Tweet
Published in the Christian Chronicle - By S. E. Ray - 12/18/06
Even if a person does not find that they are interested in astronomy, no one can help but look in awe at the clear night sky dotted endlessly with pinholes of light from the far reaches of the universe. The sheer volume of celestial bodies coupled with their dramatic distances is more than the mind can comprehend. Many might stop and praise God for His power and majesty; however, there are those who choose to box up the origin of the universe in a series of secularist theories.
In our solar system alone, we have nine planets (Pluto is now questioned) and, at last count, sixty moons. It also has many asteroids and several comets that maintain a path. The planets consistently circle the sun, and the moons circle the planets in an orchestrated motion of precision. Moons maintain a close proximity to the planets they orbit with little or no deviation. One might think they should lose orbit and fly apart or collide into one another. Yet everything is held in a perfect harmony by the laws of mathematics, laws of gravity, gases and compounds, magnetic fields, multitudes of reactions and other forces. Behind all our scientific observations, one might consider an omnipotent designer who not only created but maintains the grand creation which is far too lofty for our mortal minds to grasp.
There are those who maintain through the study or cosmology, that the universe was self-propagated by means of a gaseous explosion called the Big Bang Theory. It should be noted that the educational system maintains this position, and by the time a child is 15, they have been fully indoctrinated with the understanding that the universe was generated by interdependent events less a supernatural being. One does not have to be a student of Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter to be able to quickly discover the undisputable errors that result from the evolutionist’s position on creation.
To one of the Manhattan Project scientists, George Gamow, the detonation of an A-bomb constituted an analogy for the origin of the universe: if an A-bomb can, in a hundred-millionth of a second, create elements still detected in the desert years later, why can't a universal explosion lasting a few seconds have produced the elements we see today, billions of years later? Gamow had a tremendous flair for publicizing and popularizing his own theories, a flair that, within a few years, would establish his element theory - soon to be dubbed the Big Bang.
The Big Bang Theory Generalized
The standard model of cosmology refers to the event, between 8 and 15 billion years ago, in which the universe was born in a cataclysmic explosion. In the aftermath, planets, stars, and galaxies slowly formed as the primordial elements cooled and the universe expanded. According to the big bang theory, the universe had a definite beginning and continues to expand. Neither time nor space existed before that event, indeed, there was no "before" the big bang.
Theorists admit that they can find no connection to plot the course from the ordered universe of the Big Bang to the clumpy, imperfect universe of today. As one leading theorist, George Field of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, put it, "There is a real crisis". Cosmologists, with very few exceptions, have either dismissed the Big Bang as faulty, or have insisted that minor modifications of Big Bang theory will reconcile "apparent" contradictions. Bear in mind 'Big Bang' isn't one theory, but a constant stream of them as additional patches, sometimes contradictory, are added to try to overcome experimental refutations.
In 1889 Samuel Pierpont Langley, a famed astronomer, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and soon to be the one of the pioneers of aviation, described the scientific community as "a pack of hounds ... where the louder-voiced bring many to follow them nearly as often in a wrong path as in a right one, where the entire pack even has been known to move off bodily on a false scent." When scientists are specialized," Nobel laueate Hannes Alfven comments, "it's easy for orthodoxy to develop. The same individuals who formulate orthodox theory enforce it by reviewing papers submitted to journals, and grant proposals as well. From this standpoint, I think the Catholic Church was too much blamed in the case of Galileo - he was just a victim of peer review."
To avoid a complex column, more so than it already is, one might aptly quote Eric J. Lerner who wrote "The Big Bang Never Happened" in 1991. "The Big Bang fails scientifically because it seeks to derive the present, historically formed universe from a hypothetical perfection in the past. All the contradictions with observation stem from this fundamental flaw." Basically, he acknowledges the fundamental flaw in all evolutionistic positions. It took no great insight to realize that if the Big Bang theory was basically wrong, as had been thought as recently as the early sixties, then these researchers were simply wasting time and talent.
The annual number of cosmology papers published skyrocketed from sixty in 1965 to over five hundred in 1980, yet this growth was almost solely in purely theoretical work. The tremendous growth of the theoretical side inevitably biased the entire field against observation, which became secondary to the "real" work of manipulating equations. A challenge to the Big Bang theory would threaten the careers of several hundred researchers and by the end of the seventies virtually no papers challenged the Big Bang in any way.
Entropy, or the 2 Law of Thermodynamic has a couple variations, one which essentially states all matter and energy continually moves from complex to simple, not simple to complex. All things are in a state of decay or depreciation. For evolution to work, all matter must transverse that position. Entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. In other words, in any closed system, objects are getting more and more mixed. Mixtures do not "unmix" by themselves. The law can be defined as saying "Energy spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused or dispersed and spread out." The law not only addresses matter but also energy. Both are immutably combined and is how the universe works.
