Archive for 2014

Blindsided by Grace

 

I love surprises. In fact, one of the things I love about my husband is his enthusiasm for staging a good surprise. But lately I’ve been contemplating the idea that maybe there are some surprises that I should be “outgrowing.”

How does the concept of surprise figure into growing spiritual maturity? Often I am astounded at the grace of God, mercifully protecting, teaching and blessing me beyond my wildest expectations. I could, in fact, say that His grace comes by complete surprise. But is that a biblical view? Should I find myself astounded when I see God mercifully providing, from divinely orchestrating the circumstances of my son’s birth to blessing us with the gift of an abundant supply of baby clothes to outfit his first year of life?

hMy God does not work in ways that are predictable. I can’t expect that He will always act in the same way, or that He will always do things the way I want them done. But so often, I find myself being, I think, far too surprised by His provision. Hasn’t He said He will supply all our needs? (Phil 4:19) Isn’t He our shield and protector? (Ps. 18:2)

Blindsided by Grace. The phrase came to me one day, not too long ago, as I contemplated the mercies of my God, thinking how often I am astonished to see how He works. As I mulled over the idea (it has such a holy ring to it, don’t you think?), I began to wonder if being able to be caught off guard by the mercies of God is really what He is calling us to. Does that fit with the words of the Psalmist, who says:

“I wait for the Lord, my soul does wait, and in His word do I hope. My soul waits for the Lord more than the watchmen for the morning; Indeed, more than the watchmen for the morning.” (Ps. 130:5-6)

If I am waiting on the Lord like a watchman, I will undoubtedly still be surprised at the ways in which the everlasting, unchanging, infinite God chooses to work. After all, He, to borrow from C.S. Lewis’ vivid illustration, is “not a tame” God, and as His child I look forward to an eternity of surprises. But If I am waiting on Him, expectantly watching for Him to work, I don’t think that I will be completely blindsided by the fact that He is working!

So that is my challenge to myself, in a life fraught with uncertainty, and constant temptation to live in fear: Wait on the Lord. I desire now to be living on the edge of my seat, eagerly, expectantly, breathlessly waiting and watching – what will my God think of next? I have to think that this posture of watching will, by the working of His Spirit, help me to recognize when God’s grace takes shape in ways I do not expect. The presence of pain, sorrow, and difficulty don’t indicate His absence, but perhaps will call for an even more intense need to be aware of His presence.

My prayer is that I will be so aware and watchful of God working, that the very fact that He surprises me will be a surprise in and of itself!

 

Aimee Mariani

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

Mariani Roadtrip Schedule

 

DCTI ROADTRIP!!!

DCTI RoadtripBrian, Aimee, and little Caden Mariani are hitting the road this November for a whirlwind tour. They will be speaking, fundraising, and recruiting for the Discover Creation Training Institute (DCTI – a ministry of Alpha Omega Institute). AOI’s desire is to raise up teachers and leaders all over the country to defend and share their faith starting with Creation so that they can train others! If you are in these areas, come on out and hear their testimony and passion for Creation Training as Brian presents the 5 Common Deceptions in Our Culture and what you can do about it.

If you are interested in Creation, come explore how you can get involved! Bring your friends and family and connect with others passionate about Creation Science and Evangelism! 

Trip Schedule

 

Nov 1 – Denver, CO – Summit of Peace Lutheran Church,

                Contact Name: Scott Mauser

                                Number: 970-523-9943

                Location: 4661 East 136th Avenue, Thornton, CO 80602

                Time: 7:00 PM

 

Nov 2 – Benkelman, NE – Trinity Baptist Church (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Trinity-Baptist-Church/111660258878587)

                Contact Name: Paul Folk

                                Number: 864-313-6303 (cell) or 308-423-5582 (office)

                Location: 206 7th Ave West, Benkelman, NE 69021

                Time: 10:40 AM Sunday Service

Nov 3 – Omaha, NE Area

Nov 5 – Springfield – Branson, MO Area

Nov 6 – Bartlesville, OK

                Contact Name: Randy Smith

                                Number: 918-327-3129

Location: 1st Floor Conference Room of the Fairfield Inn & Suites, 2107 SE Washington Blvd., Bartlesville, OK 74006

                                Located behind Freddy’s and Eggbert’s

                Time: 7:00

Nov 7 – Haviland, KS – Heart of America Science Resource Center (http://hoasrc.org/)

                Contact Name: Stan Bryant

                                Number: 620-862-5654

                Location: 312 E. Hwy 54, Haviland, KS 67059

                Time: 7:00 pm

 

Nov 8 – Oklahoma City, OK Area

Nov 9 – Dallas, TX Area

Nov 11 – San Antonio, TX – San Antonio Bible-based Science Association (http://www.sabbsa.org/)

                Contact Name: Scott Lane

                                Number: 210-861-0454

Location: Jim’s restaurant, 9950 San Pedro Ave, San Antonio, TX 78216,

Located on the corner of San Pedro and Ramsey – approximately 1 mile outside Loop 410

                Time: 7:00

 

Nov 12 – Houston, TX Area

Nov 14 – Pensacola, FL Area

Nov 16 – Atlanta, GA Area

Nov 20 – Greenville, SC – Creation Study Group (http://www.creationstudygroup.org/)

                Contact Name: Skip Skipper

                                Number:  864-868-9275 (home) or 864-506-1506 (cell)

                Location: Second Presbyterian Church, 105 River St., Greenville, SC

                Time: 6:30 to visit and 7:00 presentation time

Nov 21 – Cary, NC – Colonial Baptist Church (http://www.colonial.org/)

                Contact Name: Scott Wylie

                                Number: 919-233-9100 or wylie@colonial.org

Location: 6051 Tryon Road, Cary, NC  29518. The meeting will be in room number WC116 (commonly known as the “Parlor”) Guests should use the entrance labeled “East Entrance.”

                Time: 7:00 PM

Nov 23 – Charleston, WV Area

Nov 24 – Dayton, OH – ARKY Foundation (http://www.arky.org/)

                Contact Name: Ron and Brenda Cooper

                                Number: 937-256-2759 or arkfoundation@arky.org

                Location: 2002 S Smithville Rd, Dayton, OH. (~1 mile south of US35 on Smithville Rd.)

                Time: 7:00 PM

Nov 25 – Indianapolis, IN Area

Dec 1 – Chicago, IL – Midwest Creation Fellowship North (http://midwestcreationfellowship.org)

                Contact Name: Ken Funk

                                Number: 847-356-1433

                Location: St. Mark Education Center, 1822 Grand Ave., Lindenhurst, IL

Directions: Grand Ave = Route 132, Exit Rt 94 (Tri-state Tollway) at Grand Ave/Rt132 which is the Six Flags Great America Exit. Go West on Rt 132 for about 4-5 miles to the Village of Lindenhurst. As you enter town you will see a McDonald’s on the right then a traffic light, then a strip mall and another traffic light. Just past the second traffic light is a square, white, one story building with a St. Mark Education Center sign in front. Entrance is to the rear.

