I. INTRODUCTION
A. Because it is important to our enemies:
"Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus' earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the Original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of God. Take away the meaning of his death. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what Evolution means, then Christianity is nothing."
Elsewhere he says: "If evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved. But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam's sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a fiction, then we have no need for a Savior".
C. If there was no first Adam, and this is also what evolution means, then there is no need for a second Adam. In fact, there can not even BE ANY ADAM.
D. And Psalm 11:3 says:
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? "
E. What is the foundation of the Gospel? The Book Of Genesis!
F. What is the foundation of this country? The Book Of Genesis! (...all men are CREATED equal....endowed BY THEIR Creator with certain inalienable rights...)
G. What is the foundation for marriage, the sanctity of life, the family, governments, laws, right and wrong-GENESIS!
H. God is first of all Creator in the Bible to us before He is anything else. People like to complain in this country about crime, corruption, the breakdown of the family, etc. and they all have their opinions as to why this happens but, you see, Satan has subtly introduced his poison to get people to reject the God OF THE Bible by "scientifically" removing any need for Him to explain origins. Scientists, now rejecting God, have to come explain away the existence of the Creation, as well as it's meaning. This has now been shown through 20th Century technology to be impossible. But what does man do? As Henry Morris says, The Bible Has The Answer:
I. The theories presented as fact in the last twenty years alone in Evolutionary circles prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the validity of this verse.
The Humanist Manifesto could have started out with any other subject, such as the goal to fight environmental problems, prevent wars, etc. But what do they start with? THE ORIGIN QUESTION! Why did they have to add the part about "not created"? To reveal the real attack-Genesis! Even non-Christian Michael Denton has this to say about compromise:
1. Now remember that this man is in no way, shape or form a Creationist. He hits the nail right on the proverbial head. He (maybe) has a better chance to see the forest for the trees, because he is an outsider looking in. Most Christians don't see this remarkable observation made by a non-Christian. He is absolutely correct. This compromise in Genesis is the main cause of unbelief, spiritual paralysis, stunted growth, etc. in the church today. If Genesis is not speaking authoratively on scientific matters relating to origins, or anything for that matter, then the rest of the Bible cannot be trusted. This cannot be emphasized enough.
Harlow Shapley(1885-1972) has this to add:
2. The Bible is not a science book. However, when dealing with scientific issues, material, etc., the Bible speaks with ultimate authority, not alleghory. Whenever it touches physics, zoology, astronomy, botany, archeology, chemistry, genetics, etc., it can be trusted to be correct. Not one single piece of data ever discovered (which is reliable data, as opposed to theoretical data) has ever disproven a single dot or tittle of scripture. Remember that!
EVOLUTION: MATTER, ENERGY ETERNAL
MATTER, ENERGY FROM NOTHING
SO WHAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE?
* EITHER THE MATTER, ENERGY OF THE UNIVERSE HAS ALWAYS EXISTED OR THEY HAD A BEGINNING.
* EITHER SOMEONE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE OR THEY WERE NOT.
* WITH EVOLUTION, THERE IS NO NEED FOR A CREATOR.
* WITH A CREATOR, THERE IS NO NEED FOR EVOLUTION TO HAVE OCCURRED.
1. The Hebrew word for day used in Genesis "Yom" is used 65 times wherein it means an age and 1200 times where it means a period of 24 hours. EVERY TIME that there is a number or number (ordinal) word like first, second, etc. it means this 24 hour day. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS.
2. The current Jewish year (2023) is 5782. This year is based on the Book Of Genesis and the meticulous record keeping of the Jewish people. It has been said that any Jew can trace his lineage back to the patriarchs and to Adam.
3. The Bible says very clearly that all death came from the fall of Adam and Eve. It also says that death is bad.
4. The Bible claims to be word of God 3000 times. If this is true, then God cannot lie. If he says that he Created the universe in six days, you can bank on it.
5. In the Bible, origins is important. How many times does God remind Israel of their roots, how many times does he remind them about how he took them out of Egypt? How many times does he say that we need to remember all of the things received from him?
6. That the origin of all Christian doctrine is in the Book of Genesis (the cross of Jesus, marriage, clothing, sin, redemption, death, the seven day week, Dominion).
7. Meaning of anything is tied to it's origin. The two dollars in your pocket does not mean much if it was given to you as opposed to earning it.
8. Satan only attacks important things, and The Book Of Genesis has been the number one attack for 130 years. If Evolution is not so important a tool to the Devil, then why are all of the pagan religions and cults based on it?
