A POSSIBLE YOUNG UNIVERSE?
THE BIG BANG
If you forget all else I write here REMEMBER THIS ONE THING - the big bang contradicts Genesis!
On my main web page, I begin with the order of the days of creation. (see my page)
The latest revision of the big bang theory says stars evolved first (not created) by clumping together hydrogen & helium. And this process occurred for millions of yrs because they were extremely massive in those days. (I originally heard it was billions of years but that could have been secondary or tertiary scientific literature.) Then, because of their size, they supernovaed which created (can they use that word??) 'refuse' elements (all other elements known – see my link to my copy of periodic table and note its extreme complexity that came simply from an explosion!) These refuse elements then magically clumped together to form stellar systems & any planets. The bible says earth first (Gen 1:1), THEN the sun & stars. Another note is that the plants were made BEFORE the sun was formed. How could they live millions of yrs (like day-age people believe) without the sun?!?! They just accept peoples word and don't read THE WORD.
Also, note how the periodic table has elements that donate/receive 1 electron, 2 electrons, 3, etc. This is order! This is complexity! Did virus programs just evolve by themselves?? No! They had a maker (designer) who was more complex than what they had made.
Albert Einstein stated: an important thing is to not stop asking questions. Whether it is a religious belief or a scientific postulate or theory – ASK QUESTIONS!
What is the scientific (or scriptural) proof? Does it contradict known laws of science? Is it observable and repeatable in an experiment?
A good scientist revisits his theories and reassesses. Continual testing and evaluating.
Bad science will patch one hole after another on his aged sinking boat (Darwinian time theories) at the cost of good science practices! When the patches are almost as prevalent as the boat itself, it’s time to abandon ship!!!
You see, the details are going to either prove or disprove an argument. Many assumptions are being made by various theories.
Let’s look at some details of THE BIG BANG. Why doesn’t any scientist ever mention:
1. Where the big ball of hydrogen and helium came from (because they’d have to answer "God made it.") Some have said, it was just there. (Duh!)
2. What suddenly made this ball of matter explode?
3. Angular rotation of ALL galaxies couldn’t come from an explosion – if any at all. It would make velocities radial along a line. Everything we observe rotates! From the electron around the atom, planets rotate on their axes, moons around planets, our planets around our sun, our solar system around our galaxy, our galaxy upon its axis. From small to big.
4. RED SHIFT - Most have not heard, but the red shift does have another interpretation! Not just a small percent, a 50/50 chance! They are EITHER moving away from us OR rotating. Spinning/rotating stars will give the same red shift like any object receding from one self. Since we see all objects in heaven rotating, maybe this is the better solution to red shifting star light - not result of the Big Bang everything shooting away from a common point. Now, we do know that light has traveled for great distances. But recent earth based experiments (I saw on a Nova show) indicate that light can accelerate to a few hundred times faster than its 'known' fastest speed when it is in a medium (not a vacuum). So if it can be accelerated, then, it may have had a perfect speed the day stars were created. Or, simply, God caused it to shine on the earth so we can bask in more glory from His hands! (which sounds like what the scriptures indicate anyway!)
5. There is also a BIG BANG FUDGE FACTOR stating that at 10 ^ –35 sec after THE BIG BANG, the speed of light SUDDENLY was exceeded in free space by all known matter (hydrogen & helium shards) with only itself existing in the universe. Quite a feat! At an astronomy conference in fall 2003, a NASA physicist explained this and later told me this is where "the laws of physics do not apply." How convenient. If there’s a hole in your boat, just state water pressure laws do not apply and it will not supplant the air within the boat! I think this theory sinks! OH, it gets better. In the same way this magical unexplainable force suddenly accelerated all known matter to surpass the speed of light, at 10 ^-28 seconds (if I remember correctly) suddenly and unexplainably in free space, all known matter slowed down again to the present velocities of what the galaxies & quasars hold today. This breaking of the law of physics puts galaxies in the universe at the proper spatial distance most astronomers presently agree on. WHY NOT JUST BELIEVE GOD DID WHAT HE SAID HE DID IN GENESIS CHAPTER1: He caused the light to shine on the earth (paraphrase)? IT TAKES MORE FAITH TO BELIEVE EVOLUTION THAN GOD’S WORD! Who do you believe? Changing science? Or, God’s Word, written 2 to 3+ THOUSAND years ago that we’re still pulling truth from!