Today, Cosmology remains firmly entangled with religion views. From theologians to physicists to novelists, it is widely believed that the Big Bang theory supports Christian concepts of the Genesis account. There have been many attempts over the years to harmonize the Genesis account of creation with accepted geology (and its teaching of billions of years for the age of the earth), such as ‘theistic evolution’ and ‘progressive creation’ or by what is known as the 'Gap Theory.' The Big Bang of the astronomers is simply the scientific version of Genesis, a universe created in an instant, therefore the work of a creator. Ever since 1951, when Pope Pius XII asserted that the Big Bang supports the doctrine of creation ex nihilo, Catholic theologians have used it in this way.
To many in the Judeo-Christian tradition, the idea of a universe infinite in time and space is not allowed for the same reasons Augustine argued two millennia ago: infinity is exclusive to the deity, and thus prohibited for the material universe. To say that the universe is unlimited is to obscure a crucial difference between God and nature, and thus to advocate pantheism - the idea that nature itself is inherently divine and, perhaps, needs no God. Thus a belief in an infinite cosmology is heretical. Such reasoning is intimately linked to the arguments used against Nicholas of Cusa, Copernicus and Giordano Bruno hundreds of years ago.
[See photo of star field below: The Hubble Space Telescope tried photographing a tiny patch of "empty" sky, 1/30th of the diameter of the full moon, approximately the amount of sky covered by a grain of sand held at arms-length. This image is said to be looking back 13,000 million years, almost to the beginning of time.]
Because God is infinite in power, and wisdom, there’s no doubt He could have created the universe and its contents in six seconds, or six minutes, or six hours—after all, ‘with God nothing shall be impossible’ (Luke 1:37). Insisting on six ordinary Earth days of creation is not limiting God, but limiting us to believing that God actually did what is written by inspiration in Genesis. Also, if God created everything in six days, like the Bible says, then surely this reveals the power and wisdom of God in a profound way—Almighty God did not need eons of time! However, the billions of year’s scenarios diminish God by suggesting that mere chance could generate matter from nothing.
Even if a person does not find that they are interested in astronomy, no one can help but look in awe at the clear night sky dotted endlessly with pinholes of light from the far reaches of the universe. The sheer volume of celestial bodies coupled with their dramatic distances is more than the mind can comprehend. Many might stop and praise God for His power and majesty; however, there are those who choose to box up the origin of the universe in a series of secularist theories.
In our solar system alone, we have nine planets (Pluto is now questioned) and, at last count, sixty moons. It also has many asteroids and several comets that maintain a path. The planets consistently circle the sun, and the moons circle the planets in an orchestrated motion of precision. Moons maintain a close proximity to the planets they orbit with little or no deviation. One might think they should lose orbit and fly apart or collide into one another. Yet everything is held in a perfect harmony by the laws of mathematics, laws of gravity, gases and compounds, magnetic fields, multitudes of reactions and other forces. Behind all our scientific observations, one might consider an omnipotent designer who not only created but maintains the grand creation which is far too lofty for our mortal minds to grasp.
There are those who maintain through the study or cosmology, that the universe was self-propagated by means of a gaseous explosion called the Big Bang Theory. It should be noted that the educational system maintains this position, and by the time a child is 15, they have been fully indoctrinated with the understanding that the universe was generated by interdependent events less a supernatural being. One does not have to be a student of Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter to be able to quickly discover the undisputable errors that result from the evolutionist’s position on creation.
To one of the Manhattan Project scientists, George Gamow, the detonation of an A-bomb constituted an analogy for the origin of the universe: if an A-bomb can, in a hundred-millionth of a second, create elements still detected in the desert years later, why can't a universal explosion lasting a few seconds have produced the elements we see today, billions of years later? Gamow had a tremendous flair for publicizing and popularizing his own theories, a flair that, within a few years, would establish his element theory - soon to be dubbed the Big Bang.
The Big Bang Theory Generalized
The standard model of cosmology refers to the event, between 8 and 15 billion years ago, in which the universe was born in a cataclysmic explosion. In the aftermath, planets, stars, and galaxies slowly formed as the primordial elements cooled and the universe expanded. According to the big bang theory, the universe had a definite beginning and continues to expand. Neither time nor space existed before that event, indeed, there was no "before" the big bang.
[See the planetary and sun comparion photos below, 1 thru 4. Designed by the author for the former forum, eternalpath.org, transferred to Discerning Truth.]
