Major update: 20th November 2021
Table of Contents for: Part 2 In the beginning – anything, but not God!
- Table of Contents for: Part 2 In the beginning – anything, but not God!
- Are scientists clutching at straws – anything but God
- The scientific community question Big Bang’s validity
- Evolution states that the environment creates change.
- By removing God from our world, we remove any requirements and expectations that God puts upon us.
- Evolution attacks the main witness for God:
Are scientists clutching at straws – anything but God
Popular science talks about the Big Bang theory and evolution being totally correct and all factually provable, but that is far from reality.
There are huge missing elements that just don’t make the theory work.
For a start, with the Big Bang theory, the scientists had to keep pushing back the age of the universe to try to show why the galaxies were in those positions.
And then they had to explain how and why the galaxies are moving in space and for the sums to add up the scientists had to invent the missing mass (weight) of the universe.
There isn’t just a little bit of mass missing, their calculations came up with 15% of the universe is made up of ‘stuff’, the things we could touch and see (this figure does change slightly when scientists come up with a different solution).
But 85% had to be hypothesized as the ‘missing weight’ of the universe and it was called Dark Matter.
This is just one of the many discrepancies in the theory.
So are scientists trying to come up with a theory which solves everything and not God, otherwise they would then be accountable to him?
The scientific community question Big Bang’s validity
John Horgan in 2017 wrote an article: ‘Is a Popular Theory of Cosmic Creation Pseudoscience? – Physicists battle over whether the theory of inflation is untestable, and hence not really scientific’ in Scientific American’:
The theory holds that in the first instant of the big bang, the universe underwent a tremendous, exponential growth spurt before settling down to the slower rate of expansion observed today.‘Is a Popular Theory of Cosmic Creation Pseudoscience?’ by John Horgan
First conceived in the early 1980s, inflation quickly became popular, because it seemed to account for puzzling features of the observable universe.
Inflation explains, supposedly, why the universe looks quite similar in all directions and yet isn’t entirely uniform, since it contains galaxies and other clumps of matter.
By the early 1990s, some cosmologists were beginning to doubt inflation…
Almost 40 years after their inception, inflation and string theory are in worse shape than ever.
The persistence of these unfalsifiable and hence unscientific theories is an embarrassment that risks damaging science’s reputation at a time when science can ill afford it.
Isn’t it time to pull the plug?”
Here is a really stinging statement by 33 top Scientists:
The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed– inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples.‘An Open Letter to the Scientific Community’ Cosmology Statement.org (Published in New Scientist, May 22-28 issue, 2004, p. 20) [ii]
Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory.
In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation.
It would, at the least, RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE UNDERLYING THEORY.
But the big bang theory can’t survive without these fudge factors.
Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation.
Without some kind of dark matter, unlike any that we have observed on Earth despite 20 years of experiments, big-bang theory makes contradictory predictions for the density of matter in the universe.
Inflation requires a density 20 times larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory’s explanation of the origin of the light elements.
And without dark energy, the theory predicts that the universe is only about 8 billion years old, which is billions of years younger than the age of many stars in our galaxy.
What is more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation.
The successes claimed by the theory’s supporters consist of its ability to retrospectively fit observations with a steadily increasing array of adjustable parameters, just as the old Earth-centred cosmology of Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles.”
Does Evolution attempt to gag God?
The main problem is that all scientific theories have to fit in with billions of years, because secular scientists can see no other way of getting to this high level of complexity which in their minds needs all that time for it to evolve.
The bottom line is that many scientists seem to be saying: ‘Anything, but not God.’
Evolution states that the environment creates change.
So if we believe in the whole Evolution concept then, we would believe these things:
- That natural selection happens.
- The fittest and best adapted creatures and plants increase.
- That there were multitudes of chance happenings over millions of years.
- All these wonderfully diverse insects, mammals, fish, and plant life have evolved from simple molecules, without God.
By promoting evolution God is removed from the picture.
The world around us is no longer created by a Superior Being, but it is self contained, and self sufficient.
Everything to create life, and sustain life (so Evolutionists reckon) is already here, not God.
By removing God from our world, we remove any requirements and expectations that God puts upon us.
Then there is no need for us to surrender to the great Creator, the all sustaining God.
Unbelieving people find that this eases their conscience.
Evolution attacks the main witness for God:
This witness speaks 24 hours a day, and in every country in the world and has borne witness to the Creator God, ever since the world began.
What is this witness?
The created world, because the Psalmist wrote:
The heavens declare the glory of God;Psalms 19:1-2
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they display knowledge.”
This witness says “All this is made by God!”
So man has put in a louder voice that shouts out: “All this, by chance.”
For 1000’s of years this witness has stood, proclaiming the Truth about the Creator and Designer of all things.
Suddenly that witness has been challenged, and many people have judged it to be a false witness, and they have stopped listening to that witness.
That is how important the subject of Evolution is when it is blindly accepted without question.
[i] ‘Is a Popular Theory of Cosmic Creation Pseudoscience?’ by John Horgan
[ii] ‘An Open Letter to the Scientific Community’ Cosmology Statement.org (Published in New Scientist, May 22-28 issue, 2004, p. 20) Rense.com
Images: thanks to Serif Resource CD.
I started on my Faith Journey in 1976 whilst on my sandwich year from college.
Since then I’ve not been restrained to any one denomination – believing that local Church is always important. Through career moves and life changes this has enabled me to play a part in the Assembly of God Church, Elim, various New Church Groupings, Brethren, Anglican and Baptist Churches.
I am married to Jackie and we live in Cambridgeshire in the UK.