9. The fact that the Church is apathetic about origins is proof of his success. Most Christians, when asked about the subject of Creation vs. Evolution, either brush it off as being unimportant, feel that it is better left to the intellectual apologists in the Church, believe that Genesis is true and Evolution is false but cannot demonstrate why from science, or are actually Evolutionists themselves-a compromise from the start. These are more difficult to reach sometimes than the non-Christian Evolutionist.
10. Abortion is one example. The secular world has duped everyone, including the church that abortion is justifiable on a basis that few people you will ever meet in your life even know anything about! Discussed in week five, this concept is called Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny-a totally false claim.
Yet the seed is planted firmly, skillfully and unknowingly in the minds of the unsuspecting public. THE LIBERAL NEWS MEDIA IS ONLY ALL TOO WILLING TO OBLIGE. And, for us ignorance is no excuse.
A. Can be proven to be true, except to the one who refuses to believe it(willingly ignorant).
B. Fascinating facts about our God, our universe, our world, our neighbors, ourselves.
C. All of the information presented in this class can be checked out through careful investigation by any OBJECTIVE person. The key word is OBJECTIVE. Most of the information presented is NOT READILY available to the average person, so the investigation will be difficult at first, and it is certainly not available to the average student. This amounts to censorship, yet no one in the Church seems to mind.
D. It does not take a rocket scientist to learn enough about the theory of Evolution and Creation Science to be able to defend Genesis apologetically. Yet the average Christian will not even take the time to check out the facts. To say to an Evolutionist that you believe in the story of Adam and Eve, and yet not be able to tell them why-scientifically-only brings mocking. And this is not necessary, since there is more than enough information to demolish the argument of a Darwinian Evolutionist. If an Evolutionist can stand there and intimidate a Christian with his "theory", when upon a little investigation it would turn out that the Evolutionist has no facts for his "theory", and you do(only not at your disposal because you are unprepared), then there is something drastically wrong in the Church today.
A. What is Science?
1. Data is empirical(observed, experimented) without assumptions, unwarranted conclusions.
2. These tools(the senses), are the main tools necessary to tell evidence for Creation from Evolution. The difference between an arrowhead and a pebble on a beach is the same difference between design and chance in natural objects. Since there is an over abundance of design in the natural world, you then are left with the explanation of that design. This is where the real difference between the two models(creation and evolution) stands out.
3. What Science is not.
a. Opinions, beliefs, popular consensus.
b. It is not based on theories, but practical experience.
ONE ARGUMENT MADE IS THAT
B. At the time of early cars, England made it illegal to drive faster than four miles an hour unless there was a person with a red flag running in front of them.
C. Everyone laughed when Westinghouse wanted to stop a train using the wind. Yet today all forms of transportation use air brakes.
D. Mr. Charles Goodyear and his wife tried for eleven years to Vulcanize Rubber. Everyone called them "crazy". Today millions ride on Goodyear tires.
E. Zane Grey was told he would never be able to write. People today still read his books.
F. Musicians and critics mocked and laughed when Richard Wagner wrote music. But his compositions transformed the music world. The crowd was wrong.
G. "What is Radium?" the crowd jeered at Madame Curie. Today it is a valuable asset in fighting disease.
B. Microevolution: Change within kinds(dachsunds, great danes, poodles, labrador retrievers)
2. The very concept of evolution(a NATURALISTIC view of origins) is NOT just an attempt to explain the origin of everything, but rather to explain the origin of everything WITHOUT A CREATOR GOD!
A. Recent, Special, Ex Nihilo, "Fiat" Creation
B. RECENT is from the biblical belief that the earth was created only several thousand years ago, since that is literally what the Bible teaches. Also the fact that human written records only go back several thousand years.
C. SPECIAL because it is supernatural, as opposed to natural.
D. EX NIHILO because it was done from nothing. Nothing existed before the Creation. The materials did not even exist.
E. FIAT because it was done at God's command. He spoke and it happened. In fact, in Creation Science, there are three types of Creation Science which can be presented to the general public.
