A Response to “Creation: The Story from Science (Part I – Astronomy)”

I personally found Matt’s article really interesting. As you may know, I had to write a physics paper earlier this semester to be exempt from the Honors UPII requirement at the U of A. Inspired by this very topic, I chose to do a little research on Big Bang cosmology, relating it to the philosophical argument for God’s existence known as the “Cosmological Argument.” What I liked about this post is that none of the astronomical points supporting the old age of the universe raised by Matt were ones that I explored in my own paper. Perhaps this is because I don’t really understand the important points, or perhaps it is because Matt was bringing up those most interesting and impressive to him. I have little to comment, except to say that I agree that this is, at least, compelling evidence, and my recent skimming research has pointed me in the same direction. (Of course, I am no expert, and my opinion carries little authority on this subject). At any rate, I thought this would be a good opportunity to publish the work I did this last Spring. Although I can’t vouch for my scientific accuracy, I think this paper presents some other issues that support this view in a relatively clear way. If you wish to read it, click the link: In the Beginning: A Scientific and Philosophical Inquiry. You also may want to skim to the end and read about the Cosmological Argument, since we will be covering that in the weeks to come.

-James, the younger brother


One Response to A Response to “Creation: The Story from Science (Part I – Astronomy)”

  1. Matt says:

    It was an interesting read. It’s been a while since I thought in detail about the Cosmological Argument. I wonder whether anyone has tried to tackle dealing with the philosophical implications of the eternal inflation/multiverse model (a current popular pre-Big Bang theory). It’s not clear to me that these sorts of arguments apply in such a weird spacetime.

    You’re right that we didn’t cover much of the same ground. I dealt with light travel times as I think they’re really the biggest problem for the young earth creationist, and then I covered galaxy mergers just because that’s what I work on. You could really pick almost any subject within astronomy and find evidences for age. Your paper focused primarily on the Big Bang theory (which relies on the cosmic distance ladder that I discuss). Basically I didn’t feel I had space to discuss the whole Big Bang theory, so I picked subjects where I could make concise arguments for an old Universe. Of course, it’s possible that this would make interesting fodder for a future post (or series).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: