 |
| OUT OF THIS WORLD! Did you know that the moon is moving away from us? When astronauts went to the moon, they left mirrors on the surface so that laser light could be sent to the moon, bounce off the mirror, and return to the earth. We can measure the time this round trip takes so accurately that the exact distance to the moon can be measured within a fraction of an inch. The moon is moving away from us at about 2 inches/year (called lunar regression). This means the moon is getting farther away each year, and as we go back in time, the moon was closer to the earth. At this measured rate of recession, the moon would have been touching Earth less than 2 billion years ago. It is commonly taught by evolutionists that the moon exists because material spun off of the earth as it was forming about 4.5 billion years ago. Astronomer Edouard Roche long ago calculated that from Earth’s surface to 11,500 miles out, any object would be torn to pieces by Earth’s gravitational forces. Therefore, the belief that the moon came from material originating from the earth has enormous problems because it would have been torn to pieces. Also, if the moon were truly 4.5 billion years old, it would be much farther out in space than the distance we see today. God created the moon on Day 4 less than 10,000 years ago – which means it has only moved a mere ½ mile since creation. The simplest explanation is that the moon is not that old. The moon’s distance from Earth testifies that it is young. “The belief that the moon came from material originating from the earth has enormous problems”https://mailchi.mp/435ebacf7a37/not-of-this-world?e=8233d90bcd |
Macro Evolution
All posts tagged Macro Evolution
Psalm 119:89-90
“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven. Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.”
‘There are those that claim that Evolution is a scientific theory. Scientific theories can be subject to the scientific method. If the same test or experiment is carried out under the same conditions, on different days or locations, the results should still be the same.
The existence of scientific methodology suggests that ideas, referred to as science, actually divide under two headings. The first of these would be the testable, repeatable scientific ideas, which refer to situations here and now. These can be referred to as Observable or Operational Science. This is, in fact, the real science. Not only is there nothing unbiblical about Operational Science, we can insist that such science would not be possible without a rational, biblical worldview.
The other scientific heading would be Historical Science. This is the type of science that refers to one-time, single events that allegedly happened in the past. Because these events are one-time events, they are not repeatable, nor are they falsifiable, because we do not have a time machine to go back and test things. Evolution must fall into this second category. Therefore, the alleged event, when non-living molecules got together to form a living cell, cannot be repeated. Evolution is not testable, and is therefore not Operational Science.
Some might point out that biblical creation is similarly untestable, and must be Historical Science. Although this is true, it merely serves to remind us that science is not the ultimate test of truth. The revelation of God’s word in the Bible is that ultimate truth.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/can-we-test-evolution-2/?mc_cid=3f99a6adb5&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
1 Thessalonians 5:21
“ Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
‘Science has an elevated position in Western society. There are those who would try to put Christians down, by saying “You have faith, but I have science”. Science, in the abstract, is therefore assumed to be the ultimate truth, and the universal standard, against which everything must be tested.
This, it is suggested, is because science is tested. As a high school science teacher, I would suggest to my students that scientific processes could develop as follows: The problem to be investigated is stated. A hypothesis is then developed, which seems to explain this problem, and accompanying observations. After this, an investigation—often by experiment—is designed to test the hypothesis. For this to occur, the hypothesis must be testable, and, indeed, falsifiable. To say that a hypothesis is falsifiable does not imply that it is, or even could be, false. It simply means that it is theoretically possible that an investigative result might disprove the hypothesis.
For example, our hypothesis that hot water hurts is falsifiable, given that you could plunge your hand into boiling water, to see if it feels comfortable. In practice, we know that this would indeed hurt, supporting your hypothesis. Finally, you would carry out your investigation or experiment, record the results, and from them draw a conclusion, that your investigation either supports or disproves your hypothesis.
This important concept of scientific methodology is only possible, because we expect a rational universe, with scientific laws that make sense, and that do not change. Such a rational universe is only possible within a biblical worldview, where random chance events do not take place.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/method-in-our-science-2/?mc_cid=aff60bfceb&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Genesis 1:14-15
“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.”
‘Many secular cosmologists believe that the universe came into existence in a singularity, as a result of a quantum event about 14.7 billion years ago. However, this so-called Big Bang theory is not without its problems. Principle among these is the Horizon Problem, which refers to the fact that Big Bangers cannot account for the Cosmic Microwave Background being the same temperature in all directions. This phenomenon would have required different parts of the universe coming to thermal equilibrium by radiation moving at the speed of light. Yet the maximum distance this radiation could travel is considerably less than the size of the universe.
In the 1980s, theoretical physicist Alan Guth proposed the Inflation Theory. In this model, a very rapid expansion of the universe happened from 10-36 seconds to 10-32 seconds after the Big Bang event. This allowed the entirety of the universe to be in close contact for a while, enabling transfer of energy between all parts of the universe.
There is no scientific evidence for this inflation, which is sometimes called the Big Fizz. The extremely short timescale of the event, at the beginning of a period of extremely deep time, gives the whole theory an impression of being a convenient construction, just to make the math work.
Moreover, it creates new problems of its own. There are several different models of inflation, and recent work suggesting that evidence for inflation is now available, turns out simply to disprove some of the models, without validating the concept itself.
As biblical creationists, we know that none of these models are correct. God has explained how and why the universe was created in the first chapter of the Bible.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/the-big-fizz-2/?mc_cid=7678cb4794&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
In Job chapter 40 and verse 15 and following we read about a creature called “Behemoth”. https://fb.watch/e3g3yEqhWX/
whatyareckon 