Review of P. H. Gosse's OMPHALOS: An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot
John W. Burgeson <burgytwo@juno.com>
Metanexus: VIEWS 2001.09.05 1344 words
Consider the following perennial question of childhood: "But if God created
Adam and Eve, did they have bellybuttons?"
And it would seem that, yes, Virginia, they did indeed have bellybuttons. At
least according to Phillip Henry Gosse, a Victorian naturalist, whose book
aptly titled "Omphalos" (Greek for navel), is being reviewed for us today by
John Burgeson. And Burgeson, sums up one of Gosse's main points as follows:
"Gosse's argument is simple. If you had been present in Eden twenty minutes
after Adam's creation, you would have observed his navel, a scar left from a
birth that never happened. In his digestive tract would have been the
remains of a meal he had not eaten two hours before. His feet would have had
calluses from walks he had never taken. A nearby tree, cut down, would have
shown real rings of unreal years of growth. Gosse goes on and on with this
argument, separating all time into historic time, what Gosse calls
"diachronic" time, and un-historic time, unreal time, virtual time, what
Gosse calls "prochronic" time. He argues two propositions, ones which my
friends at ICR might well take into account:
"1. All organic nature moves in a circle.
"2. Creation is a violent irruption into the circle of nature."
Does this mean that the world was created as is? Or does what we see result
from the playing out in time of this violent irruption? Furthermore, does
this mean that there really are two types of time, say "kairos" (eternal
time) and "chronos" (temporal time)? And is time, then, some kind of
creature or is it a mere artifact of perception?
Read on to find out more.
John W. Burgeson is a retired physicist and a retired IBMer. He is presently
a Stephen Minister at First Presbyterian Church, Durango, Colorado. And the
following review of OMPHALOS; An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot by
Phillip Henry Gosse (Woodbridge, Connecticut, Ox Bow Press; 1998. 376 pages,
index. Paperback. $34.95. ISBN 1-881987-10.) recently appeared in
PERSPECTIVES (the American Scientific Affiliation's quarterly journal).
--Stacey E. Ake
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Subject: Review of P. H. Gosse's OMPHALOS: An Attempt to Untie the
Geological Knot
From: John W. Burgeson
Email: <burgytwo@juno.com>
This edition of OMPHALOS is a reprint of a book originally published in
London in 1857, two years before Darwin's ORIGIN OF SPECIES. Long out of
print, unavailable to students of origins issues, it has reappeared as a
study text for historians who would like to see how one scientist struggled
to reconcile what he understood of both science and the scriptures.
References to Gosse's book appear often. Martin Gardner gives it a
sympathetic treatment in FADS & FALLACIES (1957), writing, in chapter 11,
"Not the least of its remarkable virtues is that while it won not a single
convert, it presented a theory so logically perfect, and so in accordance
with geological facts that no amount of scientific evidence will ever be
able to refute it." More recently, Chris Morgan and David Langford's FACTS
AND FALLACIES (1981) mentions it as an "ultimate invincible theory,"
overcoming "all conflict between evolution and the Bible." Gosse's son,
Edmund Gosse, in his 1905 book, FATHER AND SON, reported at length his
father's bewilderment, following publication, of the expressions of derision
that were expressed, by believers and non-believers alike.
Phillip Henry Gosse was no pseudo-scientist, but a respected and admired
naturalist of his times. Thomas Huxley called him "an honest hod carrier of
science," by which term he paid respect to Gosse's powers of observation and
writing. Gosse is associated with the development of salt water aquariums,
and published many books on water creatures of the English countryside. He
was an admirer of the new scientists; his son writes; "Where was his place,
then, as a sincere and accurate observer? Manifestly, it was with the
pioneers of the new truth, it was with Darwin, Wallace and Hooker." (FATHER
AND SON, page 128).
