| Jerry McDonald began his fourth affirmative with the following statement: This (his fourth affirmative) will be the final article that I will write in this debate in which I will present affirmative materials. I will use my final affirmative to defend those arguments that I have presented and summarize the debate. That being the case, and given the fact we don't really have any formal agreement as to the logistics in all of this, I thought it might be kinda neat to just go ahead and post my fifth negative wherein I do just about the same thing as Jerry McDonald indicates he is going to do with his fifth affirmative. So, here it is, my fifth negative: It has been my desire in discussions such as this to deal with the fundamental real world claim commonly associated with the "young-earth, creation-science" movement. That claim is that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. Jerry McDonald and I had no formal agreement regarding this debate. For reasons of his own, Jerry McDonald simply started it and I thought it appropriate to tag along. Jerry McDonald, by my count, came up with one proposition and 6 elements to go with that one argument, and two other stand alone arguments. I would like to recite what I have found to be those items: Jerry McDonald's Proposition: Resolved: The Bible teaches that God created all things in six literal 24 hour days. First Affirmation, page 1 Argument #1: Major Premise: All total situations, the constituent elements of which are factual, are total situations which are true. Minor Premise: The total situation described by my proposition (see above) is a total situation the constituent elements of which are factual. Conclusion: Therefore, the total situation described by my proposition is a total situation which is true. First Affirmation, page 2 Element #1: The language of Genesis 1 and the language of Exodus 20:9-11 both show that the creation days were literal 24 hour days. First Affirmation, page 3 Element #2: The field of botany shows the creation days were literal 24 hour days. First Affirmation, page 10 Element #3: The Bible teaches that the world is relatively young. Second Affirmation, page 1 Element #4: My opponent, Robert Baty, concedes to the position that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. Second Affirmation, page 1 Element #5: Real world evidence (oceanography) shows us that theEarth is no more than a few thousand years old. Third Affirmation, page 1 Element #6: Real world evidence (geology) shows that the Earth is no more than a few thousand years old. Fourth Affirmation, page 1 Argument #2: Major Premise: If real world evidence (such as oceanography)shows that the world is no older than a few thousand years, then Robert's "Goliath of GRAS" argument is invalid and unsound. Minor Premise: Real world evidence (such as oceanography) does show that the earth is no older than a few thousand years. Conclusion: Therefore, Robert's "Goliath of GRAS" argument is invalid and unsound. Third Affirmation, page 4 Argument #3: Major Premise: If God made everything fully grown, then everything would have to be fully grown, and the apparent age and the actual age would be two different things. Minor Premise: God did make everything fully grown, and everything did have to be fully grown. Conclusion: Therefore, the apparent age and the actual age would be two different things. Third Affirmation, pages 8,9 In discussing the above claims by Jerry McDonald, I would like to move from the easiest, to the easier and then to the easy. Jerry McDonald's "Argument #2" recited above is considered the easiest for purposes of its relationship to the proposition that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. For all those who can see through the rungs of a ladder, it is simply self-evident that the simple, logical validity of my "Goliath of GRAS" has nothing to do with whether or not anything is more than a few thousand years old. I need not dispute the validity or soundness of Jerry McDonald's "Argument #2" for that reason, though I could demonstrate that, while valid in itself, it is not sound because its major premise is false. Whether its minor premise is true or false, of course, is the topic for Jerry McDonald to take up in his more formal, in writing (or oral), for the record discussion with Todd S. Greene as to the real world evidence of age. So, Jerry McDonald loses as to his efforts regarding his "Argument #2". As to Jerry McDonald's "Argument #3", the conclusion does not establish the real age of anything and says nothing by way of showing that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. If it be granted, at least for sake of argument, that there are "apparent" and "real" ages which are different, not a particularly unreasonable position (i.e., I saw a lady today that looked 34 years old, but she told me she was really 43), it simply does NOT follow that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. So, Jerry McDonald loses as to his efforts regarding his "Argument #3". Now we are down to the easy "Argument #1" and the proposition and elements that go along with it, having disposed of "Arguments #2" and "3" as shown above. Despite Jerry McDonald's failure to provide any acceptable logic authorities, like his preferred Copi, to discuss the legitimacy of his "Argument #1, I am willing to grant, for sake of this discussion, that it is a valid argument and that its major premise is true. I