Science and Creation: Theories
"A bit of science distances one from God, but much science nears one to Him."
~ Louis Pasteur
I Appeal To Your Ability To Reason
Did you know that if you go look at your eye in a mirror, and tilt your head to the sides, that your eyeballs will twist to remain level and focused? It's pretty amazing isn't it? How do you control that!? Obviously you don't, thankfully it just happens, like many of our bodily functions. They just happen, and in most cases, if they didn't, we would not be alive. The eye is an amazing thing, with its focal points, muscles, rods, cones, etc... Not to mention converting the image from optical, to chemical, and then finally into electrical, so that our brain can interpret the world around us.
Take a look at this picture. Do you see the trochlea which holds the superior oblique in place? What a brilliant solution this is for a mechanical need! The trochlea acts like a pulley, and provides leverage in just the right place to enable the superior oblique muscle to quickly change direction. Now, according to evolution, this developed all on its own over millions, and billions of years. We will get into all of what is about to be mentioned, in detail throughout the following pages. What I challenge you to do as various topics and points are brought up, is to ask yourself, is that true, and how can we be certain that there isn't another variable at play, not being considered? This is exactly why the Scientific method is supposed to be followed. It is meant to keep experiments honest, the results unbiased, and the data pure. However, as we all know, if you want to change the outcome, all you have to do is control the inputs and just not bring up the other acting forces. Hopefully, your peers who hold your same view will support you, and silence anyone else who doesn't. No earthly thing is immune to corruption.
First, there was an explosion of nothing from which all matter and time began. Believing this requires faith because nobody saw it happen. Which, as a side note, this technically makes belief in evolution a religion for all those anti-religious scientist who don't realize they are in one themselves. After that occurred, rocks gathered and formed a planet we call Earth, even though after a certain size, space rocks tend to break each other down upon colliding, rather than clump together. Earth formed and happened to stop at just the right size, and also happens to be at the perfect 23.5 degree tilt for seasons. It is in just the right orbit, at just the right speed, with the perfect rate of spin, around just the right type of star, at the perfect size, brightness, and mass for ideal gravitational forces. We also happen to have the perfect size moon, it is also in just the right orbit to make the precise and ideal pattern for our tides, which fuel our storms, water the land so and we can breathe in what they breathe out in the atmosphere having the perfect balance of gases, temperatures, trade winds, and also a very important magnetic field. At some point in the beginning, a "primordial soup" just formed, with a caustic atmosphere that required oxygen to be present (which in the volumes needed actually kills things). Those amino acids accidentally formed out of 2000 amino acids to make useful proteins, of which, only 20 are used for life, so it was another improbable hope. Even though the odds of only those amino acids randomly forming to make one single protein are astronomically unfathomable, according to the model, not only did one form, but many did. So then proteins also built themselves because why not keep doing the impossible. Then the incredibly complex cell figured out how to make DNA, then write it, then read it, repair it, process it, and replicate it, all of which the cell needed before it was ever even assembled. It also happens to be far more advanced than any code humans have ever been able to make. Luckily, amongst many other things, the Mitochondria figured out how to harness the power of protons to fuel all that insanely complicated "random chance."
Now, our solar system is indeed a closed system. We know that because if you were to change any single thing about it, all life would not only die, it never would have existed. With all of that, and many other endless factors in mind, we come full circle and we finally arrive at the Trochlea, which supposedly developed itself over billions of years. People believe this is somehow possible, because they believe with enough time, anything is possible. Now consider all these things, and let's recite the second Law of Thermodynamics.
The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.
In other words, the longer something is around, the more it decays, until whatever fuels its life, disperses its concentrated energy and equalizes into its surroundings. You don't need to be a genius to observe this with anything you look at. If it weren't true, we couldn't actually measure the age of that thing in the first place.
Ignoring how absolutely insurmountable any supposed evolutionary transition is, the explanation as to how all of these things have come into remarkable precision, and order, is gobs of time. Even though the very solid law of entropy shows all things decay over time. Whether this is something that you have pondered before, or not, if you're an honest person and you make it through all the material in these creation sections, you will almost certainly wonder how Darwin's Macro evolution ever survived. So! Without further ado, let's get into it, and start with an impossible question to get us thinking!
Where did God come from? 3:26
At first, it was said that evolution happens so slowly, we couldn't possibly observe it, or record it. As that theory got over thrown in various ways, evolutionists began to add more and more time to the theory, in order to increase its probability. They went from publishing the occurrence of the big bang at millions of years, to 100's of millions, and now it's into the billions, regardless of the fact that, the big bang itself, and every theoretical function from that point on, defy the mechanical laws of physics. They have strayed from science and entered a patchwork of unseen and unprovable theories, such as the inflation theory, dark matter, and dark energy. Each piece of patch work that they add in a desperate attempt to save their precious foundation of deep time, only creates even more impossible hurdles for themselves.
Eventually enough of them realized all of this is so unlikely to have happened by chance, that it is more likely for none of what we can see, hear, touch, smell or taste, should actually exist. Instead of admitting that there could be a designer, their next best option is that we are just a perceiver projecting our own reality. Things exist because we look at them. I can't even list how many problems that creates, but as you will see in the 3rd video of "What you aren't being told about astronomy" videos, this is the most current crock of imagination, that the deniers of science have come up with. It's called a "Boltzmann brain" if you'd like to see for yourself.
This wandering "science" (which it so isn't) is well funded, and being publicly accepted. As far as TV is concerned, they're just sticking with the billions of years thing and never able to successfully explain what would even support that. Unfortunately, we can't watch a documentary today without the video shoving millions of years of evolution at us.
Let's take a closer look at the origin of the theory itself, and examine the beginning of Darwin's "Theory of evolution". There are many detailed and evidence packed seminars, by the most outstanding people who have approached these topics head on, and with full honesty. Like myself, many of these people did not start off with a churchy agenda. We just wanted the truth. Let the data speak for itself, instead of imposing your agenda on what you want it to be. Instead of manipulating the data to support what you want.
The video titled, "What were the original animals God created really like? - Dr. Todd Wood", was made by the fantastic group called, Is Genesis History? In this video, they describe how fantastic the puzzle of genetic coding really is. They examine what exactly it is that causes animal kinds to change so much, in such a short period of time? For example, when we humans breed dog kinds to deliberately turn off unwanted characteristics in the dog's genes, and carry through the desired characteristics. What is exactly happening with its genetics?
The answer to that question is much more difficult, and much more complex, than most evolutionists would readily admit. This is still a massive frontier, and even though a lot has been discovered in the past twenty, and even ten years, we still don't fully understand how genetics function. We are even more ignorant to the functions of epigenetics, which is the word for the mechanisms that handle all the coding, and not the coding itself.
As you will see in the video, with every animal kind we consider, all of the various available changes possible within that animal kind, are already there in the coding. In other words, any changes that happen within that kind, already have the instructions there in the coding, to fulfill any of the possible changes that can happen, within that animal kind. Those available genes are either activated, or switched off, to give that animal is unique design features. However, those available changes can only occur within the animal's own kind, and only with the coding that has always existed in that particular animal kind. These changes do not, and can not happen across animal kinds.
For more really thought provoking and interesting views, from many different creation scientists and doctors this website is absolutely a favorite.
It would seem that "Evolution" as it is generically referred to, is the first wall encountered when convincing someone that they are not a matter of chance, and that there is indeed a purpose to life. Whenever God, or the Bible is mentioned, the topic of "Evolution" will come up for obvious reasons. They blatantly do not get along, and yet macroevolution is taught in public schools to this day, and a creator no longer is. He has been removed. Believe it or not, it was very much the opposite before Darwin came along.