                Time: 6:45

Dec 2 – Milwaukee, WI – Creation Science Society of Milwaukee (http://www.cssmwi.org/)

                Contact Name:  Arnie Baganz

                                Number: 612-280-5732

                Location: Zion Lutheran Church, N48 W18700 Lisbon Rd., Menomonee Falls, WI 53051

                Time: 6:30

 

Dec 4 – Appleton, WI – Freedom Project

                Contact Name: Alan Scholl

                                Number: 920-470-7909

                Location: 750 N. Hickory Farm Lane, Appleton, WI

                Time: 6:30

Dec 5 – Green Bay, WI – Genesis Foundation (http://thegenesisfoundation-wi.org/)

                Contact Name: Jim Kraft

                                Number: (920) 676-8871

                Location: TBA

                Time: 6:30

Dec 7 – Bloomington, IL – Midwest Food Bank (http://www.midwestfoodbank.org/)

                Contact Name: Brian Mariani

                                Contact: bmariani@discovercreation.org

                Location: Midwest Food Bank, 1703 S Veterans Pkwy, Bloomington, IL, 61701

                Time: 7:00

 

Dec 8 – St. Louis, MO – Missouri Association for Creation (http://www.gennet.org/mac/mac.html)

                Contact Name: Ivan Burgener

                                Number: 618-344-6741 (home) or 618-792-6462 (cell)

                Location: TBA

                Time: Early Bird Movie at 6:30 and Main Presentation at 7:30

Dec 9 – Chicago, IL – Midwest Creation Fellowship – West (http://midwestcreationfellowship.org)

                Contact Name: John Dingess

                                Number: 630-965-7147

                Location: TBA, Carol Stream, IL

                Time: TBA

Dec 11 – Davenport, IA – Quad-City Creation Science Association (http://qccsa.org/)

                Contact Name:  Helmut Welke

                                Number: 563-940-5360

                Location: TBA

                Time: TBA

Feb 13 – Denver, CO – Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship (http://www.youngearth.org/) and Christian Home Educators of Colorado (http://www.chec.org/)

                Contact Name: Bill Browning

                                Email: jwbrowning@mho.net

                                Number: 303-843-9556

                Location: Calvary Apostolic Church, 5900 E. Yale, Denver, CO 80222

                                One block east of Yale off-ramp from I-25, at the intersection of Holly and Yale

                Time: 7:00

 

This schedule is subject to change. Further events may fill in as well. Contact us to set up additional events, whether for a large gathering or a small informal group at your home.

Email: traininginstitute@discovercreation.org        or       Call: 1-800-377-1923

DCTI website: http://www.discovercreation.org/TrainingInstitute.htm

In November, follow their Adventures as they post videos, pictures, and new info along the drive at: https://www.facebook.com/AlphaOmegaInstitute

 

DCTI Team

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

God of All Comfort

 

 

The God of All ComfortI have recently been re-reading an old book entitled, “The God of All Comfort” by Hannah Whitall Smith an author of the late 1800’s.

I am only a few chapters into the book, but it has been such a help and encouragement to me!

It is not a deep theological study, but rather a practical guide for living a more abundant, joyful Christian life.

The author had once had a conversation with an agnostic who declared, “The Christians I meet seem to me to be the very most uncomfortable people anywhere around.  They seem to carry their religion (faith and trust in The Lord Jesus Christ) as a man carries a headache .”  ( from page 7 and 8)

Hannah Smith was very disappointed to hear that Christianity… whose fruits were declared in the Bible to be love, joy and peace… should so often work out practically in the opposite direction, and should develop the fruits of doubt, fear, unrest, conflict, and discomforts of every kind.

We today are not that different, are we?  I had to ask myself which type of fruit I displayed to the watching world around me?  Do I usually display the love, joy and peace that is to characterize the Christian’s life, or do others see discontentment, conflict, worry and discouragement?  It is a convicting question!  We are Christ’s representatives to those who do not yet have a relationship with The Lord.  Does our behavior and outward countenance draw them to the Savior or repel them and make them glad that they are not so miserable as we?

The answer lies, according to this author (and I agree wholeheartedly), in KNOWING God and actually BELIEVING what He has promised in His word!  As Christians, we probably would all say,  “Oh, yes, I know God and believe the Bible.”  But I would challenge that.  I know from personal experience that when severe trials and suffering come, sometimes it is not as easy to REALLY know God and believe His word.  It can be easy to “say” we do,  but it is much harder when our circumstances are out of our control to put this into practice in our daily lives.  Our thoughts and minds crowd out the Word of God, and instead of finding His comfort and peace, we allow ourselves the self-indulgence of following the easy path of fear, worry, discouragement, and discontentment.  We cannot do this, and expect the fruit of the Spirit to be displayed in our lives.  God’s peace, joy, love and comfort are continually and abundantly being offered, but we MUST, by faith, receive them, in order to know their blessing and benefit.

In the book, “God of All Comfort,” there is a compelling thought that I would like to share with you.  Many of you are aware of my two major surgeries this past year and my struggles through the healing process these past nine months.  Many times I certainly felt like I was in a wilderness with no way out.  This statement really spoke to my heart and I trust you will find it interesting as well.

“We find ourselves, it may be, in a ‘wilderness’ of disappointment and of suffering, and we wonder why the God who loves us should have allowed it.  But He knows that it is only in that very wilderness that we can hear and receive the ‘comfortable words’ He has to pour out upon us. We must feel the need of comfort before we can listen to the words of comfort.  And God knows that it is infinitely better and happier for us to need His comforts and receive them, than ever it could be not to need them and so be without them.” (from page 40)

My heart was overwhelmed with gratitude to our precious Lord when I read that paragraph.  I was filled with thanksgiving that He would allow me the privilege to hear His words of comfort that He has been faithfully providing this past year, although I haven’t always been listening.  I have come to thank The Lord for the struggles and trials as they have caused me to redirect much of my thinking and attitudes of the past, and best of all, I better know my Savior!

I have been making a list these past months of some of the great blessings in suffering and pain that God has helped me to come to understand:

  1. A deeper desire for the Lord’s return;
  2. Less concern and desire for material things;
  3. Increased prayer life;
  4. Increased desire for heaven;
  5. Learning greater dependence on The Lord and others;
  6. Putting life and priorities in a better perspective;
  7. Developing more gratefulness for the little things;
  8. Increased compassion for others in pain and struggles;
  9. An opportunity to really “live my faith”;
  10. Deeper understanding of how brief and precious life is;
  11. Greater understanding of my weakness in contrast to the strength and power of God;
  12. To practice daily “living in His presence” and above the circumstances of life—truly finding my peace, joy and comfort in Him.

The Lord still has so much to teach me, as I think I learn His lessons slowly, but I am thankful for His patience with me and thankful for His continued guidance and presence for whatever the future holds!

 

Sue Stepanek

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

Dinosaur Track Field Trip

 

Dino Trackway 1 - GatewayLast month I had an opportunity to give some creation presentations at a church in Gateway, Colorado relating to dinosaurs and evidence for the Flood. Afterwards, we took an excursion to a dinosaur trackway which is found on a sandstone layer in the mountains between Gateway, Colorado and Moab, Utah. The question that was posed to me, as a geologist, was how they were made and then preserved. The first thing I jokingly told them is that the dinosaur must have weighed an awful lot to sink into solid rock. I followed that up with a more likely scenario that the layer had to have been still wet sand when the dinosaur walked across it and left his footprints.

