Vast amounts of time don’t prove Darwinism. However, the converse does not follow. Short amounts of time, young ages, directly refute Darwinism. This is why Darwinists have worked so hard over the last half century to make anyone who believes earth and the universe to be, in fact, rather young look like a quack, a nut, or someone with an agenda.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomer, Astronomy, Binary Stars, Charles Darwin, Comet, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, energy, Evolution, High-Energy Stars, Hydrogen, Jan Hendrik Oort, Jan Oort, Methodological Naturalism, Oort cloud, Planetary science, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Solar energy theory, Solar System, Star Clusters, Stellar energy, Sun, The Universe
Posted by Gregg on Dec 27, 2009 in
apologetics,
Creation,
homeschooling
Because of the Hubble Constant, their math doesn’t even work out anymore. There are stars that are moving far too fast; stars that are far too distant, stars that are far too bright; etc., ad nauseam. Informed scientists know this. Many have abandoned the accepted theories and are in dedicated pursuit of the truth. Many others refuse to do so because of the metaphysical implications alternative theories present. The latter group has the loudest voice.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Architect, Charles Darwin, Christmas, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Designer, Evolution, Methodological Naturalism, New Year's Day, Objections to evolution, Religion and science, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Social Darwinism, Stephen Jay Gould, The Universe
Before I step into the primordial soup that is Chemical Evolution, which slips nicely down the logical slope into the quagmire of Abiogenesis, I must preface those future posts with some foundational data. This data is important for context. The foundational data we must examine has to do with the fallacy of Darwinist reification and the age of the earth. In this post, I will focus on reification.
Pin It
Tags: Abiogenesis, Age of the Earth, Charles Darwin, Chemical Evolution, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Evolution, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Modal logic, Mother Earth, Non-classical logic, Panspermia, Philosophical logic, Reification, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism
This post will conclude my look at the Darwinian take on the Birth of Stars by listing further scientific problems with the theory and concluding with the number one problem that is insurmountable for Darwinist believers.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Environment, Evolution, Galaxy, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Nuclear physics, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Space plasmas, Star, Stellar astronomy, Stellar evolution, The Big Bang
In my first few posts explaining some of the problems with Stellar Evolution, I detailed the logical problems with the theory and several scientific problems. One of the major conclusions I reached in my personal journey of discovery was that each and every single logical and scientific problem with the collective theories of Darwinian evolution amount to single limiting factors.
Any single limiting factor is enough to refute the entire theory.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Environment, Evolution, Galaxy, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Nuclear physics, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Space plasmas, Star, Stellar astronomy, Stellar evolution, The Big Bang
Steller evolution is the theory of the origin of stars, or how stars are born. The theories of stellar evolution can be largely separated into two categories. There are theories that fall into how stars “evolved” as part of the aftermath of the Cosmic Evolution brought about by the Big Bang, and there are other theories about how stars are “evolving” even today.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astrophysics, Charles Darwin, Chemical elements, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, energy, Evolution, Gas cloud, Gas clouds, Helium, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Nuclear physics, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Space plasmas, Star, Stellar astronomy, Stellar evolution
I will now disregard facts and reason once again in order to ASSUME that, contrary to logic and every known physical law:
1. the particles DID magically manage to move toward one another and
2. the particles COULD slow down and change directions.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Atom, Big Bang, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Environments, Evolution, Galaxy, Gas cloud, Gas clouds, Gas molecules, Giant gas clouds, Homeschool, Hydrogen gas, Large-scale structure of the cosmos, Man-Made Disaster, Massive energy, Methodological Naturalism, Physical cosmology, Physical law, Plasma physics, Proto-Stars, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Stellar astronomy
If I were a Darwinist, I would have the uncanny mental ability to ignore logic and facts that refute my theory of creation absent a Creator. In that case, I could focus exclusively on evidence that supports my theory and cling to that evidence with religious zeal and fervor.
In order to understand the Darwinist methodology, one must first understand some basic rules of the scientific process. Good science is simple. Good science is observable. Good science is predictive (models reality) and makes many specific, correct predictions. Good science relies upon very few assumptions and no arbitrary assumptions.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Evolution, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism
Matter, like air, can get hot. An absense of matter cannot get hot. Heat is energy. Energy is simply transformed matter. This is why we have the first law of thermodynamics. But nothingness is an absence of matter and and absence of energy. In point of fact, nothing is an absense of everything. Nothing can become neither dense nor hot. Things like air get hot, because air is matter, not an absence of it, and some of the matter in air can be transformed into energy which nothing cannot do since it is nothing.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Albert Einstein, Big Bang, Charles Darwin, Chemical explosion, Christian, Christian Faith, Cosmologists, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, energy, Evolution, Gas clouds, George Gamow, George Reeves, Homeschool, Man-Made Disaster, Matter, Methodological Naturalism, Nothing, Obsolete scientific theories, Particle physics, Physical cosmology, Physical law, Proto-Stars, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Steven W. Hawking, Superman, Thermodynamics, Universe
There are two main categories of problems with the Big Bang theory, the currently accepted theory of how the universe and all space, time, and matter came into existence. First, there are some clear logical problems. Second, there are thousands of scientific problems. The theory stands in clear violation of physical laws and celestial mechanics.
Pin It
Tags: Arthur C. Clarke, Big Bang, Cambridge University, Christian, Christian Faith, Cosmologists, Creation, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinists, Explosive energy, George Gamow, Georges Henri Joseph Éduard Lemaître, Hiroshima, Homeschool, Isaac Asimov, Methodological Naturalism, Nagasaki, National Geographic, Obsolete scientific theories, Pearl Harbor, Physical cosmology, Secular Humanism, Solar systems, Stephen W. Hawking, The Universe, Theory, Thomas Aquinis, Thomas Aquino