Evolution happens, yes it is definitely a thing. However, as made popular by Charles Darwin and his crew, they greatly theorized it into a whole other realm. Microevolution, not macroevolution, is seen observably happening today, and it has also been seen in the fossil record. Even against false claims, not one intermediate entity of macroevolution has ever been seen, or found. We have an enormous amount of fossils of every kind, from every layer. So where are all the transitional kinds, if they all came from each other? They will often just point to some animal's part, that they didn't quite understand yet and say, "Well this must be evolution happening." Even if it appears to be an absolute hinderance to them. Mutations are from a lack of information, information is not being added to what is already there.
This topic has an enormous amount of bias, coming from people who either hate the idea of a creator, or love the idea of a creator. It would seem the best way to observe something, is If you can come to a place where you really are willing to just do some honest science, whether it ends up landing on the God side of the fence, or the "Explosion from nothing" side of the fence. Isn't real science being willing to consider all of the data, and honestly? There is a lot of very interesting evidence, and forthright data presented throughout this section. Data that you can go see, and even test for yourself if you are willing to. You'll be amazed what you are not being told in schools, or on science documentaries. All you have to do is look.
''I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?’'- Dr. Patterson, from "Darwin's Enigma"
Read more about it,
What were the Original Animals God Created Really Like? - Dr. Todd Wood 16:37
The Scientific Method was adopted by the scientific community as an attempt to remove human bias, and errors. The problem is however, humans are still the ones doing the science. This only works if those in charge are being honest with the data, with the control groups, with the testing methods, and with the numbers. If that is done correctly, then it will tell you if there any unknown variables missing, or if calculations for the preposed model are supported by the results of the test.
The steps of the scientific method are represented in this graph. It is the guiding line for anyone who decides to commit themselves to testing a thought, or a hypothesis. They should follow it as accurately and strictly as possible, so as to ensure the trueness of the results. As all things are, it too is susceptible to corruption just as it stands. You can apply dishonest tactics, or false readings into the experiment, such as saying certain variables are linear, when in reality they are actually quite dynamic. In addition to that, then add in the fact that there is an established scientific community who holds the power, and can control the set ideals and also the funding. If your report isn't published through their means of publications, such as in their scientific journals, then it isn't legitimatized. If they don't like what you're saying, then you will never have a name, or a place in their fraternity.
There is indeed a scientific family and an established hierarchy. If you do not abide to their terms and concepts, you will be excommunicated, and defunded with no chance of returning. Many know all too well how true that is, because they have experienced it first hand. However, It isn't as secret as they would like it to be. You will see later with Ben Stein's video. For now, the following videos titled "What is Science", are a wonderful set of videos put together by Professor and Ph.D Philip Stott. A man with a very impressive list of credentials and experience in the scientific community. These are just the first two of his series of videos on youtube, but each video is another thick layer of knowledge. This is a link for more about him.
1 | What is science? 7:40
2 | What is science? (Continued) 5:43
Bias and Corruption
Ruling The Scientific Community
"Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (full movie)" 1:37:59
If the information in that video is new to you, than you're bound to have a lot of questions. I did my best to answer every single good question I've had, or have ever been asked, from this point on. God is REAL, there is a purpose to life, none of this was an accident, and neither are you.
Intelligence being used to disprove intelligence was used!
According to the "Theory of Darwin's Evolution", Something exploded from nothing and the laws of physics, chemistry, all the matter in the universe, and time itself arrived. Planets somehow formed from colliding space debris, even though all space debris, once it reaches a certain size, tends to breakdown into smaller pieces in collisions, and space gasses formed into stars, even though gasses tend to diffuse, not attract. Then water, one of the main ingredients required for life somehow collected in enormous quantities on the surface of the Earth, even though water tends to boil off in extreme temperatures present with our sun, as well as in vacuum conditions, such as is the nature of space. At some point, in this water, amino acids formed, even though the best attempts to make this happen with forced an unrealistic atmospheric conditions along with the guidance of human intelligence rather than chance, what they don’t tell you about the Miller-Urey experiment is that only resulted in a mixture of half left handed, and half right handed amino acids, which is only ever present in something, once it is dead. Living things only have one-hundred percent left handed amino acids in every single protein. A half and half mixture would be toxic, as you will see in the video titled, "Answers in Genesis: Four power questions for evolutionists.
