January, 2008 – Jay A Auxt
2008 – Dr
In February, 2008, Dr
2008 – Dr.
for many years, been interested in and fascinated by the concept of time, and I
have written several documents on that interest, primarily for my own
consumption. The concept of time (as mortals conceive of time) is extremely interesting
both from a Scriptural point of view and from a Physicist’s point of view. The two views are mutually compatible in very
fascinating ways. As an example, in both
cases an absolute limit is imposed upon them toward further/continued studies
or experimentation by
Scripture alludes to nothingness as stated in John 1:1---“In the beginning, God created---“, philosophically and logically implying that just preceding God’s act of creating, there was nothing! God is a Spirit (eternal and non-material), thus existing outside of time and Man’s 4-dimensional material existence. I am totally satisfied with that implied Scriptural address of nothingness!
Science, via Cosmology, uses a similar phrase to that of John 1: 1---“In the beginning, a ‘particle’---“ (The singularity, associated with the Big Bang theory, which originally “contained” the entire Universe and exploded into the Big Bang). Of course the existence of the “particle” negates the condition of nothingness--- a problem for the theory which will be addressed later in this document.
So what is “nothingness”? That term will heretoforward simply be referred to as “nothing”. I can’t even think nothing, because as I am thinking nothing, I am thinking of the fact that I am thinking of nothing! R. C. Sproul has very effectively described nothing as---“Nothing is what sleeping rocks dream about”! The world-famous mathematician-philosopher and atheist, Liebnitz, alludes to nothing as he seemingly, frustratingly asks: “Why is there anything instead of nothing?” That is an excellent and disturbing question for a thinking person who cannot possibly accept the being of a Creating God!
So, I ask again, what is nothing? Webster’s dictionary describes nothing as: “the quality of non-existence.” That’s acceptable! Can nothing be represented by an absolute vacuum or a void within an immense container? No! Even that volume or void within the container acts as a medium to transmit radio waves, light , magnetic lines etc (that is: light, magnetic forces and gravity travel unimpeded through a nothingness), so it is NOT nothing! A vacuum is yet a medium for transmitting light, gravity etc.
The phenomenon of nothing became a
major problem to the theory of the Big Bang.
According to the theory of the Big Bang, the particle called a singularity
( about 10(-30) centimeters in diameter or one pentillianth the diameter of a single atom) mentioned earlier in this text, exploded about 17 billion years ago and the
exploded material became our Universe with its stars, galaxies, planets etc (for
a comprehensive description of this theory go to your Internet). These cosmological entities were then distributed
throughout the volume of our Universe. “BUT
But the concept of nothingness posed a frustrating concept, even to the imaginative atheist. It was seemingly impossible to attach any kind of theory that could apply to starting with nothingness, and the evolving into something. This frustration is so well expressed in the following quotation by Professor Heinz Pagels, Executive Director of the New York Academy of Sciences; Adjunct Professor of Physics at Rockefeller University; a theoretical Physicist: “The unthinkable void converts itself into the plenum of existence---a necessary consequence of physical laws.—Where are these laws written into that void? What tells the void that it is pregnant with a possible Universe? It would seem that even the void is subject to law, a logic that exists prior to space and time.”
Here, Professor Pagels, refers to nothingness as an “unthinkable void.” To me, the quote is dripping with frustration! I believe the quote may well represent the frustrations of all atheists as they observe the Creation surrounding them.
I believe the answer to the question ---What is nothing?
---is completely answered by considering the antonyms of nothing. The antonyms for nothing are everything,
Dr. OTTO E.. BERG, Astrophysicist, NASA, retired
APPROPRIATE SCRIPTURAL ADDENDUM
“For by Him were all things
created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things
were created by Him and for Him. And He
is before all things, and by Him all things consist”.
(Notice particularly, how God, who is outside of time, uses the present tense---He IS before all things---.)
2008 – Creation
In June, 2008 we saw a
Dr. Lisle discussed many areas of astronomy including galaxies, stars and planets, and major problems with strictly naturalistic explanations of their origins. The idea that stars were formed by aggregations of contracting and increasingly fast spinning space dust and gases contradicts what would be expected, since gravity would pull matter inward but is much weaker than centrifugal force and heat which propel matter outward.