HERE’S SOME EXAMPLES OF CHANGING SCIENCE & MEDIA SCIENCE ‘MISTAKES’:
We are told today, the earth
is 4.5 billion years old. In the 1960’s
we were taught the earth was 1 or 2 billion years old. In
Remember, secondary literature (news papers, magazines & their web sites), though they may have scientists on staff, it’s the non-technical editors who mistakenly (and I would hope not purposely) pass these errors. This is common with news media-science. (CLICK HERE TO SEE CNN SPEED OF LIGHT BLOOPER). Secondary literature is also distributed & readily available to more readers due to the low usage of non-technical terms. This aids in perpetuating incorrect science.
Ah, speed of light, speed of sound, what’s the difference anyway?
At normal atmospheric pressure and a temperature of 20 degrees Celsius, a sound wave will travel at approximately 750 miles/hour (abt 0.21 miles/second). The speed of a sound wave is slow in comparison to the speed of a light wave. Light travels through air at a speed of approximately 300,000 meters/second; this is nearly 900 times the speed of sound. Quite an error, don’t you think? [NOTE: I originally cut the statistics from “the physics classroom” online (a site I can no longer find) who stated light was 900,000 times the speed of sound, which, on second look, I noticed wasn’t right. So I did my own calculations & put the correction above. Sorry! WOW, can’t even trust a physics web site to be right all the time!!! This just goes to prove again – YOU CAN’T BLANKETLY TRUST THINGS ABT SCIENCE! ASK QUESTIONS!]
On January 29, 2003 I also contacted CNN about another blooper they aired about mixing up the speed of light and sound while addressing the space shuttle Columbia disaster. I used their web site to send them a message and they quickly pulled the scientifically erroneous picture and just read their story instead.
Take what you hear from the news media with a grain of salt. Then investigate yourself! KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS!
OUR SOLAR SYSTEM & URANUS AND
If the whole solar system came from one ball of matter, how can the sun (with 99% of the mass) only have 2% of the angular momentum of the solar system?? Laws of physics prove the largest body (the sun) would have the largest momentum. But why do our planets have most of the momentum? All these truths strike venom at evolution that says our solar system was once a big blob that slooowly cooled and turned into planets & a star.
Why does Uranus spin on its axis backwards?
If the whole solar system
came from one ball of matter, there is no good explanation for this! If the one
big ball of matter turned into a sun with smaller balls of matter, all the
subsets will have parallel paths (angular momentum) and won’t intersect. But the best they got is this:
Neither is there any
explanation as to what made
LET’S USE SOME MORE CRITICAL THINKING:
What physics book have you
studied to look at a 2 body, three-dimensional collision and the resultant 2
bodies remain in almost exactly the same plane of origin (our earth’s and other
planets’ planes relative to the sun)? Additionally,
Note - 3 of our planets: Venus, Uranus, & Pluto have their axis rotation reversed to their normal motion through space (called retrograde rotation). In layman’s terms, if you spin a top, [and I’ve spun many as a child] looking from above, say it spins to the right – we’ll call this spinning on its axis. You will notice it begins to make larger circles TO THE RIGHT – we’ll call this orbit around the sun. What you will NOT see is it making larger circles to the LEFT. But that is exactly what you see these 3 planets doing – rotating on their axis the opposite of their orbit. This creates more problems to the laws of physics – so it is investigated, tested and re-theorized? NO! It is IGNORED! The solar system DID NOT come from one blob of matter (called nebular theory) that slooooly cooled, etc. Physics & the Big Bang are opponents!
The earth & moon’s age is said to be 4.5 bill yrs old, yet if you reverse the moon's recession from the earth, it hits the earth at abt 1 bill yrs only! The moon's rate of recession is a very reliable constant (presently abt 2"/yr). And the effects of the moon supposedly breaking away from the earth even until a great distance away from the earth would be cataclysmic! It would cause immense tides and earth crust shears, volcanic eruptions with mountain changes - not a very habitable habitat! So, nothing could live back then
CRITICAL THINKING – what caused the supposed hot blob of matter that
will become the moon to break away from the hot blob of matter that will become
the earth? It would have had to be hot otherwise there’d be sharp jagged edges
of both from where they were adjoined. In the world of physics, this is even
more ridiculous than
So what if the blob that became the moon and the blob that became the earth congealed next to each other? Then there’d be no jagged edges but what would be the chance of these separate 2 objects having the same angular momentum? Improbable!