Even if we ignore all the things like the perfect distance of our orbit, the perfect tilt of the planet rotating at just the right speed, with just the right size moon, sun, atmospheric, chemical, and physical properties, as well as the list of other innumerable perfections of which if any were slightly changed, we could not live or have ever existed... Then we grant evolutionists the mercy of having the perfect environment with every possible amino acid available, making up the entire mass of the planet as “Primordial soup” and ask, "What would the odds be of just one standard protein forming by means of chance, from just the twenty amino acids that support life, out of over two-thousand that don't?" The results are quite literally astronomically unfathomable, and to varying degrees, depending on how much benefit of the doubt one is willing to grant them with the conditions.
The number is actually so high that the math would be too vast to try and realistically calculate it. Below, one video shows a visual analogy to try and conceive the size of this number, and the other video shows where the math is coming from. Considering what we find here, if your faith is in Darwin's evolution you just need to ask yourself, "Do you feel lucky?", or maybe it is time to consider that there is actually an intelligent creator of all things, and that what you do in this life actually matters. After all, if we did arrive by means of chance, you yourself possess intelligence, do you not? Why would one rule out intelligent design anyway since it clearly exists?
Origin: Probability of a Single Protein Forming by Chance 9:28
Origin of Life - the probability of making a protein 13:01
"Bill Nye VS Kent Hovind - Short Creation Debate" 14:39
"Information Enigma: Where does
information come from?" 21:00
"The Fossil Record:Proof of Noah's Flood
or Evolution" 16:00
"Are Mutations really the Driving Force behind Darwinian Evolution? - Dr. Kevin Anderson" 19:43
"Answers in Genesis - 4 Power Questions
for Evolutionists" 49:57
The full title to Charles Darwin's book:
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life
This theory has been blasted wide open, as out right wrong, even in the eyes of agnostic sects. If you are of native African heritage, and have dark skin, just remember he thought of you as a intermediate species, slowing down the pack. I don't think even the most left winged celebrities can get on board with that statement.
If anyone actually reads "The Origin of Species", they would likely be shocked to learn that among Darwin's scientifically based proposals, was the elimination of "The negro and native Australian peoples", which he considered savage races, whose continued survival was hindering the progress of civilization.
In his next book, The Descent of Man (1871), Darwin ranked races in terms of what he believed was their nearness and likeness to gorillas. Then he went on to propose the extermination of races he "scientifically" defined as inferior. If this were not done, he claimed, those races with much higher birthrates than "superior" races, would exhaust the resources needed for the survival of better people, eventually dragging down all civilization. Now I'll agree, people in general, are definitely becoming less intelligent, but that is another argument altogether, and has nothing to do with genetics.
Even with the amazing systems that had to be in place before the chicken or the egg, genetics and DNA are only getting worse, and not better. Ask any geneticist about it, and they will agree with the second law of thermodynamics, which states that all things tend to disorder. That is even very easy to see for yourself.
Darwin argued that advanced societies should not waste time and money on caring for the mentally ill, or those with birth defects. To him, these unfit members of our kind, ought not to survive.
Aside from all those Hitler like perspectives, there are several foundational pillars that must be in place for the overall theory to work. If any one of them collapses, the entire theory can not stand. Since his time when he thought the cell was the most rudimentary and simple building block of life, these foundational pillars have been utterly obliterated.
This can be easily understood with a basic grasp of cause and effect. Just take some time and have a look at the 17 arguments made here.
Top Ten Biological, and Chemical issues.