There are significant problems with speculations about the origin of planets around a star such as our sun. The amount of angular momentum (evolution) should be much less than that of the sun, but the opposite is true. Planets rotate in different directions which seems unlikely if they formed from the same rotating dust cloud. Jupiter radiates two times the amount of energy it gets from the sun. Therefore this giant gas planet would be cooled by now if planets are the age believed by most astronomers. In other solar systems, it appears that gas planets are close to the sun and solid planets are further away, which is the opposite of our solar system.
Another problem is that the furthest galaxies seen through the Hubble telescope, which supposedly would appear as they looked in the early universe, appear mature whereas it was thought they would appear almost formless.
The decreasing magnetic fields of Jupiter, Earth and other planets do not support an old solar system view since there is little evidence these magnetic fields start up again after they run down. The earth's field would have been too strong for life to exist much more than 6000 years ago.
We can lend a copy of this
May, 2008 – Dr. Steven Carter
In our May 2008 creation meeting,
Steven Carter M.D. presented a very interesting talk on "Your Body,
Miracle of Design.” He is a retired surgeon
who now teaches creation at
He projected photographs of objects
which were clearly made by deliberate design, such as the
Our body is a great witness to our powerful and wise God, creator of the heavens and earth and all that dwell in them.
June, 2008 – Lou Reinagel
In June 2008, Lou Reinagel, former college science teacher, gave a presentation on soft tissue in dinosaur fossils claimed to be up to 80 million years old. He showed very clear photographs from Dr. Charles Jackson as well as artists drawings of the involved various types of dinosaurs including duck billed and Tyrannosaurus Rex. Microscope views of fossil tissue showed fresh looking red blood, bone and muscle cells.
These findings were first published by Dr, Mary Schweitzer in 1996 with little reaction, but after examination of other fossils, the news was widely reported in the media and scientific publications. Protein is thought to last at most for 40,00 years, which is a major contradiction to the finding of protein in fossils allegedly up to 80 million years old. Lou told of apparent proteins in supposed 50 million year old crinoid fossils.
Although not mentioned by Mr. Reinagel, soft tissue has been found in ancient fossils of frogs, salamanders and other animals. These various fossils have been found in multiple sites with differing physical circumstances. This rebuts the claim by some evolutionists that preservation of such tissues was due to unique rock and climate conditions.
2008 – Dr
At our July 2008
We then watched
First were the Weta group of grasshopper like insects. 60 of the more than 100 species are cave Weta, some of which live in high mountain caves. One was shown as it froze into a state in which it has no apparent brain waves. After several months it thawed out and resumed activity.
Moloch Horridus is a small dessert lizard covered with many thorn like structures. To get water, the lizard stands in damp sand. Water condenses on the thorns, and flows down to tubules at the thorn bases. By contacting its throat muscles, the water is pumped through a system of tubules under the skin which lead to the throat.
Giraffes were shown, and many of their unusual features were described. They have a very large heart and special blood vessels so they can raise and lower there long necks without brain damage. They sleep 20 minutes a night and breathe at a rate of one third that of humans.
Many frogs, differing greatly in size, color and behaviors were seen. One type hatches, not as tadpoles, but directly as small frogs. Some brood in the throat of males and another in male stomachs where a special enzyme from the eggs stops the production of stomach acid. Later small frogs come out of the father's mouth. Some brood their eggs in a pouch on the mother. Fossil frogs, supposedly up to 190 million years old, appear the same as modern frogs.
The amazing mimic octopus can change to look like 17 different species, including fish, a clam and a crab. This has been videoed only in recent years.
The most wonderful creature is "God's Masterpiece," man. But, according to Mr. Kerby the best evidence that God created is the Bible, the authoritative word of God that tells us God is the creator, and how he created.
August, 2008 – Lou Reinagel
In the August 2008 Creation Society meeting, Lou Reinagel, former college and high school science teacher spoke on starlight and time. This is a difficult problem for creationists since light from outer space comes from stars and other sources thought to be millions of light years away which seems incongruous with the Biblical account which portrays the age of the universe as no more than 10,000 years.