F. Are they valid scientific theories?
"although the personal philosophies of scientists vary, as scientists they usually proceed according to the rule that in science the only questions that are admissable are questions that can be answered in principle by observations and operations called experiments"
When discussing the Former Prime Minister of England's stand on whether we came from apes or angels, William Fix has this to say about evolution:
1. Speaking on the subject of an idea presented by a certain BS Haldane and a certain Sir Ronald Fisher about populations evolving rather than individuals:
3. Besides the fact that there are about six blocks worth of outdated science books in the Louvre library in France, one of the main things you will find upon investigating the Evolution model is that the proponents of the model never seem to agree about the "facts",
"One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, or let's call it a non-evolutionary view, was last year. I had a sudden realization for over twenty years I had thought I was working on evolution in some way. One morning I woke up and something had happened in the night and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it. That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled for so long. Either there was something wrong with me or there was something with evolutionary theory. Naturally, I know there is nothing wrong with me, so for the last few weeks I have tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people. The question is:
A. The point is simply this. Creationists also cannot agree on certain matters(death before Adam, the age of the universe, etc.) but we have an absolute standard to check our stand-God's Word. The Evolutionists only has yet another opinion. There is no checkpoint with the Evolutionist. The latest fad or buzzword in Evolution is the moving pillar upon which Evolution stands. Pretty shaky. But when we as Christians begin to accept the basic tenets of the theory of Evolution, are we not also exposing ourselves to middle ground? The Creationists will not favor much of your view since it is neither biblical nor scientific.
B. The Evolutionist says "you are not part of my camp" simply because his hypotheses all do not require a "Creator" God or an "Evolver" God.
C. But why would we want to be in the middle anyway?
And again,
E. People have the mistaken notion that Evolutionism spread because it is scientifically proven. There could be nothing farther from the truth. The fact is that in the last 100 years the facts have stacked up more against Evolutionism from all of the scientific disciplines that there is no excuse for it being presented as fact any longer-except the apathy of the church in this matter.
F. I might add that there were cases where they were also found to be completely INVALID. There are six blocks of outdated science books at the Louvre library in France.
William R. Fix puts it this way:
A. Understanding a model is very important in that it is the best and actually the only way to study ideas about the past. A theory will not do.
A. Theistic Evolution-belief in Evolution, but that God did it.
All theistic Evolution stems from an alleghorical interpretation of the Book Of Genesis. There are many problems with this, as will be shown in the comparison (or contrast)to scripture after the expose on the various theories. This list of theories is in no way exhaustive as there are so many, and more coming all of the time.
A. Day-Age Theory
2. Alleghorical interpretation of Genesis. The verses are considered poetic. This inevitably puts fossils before the curse.
3. This theory was first propounded first by Hugh Miller in The Testimony of The Rocks in the 1800's.
2. First Evolution occurs, then a catastrophe enters in to wipe out all of the earth, thereby making the fossils.
3. This puts death before sin, as well.
4. Those who believe in this theory believe that all Creation occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
5. Then the real(present) Creation after Genesis 1:2.
6. This idea was first brought forth by Thomas Chalmers, in a work called Natural Theology written in 1857.
2. Evolution is believed to have occurred according to the Darwinian model, only God stepped in to correct his "mistakes".
3. This theory gives long ages for earth.
4. Really Evolution with God, only not uniformitarianism.
| Theistic Evolution | Bible |
|---|---|
| a. Matter existed in the beginning. | a. Matter created by God. |
| b. Sun and stars before the earth. | b. Earth before the sun and stars. |
| c. Land before the oceans. | c. Oceans before the land. |
| d. Sun, earth's first light. | d. Light before the sun. |
| e. Contiguous atmosphere and hydrospheres. | e. Atmosphere between two hydrospheres. |
| f. Marine organisms, first forms of life. | f. Land plants, first life forms brought forth. |
| g. Fishes before fruit trees. | g. Fruit trees before fishes. |
| h. Insects before birds. | h. Birds before insects(creeping things). |
| i. Sun before land and plants. | i. Vegetation before sun. |
| j. Reptiles before birds. | j. Birds before reptiles. |
| k. Woman before man (genetics) | k. Man before woman. |
| l. Rain before man. | l. Man before rain. |
| m. "Creative" processes still continuing. | m. Creation is complete. |
| n. Struggle and death necessary - antecedents of Man. | n. Curse is man's fault. No death before The Fall of Adam and Eve. Death is bad. |
| o. The Genesis account of creation is alleghory, myth. | o. Creation account is literal. |
| p. Earth formed in presence of light. | p. Earth formed in darkness Gen 1:2. Then Received light(Gen. 1:3.) |
| q. Earth formed as hot, molten blob which cooled after billions of years. | q. Earth formed with water on the surface(cool). XVI. Atheistic Evolution |
A. Panspermia
This belief is gaining popularity with people like Carl Sagan and Fred Hoyle, among others. This theory is based on the belief that Martians dropped our ancestors off. Need I say more? Besides, this only serves to push the origin issue further out in space. "Who made the Martians?" one might ask. If no one did, then they must be eternal, and therefore God.