Theorists admit that they can find no connection to plot the course from the ordered universe of the Big Bang to the clumpy, imperfect universe of today. As one leading theorist, George Field of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, put it, "There is a real crisis". Cosmologists, with very few exceptions, have either dismissed the Big Bang as faulty, or have insisted that minor modifications of Big Bang theory will reconcile "apparent" contradictions. Bear in mind 'Big Bang' isn't one theory, but a constant stream of them as additional patches, sometimes contradictory, are added to try to overcome experimental refutations.
In 1889 Samuel Pierpont Langley, a famed astronomer, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and soon to be the one of the pioneers of aviation, described the scientific community as "a pack of hounds ... where the louder-voiced bring many to follow them nearly as often in a wrong path as in a right one, where the entire pack even has been known to move off bodily on a false scent." When scientists are specialized," Nobel laueate Hannes Alfven comments, "it's easy for orthodoxy to develop. The same individuals who formulate orthodox theory enforce it by reviewing papers submitted to journals, and grant proposals as well. From this standpoint, I think the Catholic Church was too much blamed in the case of Galileo - he was just a victim of peer review."
To avoid a complex column, more so than it already is, one might aptly quote Eric J. Lerner who wrote "The Big Bang Never Happened" in 1991. "The Big Bang fails scientifically because it seeks to derive the present, historically formed universe from a hypothetical perfection in the past. All the contradictions with observation stem from this fundamental flaw." Basically, he acknowledges the fundamental flaw in all evolutionistic positions. It took no great insight to realize that if the Big Bang theory was basically wrong, as had been thought as recently as the early sixties, then these researchers were simply wasting time and talent.
The annual number of cosmology papers published skyrocketed from sixty in 1965 to over five hundred in 1980, yet this growth was almost solely in purely theoretical work. The tremendous growth of the theoretical side inevitably biased the entire field against observation, which became secondary to the "real" work of manipulating equations. A challenge to the Big Bang theory would threaten the careers of several hundred researchers and by the end of the seventies virtually no papers challenged the Big Bang in any way.
Entropy, or the 2 Law of Thermodynamic has a couple variations, one which essentially states all matter and energy continually moves from complex to simple, not simple to complex. All things are in a state of decay or depreciation. For evolution to work, all matter must transverse that position. Entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. In other words, in any closed system, objects are getting more and more mixed. Mixtures do not "unmix" by themselves. The law can be defined as saying "Energy spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused or dispersed and spread out." The law not only addresses matter but also energy. Both are immutably combined and is how the universe works.
Today, Cosmology remains firmly entangled with religion views. From theologians to physicists to novelists, it is widely believed that the Big Bang theory supports Christian concepts of the Genesis account. There have been many attempts over the years to harmonize the Genesis account of creation with accepted geology (and its teaching of billions of years for the age of the earth), such as ‘theistic evolution’ and ‘progressive creation’ or by what is known as the 'Gap Theory.' The Big Bang of the astronomers is simply the scientific version of Genesis, a universe created in an instant, therefore the work of a creator. Ever since 1951, when Pope Pius XII asserted that the Big Bang supports the doctrine of creation ex nihilo, Catholic theologians have used it in this way.
To many in the Judeo-Christian tradition, the idea of a universe infinite in time and space is not allowed for the same reasons Augustine argued two millennia ago: infinity is exclusive to the deity, and thus prohibited for the material universe. To say that the universe is unlimited is to obscure a crucial difference between God and nature, and thus to advocate pantheism - the idea that nature itself is inherently divine and, perhaps, needs no God. Thus a belief in an infinite cosmology is heretical. Such reasoning is intimately linked to the arguments used against Nicholas of Cusa, Copernicus and Giordano Bruno hundreds of years ago.
[See photo of star field below: The Hubble Space Telescope tried photographing a tiny patch of "empty" sky, 1/30th of the diameter of the full moon, approximately the amount of sky covered by a grain of sand held at arms-length. This image is said to be looking back 13,000 million years, almost to the beginning of time.]
Because God is infinite in power, and wisdom, there’s no doubt He could have created the universe and its contents in six seconds, or six minutes, or six hours—after all, ‘with God nothing shall be impossible’ (Luke 1:37). Insisting on six ordinary Earth days of creation is not limiting God, but limiting us to believing that God actually did what is written by inspiration in Genesis. Also, if God created everything in six days, like the Bible says, then surely this reveals the power and wisdom of God in a profound way—Almighty God did not need eons of time! However, the billions of year’s scenarios diminish God by suggesting that mere chance could generate matter from nothing.
Attached Files