Evidently, the dinosaur left the footprints in the sand shortly before a mud layer quickly filled in the trackway. Otherwise the tracks would have been quickly washed away. Further mud and sand layers would have subsequently been deposited above that to a great depth. Minerals from the body of water above would have cemented the mud and sand grains to form mudstone and sandstone.  Later geologic uplift and erosion would eventually expose the layer of sandstone. The mudstone in the track, being softer, washed away leaving the dinosaur imprints for us to see today.

Dino Trackway 2 - GatewayWhen I think of all that wet sand and the huge amount of mud and sand layers deposited above it, it speaks to me about events one might expect to occur during the Biblical Flood. Perhaps the dinosaurs were trying to escape rising Flood waters as they left the tracks, then further catastrophic deposition of layers buried everything.  Later, as the Bible indicates in Psalm 104, the mountains rose up and the valleys sank down. That caused the layers above the trackway to be revealed once again for all of us to enjoy on a field trip.

 

Dave Nutting

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

Elements of Life – Creation Perspective

The Magnificent Earth

Creation Answer:

God created the Earth before the sun, moon, and stars, and  so the earth is very unique. He created the sun and the moon specifically to be perfect for the life that He created on the earth. The earth is perfect for life, especially compared to other planets. The earth is so perfect that naturalists have to make countless assumptions, making it harder to believe their story than to accept God and His record of history.

God created and placed the elements just the way He wanted them – to give Him glory. There is no way for naturalism to explain why physics and the elements work the way they do. Renowned physicist James Clark Maxwell states that “there are immense numbers of other atoms of the same kind [throughout the universe]…Each is physically independent of all the others…We are then forced to look beyond them to some common cause or common origin [i.e. supernatural creation] to explain why this singular relation of quality exists.” His words still hold true that there needs to be a cause for the laws and structure of our universe.[i]

Currently, “there’s one thing on which most geochemists and astronomers agree: The celestial pantry is now empty of a key ingredient in the recipe for Earth.”[ii] This is saying that the origin of water on earth is still unknown. Water could not have survived the conditions in space and the hot early earth; it would have been burned up and lost to space. It has long been thought that water has come from comets shortly after the majority of the earth had accumulated, but recent studies of the water on comets show that they have a heavier water molecule. So those comets could not have contributed the majority of the water to the earth, because making the earth’s oceans from those comets would have been like “trying to make a low-fat dessert from heavy cream.”[iii]

“Scientists don’t really understand why various objects have different amounts of heavy water…People generally think that objects which formed further from the Sun should have more heavy water, but the new measurements don’t really fit.”[iv] Scientists estimate that “probably less than 15 percent” of the earth’s oceans could have come from comets or other space objects, although there may be evidence that some comets or other objects may in fact have the correct water for the earth.[v] Some scientists conjecture that “if existing objects in space couldn’t have combined to make Earth’s unique mix of water and other elements, the planet must have formed from—and entirely depleted—an ancient supply of water-rich material that has no modern analog.”[vi] This means that there is no evidence of that hypothetical material that preserved the water during the formation of the earth.

“Water isn’t the only matter on our planet today that seems unlikely to have formed at Earth’s proximity to the sun. There are also compounds and elements that readily vaporize, including chemically inert noble gases, such as argon, krypton, and xenon, and the elements nitrogen, oxygen, and hydrogen.” Osmium should have sunk towards the center of the earth early on in the earth’s formation, but yet it is found in the crust of the earth and the osmium that is found, does not match the osmium isotopes found on meteorites.[vii]

There are other planets and moons in our solar system that are perplexing as to how they have (or still have) the elements they currently do. Mercury, for example, should not be as dense as it is, so naturalists hypothesize that a large impact must have brought heavier material while stripping the light material away from the planet. There is no evidence of this kind of impact.[viii]

Enceladus geysers - Public Domain

Enceladus geysers

“Evolutionary models predicted that Jupiter would lack certain elements: argon, krypton, xenon, nitrogen, and others. But it turns out that Jupiter has lots of these elements.” Saturn’s largest moon, Titan, “has an atmosphere of mostly Nitrogen and Methane. Sunlight breaks methane down…Titan’s methane would only last for a few million years, not 4.5 billion years. However there is still methane there today…If Titan were really billions of years old, it would have…a source of new methane [and] lots of accumulated ethane…They have found potential lakes of methane and ethane, but at most only 1/10 of what it should have…They have only found 4 craters on Titan meaning that it is really young.”[ix] Another challenging moon of Saturn is Enceladus, which has a geyser on its south pole, but it should be “cold, old, and dead.”[x]

Jupiter’s moon, Io, is very volcanically active, which is a huge challenge for old age views. It puts off a tremendous amount of heat and material and simply would not be like that after billions of years. Callisto is also very geologically active, but shouldn’t be.[xi]

Also, the “naturalistic theory did not expect a uniform atomic nature of matter. ‘The relative abundances of the various isotopes of different elements are repeatedly found in similar ratios in stars, in the interstellar medium, in meteorite fragments and in the earth’s crust. The similarity of these ratios cannot be accidental, and the detailed explanation of the hundreds of known abundance ratios provides a severe task for the theory of stellar evolution.’”[xii] “In a similar vein, Gamow, a prime originator of big bang theory, also claimed ‘Relative abundances of elements [throughout the cosmos] have been exhaustively studied. … The most important result of these studies is the fact that the chemical composition of the universe is surprisingly uniform [emphasis in original].’ The interstellar medium and the intergalactic medium have D/H [Deuterium to Hydrogen] abundance ratios that do not fit into conventional NST [Nucleosynthesis Theory].”[xiii]

“It has long been claimed that big bang theory correctly predicted the 3:1 abundance of H to He in the universe. This is not true. The H/He ratio was known before big bang NST was conceived. The theory has been modified to fit the facts.” Therefore, these were not “predictions, but merely adjustments of theory (‘retrodictions’) to accommodate current data.” Also, “the belief in dark matter is at least partly due to retro-fitting big bang theory to the observed H/He cosmic abundance ratio.”[xiv]

“Other long-standing difficulties are the deuterium synthesis problem, and the overage of Population I stars. Neither has stellar NST actually explained the origin of the elements. The elements in their existence and abundances continue to point to creation.”[xv]

Radioactive decay of elements has been assumed to be constant. There are many observations that confirm this, but as more research is taking place, there are more reasons to be skeptical of that assumption. Rocks can be accurately dated only if: 1) the initial conditions are assumed correctly; 2) the elements have remained the same (they cannot come and go within the rock); and 3) the decay rate is and has remained constant.[xvi]

Some scientists are observing that radioactive decay rates may be faster the closer you get to the sun (or due to solar flares) – possibly because of more neutrinos or some other unknown particles coming from the sun.[xvii] Neutrinos can also originate from nuclear reactions in the earth or from other sources in the galaxy, both of which could affect the decay rates.[xviii] Some experiments are starting to show that under certain conditions (temperature, specific ionized states, and chemical environment), some decay rates are up to billions of times faster than normally observed.[xix]

