Post by Pahu79 on May 12, 2011 17:14:50 GMT -5
Big Bang? 13
[/b]
Neither “dark matter” (created to hold the universe together) nor “dark energy” (created to push the universe apart) has been seen or measured (w). We are told that “most of the universe is composed of invisible dark matter and dark energy (x).” Few realize that both mystical concepts were devised to preserve the big bang theory.
Rather than cluttering textbooks and the public’s imagination with statements about things for which no objective evidence exists, wouldn’t it be better to admit that the big bang is faulty? Of course. But big bang theorists want to maintain their reputations, careers, and worldview. If the big bang is discarded, only one credible explanation remains for the origin of the universe and everything in it. That thought sends shudders down the spines of many evolutionists.
If the big bang theory is correct, one can calculate the age of the universe. This age turns out to be younger than objects in the universe whose
ages were based on other evolutionary theories. Because this is logically impossible, one or both sets of theories must be incorrect (y). All these observations make it doubtful that a big bang occurred (z).
w. “...dark matter has not been detected in the laboratory, and there is no convincing theoretical explanation of dark energy.” [/i] Carlton Baugh, “Universal Building Blocks,” Nature, Vol. 421, 20 February 2003, p. 792.
“We know little about that sea. The terms we use to describe its components, ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy,’ serve mainly as expressions of our ignorance.” [/i] David B. Cline, “The Search for Dark Matter,” Scientific American, Vol. 288, March 2003, p. 52.
x. Wayne Hu and Martin White, “The Cosmic Symphony,” Scientific American, Vol. 290, February 2004, p. 50.
y. “Big Bang Gone Quiet,” Nature, Vol. 372, 24 November 1994, p. 304.
Michael J. Pierce et al., “The Hubble Constant and Virgo Cluster Distance from Observations of Cepheid Variables,” Nature, Vol. 371, 29 September 1994, pp. 385–389.
Wendy L. Freedman et al., “Distance to the Virgo Cluster Galaxy M100 from Hubble Space Telescope Observations of Cepheids,” Nature, Vol. 371, 27 October 1994, pp. 757–762.
N. R. Tanvir et al., “Determination of the Hubble Constant from Observations of Cepheid Variables in the Galaxy M96,” Nature, Vol. 377, 7 September 1995, pp. 27–31.
Robert C. Kennicutt Jr., “An Old Galaxy in a Young Universe,” Nature, Vol. 381, 13 June 1996, pp. 555–556.
James Dunlop, “A 3.5-Gyr-Old Galaxy at Redshift 1.55,” Nature, Vol. 381, 13 June 1996, pp. 581–584.
“It’s clear to most people that you can’t be older than your mother. Astronomers understand this, too, which is why they’re so uncomfortable these days. The oldest stars in globular clusters seem to date back 15 billion years. The universe appears to be only 9 billion to 12 billion years old. At least one of those conclusions is wrong.” William J. Cook, “How Old Is the Universe?” U.S. News & World Report, 18–25 August 1997, p. 34.
z. “I have little hesitation in saying that a sickly pall now hangs over the big-bang theory. When a pattern of facts becomes set against a theory, experience shows that the theory rarely recovers.” Fred Hoyle, “The Big Bang Under Attack,” Science Digest, May 1984, p. 84.
[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown
www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences17.html#wp1011757]