"Where is The Evolution?" 4:33
These following links are about what was said to be one of the earliest known "links" in the chain of evolution. It has what they called "Primitive biological systems" in the evolutionary chain. It was found as a fossil, and it was said to be 70 million years old. However, It was found in 1938 still living, and completely unchanged. Do you understand what that means? "Evolution" as it was being sold. Never. Occurred. Look at the evidence yourself. There are many examples like this, and we haven't even spoken about how the trilobites found in the deepest layers of earth, and thought to be one of the oldest, have the most advanced category of eyes on the planet, compound eyes. With just those few facts, Darwin's theory is starting to fall apart in a massive way.
This isn't remotely close to the only species found as an example to support creation and destroy evolutionary links either, there are many more, as you will see later presented by Dr. Stephen Meyer.
Any one of these examples is detrimental to the theory of happenstance, I mean evolution. Yet, they don't want "God", so accident it is.
Here is a list of other animals, that not only go against evolution, they prove creation.
God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.
His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.
Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?
Also found in
Isaiah 34:7, Psalms 29:6, Psalms 92:10
"Why Does The Bible Mention Unicorns" 8:09
You definitely need to be ready for this topic, as it is a favorite wild card amongst evolutionists to toss in, when the debate begins to turn against them. "What about where the Bible mentions Unicorns? Do you believe in unicorns?" The Bible clearly states Unicorn, does it not?
If you're not ready for that, it can really unhinge you. With a quick visit in the original languages, is very easy to see that it was referring to a species of rhinoceros. People today don't often speak latin, or understand binomial nomenclature. When they hear the word unicorn, they laugh and think of the mythical flying horse creature, not a single horned rhinoceros . If you look up the Latin translation derived from the original Hebrew or Greek translation, it is easy to see that it's writing of the "Uni-horned Rhino".
The previous video explains it all very well, and it's just something that is worth mentioning, and requires some clarification these days. The one horned rhino known as the Elasmotherium sibiricum, is a very likely candidate for what the Bible was referring to. It certainly was a force to be reckoned with, suitable for the analogies it was used in.
"TRILOGY OF LIFE - Prehistoric Park -
"Unicorn" (Elasmotherium sibiricum)" 2:12
Though there are many time keepers in the universe for us to observe, and to study the decay rates of, it should only take a few solid examples that do not support the hypothesis, to cause the scientist to go back to the top of the scientific method, and get back to the drawing board. Except we don't just have a few examples, there are hundreds of examples that do not support the amount of time Darwin's evolution wishes it had to pull off what isn't actually possible regardless of time. Go examine as many as you want.
Here is a list of 101 more of them, if you'd like to check them out.
Top 10 Evidences For a Young Earth
"5 Evidences The Earth Is
Less Than 10,000 Years Old" 8:17
The Lunar Laser Ranging experiment Apollo missions 11, 14, and 15, the crews left retroreflectors on the surface of the Moon. These are a series of small concave, half cube mirror reflectors, that always return a laser beam back to its origin, on principle of physics. Visit this link to learn more.
The entire purpose of this was to accurately (to the millimeter) observe the moon's orbit, and distance. After monitoring the Moon's orbit for over 50 years now, they have learned it's traveling away from Earth at a rate of 3.8cm, or 1.5 inches a year. They admit that figure is "Anomalous", and it would be, if there weren't 100's if not 1000's of other examples that are also anomalous to the what they are trying to believe. I suppose an evolutionist would just ignore this, and move on...
For those of us with an open mind, and who are willing to read the cards as they lie, the obvious data makes perfect sense compared with everything else we find. The Earth is much younger than they teach. For this example, I have kept the math linear, even though in reality the effects are much greater, as I will explain. It is a very easy one to calculate and understand why this refutes the belief of such an old Earth. Especially, when you consider the Moon is the major factor that raises and lowers the tides.
We can easily calculate how much the Moon's distance to Earth effects our tide to the foot by comparing the current highest possible tide, and the lowest possible tide for any given year. We use the closest the Moon gets to Earth in orbit, with the farthest it gets. Then we can add back the years at the rate of 1.5 inches a year, and see just how high the tides would have been. As I said, I have kept this calculation linear for simplicity, but the real results are actually quadrupled. In addition to that and for even more accuracy, you would also need to factor in how much stronger the suns gravity would be if we added back all the mass it has used as fuel and burned up over time.