None of these 2 possibilities are very feasible, much less, the evolutionary theory of the moon breaking away from the earth. When you really look at it, there is NO explanation of the origin of the moon – naturally. The only real explanation is God made it!
Saturn has 2 moons that exchange orbits every 2-3 year cycles. Why didn't this kinetic energy dissipate over millions of yrs?? Because it isn’t that old.
And remember the results of our Saturn satellite Cassini – Saturn’s rings were made out of sharp pointed ice/rock! After millions of yrs, this should all be rounded. No wonder they are puzzled, they still are wearing their evolutionary sunglasses. Those things will blind you! They block good scientific observations and filter out truth!
Jupiter's first moon, Io, has
multiple volcanic eruptions. Dr. Van Till had a 2 day seminar March 16 & 17
You can contort the surface and generate some heat from the energy in the surface, but this will not sustain the molten core which is what is erupting from the volcanoes.
There is no valid explanation for why comets still exist after millions of yrs. Comets burn out as they keep going. That is the tail – the material jettisoned from it as the ice boils from its approach to the sun. The supposed Oort cloud (comet nursery that shoots one out every now & then) that is beyond Pluto has two camps of thought: one says it is in one direction from our sun; the other is in a very different direction. (based on Nova program). No one has seen this cloud either. There are only theories about it based on unsure evidences.
Now the funny thing, is, since the discovery of a 10th planet, far beyond Pluto, there still is no evidence of a comet nursery. Neither does anyone explain, first, the mechanism that kicks the comet out of the nursery (like it’s growing comets!) and, second, how the comet gets a rotational path around our sun instead of just cutting through our solar system. NO evidence for the Oort cloud and the physics of the whole comet trajectory is bad! Just another PATCH on the evolutionary web of deception to keep people believing in the faith of evolution!
SOME OF EARTH’S ‘CLOCKS’
Earth's electromagnetic field is decreasing with each year. since we've been measuring it (abt 150 yrs) it has decreased at the rate of one half every 1400 yrs! If you reverse this rate of decrease, the Earth's magnetic field's 'original' strength was (if it were millions of years old) would be the size of either the sun or Jupiter!!! Remember, one thousand Earths can fill Jupiter, one thousand Jupiters can fill up the sun. Whichever one it is, it would be enormous and the effects of this powerful magnetic field on any living organism on the earth under those conditions would be hazardous (life wouldn’t evolve!) The bearable field strength fits to under 14,000 years. Sorry cave men, mammoths & dinosaurs, too hazardous for you to live!
The ocean’s saltiness
increases as time goes forward due to sediment runoff. If the earth were
millions or more yrs old, it would be too salty to either support little life,
or support no life (like the
Radioactive elements original quantities have decreased over time. No debate there. But over millions of years, there would be so much radioactive material on the Earth that living things would suffer from radiation poisoning!!! Forget about that amoeba or that fish crawling out of the slime pond! He would have died before he even magically got more genetic information to become an advanced creature.
There are not enough pulsars (neutron stars) in the universe for it to be millions (and much less billions) of years old. There are only a few hundred. And scientists are puzzled that there are not numerous amounts.
Are new stars being 'born' ?? ALL observable science shows matter decaying - not organizing. So, no new stars are being born. We may just have started seeing the light (pun intended.)
Will we see the asteroid belt turn into a planet? Eventually? NEVER! (technically there is barely enough material even for a small planet.) Let me reiterate: ALL OBSERVABLE SCIENCE shows matter decaying - not organizing.
1. to separate day from night
2. for signs
3. for seasons, days & years (count passing time)
4. to give light on the earth
Why would God create something for us not to marvel at? Of course, we can't see all of God's marvels at once (close stellar objects, distant stellar objects) because we wouldn't appreciate nor even perceive (with our limited minds) the vast complexity of what we behold. A parallel of equal magnitude is the inward depth of complexity in cells and atoms.
HOW OLD WAS ADAM WHEN HE WAS CREATED?
When did the first fruit trees produce fruit for Adam & Eve to eat? How long did they have to wait for food to ripen??
This is called "apparent age." Adam & Eve could walk & talk and pick fruit from trees. They were not toddlers! But they were 1 day old! The same applies with the universe! Stars seem far away, but, how long did it take for the light to reach earth?? God could have certainly made it shine on earth. (as stated above.)
If life came from other planets, where did that life come from??? This is just putting off the argument WAY WAY back in the past so you forget abt it. So have you asked this question? If not, you fell for Satan’s lie too!