know, I am being too kind. Like, I'm not even sure what the major premise really means or how Jerry McDonald would go about proving such a universal affirmation. But let's go with it and move on to the minor premise, the proposition and the elements. The minor premise of "Argument #1" states: The total situation described by my proposition is a total situation the constituent elements of which are factual. The proposition referenced is: The Bible teaches that God created all things in six literal 24 hour days. First problem: The proposition says nothing about nothing being more than a few thousand years old. Second problem: The proposition is not, for purposes of a discussion as to whether or not anything is more than a few thousand years old, a statement of the "total situation". The "total situation" on the issue under consideration, that nothing is more than a few thousand years old, simply includes the biblical text and the real world "text". That being the case, as Jerry McDonald implicitly admits with his "6 Elements", his minor premise is deemed false for purposes of this discussion. Jerry McDonald's proposition does not describe the "total situation" necessary to meet the requirements of his argument and sound reasoning if it is intended to reach the conclusion that, "therefore, nothing is more than a few thousand years old". Third Problem-The 6 Elements: As noted above, for sake of this discussion, it is my conclusion that there are only two relevant "elements"; though they may be subdivided almost without limit, or at least more than any mortal could have the time, talent and ability to fully consider. Those two elements are simply the text and the real world evidence. Did you get that! The two relevant "elements" are the text and the real world evidence. That immediately eliminates Jerry McDonald's "Element #4" as irrelevant. It has already been explained in my earlier submission why the claim is false. But even if it was true, it would not have any relevance to whether or not anything really is more than a few thousand years old. Jerry McDonald's "Element #1" and "Element #3" deal with the textual element. Jerry McDonald's "Element #2", "Element #5" and "Element #6" deal with the real world evidence. As to my purpose in dealing with the fundamental "young-earth, creation-science" position that nothing is more than a few thousand years old, as Todd S. Greene has reasonably explained in a recent posting to my discussion list (link provided below), one's interpretation of the text need not be disputed. The fundamental "young-earth, creation-science" issue has to do with whether or not the real world evidence rebuts the real world claim that nothing is more than a few thousand years old and, by implication, shows that either the interpretation of the text is wrong or the text itself is wrong. So, I have, by my count, disposed of "Element #1", "Element #3", "Element #4. That leaves "Element #2", "Element #5" and "Element #6" for consideration. .. In other words, as suggested by Jerry McDonald, does the real world evidence show that nothing is more than a few thousand years old? At best, Jerry McDonald's attempts only suggest that there may be certain characteristics about the Earth that are less than a few thousand years old, and Todd S. Greene stands prepared to actually deal with such claims in the more formal, pending debate with Jerry McDonald on those issues. Similarly, Todd S. Greene stands prepared to therein offer specific affirmative evidence that some characteristic as to the Earth and as to the Universe shows that both the Earth and the Universe are more than a few thousand years old (i.e., at least 100,000 years old). Jerry McDonald has not shown that nothing is more than a few thousand years old. He has preemptively indicated that he rejects any real world evidence that some thing is more than a few thousand years old based on his NONscientific "apparent age" doctrine. Jerry McDonald's default "apparent age" defense, admitting he has no scientific rebuttal to what he knows is real world evidence that some thing is more than a few thousand years old, is a concession to me and my "Goliath of GRAS" that is equivalent to an admission of defeat. I accept, therefore, Jerry McDonald's implicit admission of defeat. My "Goliath of GRAS"...still unbeaten and still the one to beat. Now, we look forward with great anticipation to the upcoming, pending McDonald-Greene Debate which, according to reports, will not involve the use of the religious text for proof by Jerry McDonald but will be limited to determining whether or not anything is more than a few thousand years old without regard to any religious textual foundation (i.e., the real world evidence and any other such non-religious evidence that Jerry McDonald may choose to invoke). Those interested in the further pursuit of these important public issues may wish to visit and participate in my public discussion list found at: http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/Maury_ and_Baty/ The message archives are publicly available at the above website. You are welcome to join, but may participate without being a member by simply using the "post" or "reply" icons or by sending an e-mail addressed to: Maury_and_Baty@ yahoogroups. com Sincerely, Robert Baty |
| The McDonald-Baty Debate The Age of the Earth |
Baty's Fifth Negation
 |
| |
 |
| but try the spirits whether they are of God 1 Jno. 4:1 |