B. Punctuated Equilibrium or The Hopeful Monster Theory.
In this theory, the idea is simply that one day, a reptile layed an egg, and a bird came out. And this is science!!!! The argument is based from a LACK of fossil evidence. Whenever you argue for something from
a LACK of evidence, that is ludicrous. It should never be called science, and yet scientists were the first ones in this country to give birth to it.
1. This was invented by Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould:
"Well, it seems to me that they have accepted that the fossil record doesn't give them the support that they would value, so they searched around to find another model and found one. The support they get for that model comes from geneticists and population biologists who have trouble imagining how a large population could split. So they say it doesn't have to happen that way. A population was isolated by a catastrophe of some sort. Once you start applying that reasoning to the fossil record, you are doing what these people(Creationists) are saying you are doing. When you haven't got the evidence, you make up a story that will fit the lack of evidence."
C. Spontaneous Generation - POOF!
(Experiment by Pasteur-1861) The concept of Spontaneous Generation inherent in all atheistic Evolutionary theories. This is of necessity since there has to be a naturally explicable origin of all life. If there is no Creator, the life had to come from non-life somewhere along the line. If nobody did it, it had to happen by itself.
1. If you have ever raised kids, you know that when disasters happen with paint, food, toys, etc., and "nobody" did it, you of course know that SOMEONE is lying, since paint cans are not known to walk themselves out of the closet in the garage, open themselves, and spread themselves evenly on furniture.
With the advent of modern science and especially travel in space, the answers to the questions of the origin of the universe and even our own origin were long hoped to be answered. Now, years later, we have many, many more questions and very, very few(if any)answers.
1. All attempts in the evolutionary or naturalistic realm to explain the origin of the universe were directly related to the desire to discount the Genesis account. That is the main thrust, not just to be "scientific".
John 1:1 says:
1. The Big Bang Theory can simply be stated by saying that a ball once existed that was of infinite density, weight, gravity, and contained every particle of every type in the universe. This ball exploded, created a huge homogeneous cloud as it expanded(and is still expanding)and condensed to form the stars, planets, and life itself. This cycle was supposedly repeated over and over throughout time, or only happened once, depending on who you ask.
1. The Big Bang Theory is now old, outdated science, since so many of the top astronomers have found fault with it. They all basically agree that a revision or a total rewrite is necessary to explain the origin of the universe.
2. Why the reversal of this hypothesis? It is all very simple. In the years since the space programs in the USA and Russia started, the hopes have been dashed of ever finding the answer to the cosmogony question. The more they look out in space, the more questions are raised. The questions well outnumber the answers.
3. For instance, the Big Bang Theory states that the universe was once condensed into a ball the size of a softball, yet they never address the basic question of the day-"Who Made The Ball?" If no one made the ball, then the ball is eternal. If the ball is eternal, then it is God and will inevitably be worshipped. Does this sound like a concept from a Carl Sagan program? That's because it is.
4. The Big Bang Theory states that the Universe has done this exploding-shrinking-exploding process an innumerable amount of times. In thier quest for the Big Bang proof, the scientists have now discovered that there is not even enough energy to cycle more than once. In fact, the computer model done for the theory showed that the process would have had to be so precise, so intricately timed, balanced, etc. that any slight error would have destroyed the material or made it shrink all over again. With no scientist there to monitor this procedure(turning valves, checking temperatures, etc.), how could this process have happened? The answer is that it could not.
5. In his book The Big Bang Never Happened, Eric Lerner shows the fact that there is only ten percent of the gravity needed to make the Big Bang occur. A full TEN TIMES MORE GRAVITY is completely lacking!
6. According to the theory, there is an effect in the universe called the Doppler Effect. This we know. What we do not know is whether the colors of certain stars is from this effect or from the light particles naturally slowing down.
7. The Doppler Effect is the effect of sound or light or radio waves, etc. when an object is moving away from you. After a train passes by with the whistle on the sound seems to get lower in frequency, doesn't it? This is the Doppler Effect. The space for the waves to fit in is expanding is the object moves away and the waves seem to spread out farther, and consequently appear to be longer and at a lower frequency. They are actually not a lower frequency, but that is the effect of moving away.
8. Well, the cosmologists apply this to the light coming from distant stars. Since some stars appear to be red, they assume that the frequency of the light is going down. Red light has a lower frequency than white light, so they assume the object is moving away. And yet, you can not prove this, as the light could be slowing down from the bombardment of other particles in space, plus the unproven idea that light itself may be slowing down as entropy takes over. We just don't know.
9. The light could be red simply from slowing down and not at all from a star travelling away from us.
10. The point is that we do not know that the universe is expanding or standing still. The whole bundle of evidences for this is based on assumptions which easily, more likely and more logically (scientifically speaking) can be explained in terms of entropy-A UNIVERSAL LAW.
