Skip to comments.Creation Conversion: The Turning Point (Spike Psarris)
Posted on 06/19/2014 8:22:04 AM PDT by fishtank
Creation Conversion: The Turning Point
Last month in our second Creation Conversion article, Dr. Vernon Cupps described how he came to a young-earth view of creation after he took the time to investigate the actual scriptural, observational, and experimental evidence. Heres another conversionthis time from Spike Psarris in the field of astronomy.
I was an atheist and an evolutionist well into my adult years, working as an engineer in the military space program. One day a Christian co-worker challenged me on my atheism: You believe in the laws of physics, dont you?
Yes, we use them here every day, I replied.
Then how do you reconcile them with the Big Bang? He didnt explain what he meant, but he didnt have toI suddenly realized that fundamental physics and the Big Bang model dont get along very well. This was a mental version of scales falling off my eyes as I realized I believed mutually incompatible things. I was surprised, and wondered: Why couldnt I see this problem before?
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
After almost a year of doing this, eventually I had to admit that the evidence (scientific, historical, etc.) did not agree with my atheism. Instead, the biblical account of history was true. I didnt like this, though. If the Bible were true, then I was a sinner who deserved judgment. But I had to admit that this is where the evidence led.
After struggling with this for a while, I finally realized that yes, I am a sinner. And God knows my sin better than I do. But He also loves me enough to have sent His Son to pay for it in my place. I realized that, truly, the gospel is Good News. What better news could there be? At that point, I accepted the Lord and became a Christian.
There are many people who believe in creation because they are Christians. I am one for whom the opposite sequence is trueI became a creationist first, and a Christian afterward.
* Mr. Psarris has a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Massachusetts, and was formerly an engineer in the United States military space program. For more information, visit his website at
Cite this article: No Author. 2014. Creation Conversion: The Turning Point. Acts & Facts. 43 (6).
ICR article image.
Spake Psarris website
The accidental orbital capture of objects is rubbish or we would have thousands of captured asteroids in orbit around the earth. As it is, satellites need periodic adjustments to stay in orbit.
“As it is, satellites need periodic adjustments to stay in orbit.”
You do realize that the earth’s rotation is slowing and the moon is moving farther away? Without adjustments we are doomed.
Items 65 thru 68 from: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Evidence of recent volcanic activity on Earths moon is inconsistent with its supposed vast age because it should have long since cooled if it were billions of years old. See: Transient lunar phenomena: a permanent problem for evolutionary models of Moon formation and Walker, T., and Catchpoole, D., Lunar volcanoes rock long-age timeframe, Creation 31(3):18, 2009. See further corroboration: At Long Last, Moons Core Seen; http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/01/at-long-last-moons-core-seen.html?rss=1
Recession of the moon from the earth. Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity (Roche limit) at less than a quarter of their supposed age.
The moons former magnetic field. Rocks sampled from the moons crust have residual magnetism that indicates that the moon once had a magnetic field much stronger than earths magnetic field today. No plausible dynamo hypothesis could account for even a weak magnetic field, let alone a strong one that could leave such residual magnetism in a billions-of-years time-frame. The evidence is much more consistent with a recent creation of the moon and its magnetic field and free decay of the magnetic field in the 6,000 years since then. Humphreys, D.R., The moons former magnetic fieldstill a huge problem for evolutionists, Journal of Creation 26(1):56, 2012.
Ghost craters on the moons maria (singular mare: dark seas formed from massive lava flows) are a problem for the assumed long ages. Enormous impacts evidently caused the large craters and lava flows within those craters, and this lava partly buried other, smaller impact craters within the larger craters, leaving ghosts. But this means that the smaller impacts cant have been too long after the huge ones, otherwise the lava would have flowed into the larger craters before the smaller impacts. This suggests a very narrow time frame for all this cratering, and by implication the other cratered bodies of our solar system. They suggest that the cratering occurred quite quickly. See Fryman, H., Ghost craters in the sky, Creation Matters 4(1):6, 1999; A biblically based cratering theory (Faulkner); Lunar volcanoes rock long-age timeframe.
“Evidence of recent volcanic activity on Earths moon “
No evidence exists ...
Earth did capture thousands of asteroids. They all eventually smashed into the moon or the earth. Why do you think there are a bazillion craters visible on the lunar surface? The earth would look the same if not for erosion.
The author is referring to the capture of celestial objects in perfect orbit, not simply smashing into the planet.
The first real change in my opinions bout old earth and young earth creationism came about when granite and polonium halos were discussed. One of the funniest arguments against polonium halos ended with “this hypothesis cannot accommodate the many alternative lines of evidence that demonstrate a great age for the Earth.” If one fact shows up the theory, maybe those other lines of evidence need to be reviewed.
The kicker for evolution was the fact that once a new species (change in chromosome number) occurred, who the heck did it mate with. Hopeful monsters aside, the mathematics alone make it impossible.
” No plausible dynamo hypothesis could account for even a weak magnetic field, let alone a strong one that could leave such residual magnetism in a billions-of-years time-frame.”
Depends on your definition of ‘plausible’. A few decades back there was no plausible explanation for the sun lasting more than a few thousand years because it did not contain enough fuel to burn longer than that.
Your statements contradict each other. What percentage of asteroids could attain a perfect orbit since even our satellites need adjustments?
Scientist's tell us that ... "The Moon flew off its parent after a giant impact. Because it stayed small, cold and undisturbed it gives a better picture of the past than does its parent. ... The Earth's turmoil makes it harder to trace its own origin. It's oldest rocks, found in Greenland and Western Australia are just under four billion years old."
Can you provide the source of your Moon volcanic activity evidence?
Scientist’s tell us that ... “The Moon flew off its parent after a giant impact. Because it stayed small, cold and undisturbed it gives a better picture of the past than does its parent. ... The Earth’s turmoil makes it harder to trace its own origin. It’s oldest rocks, found in Greenland and Western Australia are just under four billion years old.”
Easily one of the most laughable theories purported by ‘scientists’
2 links regarding lunar volcanic activity:
I found this at www.lei.usra.edu
“What evidence is there of volcanism on other planets?
Moon:Â Â Our closest neighbor has small volcanos, fissures (breaks in the crust), and extensive flows of basalt, a fine-grained dark volcanic rock. The large dark basins that you can see on the Moon are the maria â areas of these lava flows. However, all these volcanic features are old. There are no active volcanic features on the Moon. Most of the volcanic activity took place early in the Moon’s history, before about 3 billion years ago. The most recent lava flow occurred about 1 billion years ago.”
Yeah, that’s my point. They won’t be captured in earth orbit.
From my creation.com link in prior post:
How long has the moon been receding?
Friction by the tides is slowing the earths rotation, so the length of a day is increasing by 0.002 seconds per century. This means that the earth is losing angular momentum.7 The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum says that the angular momentum the earth loses must be gained by the moon. Thus the moon is slowly receding from Earth at about 4 cm (1½ inches) per year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. The moon could never have been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit, because Earths tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it. But even if the moon had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance.8 NB: this is the maximum possible agefar too young for evolution (and much younger than the radiometric dates assigned to moon rocks)not the actual age.
The other 2 articles also were both less than 1 billion years, 100 million and 800 million respectively.
For my money, I’ll rest w/ God’s Biblical statements and say actually only 6 thousand years old and quite likely the volcanic activity followed from Noah’s flood and Earth remnants from the fountains of the great deep hitting the moon. ymmv. :’)
Center for Scientific Creation - In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
No, my statements make perfect sense. Astrophysics theory says that planets capture passing celestial objects by the law of mutual gravitational attraction. Yet, besides the moon, all objects in earth orbit are artificial satellites, i.e. no captured asteroids are in orbit. They either pass by or crash into the earth because the probability of them passing at just the right speed, distance, and angle to be captured into permanent earth orbit is essentially zero.
OK, sorry it appears I misunderstood your statements.
By the same token did you misunderstand the author?
Meanwhile, I was taking some graduate-level physics classes. I started to notice more and more incompatibilities between physics and my evolutionary beliefs. For example, in an astrodynamics class we modeled orbital insertions (where one object gets gravitationally captured and goes into orbit around another). This requires precise maneuvering and the shedding of a lot of energyour spacecraft can enter orbits around other planets only because they have thrusters, and thus can steer and brake. But objects like asteroids lack this ability, so theyre extremely unlikely to be captured gravitationally into stable orbits around other objects.
From your second link:
"The researchers hint that they may also be volcanic in origin."
"Without further studies its difficult to determine the exact origin and ages of these lunar formations."
Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/94583/scientists-suggest-evidence-of-recent-lunar-volcanism/#ixzz357AraZzK
Thank you for your research findings, but ... one thing I learned in my engineering years is that beliefs belong in church.
Then you should realize some common sense from your engineering years that the 4 thermodynamic laws supercede and override any and all evolutionary claims with the lone possible exception of natural selection. If you really start thinking about deep-time from an Occam’s razor point-of-view you’ll also see just how many natural clocks indicate short ages in thousands of years rather than millions and billions and how impossible long ages are too. Mostly though you’d need to see how willingly scientists are just plain wrong [i.e. global warming is just the tip of the iceberg].
Also code does not write itself. Just the fact that you can converse with others of your kind in so many ways and on so many levels indicates pre-programmed skills provided to mankind from a higher intelligence. But if that’s not convincing enough for you, just start analyzing the DNA genetic code and see if that does not also indicate programming at an even higher intelligence level. My God even provided most all of the lower life forms skills that still make mankind envious to be able to re-produce [i.e. the dolphins sonar or the bird and insects navigation abilities].
Mankind merely copies and mimics intelligence and knowledge derived from all the creative power in the entire universe from a single source - the Great I Am.
Or wait until your death to be reconciled to these obvious facts and left stammering for why you chose zero accountability to the one true God and full accountability for your sins.
Also there are plenty of false beliefs both inside and outside of the church.
Just read the Bible if you desire to find the one source of absolute truth.
For even God said ‘The only true religion is one that takes care of widows and orphans AND is not corrupted by this world’ = there is no true religion, bub, just faith = imputed righteousness from the one and only True Redeemer of man’s soul, Jesus Christ.
I prefer Ayn Rand's litany about absolutes.
Reality is an absolute, existence is an absolute, a speck of dust is an absolute and so is a human life. Whether you live or die is an absolute. Whether you have a piece of bread or not, is an absolute. Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looters stomach, is an absolute.
Paraphrasing Ayn Rand, twisting your acceptance of supernatural absolutes has forced you to reject the absolute of nature.