From the article.
From the article.
Creation Scientists Puzzled by Science.
Space Cows......
What if the planetary rings are a million years old instead of a billion or more? Does that make the cosmos or the earth only a few thousand years old?
Much of science is speculation but speculative error is also the error of the young earth people.
Mainstream astronomers are going to learn some new stuff that heretic astronomers have been hooting about for ages:
1. Saturn’s rings are recent
2. Io’s eruptions are electrical discharges
3. The sun (and all stars) is the remnant of a galactic Birkland current Z pinch
4. Big Bang, Dark Matter, Dark Energy and Black Hole are mathematical hallucinations.
5. Almost all life was wiped out in North America 10,000 years ago by a comet impact
6. The sun (and all stars) are electrical arc discharges not H-bombs
7. 99% of all matter in the Universe is in the plasma state and hence is electrical in nature
8. The “solar wind” would be more aptly named the solar electric current
9. Radiometric dating is heavily skewed in the presence of static electrical fields thus all geological and archaeological dating relying on isotope decay is unreliable.
10. Gravity has an electrical component
www.thunderbolts.info
Earth is not young. Accept it.
Io is frictionally heated by the gravitational changes of its elliptical orbit close to massive Jupiter; that energy never "runs out."
This author is either an idiot or a liar. Probably some combination of the two.
I’m sure that it puzzles priests, doctors, welders and cab drivers too. What the in bloody heck do “evolutionary scientists” have to do with astronomy? Evolutionary scientists would be ones who study evolution, right? Evolution only deals with the diversity of life on earth. Evolutionary scientists would have no great expertise on the age of objects in the solar system, at least not any more than anyone else.
“The brightness of Saturn’s rings is puzzling because after billions of years, they should have been darkened by dust from comets and asteroids. Yet these rings are still brilliantly beautiful.”
Are these people really this stupid? The moon is covered in dust and last I checked it reflects light just fine. Where in “God’s plan” does it indicate that dust is flat black? Stuff like this just makes creationists look stupid. My God did create the universe but he is not a Luddite. When “creation science” beliefs are so clearly ignorant it makes it easier for people to doubt other religious teachings and thought. People like this are truly doing Satan’s PR work.
“The brightness of Saturn’s rings is puzzling because after billions of years, they should have been darkened by dust from comets and asteroids. Yet these rings are still brilliantly beautiful.”
Are these people really this stupid? The moon is covered in dust and last I checked it reflects light just fine. Where in “God’s plan” does it indicate that dust is flat black? Stuff like this just makes creationists look stupid. My God did create the universe but he is not a Luddite. When “creation science” beliefs are so clearly ignorant it makes it easier for people to doubt other religious teachings and thought. People like this are truly doing Satan’s PR work.
The article says “should .... yet” a lot. Shows the muddy thinking that has become common.
The universe “should” not do anything. The universe does what it does, and it’s up to us mortals to figure it out - but we don’t seem to be doing a very good job of it.
There are no anomalies in the universe. The universe is working quite well the way it always has.
There is also the requirement that the hypothesis have predictive explanatory power. It must be able to give a further explanation for something we don't know yet, but on investigation, turns out to be the case.
"ITWASALIENS" and "GODDIDIT" do not apply.