11. Do Explosions Create Order? The very precept of the Big Bang Theory is that this initial explosion created the stars, planets, life all the way to man himself. This is absurdity of the highest order, since anyone who has ever seen an explosion can attest to the fact that there is a mess afterwards. You do not get a car(a completely built one at that)if you take plastic, metal, glass, rubber, etc. and explode it, no matter how precisely you explode it, no matter how many times. In fact, the more you explode it, the more dust you get-surely nothing which resembles a car.
12. The problem with the Steady-State Theory is that no one has ever seen this place where the gasses and particles are supposed to originate from, nor has anyone any idea where it might be. The only explanation offered is that is must, of necessity, be very far away. This is because it has never been seen, once again an argument from lack of evidence.
13. There are many Laws in the Universe, and entire physics classes are frequently taught with emphasis on mainly the study of these laws, but here are a few.
D. The Laws of the Universe
To quote Dr. Henry Morris,
4. The tactic of trying to find a way to circumvent these and all natural laws through empty arguments is common in Evolutionary circles. This stems from the fact that these laws are totally against the theory. If these are laws, and they are, then Evolution in any way is impossible.
XVIII. The Nebular Hypothesis:
1734: Emanuel Swedenborg(Svedberg)Formed a new religion(new age) said that it all started out as a spinning nebula which cooled, contracted, spun faster(much like a skater when he or she pulls in the arms), resulting in a condensation of the nucleii, the center being the Sun.
1755: Immanuel Kant started with a non rotating nebula cloud which starts spinning, again for unknown reasons. The gravity forces the cloud to contract, spin faster, become shaped like a disc. This disc had a center condense to form the sun,m while the outside condensed to form the planets and moons.
1796: LaPlace again started the whole idea out with a rotating nebula, spinning faster, causing matter to be ejected from the rim. This matter forms a planet. This process is then repeated, eventually to fill the solar system with planets.
1890: George Darwin proposed that the fact that, since the moon was receding from the earth, the moon was caused by the earth spinning so fast in the past(rotating at a five hour day!) that this would cause the earth to be shaped like an oblate spheroid, much like it is today only much more exaggerated. This rotation forced the moon to be ejected from the earth.
1900: Thomas Chrowder Chamberlain and Molton invented the Planetesimal Hypotheses which says that a passing star removed the planets and moon from the sun. This material later condensed to form a solar system.
1917: Jeffries and Jeans came up with the Tidal Hypothesis, similar to the above.
1944: Von Weizsacker came up with a hypothesis similar to LaPlace's spinning nebula. The disc would form first a "proto-sun" in the center, then a sun. The eddies would form the planets after this.
1948: Whipple came up with the "Dust Cloud" hypothesis. This said that dust existed out in outer space, and later light particles would force this to contract to form the solar system.
1951: Kuiper had a Proto Planet Hypothesis similar to the one by Von Weizsacker above.
1. The problems with all of these are numerous to say the least, and yet the abandonment of the Big Bang from the findings in Astronomy in recent years may bring back the popularity of the Nebular Hypothesis, of necessity.
2. There is no answer to the most basic question of where the material came from in the first place. This is a question of origin, and a hypothesis that deals with the origin of something needs to address this first and foremost.
3. First of all, the very idea that, anything gaseous that is spinning will condense to form stars, planets and moons, goes beyond reason and the laws of physics. Any gas in outer space would tend to spread out, and it has never been shown that it would condense all by itself.
4. LaPlace's rotating nebula starts with a rotation of unknown cause.
5. The angular momentum of the planets is around 99 times larger than the sun, while the sun is supposed to have 99 times as much as the planets. This is a total reversal, and physically impossible if the hypotheses of the formation of the solar system are assumed to be correct. What this means is that any of the popular theories mentioned above, if they happened, left no evidence and defied the laws of physics.
6. Mr. Darwin's hypothesis of the spinning earth ejecting the moon has no evidence.
7. The densities of the planets vary, and this is an enigma to evolutionists, as they all supposedly originated from the same blob of matter.
A. They,re not all the same
1. The Theory of Evolution implies by it's very nature that the different celestial bodies are made of the same materials, in the same way. This is basic cosmogony rooted in the Big Bang Theory or The Steady-State Theory. If they all originated from the same "ball" or hydrogen-particle source, then this of course would be the case.
2. The problem is that this is not the case in outer space. The stars each seem to have a different makeup. Each one is unique.
