Comments to AiG:
Astronomy Confirm a Young Universe?
Most scientist couldn't care less about what
the Bible teaches.
Very few scientists are interested in refuting the
Bible, How often do you find remarks as 'This result contradict the Biblical
account' in a scientific paper - next to never.
Influence from the Moon
They mention a
number of positive influences from the moon on life on earth. So what? There
are probably millions of potentially life-carrying planets out there. Only
those with the very best conditions can carry life for a substantial amount of
time. Earth is such a planet, partly because of the moon.
First: This does not support an earth a few
thousand years old. They only argue that it cannot be several billion years
Second: The calculations are very difficult, as the continents have been moving
around. The slowing down of earth’s rotation is due to the tides depends on the
distribution of continents. When all continents were gathered together, the tidal
slowing of earth’s rotation was much slower.
They do not
mention two other possible sources of comets: The so-called ’Scattered disc’
and the so-called ’Centaurs’. Wonder why not?
Is it so unreasonable to assume that if you find a large number of objects that
are just above large enough to be visible, then there is a large number of
smaller objects? Time will show whether still smaller objects will be found,
confirming the theory, or not.
they mention the so-called ’Snowball Earth’ hypothesis that is somewhat in line
with their predictions. Also, temperature on earth very much depend on the
content of the atmosphere, especially CO2. Why don’t they mention that?
they say is: ’Astronomers do not know everything about stars’. So what? No
scientist can postulate to know everything about anything.
formation: Basically the same as above: ’We do not know everything’. Given an interstellar
cloud is large enough, cold enough and dense enough, it will collapse into a
star. It is a matter of details, which of course is very complicated.
Wave Theory: I am not an astronomer, so I cannot judge, but here is a completely
different description of the theory, by Professor in Astronomy at Case Western
It is part
of course, therefore it is in the form of questions, but it can be understood.