Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site houxa.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!houxa!fdf From: fdf@houxa.UUCP (Franklin Fite) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 30) Message-ID: <718@houxa.UUCP> Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 16:35:39 EDT Article-I.D.: houxa.718 Posted: Thu Jun 27 16:35:39 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 28-Jun-85 00:57:50 EDT References: <381@iham1.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ Lines: 30 > as star deaths. The deaths of stars are bright and sudden > events called ''novas'' and ''supernovas.'' Similarly, the > birth of a star should be accomplished by the appearance > of light where none previously existed on the many > photographic plates made decades earlier. Instruments > should also be able to detect dust falling into the new > star. We have NEVER seen a star born, but we have seen > thousands of stars die. There is no evidence that stars > evolve [a]. > > a) Paul M. Steidl, THE EARTH, THE STARS, AND THE BIBLE > (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), pp. 143-145. > > > Ron Kukuk The rate at which new stars form in this galaxy is about 20 per year. [b] b) Papagiannis, M., "Sky and Telescope", June 1984, pp 509-510. The author cited above is a professor of astronomy at Boston University. Perhaps the confusion is in saying that we don't "see" new stars being born. Frank Fite Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ ihnp4!houxa!fdf