As radioactive decay occurs, a common by-product is helium. Therefore helium is created within rocks and the rate that helium leaves those rocks has been observed and calculated. But if the earth were old, there should be much less helium in these rocks. This should contribute to more helium being in the atmosphere. Helium does escape the earth’s atmosphere, but that rate is less than the amount that is coming out of the rocks. This means that there should be more helium in the atmosphere, but there is not, and Hourglass and bookso this evidence shows that the atmosphere can be no more than 2 million years old.[xx] And actually “helium diffuses so rapidly that all the helium should have leaked out [of the rocks] in less than 100,000 years.”[xxi] There is even Carbon-14 in coal, fossils, and diamonds, which should have decayed beyond detection by now and thus is evidence that these items are not millions of years old.[xxii]

The most challenging aspect for naturalism is that it has an almost impossible amount of variables and details to work out in their theories. They bear the burden of proof to show more evidence that will prove answers beyond a reasonable doubt for the many necessary processes for their theory to be true. Naturalists have a lot of challenging questions to answer. Consider even how they claim that the earth gained its oxygen from cyanobacteria around 2.45 billion years ago during the Great Oxidation Event, “but mysteries remain. What occurred 2.45 billion years ago that enabled cyanobacteria to take over? What were oxygen levels at that time? Why did it take another one billion years—dubbed the “boring billion” by scientists—for oxygen levels to rise high enough to enable the evolution of animals? Most important, how did the amount of atmospheric oxygen reach its present level? ‘It’s not that easy why it should balance at 21 percent rather than 10 or 40 percent,’ notes geoscientist James Kasting of Pennsylvania State University. ‘We don’t understand the modern oxygen control system that well.’”[xxiii] Everything in this complex story, billions of years long, with very little observation and experimentation is a rough guess, very speculative and worthy of healthy skepticism.

 

What the Bible Says: Gen 1-2

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Maxwell, J., Atom; in: Encyclopedia Britannica 3:36–49, 1878; p. 49.

Jonathan Henry, The elements of the universe point to creation: Introduction to a critique of nucleosynthesis theory, August 2006, Journal of Creation 20(2):53-60, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-elements-of-the-universe-point-to-creation#endRef106, accessed July 17, 2014.

[ii] Ben Harder, Water for the Rock: Did Earth’s oceans come from the heavens?, Science News, Volume 161, No. 12, March 23, 2002, p. 184, Science News Online, http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/water_for_the_rock.html, accessed June 30, 2014.

[iii] Ben Harder, Water for the Rock: Did Earth’s oceans come from the heavens?, Science News, Volume 161, No. 12, March 23, 2002, p. 184, Science News Online, http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/water_for_the_rock.html, accessed June 30, 2014.

[iv] Holly Hight, Comets were responsible for Earth’s oceans, October 6, 2011, Cosmos Online, http://cosmosmagazine.com/news/comets-were-responsible-earths-oceans/, accessed June 30, 2014.

[v] Kimberly M. Burtnyk, Did Comets bring water to Earth?, June 13, 2012, EarthSky, http://earthsky.org/space/did-comets-bring-water-to-earth, accessed June 30, 2014.

[vi] Ben Harder, Water for the Rock: Did Earth’s oceans come from the heavens?, Science News, Volume 161, No. 12, March 23, 2002, p. 184, Science News Online, http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/water_for_the_rock.html, accessed June 30, 2014.

[vii] Ben Harder, Water for the Rock: Did Earth’s oceans come from the heavens?, Science News, Volume 161, No. 12, March 23, 2002, p. 184, Science News Online, http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/water_for_the_rock.html, accessed June 30, 2014.

[viii] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol I Our Created Solar System, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2009.

[ix] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol I Our Created Solar System, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2009.

[x] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol I Our Created Solar System, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2009.

[xi] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol I Our Created Solar System, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2009.

[xii] Harwit, M., Astrophysical Concepts, Springer-Verlag Inc., New York, p. 304, 1982.

Jonathan Henry, The elements of the universe point to creation: Introduction to a critique of nucleosynthesis theory, August 2006, Journal of Creation 20(2):53-60, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-elements-of-the-universe-point-to-creation#endRef106, accessed July 17, 2014.

[xiii] Gamow, G., The Creation of the Universe, Mentor Books, New York, p. 49, 1952.

Jonathan Henry, The elements of the universe point to creation: Introduction to a critique of nucleosynthesis theory, August 2006, Journal of Creation 20(2):53-60, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-elements-of-the-universe-point-to-creation#endRef106, accessed July 17, 2014.

[xiv] Jonathan Henry, The elements of the universe point to creation: Introduction to a critique of nucleosynthesis theory, August 2006, Journal of Creation 20(2):53-60, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-elements-of-the-universe-point-to-creation#endRef106, accessed July 17, 2014.

[xv] Jonathan Henry, The elements of the universe point to creation: Introduction to a critique of nucleosynthesis theory, August 2006, Journal of Creation 20(2):53-60, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-elements-of-the-universe-point-to-creation#endRef106, accessed July 17, 2014.

[xvi] Mike Riddle, Does Radiometric Dating Prove the Earth Is Old?, October 4, 2007, Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/does-radiometric-dating-prove-the-earth-is-old/, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xvii] Dan Stober, The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements, August 23, 2010, Stanford News, http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xviii] Emil Silvestru, Neutrinos – the not-so-neutral particles, December 2010, Journal of Creation 24(3):13-14, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/neutrinos-not-so-neutral, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xix] John Woodmorappe, Billion-fold acceleration of radioactivity demonstrated in laboratory, August 2001, Journal of Creation 15(2):4-6, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/billion-fold-acceleration-of-radioactivity-demonstrated-in-laboratory, accessed June 30, 2014.

Tas Walker, Radioactive decay rate depends on chemical environment, April 2000, Journal of Creation 14(1):4-5, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/radioactive-decay-rate-depends-on-chemical-environment, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xx] Jonathan Sarfati, Blowing old-earth belief away: Helium gives evidence that the earth is young, June 1998, Creation 20(3):19-21, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/blowing-old-earth-belief-away-helium, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xxi] Andrew Snelling, #6 Helium in Radioactive Rocks: 10 Best Evidences From Science That Confirm a Young Earth, September 11, 2012, Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/6-helium-in-radioactive-rocks/, accessed June 30, 2014.

[xxii] Andrew Snelling, #7 Carbon-14 in Fossils, Coal, and Diamonds: 10 Best Evidences From Science That Confirm a Young Earth, September 11, 2012, Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/7-carbon-14-in-fossils-coal-and-diamonds/, accessed July 17, 2014.

Andrew Snelling, Carbon-14 in Fossils and Diamonds: An Evolution Dilemma, December 8, 2010, Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/carbon-14-in-fossils-and-diamonds/, accessed June 30, 2014.

Gary Bates, Flood Fossils: A stunning new book with family friendly, groundbreaking creationist research will excite many, July 17, 2014, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/flood-fossils-book, accessed July 17, 2014.