Highest perigee & perihelion tide
with the moon at a closest distance of
Lowest apogee & aphelion tide
with the moon at a farthest distance of
Difference of perigee and apogee
Range of tide
30,564 /9.2 = 3322.174
So about every 3,322.174ft =
1 foot in tidal height
The average moon travel
away from the Earth
is calculated to be
1.5 in per year
by NASA since 1969
1.5 x 100,000 years =
150,000in / 12 = 12,500ft
12,500 / 3322.174 = 3.76 ft
So every 100,000 years = 3.76 feet
1 million years = 37.6 feet high
2 million = 75.2ft
5 million = 188ft
10 million = 376ft
100 million years = 3,760 feet high
1 billion years = 37,600 feet high,
or 7 miles high.
Long before the tides got that drastically detrimental to life on Earth, the Moon would have crashed into it. The two planetary bodies would have reached what is known as the "Roche limit" at around 9,500km apart. The Roche limit is the exact distance at which two large bodies get close enough to each other, where the forces that pull them together, become greater than the gravitational forces that hold the individual bodies of mass together. At this limit the begin to break apart as they smash into each other and then become one large body of mass.
Even at 1 million years, a tidal wave that high and frequent would have been a terrible thing. The 2010 tsunami of Japan was very big at 128 feet, and just look what it did. Now let's consider the 10 million year mark. Even evolutionists have been backed into a corner to admit that the probability of evolution being a sound theory is impossible without at least a billion years. At 10 million years the tides would swing 376 feet which would devastate the planet. Just to throw another wrench in there, evolutionist say the Moon came from the Earth, which is spinning incredibly fast at 1000mph at the surface, and it's also on a 23.5 degree tilt of rotation, so due to the law of conservation of angular momentum, the moon should also be spinning and on the same axial tilt. However, as another wonder of God we call a "Tidal lock", the same face of the moon is always looking back at us.
In addition to all this math done, as I said it in order to keep it simple it was done as if it was a linear effect, but it isn't. The tidal attraction to the Sun and Moon's mass would be hyperbolic, just like 2 magnets as they get closer. The effect would actually be about 4 times stronger with every bisection. This is due to the "Inverse square law", meaning all those figures are grossly understated. It would actually be much worse. Just go back to the math and "quadruple" each "Foot high" result, to get the real answer.
Now, if you think to yourself "Perhaps the rate at which the moon is traveling away from Earth, is increasing in distance as time goes on?" The answer to that, is that it is actually incredibly consistent, but you are correct. It is true to say that it is not a constant, but the variation is actually decreasing its rate of separation in distance as time goes on. That means it is slowing down over time, adding yet another layer to confirm a young Earth, and confound the evolutionist's agenda.
More reasons why the Moon is so special
The Extraordinary Design of the Universe - Dr. Danny Faulkner 20:14
The more I study science, the more I believe in God.
~ Albert Einstein
Our Sun, is a running engine. It's mass is made out of it's own fuel. As she burns it gets used, thereby decreasing its mass. This is all measurable from here. To say it remains unchanged, is really something unreasonable.
Gravity is extremely consistent, and the matter of which the sun is comprised of, is quite uniform. The burn rate of the fusion process is consistent, and it is located in a very stabile environment, (the vacuum of space). According to NASA, It rips through 600 million tons of hydrogen per second, and resets its solar cycle every eleven years or so. With all of that in mind, let's consider a couple of the statements from their website.
