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