[xxiii] David Biello, The Origin of Oxygen in Earth’s Atmosphere, August 19, 2009, Scientific American, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/origin-of-oxygen-in-atmosphere/, accessed June 30, 2014.

Elements of Life – Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

The Earth is a unique place that is not poisonous to life, but has all the resources we need to survive… plus so much more. Why does the earth have all of the elements that it does? How were all of the different elements created? Do the other planets have the same elements? Were there heavier elements on the earth long ago that have radioactively decayed over time?

 

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

The Big Bang produced hydrogen, helium, and lithium, which would eventually condense into stars, and as time went on, many other elements were formed within these stars. Every element heavier than iron has been produced by supernovas, or exploding stars, since these elements need increased amounts of energy for production. As the universe has aged, these elements have been propagated throughout the universe, including the dust cloud that will condense and form our sun and planets. If our solar system were located elsewhere in the Milky Way Galaxy, then Earth would not have acquired the same elemental composition that it has today. The Earth formed around the recently condensed sun as rocky material clumped together, cleaning up its orbital path around the sun. There are 92 naturally occurring elements that compose the earth and these elements bond to form a vast array of minerals.[i]

“Scientists at the Carnegie Institution have found that the mineral kingdom co-evolved with life, and that up to two thirds of the more than 4,000 known types of minerals on Earth can be directly or indirectly linked to biological activity. The finding, published in American Mineralogist, could aid scientists in the search for life on other planets.”[ii] Clumping material, like asteroids, in the universe appear to have around 60 different types of minerals. Planets with volcanism and water can have up to around 500 different minerals, “however, only on Earth – at least in our solar system – did mineral evolution progress to the next stages.” The activity of the tectonic plates on Earth add to the amount of mineral types, but “of the approximately 4,300 known mineral species on Earth, perhaps two-thirds of them are biologically mediated,” and also “principally a consequence of our oxygen-rich atmosphere.” “For at least 2.5 billion years, and possibly since the emergence of life, Earth’s mineralogy has evolved in parallel with biology…One implication of this finding is that remote observations of the mineralogy of other moons and planets may provide crucial evidence for biological influences beyond Earth.”[iii]

aEarth&planetsA few of the planets in our solar system have some of the same elements as earth, like oxygen, magnesium, calcium, and aluminum. Hydrogen is one of the most abundant elements, but without the protection of an atmosphere, it would easily be blown away. Hydrogen is crucial to life, as it is essential for water and water is essential for the evolution of life. The planets and other objects in our solar system should be of similar composition, since they all formed from the same dust cloud, but as the dust cloud was forming many of the lighter elements were blown further from the sun, resulting in the rocky terrestrial planets closer to the sun and the larger gas planets much farther out.

We observe that the radioactive decay of heavier elements to lighters element occurs constant rates. Because the decay rates are constant and known, the ages of rocks, materials, and artifacts can be calculated with certainty. Radiometric dating methods have been confirmed as consistent based on archaeological, archaeoastronomical, geological, and biological research.[iv]

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Lisa Gardiner, Elements in the Earth’s Crust, last modified November 13, 2007, Windows to the Universe, http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/geology/crust_elements.html, accessed July 17, 2014.

[ii] Astrobio, Earth’s Mineral Evolution: Mineral Kingdom Has Co-Evolved with Life, November 14, 2008, Astrobiology Magazine, http://www.astrobio.net/topic/solar-system/earth/geology/earths-mineral-evolution/, accessed June 30, 2014.

[iii] Astrobio, Earth’s Mineral Evolution: Mineral Kingdom Has Co-Evolved with Life, November 14, 2008, Astrobiology Magazine, http://www.astrobio.net/topic/solar-system/earth/geology/earths-mineral-evolution/, accessed June 30, 2014.

Elizabeth Howell, Why Complex Mineral Surfaces Could Be Indications of Life, June 9, 2014, Astrobiology Magazine, http://www.astrobio.net/news-exclusive/complex-mineral-surfaces-indications-life/, accessed June 30, 2014.

[iv] Christopher Gregory Weber, Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating, Spring 1982, Vol 3, Num 2, Pages 23-29, http://ncse.com/cej/3/2/answers-to-creationist-attacks-carbon-14-dating, accessed July 17, 2014.

Our Sun – Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

As the Bible records, God created the sun on day 4… after the earth. God created the lights in the heavens (including the sun) for signs, seasons, days and years and to give light on the earth.  (Gen 1:14-15) The sun also declares the glory of God. (Psalm 19:1) The sun causes different climates and weather patterns and even “plays a major role in producing clouds.”[i] There are many factors about the sun that make it very important for life on earth.[ii] Naturalistic methods say that the sun is 4.6 billion years old, but that result is based on assumptions about how much hydrogen has fused into helium. Naturalists have to take these results on faith that their assumptions are correct, whereas creationists have faith in the Bible and that God made the sun with the composition of elements that He wanted.[iii]

Many say that our sun is very average and normal. Cosmologist Carl Sagan said, “Where are we? Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.”[iv] Ph.D. astronomer Theodore P. Snow stated, “Our star, the sun, is rather ordinary…in many respects then, the sun is a very run-of-the-mill entity.”[v]

In reality, our sun is “brighter than about 85 percent of all stars, and it has more mass than about 90 percent…Our sun is very stable and has small flares, if the flares were bigger they could rip away our atmosphere and fry the earth…A superflare could be deadly, but there is no evidence of any superflares…our sun is very unusual because of this.”[vi] “Sun-like stars normally produce a bright superflare about once a century…a consensus is emerging that our sun is extraordinarily stable.”[vii] Hopefully this stability continues, because Earth is constantly threatened by solar activity which could do tremendous damage to electronics and communications systems, and that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Sun on the OceanA great challenge to naturalistic models is that the sun needs to have been extraordinarily stable throughout its whole life. The young faint sun paradox explains that as the sun has aged, it should now be 40% brighter than it was 4.6 billion years ago, so consequently in the past it was dimmer and the earth would have been colder. Astrophysicist Danny Faulkner describes the problem that at 3.8 billion years ago the earth would have been an average temperature of -3° C, which is below freezing.[viii] “Simple energy-balance climate models of the Budyko/Sellers type predict that a small (2–5%) decrease in [current] solar output could result in a runaway glaciation on the Earth. But solar fluxes 25–30% lower early in the Earth’s history apparently did not lead to this result.”[ix] That would have been devastating for life as it was just starting to evolve.