''The Sun consumes about 600 million tons of hydrogen per second. That's 6 x 10 to the 8th power, tons. For comparison, the mass of the Earth is about 1.35 x 10 to the 21st power tons. This would mean the Sun consumes the mass of the Earth in about 70,000 years. ~Dr. Louis Barbier - (NASA)
"It is incorrect to say that the Sun is shrinking and it has been since the "creation" of the Universe. The Sun is not shrinking at a consistent rate. The data that were used to derive that were both wrong and misinterpreted. See the Skeptic Friends Network. Dr. Eric Christian
Go to the next link below this to find, and click on that "skeptic Friends" links. you have to see their response for yourself.
Then about the solar cycle he says this:
The periodicity of the eleven year solar cycle is complicated by the fact that there is no well-timed event that you can actually use as a basis for your periodicity. However, the Sun is much more regular than the "Seven to eighteen year range" that you mention. You can look at this image to see the best long term measure of solar activity (the sun spot number). There are modern observations that give a better measure of solar variability, but we've only got data for two or three cycles worth. The actual long term period is slightly more than eleven years and is remarkably stable. There are scientists who look at the statistics of solar activity and may have found other periodicities, but for the general public, there is effectively no difference between eleven and twelve years, especially given the broad and irregular temporal structure of both solar min and solar max.
Dr. Eric Christian (October 2003)
This is all on their website!
So NASA is saying, In a surprisingly consistent manner it burns up six hundred million tons of hydrogen (which has mass, as matter does) per second, in an energy transfer from a gas through a fusion burning process, and converts and expels the matter into heat and light energy, thereby removing the matter it has, and it does this at a surprisingly constant rate, but isn't "shrinking" at a constant rate... Really? How many laws of physics does that break?
Even if the pull of gravity decreased at just the right rate, so that its diameter expanded in direct proportion to the fuel it burnt, and it's diameter remained roughly the same, over the span of even one million years, gravity would still decrease significantly, because it has been burning it's own mass. Gravity, is very important to our orbit, and orbit is very important to our seasons and temperature. That is also true about the perfect balance of heat delivered, the ellipsis of the orbit, the twenty three and a half degree tilt of the earth's rotation, which gives us seasons. This is the same for the moon which provides the tides to pump our oceans, and the weather systems to create the storms that shield the sun even more. Which in turn provides the nitrogen and rain for our soil to feed the plants, and that allows them to give off oxygen, and allows the mammals to breathe, and in return exhale the carbon dioxide for the plant's photosynthesis. All of this could not exist if the sun wasn't just right.
Even with all of that considered, and only the variable of gravity was changed by that much. It still would not allow for life on earth. Not to even mention the magnetic protection, chemical, or any of the other thousands, and thousands of other variables that need to be in place for us to survive. It could not work if just that one thing were changed, by only one million years at a constant burn rate of six hundred million tons per second.
The fact is, that it's being used up, and therefore it's features are decreasing, not remaining completely unchanged from an unlimited supply of energy from nowhere. At some point you have to admit that our very existence as we know it, to be happenstance from and explosion of NOTHING is absolutely absurd! The sooner you can admit this is ridiculous, the sooner you will realize the existence of a grand designer makes WAY more sense. The next step is finding out if this creator has left us any way of knowing him. I was shocked to find that there is only one so called religion that not only holds water, it has an enormous amount of support evidentially, literally, and philosophically. It even proves it's divine authorship by its written details and much more. The good news is that these days, it isn't that difficult to verify, much of the research has been done, and all you have to do is go look. Fortunately, you came to the right website, and a lot of it is here waiting for you.
That is up to each of us to decide based on research, and fueled by the guarantee that we will one day die. So if there is a designer of all this, then what is the point? Why are we here? Faith was never meant to be blind, and I can assure you, there some very solid answers for you if you seek them.
Here is a bunch of work, data, and even charts compiled found on the sun.
There is math all over the universe, with whatever calculations you want to perform to show that the law's of thermodynamics are at work. You will find that energy does dissipate, and it can be measured and added back against time. Doing this with millions of years will give you staggeringly large, and very impossible results to support these evolutionary theories to our existence, as we know it. This math shouts that creation is very young, and people are just trying to find a way to say it doesn't, so that they can be their own God and do as they please, turning a blind eye to their own temporal and futile existence. You will leave this world with as much control as you had when you came into it, so it would be wise to humble yourself and seek out your maker.