3. In fact, the hope for the evolutionist for a long time was that they would find evidence of planetary systems out in space, and yet the sun is the only one ever found. Even the most recent exclamation of a planet found with another star turned out to be nothing more than a mathematical error in calculation.
B. Cluster Galaxies
1. The scientists discovered that there were stars in the heavens which were travelling away from a common point in relation to each other. They called them Cluster Galaxies. Some of these had only several galaxies in each, but many had millions of galaxies. So they tracked the stars'trajectories backward to thier point of origin by computer.
2. They also knew the speed at which the stars were travelling away from each other. Knowing how far apart they were and the speed at which they were moving, they calculated the length of time that would have passed before they were actually touching.
3. Some of the times calculated gave long ages of millions of years. But some of them turned out to be spreading out for only less than ten thousand years.
4. The fact is that at the rates that they are travelling, they should have been blown apart ages ago. Galaxies themselves are actually so tight together that they appear to have not been travelling for only a short time.
5. A perfect illustration for this is when you go to a parade and see them release balloons from a net. The balloons in this case are the stars. If you went to the parade and took a picture of balloons ten seconds after the release, the balloons would be fairly close. That is the picture of the stars we get. The evolutionists are essentially saying that the picture was taken almost eight and a half hours after the release.
6. The problem is even worse because the stars are known to not have sufficient energy to hold together. 80-90% of the mass needed for that amount of gravity is lacking.
7. The maximum age calculated was 2-4 million years. This age is not acceptable to the theory of evolution in any way.
8. There was also a hope that what would be known as field galaxies would be found in abundance, since they assumed that the universe was old. No field galaxies found.
9. The main problem was that they needed to find out what exactly was holding it together. There was obviously a problem with mass. IT WAS MISSING! They postulated that there was hydrogen clouds-either hot, cold, or warm. None of any temperature.
10. They searched for black holes to find the missing mass. They got the same result. None were found. Besides, many of these would be needed needed to satisfy problem. On top of that, black holes would eat galaxy entirely.
11. Again, the best solution is to take it at face value.
"The stars are diverging from a common point so fast that in some cases if thier motion were projected backwards to this common point, the cluster could have originated only several thousand years ago....We have many star clusters that are disintegrating so rapidly that thier ages can in no way be on the order of a billion or billions of years."
1. Comet core is a small, "dirty iceberg"?
2. There is an effect in nature called the Poynting-Robertson effect. An example is the difference between walking and standing in the rain with an umbrella. When you stand, the rain appears to be coming straight down on you(provided the wind is not blowing). But when you walk or run, the Rain appears as though it is falling sideways into your face. The same thing happens in outer space.
3. The object moving in place of you is the comet, the object coming at it is the photon, or particle of light emanating from our own sun or nearby star.
4. The sun and the other stars act as "solar janitors". The particles they emit(photons) slow down the comets advance and cause the tail on the end of the comet. This may not sound like a lot for a little particle of light, but consider the fact that the only reason that you see them is that these particles are affecting the comet in this manner.
5. Many of these comets have a life span of millions of years. But five million of these have a life span of 1500-10,000 years.
D. There are many explanations from the evolutionists of why they exist:
1. Volcanoes in space spew them out. None of these volcanoes have ever been seen in outer space.
2. Jupiter "steals" them off of long term comets. But not enough pass by Jupiter for this idea to account for all of the short term comets.
3. "Oort's Cloud" releases them upon passing by our solar system. But Oort's cloud has never been found.
1. Ever wonder why the lunar L.E.M.s had lunar landing pods? The reason is that the scientists thought that the surface of the moon would be covered in anywhere from fifty to one hundred and eighty five feet or more of space dust.
2. This calculation was based on the amount of dust falling on the moon every year. (14 milllion tons) times the number of years of the existence of the moon-at that time around four and a half billion years.
3. July 20, 1969-"Eagle has landed". The lunar L.E.M. finally hits the lunar surface and hits solid ground strongly enough to actually bounce! Astronaut Neil Armstrong leaves the L.E.M. and steps out with the first footprint, now a classic.
4. Werner Von Braun was a creationist and a Christian who worked for N.A.S.A. He believed the Bible literally. He said that only several inches would be found there, because the earth was not too old. Braun was right!
5. Upon the discovery of the lack of dust on the moon, the evolutionists first calculated the age of the earth based on the amount of dust. The age turned out to be ten thousand years!
6. So what did the scientists do? Do you think that they accepted the facts literally which clearly speak of a young moon? No! They still insisted that the moon was old(evolution is a fact!) and proceeded to hypothesize on reasons, or rather excuses, for this problem.