These estimates are in stark contrast to the naturalistic hypotheses. “Geologists note that Earth’s rock record insists that Earth’s average temperature has not varied much over the past four billion years, and biologists require a nearly constant average temperature for the development and evolution of life.”[x] Naturalistic hypotheses say that “as new forms of life evolved, the mix of gases in Earth’s atmosphere gradually changed. Evolution proposes that the early atmosphere contained a greater amount of greenhouse gases (such as methane) than today. This would have produced average temperatures close to those today, even with a much fainter Sun. As the Sun gradually increased in luminosity, Earth’s atmosphere is supposed to have evolved along with it, so that the amount of greenhouse gases have slowly decreased to compensate for the increasing solar luminosity.”[xi] “While there is some tolerance for deviation, any prolonged deviation from ideal conditions could have led to catastrophic heating or cooling from which the Earth might not have recovered. Venus and Mars are possibly examples of each of these scenarios.”[xii] “The precise tuning of this alleged co-evolution is nothing short of miraculous.”[xiii]

“James Kasting stated in Nature: ‘Despite all these proposed warming mechanisms, there are still reasons to think that the faint young Sun problem is not yet solved.’ Alicia Newton writes in Nature Geoscience: ‘Challenges for each hypothesis remain, and are likely to remain for some time.’”[xiv]

That paradox is not the only challenge to the naturalistic models. Just like the sun, gas planets, like Jupiter and Neptune, also radiate heat and enough to challenge their 4.5 billion year history. With Jupiter and Neptune radiating more than twice the energy that they receive, they could not have lasted billions of years.[xv]

The sun rotates around its equator and the planets should have supposedly formed revolving around the sun’s equator as well (everything rotating in one disk), but the planets all go around the sun in a disk that is different from the sun’s rotation. This is a big challenge to the nebular theory, as a couple of scientists put it: “we may note that one difficulty common to all solar nebula theories concerns the rotation axis of the sun, which is at 7 degrees to that of the system as a whole. It is not feasible that the rotation axis of the central body could be so inclined to that of the disk or, alternatively, that planets produced within the disk could systematically depart so much from its plane.”[xvi]

The rotation rate of the sun is also a challenge in that it rotates too slowly, and thus, “the angular momentum of the sun is far too small to be consistent with an evolutionary origin.”[xvii] It works like this, “as skaters pull their arms in, they spin faster…When the skaters pull their arms in, the distance from the centre decreases, so they spin faster or else angular momentum would not stay constant [which it has to]. In the formation of our sun from a nebula in space, the same effect would have occurred as the gases allegedly contracted into the centre to form the sun. This would have caused the sun to spin very rapidly. Actually, our sun spins very slowly, while the planets move very rapidly around the sun. In fact, although the sun has over 99% of the mass of the solar system, it has only 2% of the angular momentum. This pattern is directly opposed to the pattern predicted for the nebular hypothesis. Evolutionists have tried to solve this problem, but a well-known solar-system scientist, Dr Stuart Ross Taylor, has said in a recent book, ‘The ultimate origin of the solar system’s angular momentum remains obscure.’”[xviii]

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] How Clouds Form, August 13, 2013, Climate Education for K – 12, NC State University, https://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/edu/k12/.cloudformation, accessed June 25, 2014.

[ii] Sun, 2014, Answers in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/sun/, accessed June 25, 2014.

Jason Lisle, Ph.D., The Solar System: The Sun, 2013, Acts & Facts 42(7):10-12, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/solar-system-sun/, accessed June 25, 2014.

[iii] Jonathan Sarfati, Age of the Sun, November 13, 2011, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/sun-age, accessed June 25, 2014.

[iv] Sagan, Carl, Cosmos, Episode 7, “The Backbone of Night”

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[v] Snow, T.P., Essentials of the Dynamic Universe, 1993, West Publishing Co, p. 256.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[vi] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[vii] Seife, Charles, “Thank Our Lucky Star,” 1999, New Scientist 2168:15.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[viii] Danny Faulkner, The young faint Sun paradox and the age of the solar system, August 2001, Journal of Creation 15 (2):3-4, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-young-faint-sun-paradox-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system, accessed June 20, 2014.

[ix] Caldiera, K. and Kasting, J.F., Susceptibility of the early Earth to irreversible glaciation caused by carbon dioxide clouds, Nature 359:226–228, 1992.Michael J. Oard, Is the faint young sun paradox solved?, August 2011, Journal of Creation 25(2):17-19, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/young-sun-paradox#txtRef5, accessed June 25, 2014.

[x] Danny Faulkner, Ph.D., The Young Faint Sun Paradox and the Age of the Solar System, 1998, Acts & Facts 27(6), Institute for Creation research, https://www.icr.org/article/429/, accessed June 25, 2014.

[xi] Danny Faulkner, Ph.D., The Young Faint Sun Paradox and the Age of the Solar System, 1998, Acts & Facts 27(6), Institute for Creation research, https://www.icr.org/article/429/, accessed June 25, 2014.

[xii] Danny Faulkner, Ph.D., The young faint Sun paradox and the age of the solar system, August 2001, Journal of Creation 15(2): 3-4, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-young-faint-sun-paradox-and-the-age-of-the-solar-system, accessed June 25, 2014.

[xiii] Danny Faulkner, Ph.D., The Young Faint Sun Paradox and the Age of the Solar System, 1998, Acts & Facts 27(6), Institute for Creation research, https://www.icr.org/article/429/, accessed June 25, 2014.

[xiv] Kasting, J.F., Faint young sun redux, Nature 464:688, 2010.

Newton, A., Warming the early Earth, Nature Geoscience 3:458, 2010.

Michael J. Oard, Is the faint young sun paradox solved?, August 2011, Journal of Creation 25(2):17-19, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/young-sun-paradox#txtRef5, accessed June 25, 2014.

[xv] Dr. Jason Lisle, Creation Astronomy: Viewing the Universe Through Biblical Glasses, Answers in Genesis – USA, Creation Library, DVD, 2006.

[xvi] Dormand, John R., and Woolfson, Michael M., The Origin of the Solar System: The Capture Theory, 1989, New York: John Wiley & Sons, p. 48.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[xvii] Dr. Jason Lisle, Creation Astronomy: Viewing the Universe Through Biblical Glasses, Answers in Genesis – USA, Creation Library, DVD, 2006.

[xviii] Jonathan Sarfati, The sun: our special star, December 1999, Creation 22(1):27-31, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-sun-our-special-star, accessed June 25, 2014.

Our Sun – Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

When you look at it, the sun, it seems very close. However, light from the sun takes 8 minutes to get from the sun to the earth. The sun is so big, you could take around one million earths and fit them into the size of the sun. The sun is the closest star to Earth at a distance of 93 million miles.[i] Our sun is considered an average star, although very special to our solar system in many ways. Not only does it provide light to the earth, it provides heat for the planet as well. How old is the sun? How did the sun form? How did the earth form around the sun? How has the sun changed over time?

 

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

Sun and Prominences Around 4.6 billion years ago, the sun was formed out of a huge cloud of dust and gas. Most of these gases were condensed into the center of the cloud, due to gravity and other external forces. The condensing of the gases within this cloud made it very hot and allowed the fusion reactions to begin, lighting up the sun and giving off the energy which is so essential for the earth as we know it. The leftover matter of this cloud, further away from the sun, coalesced into our planets.[ii]

The SunThe sun is the largest object in our solar system, but is simply referred to as, and rightfully so, an “ordinary” or “medium” sized star. The sun contains about 70% hydrogen and 28% helium and the last 2% is composed of heavier elements.[iii]  The age has been calculated to about 4.6 billion years based on the methods of helioseismology, which examines the rate of fusion today and determines how long the sun has been burning.[iv] Regions of the sun rotate around its axis at different rates, around its equator, the sun rotates every 25.4 days, but near the north and south poles it takes 36 days to rotate. At the core of the sun, temperatures can reach up to 28 million degrees Fahrenheit.

