Two challenges to the infallibility of the Holy Scriptures

Figure 3: Charles Darwin developed the idea of the general theory of evolution, which Smolin has copied by analogy.

Charles Darwin developed the idea of the general theory of evolution.

Charles Darwin published his “On Origin of Species” in 1859, which began a major attack on the veracity of the Word of God. Darwin’s message essentially was an attack on the true history in Genesis, even the actual historicity of the Genesis account of creation and the events that followed shortly thereafter. That ultimately means it was a challenge to the trustworthiness of the Bible.  Since that time we have seen a rapid decline of faith in the veracity and authority of God’s Word, starting with Genesis. The visible church has fallen in great apostasy.

Here when I write of God’s Words and their veracity and infallibility I refer to the God breathed Words in the original autographs, which for the New Testament were largely written in the ancient Greek vernacular.

Bishop Brooke Foss Westcott and Professor Fenton John Anthony Hort were conservative, Anglican (Church of England), scholars who produced a new Greek New Testament based on the Alexandrian codices (uncial books), mostly Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus ℵ (Aleph), which are believed by many to be among the oldest extant Greek texts. But age does not guarantee purity of a form closest to the original. Continue reading

Cosmic storytelling

A never-ending storyBB history

The big bang is a good story … as far as storytelling goes.

“Storytelling has been the single most powerful communication tool for thousands of years and we are just starting to understand how relevant and significant it is today.”1

But…

 “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story,”

…as Mark Twain once is reputed to have said. Some doubt he said that, but knowing he was as an author of adventure fiction the claim is quite credible. Continue reading

Theory of Everything by Dark Matter

A letter to a colleague written April 1st, 2015, published April 6th, 2015.

Dear Obsidian Noire,

Thank you so much for you recent theoretical proofs in the Dark Matter Sector. The following is how I usually explain Dark Matter and those other entities from the Dark Sector to those who have doubts.

God said “Let there be light!”  The reason: the Universe began in total darkness.

For a long time the correct meaning of this statement in Genesis chapter 1 had been once lost in darkness, but we now know for science has shown us what it really means. The author of the text really meant that because even God could not see what He was doing, He created light. He had to. Once the light separated from the Darkness He could see enough to start sorting out the chaotic mess that had formed. But this way of speaking was just how the ‘early primitives’ thought and spoke about the Universe. We now know better. I will try to explain this in the simplest terms.

Einstein quoteAt the beginning the Darkness was all around in many forms including Dark Energy, Dark Radiation, Dark Flows, Dark Holes (also called black holes) and the most ubiquitous stuff of all, Dark Matter. All these entities belong to what we call in physics the ‘Dark Sector’, which now has become firmly established through modern science.

The Dark Ages was that period in the history of the Universe just after the big bang, when Dark Matter assembled the necessary materials to build all stars and galaxies. God was not involved so much in that as He was busy keeping the Darkness out while He created normal matter—protons and neutrons etc., the stuff we do observe in the Universe. Well, He started off the Universe in a big bang, that took a lot out of Him, and as a result the Darkness eventually won. Continue reading

Science the new religion

Science has become the new religion. Those who dare challenge the dictates of ‘science’ are often declared crackpots, pseudo-scientists or just plain crazy. If you deny or doubt evolution, or anthropogenic global warming (AGW), now called ‘climate change’, or the effectiveness or safety of certain vaccines, or the universal safety of genetically modified foods, as compared with natural breeding and hybridization practices, you are called nasty names. These might include ‘flat-earther’, particularly if you deny Darwinian evolution.1

It has come to a point now that to be called a ‘creationist’ is a big negative, like you are a pseudo-scientist, or follower of astrology, or witch doctors, etc. Such a person is thinking irrationally and cannot be trusted according to the new paradigm.

Then there are those who are called some sort of ‘climate change denier’, who must be funded by ‘big oil’, as though they must have a corrupt vested interest or be just plain crazy. As a physicist I have analyzed the global temperature data, spanning the last 100 years, downloaded from the Met Office Hadley Centre.2 I have no vested interest here, but I find that a continued warming trend is not supported by the data. But I remain skeptical. The main problem I see is the limitation of human time scales and the lack of any really robust model that successfully predicts developing trends.3 Continue reading

Why is Dark Matter everywhere in the cosmos?

A product of the Dark Side

sombrero-galaxy

Sombrero Galaxy Credit: NASA/ESA and The Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)

Why is dark matter assumed to exist in the cosmos? From reading news headlines you would think it has been clearly identified and that we now know so much about this once elusive stuff. It has been sought in many different laboratory experiments for more than four decades now, but never found. Why then are astronomers so confident it is out there? Let me try to put this into context and I hope it will become clear. Continue reading

The coming long dark winter?

Dark Winter

book long dark winterIn his book “Dark Winter, How the Sun Is Causing a 30-Year Cold Spell,”1 John L. Casey outlines a distinctively different interpretation of so-called ‘global warming.’ Casey makes the claim that, in 2007, he announced to the world, to those who would listen anyway, that the Earth would from that time on undergo a massive cooling period, which would last for about 30 years.

Casey developed his theory around what he calls solar hibernation. This is an expression to describe the state of the Sun when it exhibits a long period of low sunspot number. That is called solar minimum by the space science community.

Casey documents a theory that the Sun is absolutely the main driving force for Earth weather. Solar irradiance is the energy flux experienced at the Earth, and human kind cannot do anything about it.

There are many websites, both for and against anthropogenic global warming, now called ‘climate change’ but Casey’s theory is different. He is not the only engineer or scientist to notice a correlation between sunspot activity and global temperatures, but he adds 32 other physical reasons (lines of evidence) that corroborate his theory, in Appendix 3 titled: “Press Release: Global Warming Has Ended; the Next Climate Change Has Begun.Continue reading

Is Dark Matter the Unknown God?

CM Title imagePublished in Creation magazine 37(2):22-24, 2015.

Over years of researching cosmology and astrophysics, I have argued that ‘dark matter’ is a sort of ‘god of the gaps’,the ‘unknown god’. It is proposed mainly to rescue the standard big bang model from problems when a mismatch is found between the theory and some observations. However, secular cosmogonists (scientists who study the beginning of the universe) usually believe the big bang worldview to be correct as well as all its associated astrophysics. So they must postulate something invisible to explain the discrepancy. This ‘something’ is ‘dark matter’, a hypothetical substance that emits no light or radiation, so cannot be seen.

Several years ago, astronomers claimed that they now had direct empirical proof of the existence of ‘dark matter’.2 This was dutifully repeated in the popular media.3 It was claimed that this demolishes the criticisms of ‘dark matter skeptics’. The section entitled “Dark Matter Proof?” (below) explains this further, and shows how there are many competing explanations for the same evidence. Continue reading