7. The first thing that NASA said was that wind erosion had caused the dust to fall into the craters. But there is only one problem- there is no wind on the moon! When the astronauts planted the flags in the soil, it never waved- and it still hasn't!
8. But, even knowing this they looked in the craters anyway. The dust was not there.
9. Then they argued that not all Evolutionists believed this idea of lots of dust being found on the lunar surface, but......
10. Rand Mcnally says otherwise. They believed ths idea all the way into the late 1960's.
12. Evolutionists claim there is now known to be less dust accumulating.
13. But NASA, Smithsonian reports state otherwise.
14. The point is that the scientists practiced good science right up to the point of the evidence being taken at face value. As soon as the facts do not fit the model, then it should be realized that there is a problem with the model, not the evidence. If the test or experiment invalidates the theory, the theory goes.
15. The same amount of dust falling is true for earth. 14 billion tons/year falls to earth.
16. That equals 182 feet! But where is this dust? Meteoritic dust is very distinct-it has a high nickel content. Our earth soil is nothing like this, and it could be rightly argued that this is because of erosion. This argument will be dealt with later.
G. Retrograde Rotations
1. According to the theory of evolution, the planets came out of either a steady state of the universe or a huge explosion. Either one being the case, the planets are thought to have come out of the condensation of particles which previously had rotated in a swirl. This swirl would have all of the planets in the same orbit direction and on the same direction of rotation.
2. But Uranus, Venus and Pluto all spin in the wrong direction. This violates the both theories as they would not be a prediction of the Evolutionary model at all.
3. 1/3 of all planetary moons have same problem, with respect to the planets they orbit.
4. All of the sixty or so moons in our solar system should revolve in the same direction, but at least six revolve backwards.
H. Sun Is Shrinking
1. .1 percent per century.
2. 5 feet/hour.
3. 100,000 years ago-twice as large.
4. 1,000,000 years ago-no life on earth.
5. 20,000,000 sun would touch earth.
6. This shrinkage has been confirmed ever since 1836.
I. Moon Is, Too
1. Receding from earth.
2. Moon should be much farther away.
3. It should have only required half of the evolutionary postulated time to move this far from the earth, and by now would have been so small as not to be able to be seen.
J. Magnetic Fields Of Planets
1. The magnetic field of the earth has been studied for 140 years. Karl Gauss was the first scientist to study this in 1835. So far, the rate of the decay of the field has only been confirmed. The decay rate is 830-1400 years/half-life. The study was done by Dr. Thomas Barnes, a creationist and physicist.
2. The half-life of 830 years was discovered by the Magsat satellite launched in 1979 by NASA showed the half-life of 830 years. The documentation for this is "Magsat Down, Magnetic Field Declining", Science News, Vol. 117, No. 26, 1980, p. 407. Also "Initial Geomagnetic Field Model From Magsat Vector Data", Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 7, No. 10, (1980), pp.793-796.
3. What this means is that 1400 years ago the magnetic field was twice as strong.
4. And 2800 years ago it was four times as strong.
5. 7000 years ago it would have been about 32 times as strong. This strength is about the upper limit for the earth as life would have been impossible.
6. 10,000 years ago the magnetic field in the earth would have been the same as a magnetic star, and the amount of current flowing from the electricity required to hold the field would have made the planet HOT!
7. 30,000 years ago the surface temperature of earth would have been 5,000 degrees centigrade-enough to vaporize it all.
8. The evolutionists have once again gone to the "hypotheses board" to come up with explanations for this.
9. One idea is called the "Reversal Hypothesis" which says that there were times in the earth's history where reversals in the field occurred. The paleomagnetic fields found in rocks was presented as proof of this idea, but it has been shown that lightning strikes can do this. Rebuttal is Acts & Facts, "Impact" #100, October, 1981, Institute For Creation Research, San Diego, Ca.92021.
10. But this idea has no scientific basis:rocks can self-reverse, independent of earth.
11. The Van Ellen Radiation Belts depend on earth's magnetism.
12. If magnetism, goes down, radiation reaching earth goes up.
13. This affects Carbon 14 dating system.
14. The one thing holding the ozone layer in place and preventing it from escaping from our planet is the magnetic field. If the field can not hold it in place, it escapes into space. This is the one main reason for the loss of the ozone layer, not aerosol spray cans. The loss is very fast and it appears that the time is short for the earth, unless, as Dr. Carl Baugh says, "Whoever wound this thing up, has to come back and wind it up again"
15. To get documentation on this, there is the Keith L. McDonald and Robert H. Gunst paper entitled, "An Analysis of the Earth's Magnetic Field from 1835 to 1965", Environmental Services Administration Report IER 46-IES1(Washington, D.C.:U.S. Government Printing Office, U.S. Dept. Commerce, July 1967.