The sun is expected to be around for about 10 billion years. Since the sun is approximately 4.6 billion years old, it has used up about half of the hydrogen that it has in its core. Eventually, it is going to run out of hydrogen, but before that it will swell into a red giant star which will then envelope and destroy the whole earth.

An interesting conundrum, the young sun paradox, was first brought up by Carl Sagan and George Mullen in 1972, which says that the sun was dimmer in the past and therefore the earth would have been colder. But geology has shown that the earth was warmer in the past than we would be anticipate, because, for the majority of its existence it has had liquid water. Complex interactions with larger oceans, less clouds, and life evolving (which influenced the gases of the atmosphere causing a greenhouse effect), kept the earth sufficiently warm and stable.[v] One researcher says, “we show that the paradox is definitely not as challenging as was believed over the past 40 years. While we can’t say definitively what the atmosphere looked like back then without more geological evidence, it is certainly not a stretch at all with our model to get a warm early Earth that would have been hospitable to life.”[vi]

From a naturalistic standpoint, the Sun’s Angular Momentum, or lack thereof, seems to be a challenge. The more mass in the center (like the sun), the faster it should spin, but we observe that the sun rotates very slowly. One hypothesis suggests that there was originally more mass in the center of our protostar, but during the T Tauri stage much of the mass was expelled from the center, slowing the inner rotation rate. Another hypothesis is that the planets may have migrated towards or away from the sun during their formation and thus changing the rotation rates. Some even suggest that an extra gas giant planet, or what makes up the Kuiper Belt, may have originally been closer to the sun, but may have been catastrophically expelled from the solar system.[vii]

During the developing solar system, there would have been an incredible amount of chaos; objects were impacting each other everywhere. The beginning of the solar system was very turbulent and catastrophic, but over time, the largest objects (now planets) gained dominance and cleaned up our solar system to make it the way it is today. Planets, or moons, rotating too slow or too fast or in strange directions or even revolving in random fashion is most certainly due to all of the tumultuous impacts and gravitational interactions of a vast myriad of early solar system objects. With so many variables, it is difficult (if not practically impossible) to give an exact answer to every strange movement in the solar system today, let alone the universe. However, scientists are constantly learning more and more and arriving at satisfactory answers. Our understanding will only get better. What should not happen is to simply lie down amidst the overwhelming amount of information and resort to saying, “oh, we can’t figure it out, so God just did it that way.” That perspective only impedes the progress of science.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Sun: Read More, last updated May 5, 2014, NASA, http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Sun&Display=OverviewLong, accessed June 25, 2014.

[ii] Dr. Cathy Imhoff, The Sun, 2014, Scholastic, http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/sun-0, accessed June 25, 2014.

[iii] The Sun, 2013, Nine Planets, http://nineplanets.org/sol.html, accessed June 25, 2014.

[iv] Jonathan Sarfati, Age of the Sun, November 13, 2011, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/sun-age, accessed June 25, 2014.

[v] Andrea Thompson, Clouds May Hold Key to Why Early Earth Didn’t Freeze Over, March 31, 2010, Space.com, http://www.space.com/8118-clouds-hold-key-early-earth-didnt-freeze.html, accessed June 25, 2014.

“Why Earth is not an ice ball: Possible explanation for faint young sun paradox,” Purdue University, ScienceDaily, www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120530152034.htm, accessed June 25, 2014.

[vi] CU study shows how early Earth kept warm enough to support life, July 9, 2013, University of Colorado Boulder, http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2013/07/09/cu-study-shows-how-early-earth-kept-warm-enough-support-life, accessed June 25, 2014.

[vii] Origin of the Solar System, Geol212: Planetary Geology Fall 2014, University of Maryland, Department of Geology, http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/geol212/lectures/26a.html, accessed June 26, 2014.

Tobias Chant Owen, Solar System, last updated April 11, 2014, Encyclopaedia Britannica, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/553008/solar-system/242068/Solution-to-the-angular-momentum-puzzle, accessed June 26, 2014.

“Being a Dad Who Leads” Book Review

 

I am now officially a father of a sweet little boy and my wife and I are loving it. He is so precious to us. We have been so blessed by the generosity of others. Normally at baby showers, you get great stuff for the baby or for the mommy, but a couple of friends gave me, the daddy, a thoughtful gift. They gave me a book entitled, “Being a Dad Who Leads” by John MacArthur.

Being a Dad Who LeadsI was somewhat familiar with the author and pastor and so I was excited to dig into it, even though our baby was not even born yet. What I love about John MacArthur, remembering from one of his other books, is that he uses so much scripture in his writing and preaching… and he did not disappoint with this book.

In this book, MacArthur touched on a number of key passages and themes dealing with being a father. As men, we are to “love our wives, just as Christ also loved the church.” (Ephesians 5:25) We are called to be Godly examples and leading our wives and children in a way they will notice and hopefully even the outside world will notice. The family is the primary priority – above our work.  Being a Godly father is likened to Christ’s relationship to the church, and also as similar in role to a church leader, so it is important.

MacArthur also exposits the passage in Proverbs 7 about being wise and avoiding the seductress. From that passage, there is a lot of insight, advice, and guidelines for fathers to help train their children. MacArthur also describes the attributes and characteristics of the father in the prodigal son account (Luke 15:11-32) and how that represents God and is an example of how we are to be as fathers.

MacArthur encourages parents to continually share the gospel clearly. Over and over again, he refers back to Ephesians 6:4 which says, “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” From this verse and MacArthur’s emphasis, I was encouraged to make every moment and every instance a learning experience to relate and teach God’s Word to myself, my wife, and my children. Every circumstance can be used to teach us and point us to God and His Word.

I was very blessed to already have received this book and to have had the opportunity to read it, since I am just starting out. I legitimately think that raising up men to be Godly leaders of their home can change our deteriorating culture. In fact, I may buy this book in large quantities to start giving away and I may even do a book study with the fathers around me. I am even considering including the young, single men around me that will someday be fathers. This is great teaching from God’s Word and it is crucial that we focus on His Word to make a difference in our families and community.

 

Brian Mariani

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

Star and Planetary Formation – Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

In order for stars to start forming, there must be gas clouds that can be compressed. The possibilities for compression can be:

  • a nearby supernova (exploding star),
  • dust grains from a supernova that cool and compress the gas cloud,
  • colliding gas clouds, like galaxies colliding,
  • black holes, which may emit jets of high-speed material that will compress the gas cloud, or
  • radiation from other nearby stars may compress the gas cloud.