It is amazing that some who are accustomed to these fields still have the deliberate nerve to search for anything that disproves a creator, and can actually ignore the glaring data because they either don't want God, or don't want to be ostracized by their peers. Evolution is indeed a religion, and it requires defiance, bullying, or a lack of understanding to just accept what is handed to you, and just as I say to anyone in a cult belief. THINK FOR YOURSELF, go crunch some numbers and search the nitty gritty, as well as the beginnings to these ideas. The beginning is the foundation of any belief, and it will determine the strength of the entire house.
Some more unavoidable math.
A good way to make a point is to hyperbolize; to exaggerate the scenario, so as to better reveal the degree of its effects. This is done for us when it comes to studying the largeness of creation, with the expanse of space, or the smallest forms of life, with microbiology. In doing this we should eventually come to a point where we realize that, we couldn’t possibly explain how anything began. Not only is it irreducibly complex, and also has a definite beginning, but where did it come from?
In that moment, you should realize it isn't just because we don’t understand. It's safe to say, we will never make a galaxy, or even build a single celled organism into motion, even if we robbed Peter to pay Paul! We are not in charge of existence, and we were put here. Nothing in this incomprehensibly large space, or these unbelievably small atomic structures found in this precise universe was a matter of chance, at all. So who is in charge, and how do we know that?
Life is NOT an accident, and we do NOT exist without meaning or purpose. There are glaring facts of things that exist, that could not exist if the beginning was not so long ago. The rate of decay is far too quick for the features of any given astronomical body, but as evolutionists state, Darwin's theories make no sense without trillions and trillions of years.
Consider how every single explanation from evolutionists on how stars form, require other stars to already exist! A cosmic chicken and the egg scenario. Not to mention we have never seen a star form, they just point to gassy nebulas where we cant see inside of, and say it happens there of course. They have tried to sell the theory of “Dark matter” and “Dark energy”, but even that is too far of a stretch for mainstream astrophysicists to buy. These videos by Spike Psarris are the best videos I have ever seen produced. They're available for purchase in very high definition at:
Astrophysicist Atheist to Creationist
"Spike Psarris Testimony" 7:11
"What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy
- Vol I (Our Created Solar system)" 1:50:59
"What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy
- Vol II (Our Created Stars and Galaxies)" 1:03:05
"What You Aren't Being Told About Astronomy
- Vol III (Our Created Universe)" 1:47:39
How can we see stars so far away?
"Distant Starlight Vs. The Biblical Timeline.
(The Short Version)" 13:47
"(Undebunkable) Cosmic Microwave Background Proves Intelligent Design - but by whom?" 10:07
"Distant Starlight: Does It Disprove Biblical Creation?
(The In-Depth Version)" 1:18:15
"The horizon problem - why does the universe look the same in all directions" 2:37
Why I Believe In 24-hour Days
This article is too good to miss. It is hands down the best explanation, as to why we can take the Bible literally about 6 standard days of creation.
How to get ETERNAL LIFE
according to the Bible
Believe in your heart Jesus is The Lord, and that God raised him from the dead.
Declare it with your mouth, and you will be saved.
If you believe Jesus is your savior, be thankful! We're going home to place where 1 Corinthians 2:9 happens!
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
If you aren't quite sure Jesus is your savior, put your heart out on a limb. Nobody even needs to know you said it, God knows. It doesn't cost you anything, it is very easy, the reward is eternal life, just take a moment to believe,
Jesus is who he said he is.
Even if nothing happened, you are still in the same place you were before. The risk vs. reward here is an easy decision.
John 3: 12-21
If I have told you earthly things, and you believe not, how shall you believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? And no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that believes not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are worked in God.
Acts 11: 16-18
Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”
“John’s baptism,” they replied.
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.”
What is the will of The Father?
“And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”