES, YES, YES!! [sic]
Student:  It says that Christ, the Creator, "Is before all things, and by him all things consist (are held together). *  Also it says "All things were made by him (Christ); and without him was not anything made" **
Footnote: * Col. 1:17  ** John 1:3
Professor:  Are you saying that He is the creator?
Student: Yes, "He (Christ) was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." John 1:10

Chick seems to be implying that his limited knowledge of quantum mechanics means Jesus is personally holding every atom together contrary to natural law.   I'm lost for words.

Panel 32 and 33

Professor quits his job.

Panel 34 and 35

Student witnesses to the whole class.