 

In each of those possibilities, “they all require stars to exist before more stars can be made.”[i] “First of all, if the collapsing cloud theory can’t even explain the sun alone, then it is doomed from the start. To form the sun, or any star, a cloud must be dense enough to collapse and compress the interior so that it becomes hot enough for nuclear fusion to start.”[ii] “Interstellar gas clouds are too large and diffuse for gravity to overcome gas pressure. So they won’t collapse and form stars – they’ll disperse instead.”[iii] “The Butterfly Nebulaorigin of stars represents one of the most fundamental unsolved problems of contemporary astrophysics.”[iv] “There are so many uncertainties in this picture that at present we do not really have a theory of star formation.”[v] “We’re starting from a shaky foundation…we don’t understand how a single star forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.”[vi]

“Astronomers frequently report about ‘new stars’ or ‘young stars’ that they assume formed over the last few million years. Naturalistic astronomers would say that stars can form in the present from clouds of dust and gas in space. No one has actually seen these stars form. They are assumed to be young because of their location near gas and dust clouds where astronomers think that stars form.”[vii]

“Evolutionary scientists would expect that in millions of years, dust very near the star would be driven away or would be vaporized…Recent research on dust disks has turned up examples of stars that according to accepted ideas of stellar evolution are old, yet they are observed to have extensive dust disks.” They have “found some young stars missing discs and some old stars with massive discs.’”[viii]

So can stars still form? “Some creation scientists might argue that stars could not form after the Creation Week. However, others would say that stars could form after the Creation Week, but would argue that the naturalistic origins theories accepted today are not adequate explanations of the process.”[ix]

Can planets form? Gas by nature, especially hot gas, wants to expand more than gravity will be able to hold it together, because gravity is a very weak force. One scientist says “talk about a major embarrassment for planetary scientists. There, blazing away in the late evening sky, are Jupiter and Saturn – the gas giants that account for 93% of the solar system’s planetary mass – and no one has a satisfying explanation of how they were made.”[x] Gravity will not even be enough to keep two objects together when a collision happens. When two rocks hit each other, they will break up and fly away from each other unless it is the smallest collision possible (like a gentle side-swiping accident) or if there is magnetism involved. Gravity is not strong enough even to clump rocks together to make planets. Reading naturalistic explanations of the origin of stars and planets, one can easily see that gravity is the main hero of the plot, but gravity simply is not that mighty. “To sum up, I think that all suggested accounts of the origin of the solar system are subject to serious objections. The conclusion in the present state of the subject would be that the system cannot exist.”[xi]

Ultimately, stellar evolutionists have to make a lot of assumptions about the history of the universe, the solar system, the sun, the earth and so much more. Even studying the chemical composition of the Earth and the Sun has brought up challenges to the stellar evolution model. Some elements are created in stars like our sun, but elements heavier than iron are made and spread throughout the universe by supernovae (exploding stars). For our solar system to get the heavy elements that it currently has, many nearby stars must have exploded over billions of years to provide a rich dust cloud where our sun and solar system could form. Surprisingly, scientists have “found abundances of heavy elements” in old galaxies, but “the chemistry of galaxies should have been fairly primitive.”[xii]

Also surprising to secular scientists is that in studying the composition of the sun, they found different variations of oxygen and nitrogen in the sun as compared to the Earth and other objects. “These findings show that all solar system objects including the terrestrial planets, meteorites and comets are anomalous compared to the initial composition of the nebula from which the solar system formed.” In other words, our dust cloud (now solar system) should still have the same compositions, but that is not the case. NASA Genesis Mission investigator Kevin McKeegan says, “The implication is that we did not form out of the same solar nebula materials that created the sun — just how and why remains to be discovered.”[xiii]

Consider Mercury as another example. Since Mercury is so close to the center of the dust cloud (now the sun), it should not be that dense and it should not have sulfur, but it does. Mercury should not even have a magnetic field, but it does. In fact, magnetic fields all over the solar system are challenging to the stellar evolutionary worldview.[xiv]

There are even more examples that suggest that stellar evolution is not possible. The sun is tilted respective to the orbits of the planets, which should not be possible. Uranus and many of the moons in our solar system rotate the opposite way.[xv] The sun should be spinning much, much faster… but it does not. “Evolutionists have tried to solve this problem, but a well-known solar system scientist, Dr Stuart Ross Taylor, admitted when discussing the angular momentum problem that “a predictive theory of nebular evolution is still lacking.”[xvi]

According to the Bible, planets and stars were created on the fourth day of creation. “Although the Bible doesn’t specifically say ‘planets,’ it is correct to say that the Hebrew word translated “star” included the planets.”[xvii] God created the stars and planets, they couldn’t just form naturally. “The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.” (Ps 19:1, NASB)

 

What the Bible Says: Psalm 19:1, Psalm 8:3, Gen 1:14-16 Gen 1:19

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[ii] Jonathan Sarfati, Solar system origin: Nebular hypothesis, July 2010, Creation 32(3): 34-35, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/nebular-hypothesis, accessed June 20, 2014.

[iii] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[iv] Charles J. Lada and Frank H. Shu, The Formation of Sunlike Stars, May 4, 1990, Science 248: 564

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[v] Middlehurst, Barbara M., and Aller, Lawrence H., Editors. Nebulae and Interstellar Matter. 1968. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 58.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[vi] Carlos Frenk, as quoted in Irion, Robert. “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” March 19, 2004, Science 303:1750.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[vii] Wayne Spencer, Star Formation and Creation: Can We See Stars Forming?, November 19, 2008, Answer in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/stars/star-formation-and-creation/, accessed June 20, 2014.

[viii] Wayne Spencer, Star Formation and Creation: Can We See Stars Forming?, November 19, 2008, Answer in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/stars/star-formation-and-creation/, accessed June 20, 2014.

[ix] Wayne Spencer, Star Formation and Creation: Can We See Stars Forming?, November 19, 2008, Answer in Genesis, https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/stars/star-formation-and-creation/, accessed June 20, 2014.

[x] Richard A. Kerr, ‘A quickie birth for Jupiters and Saturns’, Science, Vol. 298, November 29, 2002, 1698-9.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol I Our Created Solar System, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2009.

[xi] Sir Harold Jeffreys, The Earth: Its Origin, History, and Physical Constitution, p. 359.

Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[xii] Keith Cooper, When Did the Universe Have the Right Stuff for Planets? September 4, 2012, Astrobiology Magazine, Space.com, http://www.space.com/17441-universe-heavy-metals-planet-formation.html, accessed June 20, 2014.

[xiii] Sun and planets constructed differently than thought, NASA mission suggests, June 24, 2011, NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory, ScienceDaily, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110623145430.htm, accessed June 20, 2014.

[xiv] Spike Psarris, Mercury: New Discoveries Delight Creationists, Creation Astronomy and Alpha Omega Institute, http://www.discovercreation.org/newsletters/MercuryNewDiscoveriesDelightCreationists.htm, accessed June 20, 2014.

[xv] Duane Gish, Ph.D., The Solar System – New Descoveries Produce New Mysteries, June 1974, Acts & Facts, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/solar-system-descoveries-produce-new-mysteries/, accessed June 20, 2014.

[xvi] Jonathan Sarfati, Solar system origin: Nebular hypothesis, July 2010, Creation 32(3): 34-35, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/nebular-hypothesis, accessed June 20, 2014.

[xvii] Ken Ham, “When Were Planets Created?”, Last Modified August 26, 2010, Answers in Genesis http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/kw/planets-created, Accessed December 2, 2012.