But Gosse was also a biblical literalist. The Bible does not lie, and the
facts of nature must take second place to the revealed word, a word which he
was convinced he knew and knew well. When his wife died painfully of cancer
in February of 1857, he turned his attention to a reconciliation of the
issue. OMPHALOS appeared in print that fall; within two years it had
disappeared into the history's rubbish heap. Twenty years ago, I found a
second generation photocopy at Gordon-Conwell. For the past two decades a
photocopy of that photocopy has resided on my bookshelf.
Gosse's argument is simple. If you had been present in Eden twenty minutes
after Adam's creation, you would have observed his navel, a scar left from a
birth that never happened. In his digestive tract would have been the
remains of a meal he had not eaten two hours before. His feet would have had
calluses from walks he had never taken. A nearby tree, cut down, would have
shown real rings of unreal years of growth. Gosse goes on and on with this
argument, separating all time into historic time, what Gosse calls
"diachronic" time, and un-historic time, unreal time, virtual time, what
Gosse calls "prochronic" time. He argues two propositions, ones which my
friends at ICR might well take into account:
1. All organic nature moves in a circle.
2. Creation is a violent irruption into the circle of nature.
Quoting the philosopher Chalmers, who wrote "We have no experience in the
creation of worlds, ... " Gosse concludes, at least for the organic world
(he disclaims any arguments for the inorganic), that any act of creation
must involve the creation of a being with a history that never took place.
On page 336 he writes, "...we cannot avoid the conclusion that each
organism was from the first marked with the records of a previous being. But
since creation and previous history are inconsistent with each other; as the
very idea of the creation of an organism excludes the idea of pre-existence
of that organism, or any part of it; it follows, that such records are
false, so far as they testify to time; that the developments and processes
thus recorded have been produced without time, or are what I call
'prochronic.'"
The objections to Gosse's thesis are well known; the two most often cited
are (1) that it is simply a variation of Russell's hypothesis, "last
Thursdayism," the hypothesis that we were all created, complete with
memories of unreal events, on Thursday morning of last week, and (2) a
rejection because "God can't lie" and a false history must be taken as
evidence that He did lie. But Gosse's arguments go well beyond Russell's
hypothesis, and he argues well that any fiat creation, even by God, must
necessarily include unreal history. His arguments need to be taken
seriously.
Gosse's thesis is not, of course, "scientific." While it may be true, it is
not testable, nor does it suggest future research projects. It is a dead
end. Gosse recognized this, for he urged his fellow scientists to continue
as if unreal history were real; to construct their theories independent of
his thesis.
For many years I have asked my friends at ICR for comments. To date, they
have declined that opportunity. Holding, as they do, that fiat creation did
happen, it seems that part of OMPHALOS ought to play a part in their
theorizing. One thing seems certain. If one posits fiat creation of any
kind, an appearance of age must be a part of that hypothesis. That fact
makes scientific tests of the claim difficult, if not wholly impossible,
leading to the observation that "Scientific Creationism" is simply an
oxymoron. Sorry about that, Henry.
I highly recommend this book to my ASA colleagues interested in origins
issues. It is a good read. For the biblical literalist, one who has
honestly and thoroughly confronted the scientific data, I see it as the
only intellectually coherent position possible.
Thanks to Jack Haas, George Murphy, Emrys Tyler and Loren Haarsma for help
in improving this review.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This list is hosted by Metanexus: The Online Forum on Religion and Science http://www.metanexus.net>.
The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Metanexus or its sponsors. To comment on this message, go to the browser-based forum at the bottom of all postings in the magazine section of our web site at
http://www.metanexus.net/index2.asp?fc=/archives/searcharchives.asp?list=16listtype=Magazine.
Metanexus welcomes submissions betwwen 1000 to 3000 words of essays and book reviews that seek to explore and interpret science and religion in original and insightful ways for a general educated audience.
Previous columns give a good indication of the topical range and tone for acceptable essays.
Columns may be quoted or republished in full, with attribution to the author of the column and "Metanexus: The Online Forum on Religion and Science <http://www.metanexus.net>".
Please send all inquiries and submissions to Dr. Stacey Ake, Associate Editor of Metanexus at
mailto:ake@metanexus.net. Copyright 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 by William Grassie.
POWRÓT