16. The Voyager II mission really speaks loudly of creation if models can predict data, as they should if accurate and true.
17. Uranus, Neptune Predicted by Creationist Russell Humphreys of the Institute Of Creation Research way back in 1984 to be 1 x 10^23/ampere-meters squared and 1x10^25/ampere-meters squared respectively. The Voyager II had not reached the planets yet.
18. Evolutionists predicted no magnetism left by now.
19. January 20, 1986 Voyager II Passes By Uranus.
20. Magnetic moment measured at 3.0 x 10^24!
21. August 25, 1989 Voyager II passes by Neptune.
22. 1.5 x 10^24 as a magnetic moment of Neptune.
23. Fluid interior indicates heat outflow for Neptune, so Evolutionists were close, too.
24. Uranus had no outflow at all like Neptune.
K. Year/Month/Day/Hour/Minute-Week?
1. Year= 365 days.
2. Month=30 days.
3. Day= 24 hours.
4. Hour= 60 Minutes.
5. Minute= 60 Seconds.
6. Week=?
a. Daniel 7:25
" For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
8. Gave Israel a pattern to follow.
9. Genesis 8:22 " While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. "
10. This also explains the 23 1/2 degree tilt of the earth's axis.
L. Earth's Location Is Exact
1. 93,000,000 miles from sun.
2. All other planets in wrong location for life.
M. Tilt Of Axis=23 1/2 Degrees
1. Four seasons.
2. They are also caused by revolution around sun.
N. Curvilinear Movement
1. Everything in space, including light, moves in a curved line.
O. Microwaves In All Directions
1. Once thought to be in only one direction.
2. Later found to be in all directions.
3. One reason for abandonment of Big Bang Theory.
P. Oxygen, Water On Earth
1. Water very rare in universe, stuff of life.
2. Oxygen 20% , Nitrogen 78% .Perfect. Less Nitrogen and lighting a fire would be very dangerous.
Q. Moons Of Planets Move In All Orbits
1. Not only different orbits but different planes.
R. The Sun As A Vacuum Cleaner?
1. Photons slow stellar dust over time.
2. Poynting/Robertson effect.
3. Walking in rain with umbrella as opposed to standing in the rain.
4. Rain is falling straight down, but appears to be going at you. Light radiation from the sun(photons) is the rain, particles in space are your umbrella.
5. Dust, gas should have been swept in a long time ago, but they are abundant.
S. Io, Io, It's Off To Jupiter We Go
1. Voyager-1979: flies by Io, a satellite of Jupiter.
2. Witnessed volcanic eruption.
3. Should be long dead and cold if billions of years old.
4. Example of smoking cigar in mountain cabin.
T. The Radioactive Moon
1. Also U-236 and Th-230 isotopes found on Io.
2. Short Half-life: shouldn't be there.
U. Saturn's Rings Show Instability
1. Turbulence found in rings.
2. Violate all laws of physics. After 4.5 billion years in the same place, they should be still long before now.
3. EXCEPT if they are young!
V. Uniqueness of the earth
1. Even though rate of rotation is slowing, any large rate of change would burn us up, or freeze us at night.
2. Temperature variations are at minimum, due to circular orbit.
3. Moon 240,000 miles away. If 1/5th distance, the continents would be wet twice/day from high tide.
4. Crust thickness few feet different would change absorption rate of free oxygen and carbon dioxide-killing animals, plants.
5. Atmosphere protects from radiation.
6. Atmosphere also protects from 20 million meteors, at 30 miles/second.
7. Earth perfect size, mass for gravity to allow us to live.
8. Many more reasons.
W. Temperature
1. As with Jupiter and the other planets viewed from telescopes and space probes, if the universe itself were billions of years old, then the temperatures of all things should have reached a steady state by now. The hot should have warmed the cool and vice versa. In fact, the universe is actually made up of fast cooling bodies intermingled with freezing temperatures.
X. Stars Turning On?
1. Have you ever gone outside and seen a new star that had collapsed and finally "turned on"? According to the Evolution Theory, the Universe was, is, and always will be evolving. This includes the formation of new stars. These stars are theoretically from the condensing of gases such as hydrogen which eventually get so hot that they light up, and-voila! You get a star.
2. And yet, in all the years of sweeping the heavens for the truth of the origin of the universe, no one has ever seen a star form or light up. This is also why you do not see stars "turning on". The occasional "twinkle" or "blinking" of a star is because of our atmosphere alternately covering and uncovering the stars.