Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 44)
Message-ID: <556@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 21:17:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: psivax.556
Posted: Thu Jul 11 21:17:09 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 20:30:11 EDT
References: <402@iham1.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Distribution: net
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 70
Summary: 

In article <402@iham1.UUCP> rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) writes:
>
>     THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE
>
>II. (Astronomical Sciences): THE UNIVERSE, THE SOLAR SYSTEM, AND  LIFE
>    WERE RECENTLY CREATED.
>
>    C.  MOST DATING TECHNIQUES  INDICATE  THAT  THE  EARTH  AND  SOLAR
>        SYSTEM ARE YOUNG.
>
>       83.  The sun's gravitational  field  acts  as  a  giant  vacuum
>            cleaner   that   sweeps   up   about   100,000   tons   of
>            micrometeroids per day. If the  solar  system  were  older
>            than  10,000  years,  no micrometeroids should remain near
>            the  center  of  the  solar  system  since  there  is   no
>            significant  source  of replenishment. A large disk-shaped
>            cloud of these particles is orbiting the sun.  Conclusion:
>            the solar system is less than 10,000 years old [a,b].
>
>
>       84.  The sun's radiation applies an outward force on very small
>            particles  orbiting the sun. Particles less than 100,000th
>            of a centimeter in diameter should have been ''blown out''
>            of  the  solar system if the solar system were billions of
>            years old. These particles are still orbiting the sun [a].
>            Conclusion: the solar system is young.
>
	Well, another contradiction! In fact it is even worse! These
two facts would seem to explain each other! It looks like these two
opposing forces might just cancel each other.
>
>       85.  Since 1836, over one hundred different  observers  at  the
>            Royal Greenwich Observatory and the U.S. Naval Observatory
>            have made DIRECT visual measurements  that  indicate  that
>            the  sun's  diameter  is  shrinking at a rate of about .1%
>            each century or about five  feet  per  hour!  Furthermore,
>            records   of  solar  eclipses  indicate  that  this  rapid
>            shrinking has been going on for  at  least  the  past  400
>            years  [a].  Several INDIRECT techniques also confirm this
>            gravitational collapse, although these  inferred  collapse
>            rates  are  only about 1/7th as much [b,c]. Using the most
>            conservative data, one must  conclude  that  had  the  sun
>            existed  a  million years ago, it would have been so large
>            that it would have heated the  earth  so  much  that  life
>            could  not  have  survived.  Yet, evolutionists say that a
>            million years ago all  the  present  forms  of  life  were
>            essentially  as  they  are  now,  having  completed  their
>            evolution that began a THOUSAND million years ago.
>
>            a)  G.B. Lubkin, ''Analyses of Historical Data Suggest Sun
>                is  Shrinking,''  PHYSICS  TODAY,  September 1979, pp.
>                17-19.
>            b)  David W. Dunham ET. AL., ''Observations of a  Probable
>                Change  in  the  Solar Radius Between 1715 and 1979,''
>                SCIENCE, Vol.210, 12 December 1980, pp. 1243-1245.

	Hmm! Can't seem to escape the extrapolation fallacy now can we.
Just because the Sun has been shrinking for a paltry 400 yrs is no
reason to assume an unchanged rate in the past. In fact the inaccuracy
of measurements prior to the last few decades makes high precision
and accuracy in these rate estimates impossible. All we know is that
the Sun *appears* to have been shrinking at *aproximately* the rate
indicated. So many stars are pulsating variables that a cyclic pattern
for the Sun is hardly extraordinary.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

{trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen