Creation Cosmologies Solve Spacecraft Mystery

ICR ^ | October 1, 2007 | Dr. Russell Humphreys

[GodGunsGuts]

Creation Cosmologies Solve Spacecraft Mystery by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.*

A groundbreaking new technical paper1 shows that several creationist cosmologies can explain the "Pioneer anomaly," a decades-old mystery about distant spacecraft. Big Bang theorists cannot use this solution, yet they have found no alternative explanation they can agree upon. Thus the Pioneer data are evidence against the Big Bang and for a biblical, young universe....

[GodGunsGuts]

ping

[MHGinTN]

Time to apply Feynman’s ‘excess radius’ don’tchaknow.

[dragnet2]

Institute for creation research?

>>Creation Cosmologies Solve Spacecraft Mystery by D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.*<<

Hmmm.

The author of this also seems to mention his "book" he recently wrote in the article.

This does not seem to be reported from an independent source, but rather from someone with an interest, or possibly conflict here.

[Coyoteman]

From the article:

The upshot is that God's stretching of the fabric of space increases the speed of radio waves, the basis of radar measurements. Recall that in the first paragraph of this article, I said that it was "radar-like signals between earth and these spacecraft" that showed the changes in the spacecraft speeds. In the technical paper I show that the speeding up of the radio waves reduces the "radar" distance of the spacecraft below what is expected in precisely the right way as to explain the apparent deceleration. The Pioneer anomaly is the first evidence we have that the expansion of space is occurring today and locally, not just in the past and far away.

You've got to be kidding.

This is silly even for creationists.

[GodGunsGuts]

You might want to read the following summary of Dr. Humphreys book (there are formatting problems, but it’s the best summary I have seen so far...although the book and video are much better). I think he’s on to what may turn out to be a major scientific breakthrough—GGG

http://www.jracademy.com/~warcholj/cyberchallenge2002/webdoc3.html

[ryan125]

Yes that is pretty silly. I don’t know why there is this whole debate about the “big bang” anyways. The new and increasingly common accepted theory is a “sling shot” effect where the universe has existed for ever and the expansion and contracting of space is merely based on where the universe is in a 10 dimensional multi-verse.

[GodGunsGuts]

==You’ve got to be kidding...This is silly even for creationists.

I’m all ears, Coyoteman. Break it down for us.

[GodGunsGuts]

See post number 6 for link. It might help explain where he’s coming from a little better—GGG

[dragnet2]

I have no desire to get into an argument with you, but I suspect, after a cursory review of the link, and the author, there seems to be a conflict, or special interest here in regards the site, and the author.

It does not appear this article was submitted or written by an independent, or unbiased entity.

[ConservativeMind]

I appreciate the attempt to use the Bible to explain such things, but it really seems hokey when, at the beginning of the report, the author states that because no one has come up with a scientific reason, that this automatically means it proves Creationism.

That is not a rational argument.

Just because no one has told me why my car is slowly leaking oil doesn’t mean fairies are tapping the bottom of it with spoons made from dandelions while nursing ants.

His argument makes about as much sense as that.

[GodGunsGuts]

Here’s a link to another summary and his technical paper mentioned in his original post:

Summary:

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5181/

Technical paper:

http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/journal_of_creation/vol21/5181creationist.pdf

[FreePoster]

So the expanse started near the center of the large ball of water as a thin spherical layer separating a planet-size ball of water inside it from the much larger amount of water outside it (Genesis 1:7)

Wow, which translation is that?

[GodGunsGuts]

See post 6 and post 12 for summary and technical paper. I have read his book, and I really think he’s on to something. You be the judge—GG

[ryan125]

“In all ?Big-Bang? hypotheses, every galaxy is moving away from every other galaxy in 3D” That is not what the big bang theory states at all, scientists have known since before the big bang theory that galaxy’s collide all the time. I’m not sure why he even added that.

He also tries to state that because earth is nearly at the center of the universe that means that it was designed. That is a horrible use of logic. Remember just because someone agrees with our point of view does not make them right. This guy is stretching science into something he seemed to have made up because it sounds right.

[GodGunsGuts]

It’s my fault. Having read his book I was assuming knowledge that those who have not read his book probably don’t have. If your intereste in pursuing it further, see links in post #6 and #12.

[BlueDragon]

Thanks for the ping. If at times you get no response from me, it's most likely I'm in lurking read only mode. If you don't get any response from me in a six month, or more period, that will mean either;

I'm dead,

or,

I went on a long fishing trip.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[LeGrande]

Do you seriously believe this stuff?

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Yes that is pretty silly. I don’t know why there is this whole debate about the “big bang” anyways. The new and increasingly common accepted theory is a “sling shot” effect where the universe has existed for ever . . . <<<

Forever implies there was no beginning to the universe, and no creator, which is illogical (and scientifically unprovable, to say the least). Reminds me of this verse:

“He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)

LOL! And this one:

“I [Jesus] am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.” (Revelation 21:6)