An Open Letter to the Scientific
(Published in New Scientist, May 22,
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. 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
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-centered
cosmology of Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles.
Yet the big bang is not the only framework
available for understanding the history of the universe. Plasma
cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesize an evolving
universe without beginning or end. These and other alternative
approaches can also explain the basic phenomena of the cosmos,
including the abundances of light elements, the generation of
large-scale structure, the cosmic background radiation, and how the
redshift of far-away galaxies increases with distance. They have even
predicted new phenomena that were subsequently observed, something the
big bang has failed to do.
Supporters of the big bang theory may retort
that these theories do not explain every cosmological observation. But
that is scarcely surprising, as their development has been severely
hampered by a complete lack of funding. Indeed, such questions and
alternatives cannot even now be freely discussed and examined. An open
exchange of ideas is lacking in most mainstream conferences. Whereas
Richard Feynman could say that "science is the culture of
doubt", in cosmology today doubt and dissent are not tolerated,
and young scientists learn to remain silent if they have something
negative to say about the standard big bang model. Those who doubt the
big bang fear that saying so will cost them their funding.
Even observations are now interpreted through
this biased filter, judged right or wrong depending on whether or not
they support the big bang. So discordant data on red shifts, lithium
and helium abundances, and galaxy distribution, among other topics,
are ignored or ridiculed. This reflects a growing dogmatic mindset
that is alien to the spirit of free scientific inquiry.
Today, virtually all financial and
experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies.
Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review
committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big
bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has
become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the
Giving support only to projects within the big
bang framework undermines a fundamental element of the scientific
method -- the constant testing of theory against observation. Such a
restriction makes unbiased discussion and research impossible. To
redress this, we urge those agencies that fund work in cosmology to
set aside a significant fraction of their funding for investigations
into alternative theories and observational contradictions of the big
bang. To avoid bias, the peer review committee that allocates such
funds could be composed of astronomers and physicists from outside the
field of cosmology.
Allocating funding to investigations into the
big bang's validity, and its alternatives, would allow the scientific
process to determine our most accurate model of the history of the
For the last few decades, several creationists have been reporting on the vertical expansion of fossil ranges, interpreted as either ‘older’ or ‘younger’ in the geological column timescale. These finds are probably the tip of the iceberg, since we cannot go through all the relevant journals that would report range expansions. In fact, many of these issues likely go unreported because many ‘anomalous’ or ‘uninteresting’ fossils end up in the back shelves of museum collections, as Dr Carl Werner has discovered.1 As such, it is hard to know just how large the scale of this phenomenon is, though it is almost certainly more severe than reported in any literature, secular or creationist.
Some range expansions are quite large, such as moving the time boundaries by 50 to 100 Ma or more. Some examples are: the pushing back of eukaryote evolution one billion years;2 the discovery of grass in dinosaur dung from the Mesozoic;3 ‘sophisticated’, diverse mammals now found in the Mesozoic;4 and the origin of flowering plants may have been pushed back 100 Ma.5,6 Moreover, organisms that were thought to be extinct for many millions of years are found to be living, such as the Wollemi pine found alive in New South Wales, Australia.7 Archeological discoveries also contribute to the range expansions by indicating man was always smart, making it less likely he evolved.8
Many of these range expansions are not considered too significant, being only a matter of millions of years or from a fossil that is not used as an index fossil. Nonetheless, it still indicates that the fossil record is not precisely timed as evolutionists often make it out to be. Moreover, it accentuates the problem of stasis, revealing the ad hoc nature of much evolutionary storytelling about the fossils. Essentially, it shows that evolution and deep time act more as assumptions constraining their interpretation of the fossil record than as conclusions they draw from the fossil record.
I sat in during a 7th grade social studies class today at Badger Middle School in West Bend, WI. The students are learning about "human evolution". During the class the students were to use the picture to the right and put in chronological order how "man evolved from animals". There were links to sites like the Smithsonian's, What Does it Mean to Be Human, page. The students were also told dinosaurs went extinct 66 million years ago during the K2 event in Mexico. One girl wisely asked the teacher, "How do you know" it happened that long ago. The teacher said he wasn't sure; there could be more causes.
I say, good for that girl!! She wasn't swallowing the shallow statements.
Yet, the information was given with such authority; no other explanations were allowed, and no evidence presented that contradicts what was presented.
One boy was making ape sounds during the class. I ask, if we tell kids they are animals won't they act like it? Yes, indeed!
I was not allowed to talk so I remained silent. After the class the staff member who escorted me to and from class asked how it went. I explained how I thought it went and asked him if he believed he evolved from apes. He shrugged his shoulders and would not answer me.
So, kids are taught as fact something the adults cannot even defend. Is this not indoctrination?
Why are kids not told that soft, stretchy tissues has been found in unfossilized dinosaur bones? That more and more scientists deny "Lucy" is our ancestor? That "Lucy" was a 3.5 foot chimp and was a tree dweller and not bipedal. That the bones found in the earth had no flesh or eyes in them but that artists make the bones look human? That it is a story made up to try and explain our origins without a Creator. That man evolving from a chimp through mutations and natural selection is mathematically not possible- and most scientists know it!
Well, as God grants us the opportunities we will continue to press on and speak the truth in love. Pray for us!
For more than a dozen years we have participated in county fairs, the WI state fair and other outreaches around the state. Our booth has been the highlight of many fairs and we are told, "it's the best booth at the fair".
Now, we are working on a mobile museum called Genesis Walk Museum that will display the history of the world and mankind. Genesis 1-11 will be highlighted. The promise of redemption given by God to Adam and Eve will be the culmination of the walk. Evidences will be displayed on the topics of the days of creation, Biblical kinds of plants and animals, dinosaurs, earth's history, Noah's flood, people groups and more.
Having a mobile museum will allow us to reach more people and attend more events.
Please contact me if you would like to help make this happen.
Email Mary @ email@example.com
Waking up to the beautiful snowfall this New Year's Day 2019 reminds me of freshness and newness, and it reminds me of Lamentations chapter 3 and God's faithfulness: This I recall to my mind, therefore have I hope. It is of the LORD’S mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not. They are new every morning: great is thy faithfulness.
I always like to think about the pre-flood world as sort of a paradise, not Eden, but as much less harsh than what we live in today. No blizzards, no icy roads to travel down, no intense heat and humidity, food readily available, much longer lifespans, etc. Yet, as I read in Genesis 5 this morning, the text says that Noah's father, Lamech "called his name Noah, saying Out of the ground that the LORD has cursed, this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the painful toil of our hands"
Yes, life is difficult at times and we do toil to make a living and provide for our families, and "the world" bears down.
Find encouragement this New Year in the knowledge that His mercies are not consumed, His compassions fail not, His mercies and compassions are new EVERY morning.
Be thankful to Him for His faithfulness.