Lou used as a model of the universe a large white balloon with dark spots on the surface. As the balloon expanded the dots moved further apart from each other and discussed the problem and a possible answer. A part of a solution is the frequent Bible statement that God stretched out the heavens. Many creationists consider the best current explanation to be that of Dr. Russell Humphries, which involves relativity and quantum theory which are hard for most people to thoroughly understand.
Humphries' book and video
September, 2008 – Pat Briney
In September, 2008, Pat Briney, PhD, Microbiology gave an excellent talk on
"Presenting a credible case for creation to a secular audience." He related how he received his PhD from the
Dr. Briney organizes the study of origins into three areas: origin of the universe, of life and of species. Naturalistic origin of the universe is contrary to the first and second laws of thermodynamics, which are: energy cannot by purely naturalistic means be created or destroyed, and natural processes always proceed to disorder. Evolutionary origins of life contradict the Biogenetic Law that all life comes from life. Origin of species by evolution is not supported by probabilities, clear signs of intelligent design, laboratory research and fossils.
This is one of the best presentations we have had on the basics of science showing that creation is a reasonable, scientific explanation supported by natural laws. Much more information was given in this program which is on a recording that is available.
2008 – Dr.
In November, 2008, Dr.
Afterwards, we showed a very
In his opinion, a variety of geological
sites have been misinterpreted or ignored by secular
scientists. An example is the supposedly 1.8 billion year old rock
Many other findings contradict evolutionary dates such as soft tissue in dinosaur fossils allegedly millions of year old. Upright trees are found buried in layers of rocks (polystrate) supposedly deposited during hundreds of thousands of years, even though almost always lifeless trees disintegrate within a hundred years if not covered rapidly by sediments which quickly are turned into rock Sequoia tree stumps, indigenous to temperate climates, are found protruding from the ground surface in the far north, and have wood that can be burned despite being in rock strata allegedly millions of years old.
Photographs were shown of dinosaur foot
prints amidst water ripple marks which, almost surely, were buried
quickly after their formation. This is one of
many findings supporting a catastrophic formation
of most strata. Although usually absent on the ocean
floor, large amounts of calcium are found in rocks formed
from ocean sediments. Dr.Silvestru proposes that large amounts of calcium, deep
underground, were released when fountains of the deep opened
in Noah's Flood. He spoke about the possible abiogenic origin of petroleum, i.e. the formation of
oil from chemicals, such as methane, deep underground.
December, 2008 – Dr. Charles Jackson
In December, 2008 Dr. Charles Jackson spoke to an audience of 70 people on new evolution theories. In the first part, he presented relatively new findings and statements by prominent evolutionists that contradict important aspects of neo-Darwinism.
Among new findings are soft tissues in many ancient fossils, and evidence which basically disqualifies several notable alleged ancestors of man such as Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus and "Lucy." He presented criticisms of supposed evolutionary evidence and beliefs such as Molecular clocks and gradual evolution by mutations made by Milford Wolpoff, Jeffrey Schwartz and Lynn Margules. See the October 2007 meeting at www.FrederickCreationSociety.org. Dr. Jackson also mentioned that humans have 75 % of the same genes as nematode worms, and that 100% of professors in Yale are atheists.
Dr. Jackson then spoke extensively about an important meeting in Altenberg
Concepts included punctuated equilibrium (apparent rapid evolution of new species for which few transitional fossils were left, or at least not found,) evolvability (the ability to evolve), epigenetic inheritance (traits inherited from sources other than genes). Other ideas were phenotypic innovation, facilitated variation and gender accommodation, which I cannot define and at this point do not adequately understand. These, it was expected, would answer problems of current Darwinism, and give a more coherent evolutionary theory. Further information may be Googled. There are two general views about this seminar. One is that it was needed because of disagreements about and significant flaws in modern Darwinism. On the other side, a summary by the participants essentially says they confirmed that evolution theory is strong and that they had elucidated and added to Darwinism.