Posted on 09/09/2009 4:13:32 PM PDT by FreedomOfExpression
Apologetics Press :: In the News
Don’t Bank Your Bucks in Big Bang Theory
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
For the past several decades, untold millions of students around the world have been taught that the Universe and everything in it is the result of a tiny ball of matter exploding 13-15 billion years ago (e.g., Hurd, et al., 1992, p. 61). Immediately following this “big bang,” the exploding material supposedly expanded in less than a millisecond to cause “most of the growth” of the 14-billion-light-year observable Universe (see Coles, 2007).
This expansion, called “inflation,” has purportedly been “well established as an essential component of cosmology” (Coles, 2007, p. 33, emp. added). In fact, in an article penned in 2007 titled “Boomtime,” Dr. Peter Coles recognized that the theory of “[i]nflation puts the ‘bang’ in the big bang” (p. 36). Now, however, scientists are inching closer and closer to the conclusion that “the theory seems to have failed” (Brooks, 2008, 198[2659]:31).
The journal New Scientist recently ran an article by Michael Brooks titled “Inflation Deflated” (2008, 198[2659]:30-33). In the article, Brooks admitted that “[i]nflation is arguably the most important theoretical idea in cosmology since the big bang” (p. 31). Inflationary theory has “suggested that the major problems in cosmology could be solved if the universe had blown up like a balloon, inflating faster than the speed of light in the moments after its birth” (p. 31, emp. added).
Yet now, the theory first proposed nearly 30 years ago to solve “major problems” with big bang cosmology, and the theory that has been advanced in classrooms all over the world as fact, is sheepishly “starting to look a little vulnerable” (p. 31). “[T]he theory seems to have failed,” wrote Brooks. Why? First, “there is the lack of any solid scientific idea for why or how inflation might have happened” (p. 32, emp. added).
Second, “satellite measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation...seem to contradict the predictions of inflation” (p. 31). In short, although Brooks and others believe it is still “too early to say that simple inflation is definitely on the skids” (p. 33), “the theory seems to have failed” (p. 31). Atheistic cosmology’s “best theory of the early universe is starting to look a tad insecure” (p. 30, emp. added).
That must surely be a depressing thought to atheists: their “best theory” for the origin of the cosmos is “insecure,” lacking “any solid scientific idea for why or how inflation might have happened.” A better alternative to ultimate origins is found in the first verse of the Bible: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth” (Genesis 1:1). “For He commanded and they were created” (Psalm 148:5). So, “[l]ift up your eyes on high, and see Who has created these things” (Isaiah 40:26).
REFERENCES
Brooks, Michael (2008), “Inflation Deflated,” New Scientist, 198[2659]:30-33, June 7.
Coles, Peter (2007), “Boomtime,” New Scientist, 193[2593]:33-37, March 3.
Hurd, Dean, George Mathias, and Susan Johnson, eds. (1992), General Science: A Voyage of Discovery (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall).
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3734
Come to think of it, the Big Bang theory conflicts with Darwin’s theory in that the imagined Big Bank event is nothing more than another twist to the seven-day Biblical creation story.
When considering infinity in a mathematical sense, astronomical observations are telling us that things have been — and will be — around for a very long time.
Enjoy the Darwinian ride ... It’s all we’ve got.
[[When considering infinity in a mathematical sense, astronomical observations are telling us that things have been — and will be — around for a very long time.]]
Actually that isn’t true- thosel inks I provided show the strong possibility that thigns are much younger than imagined- And not sure what astronomy has to do with Darwinism? Darwin’s theory can’t explain where DNA came from or where metainformaiton came from- only creation by an intelligent designer can
Why not by God?
“... not sure what astronomy has to do with Darwinism?”
On day number one in my long-ago Astronomy class, I learned that basic explanations as to astrnomical matters come from looking at our own Earth. The proof that our Earth is rotating, for instance, comes from observations on which way water swirls as it goes down a drain. North of the equartor, water rotates clockwise (CW); South of the equator it rotates CCW.
Carrying that a bit further, Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” has 14 chapters, 4 of which involve Geology and/or Geography.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.