This video is going to be very difficult to make and it's going to be very difficult for you to understand Because I'm going to be talking about mathematical formulas and I'm going to be talking a lot about mathematics So if you don't understand mathematics, don't watch this video Okay next, but hey, how about the earth's magnetic field? This is where there's magnetic field has been measured since 1835 and it's growing weaker, which means it used to be Stronger you guys run the ball. Okay, here's the problem. The evolution is have no folks if we extrapolate back we're just to 20,000 years ago How long? 20,000 years ago 20 million not 20 million 20 billion 20 billion 20,000 years ago They heat produced by the magnetic field would have liquefied the earth Get the fuck out of here. It's just 20,000 years ago and a million years ago folks Just if the magnetic field would have been so strong it would have vaporized our planet vaporized the planet Now I had to think long and hard about this because even for a creationist theory this is nuts How would the earth's magnetic field melt anything? The first thing I did was to figure out exactly how much heat it would take to melt the earth's crust over 30 trillion trillion kilojoules I'm sure the heating engineer is watching this will tell you my calculation is dodgy and to be honest I haven't really checked it but still we need a staggering amount of heat to liquefied the earth Even Crohn's fellow creationists would tell him this sounds nuts So here's what I think happened Billy was sitting at the breakfast table one morning reading a book by Thomas Barnes a creationist who argued that because the earth's magnetic field is decaying It must have been excessively high in the past Working his way through a bowl of sugar-frosted sugar loops Crohn thought very high magnetic field Wow like those energy fields in star wars and stuff Maybe it would like heat up the planet or something. Hey wait vaporize the entire planet. Yeah, that's it But the earth's magnetic field doesn't even melt ice at the poles where it interacts with the earth's surface So it's not going to melt any rocks firstly Barnes made a crucial error He assumed that the magnetic field was generated by an electrical circuit within the earth Which is an old idea long discarded as the energy runs down thought Barnes the electrical circuit weakens and the magnetic field dies So extrapolate back and the magnetic field would have been much stronger in the past Now his reasoning would mean that the electrical current needed to produce such a huge magnetic field would have required a huge amount of energy Yes enough energy to melt every rock on the planet Unable to climb down from the chair on which he was dancing Crone mistook the high amount of energy required to generate the magnetic field to mean that the magnetic field itself generated energy Since Barnes wrote that book in 1973 Researchers have discovered that it's not free electrons that generate the magnetic field But the movement of molten rock that acts as a kind of dynamo Thermodynamic currents are caused by heating and cooling just as happens in the world's oceans and just as ocean Circulate because of the motion of the earth so does molten rock under the surface The magnetic field strengthens and weakens according to the dynamics of this circulation Okay, Billy what else now? Folks here's a problem with the evolutionary times go runs in the major problem starting with just one couple Eight people my eight people just one couple just 41,000 years ago. Did you say a million not a million? Oh two million not two man Just 41,000 years ago taking into wars and all that stuff the population of our buy-out folks would be two to 10 to the 89th hour How great is that number this number so great folks? There would not be enough space in the universe to hold that many bodies I can't dissect Billy Crones calculations because he doesn't give us any calculations So does anyone have a mathematical analysis of this population thing? But if you're good at mathematics, you're probably gonna understand what I'm trying to say Well, I want to do avoid some difficult math, but I guess there's no way around it Human population history has been calculated by geneticists and anthropologists But as you can see the math is not easy. This is just one part of one paper Analyzing the manifestation of inbreeding in genes and its effect on population So let's see what creationist mathematicians have come up with to debunk it and If you want to watch this video and you're not very good at maths then try and understand what I'm saying and try and stay along Okay, fair enough. I'll listen carefully to your argument And if I manage to spot a flaw at some point I'll stop the video We have the original population According to evolution. Okay, let me stop you there No part of evolution theory suggests that the original population of humans was two Humans evolved in groups through the interchange of genes We can all trace our ancestry back to one man and one woman of course But they lived at different times and different places. There was never an original pair of breeding humans But do go on the population doubles every 150 years Sorry, I have to stop you again. On what basis did the prehistoric population double every 150 years? Where does that figure come from? I messaged Truthful Christian to ask him for his source and he wrote back I got this number from a friend of mine at the fitness club in my local area Yes, but it's not Look scientists have spent decades researching human population through archaeological evidence and the mapping of the human genome And they've written volumes of scientific papers calculating past population growth based on this evidence And you're saying that all they really needed to do was ask Richard Simmons Now I don't want to be too hard on Truthful Christian because no one who sincerely wanted to pull the wool over our eyes Would be so honest as to admit that his scientific information comes from the local gym and truthful Christian was honest enough under no pressure from me to accept that he may be wrong and his numbers may not be accurate So clearly this guy isn't out to deliberately deceive and this disqualifies him for a golden crocodile But let's pursue this local fitness club connection I think I may have traced it back to this line from answers in Genesis Let us assume AIG says that the population doubles every 150 years Why assume such an arbitrary figure? Why not 80 or 200 or 120? Because answers in Genesis was working backwards the Bible gave it a starting population of eight people and AIG wanted to show that after 4,500 years that population would expand to 6.5 billion Knowing the answer made the math very easy what rate of growth is required to get that answer Turns out to be a doubling every 150 years So then answers in Genesis turned the calculation around and started at the beginning if the population 4,500 years ago was eight people and assuming a doubling of the population every oh, I don't know let's say 150 years what population should we have today? Why it works out to 6.5 billion and since that's what we've got the Bible must be right Then using the same arbitrary doubling of population every 150 years what population will we have today if humans have been around for 40,000 years? There would not be enough space in the universe to hold that many bodies But of course a doubling of the population every 150 years never happened for most of human history Human populations expand according to the resources that are available to fuel that expansion Hunter gatherers have very low population growth because the land can't support a large population of hunter gatherers When the Neolithic farming revolution came along populations grew because the same amount of land could support more people And when cities grew up in Egypt Mesopotamia India and China they could support larger populations still So prior to the Neolithic human populations didn't grow very fast at all They were constrained by the resources that fed them Into this mix you have to add the occasional mass extermination Around 70,000 years ago a volcanic eruption in Samatra caused global cooling which reduced the human population to as little as 10,000 people in Africa and India Coming up with ideas about human population at the breakfast table is easy If you apply arbitrary numbers and do a bit of simple math Conducting careful research over decades doing more sophisticated mathematical calculations Not making arbitrary assumptions and basing every conclusion on the evidence is much harder But the result stands up to scrutiny