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!cbosgd!ihnp4!iham1!rck
From: rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 29)
Message-ID: <379@iham1.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Jun-85 13:07:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: iham1.379
Posted: Tue Jun 25 13:07:20 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Jun-85 07:05:12 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 60


     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.

       51.  Computer simulations of the  motions  of  spiral  galaxies
            show  them  to  be highly unstable; they should completely
            change their shape in only a small fraction of the assumed
            age  of the universe [a]. The simplest explanation for why
            so many spiral galaxies exist, including our own Milky Way
            Galaxy,  is  that  they  and the universe are much younger
            than has been assumed.

            a)  David Fleischer, ''The Galaxy Maker,'' SCIENCE DIGEST,
                October 1981, Vol. 89, pp. 12ff.

       52.  If the sun, when  it  first  began  to  radiate,  had  any
            nonnuclear   sources  of  energy,  they  would  have  been
            depleted in much less that ten million years.  Theory  [a]
            and  experiment  [b] indicate that today nuclear reactions
            are not the predominant energy source  for  the  sun.  Our
            star,  the  sun,  must  therefore  be young (less than ten
            million years old). If the sun is young, then  so  is  the
            earth.

            a)  A.B. Severny,  V.A.  Kotov,  and  T.T.  Tsap,  NATURE,
                Vol. 259, 15 January 1976, pp. 87-89.
            b)  Paul M. Steidl, ''Solar Neutrinos and A  Young  Sun,''
                in  DESIGN  AND ORIGINS IN ASTRONOMY, edited by George
                Mulfinger, Jr. (Norcross, Georgia:  Creation  Research
                Society Books, 1983), pp.  113-125.

       53.  Detailed analyses  indicate  that  stars  could  not  have
            formed  from  interstellar gas clouds. To do so, either by
            first  forming  dust  particles   [a,b]   or   by   direct
            gravitational  collapse  of  the gas, would require vastly
            more time than the alleged age of the universe. An obvious
            alternative is that stars were created.

            a)  Harwit, ASTROPHYSICAL  CONCEPTS  (New  York:  John  C.
                Wiley, 1973), p. 394.
            b)  ''...there is no reasonable astronomical  scenario  in
                which  mineral  grains can condense.'' [Sir Fred Hoyle
                and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, ''Where Microbes Boldly
                Went,'' NEW SCIENTIST, 13 August 1981, p. 413.]

                                 TO BE CONTINUED


      III.  (Earth Sciences):
				Ron Kukuk
				Walt Brown