Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site iham1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!iham1!rck From: rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 28) Message-ID: <378@iham1.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 13:16:32 EDT Article-I.D.: iham1.378 Posted: Mon Jun 24 13:16:32 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Jun-85 05:59:58 EDT Distribution: net Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 56 THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE I. (Life Sciences): THE THEORY OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS INVALID. (See 1-36.) II. (Astronomical Sciences): THE UNIVERSE, THE SOLAR SYSTEM, AND LIFE WERE RECENTLY CREATED. A. NATURALISTIC EXPLANATIONS FOR THE EVOLUTION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM AND UNIVERSE ARE UNSCIENTIFIC AND HOPELESSLY INADEQUATE. 50. The cosmic background radiation is considered by many to be the major evidence supporting the Big Bang Theory. However, recent measurements of this radiation above the earth's atmosphere indicate that it is not consistent with the Big Bang hypothesis [a-c]. Nor is the abundance of helium in the universe consistent with the Big Bang [d,e]. Furthermore, if the Big Bang occurred, the universe should not contain lumpy [f-h] or rotating bodies. Since both types of bodies are seen [i], it is doubtful that the Big Bang occurred. a) H. P. Gush, ''Rocket Measurement of the Cosmic Background Submillimeter Spectrum,'' PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, Vol.47, No. 10, 7 September 1981, pp. 745- 748. b) Kandiah Shivanandan, James R. Houck, and Martin O. Harwit, ''Preliminary Observations of the Far-Infrared Night-Sky Background Radiation,'' PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, 11 November 1968, Vol. 21, pp. 1460-1462. c) ''Freak Result Verified,'' NATURE, Vol.223, 23 August 1969, pp. 779-780. d) Paul M. Steidl, THE EARTH, THE STARS, AND THE BIBLE (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), pp. 207-208. e) D.W. Sciama, MODERN COSMOLOGY (London: Cambridge University Press, 1971), pp. 149-155. f) Geoffrey Burbidge, ''Was There Really a Big Bang?'' NATURE, Vol. 233, 3 September 1971, pp. 36-40. g) Ben Patrusky, ''Why Is the Cosmos 'Lumpy'?'' SCIENCE 81, June 1981, p. 96. h) ''Deep Redshift Survey of Galaxies Suggests Million- Mpc**3 Void,'' PHYSICS TODAY, January 1982, Vol. 35, pp. 17-19. i) Stephen A. Gregory and Laird A. Thompson, ''Superclusters and Voids in the Distribution of Galaxies,'' SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, March 1982, pp. 106- 114. TO BE CONTINUED III. (Earth Sciences): Ron Kukuk Walt Brown