The Joys of a Youthful Dwarf Planet

When a woman is pregnant she can feel the energy of the child from the womb when born and growing up, children display a lot of energy because of their youth. In space exploration, we can expect to see an active solar system because it’s not billions of years old. If the solar system was billions of years old, activity on Pluto, for example, would be completely dead by now. 

Back in 2007, the Dawn space probe was launched by NASA with a mission to study three dwarf planets but later on, NASA decided to narrow it down to just two. Since then, the mission has completely contradicted billions of years old which have shocked some planetary scientists who are working on the mission. 

“Changes in the abundance of water ice on a short timescale, as well as the presence of hydrated sodium carbonates, are further evidence that Ceres is a geologically and chemically active body,” said Cristina De Sanctis, VIR team leader at the Institute of Astrophysics and Planetary Science.” 

What scientists have discovered was rapid geological changes and these rapid geological changes did not happen 100 years ago, nor 5 years ago nor 1 year ago, rather the space probe was able to detect the changes within 6 months! Do you know how cold it is in space? Do you know how long your coffee would stay warm if let it sit outside in freezing weather? Not long, right?

Now think of Ceres which is basically an asteroid which is smaller than Pluto, sitting out there in space which is very cold. One would think after billions of years that Ceres would be frozen out by now with no activity, right? Of course! Just like the coffee in freezing weather, there would be no reason to assume that the coffee would stay warm for many years after being exposed to cold weather for that long! Those who believe in the billions of years age would assume that as well and rightly so. But their assumptions about how old the solar system is, are in direct conflict with what is really going on in the solar system! 

So how did the scientists maintain the billions of years with Ceres? The answer, they didn’t, however, they came up with some imaginary estimates based on millions of years instead which falls way short of the billions of years in which they believe.  

But it’s not in conflict with creationism, rather it confirms it!  

 

Advertisements

Crashing Materialistic Paradigms

You have to love space exploration, the Cassini mission was fun to write about as it supplied a lot of data along with others space explorations like New Horizons which is now on its last leg of its mission after it passed by Pluto. And now along comes the Juno mission which hasn’t been a disappointment! Every mission has a huge magnitude of surprises (crashing materialistic paradigms) which goes far beyond the norm for exploring the unknown.

But when a human spacecraft is unable to travel vast amount of distances so that observations can be seen from a direct vantage point, evolutionary scientists decided to create SETI and Astrobiology and then waste millions of dollars on hypotheticals based on materialism (evolution). Take this paper contained in pnas as an example…

“The search for extraterrestrial life is one of the most exciting frontiers in present-day astronomy. Recently, the TRAPPIST-1 star was discovered to host seven rocky planets with masses and radii similar to those of the Earth, of which at least three of them may be capable of supporting life. Our paper addresses the possibility that life on one of these planets can spread to others through the transfer of rocky material. We conclude that this process has a high probability of being operational, implying that this planetary system may possess multiple life-bearing planets. Thus, our work has profound theoretical and observational consequences for future studies of the TRAPPIST-1 system and the likelihood of life in our galaxy.”    

You have to give these scientists some credit, the fact that there is not one shred of evidence for life on those planets, no evidence for life being transported to Moon or Mars or any other planet in our solar system and yet, they get paid huge amounts of money to come up with these amazing science fiction stories so they can “look further” into the unknown subject. Abiogenesis or sometimes called chemical evolution or sometimes even referred to as “soups to cells”.  There is an attempt underway to divorce evolution with the origin of life because speculations are decreasing due to advance technology along with the complexity of the cells. The origin of life theory makes evolution overall look weaker. And if you are trying to convince people that evolution is an indisputable fact, you sure don’t want to make it look weak.

But the reality of the situation, evolution is weak. The subsets of evolution are weak as well. The problem with the origin of life from a materialistic view is that all components are required to be present, within the same location in order to have a remote possibility to create a living cell. However,  carbonyl chemical groups which are needed for life can destroy amino acids which are also needed for life. Living cells have mechanisms that prevent cross-reactions but not entirely, sometimes it does happen and when it does, living cells have the ability to repair the damage but dead chemicals do not have such abilities! If scientists do not know after 60+ years of trying how dead chemicals were created life on earth what makes them able to predict life on other planets that a spacecraft cannot fly to?

There is a huge difference between the Juno mission and this kind of so-called research!

Every encounter that Juno makes, crashes another materialistic paradigm as pointed out in The Conversation…

“NASA’s Juno mission has started to deliver – forcing scientists to reevaluate what they thought they knew about the giant planet. The first findings from Juno, published in Science, indicate that many aspects of Jupiter have defied expectation – including the strength of its magnetic field, the shape of its core, the distribution of ammonia gas and the weather at its poles. It certainly makes this an exciting time to be a Jupiter scientist.”

Normally evolutionary scientists are taught, along with their egos, and agenda to never admit they are wrong. Rather, they will use words like, “improving our understanding or insight” or “needs to be looked further into” when their models are so way off base and looking into could last 50 to 100 years or more like the origin of life which leads to nowhere. Also admitting they are wrong would suggest that evolution, whether that be planetary evolution, or stellar evolution, or evolution in general, would suggest it’s rather weak in theory and that is a no-no, they want to make it look like the strongest thing in science that we know today. The Juno’s mission is no different.

Juno wasn’t the only spacecraft to record data that crushed assumptions about the planet’s magnetic field but NASA’s Cassini spacecraft during its final leg of its mission discovered as stated in NASA’s site…

“Based on data collected by Cassini’s magnetometer instrument, Saturn’s magnetic field appears to be surprisingly well-aligned with the planet’s rotation axis. The tilt is much smaller than 0.06 degrees — which is the lower limit the spacecraft’s magnetometer data placed on the value prior to the start of the Grand Finale.”

“This observation is at odds with scientists’ theoretical understanding of how magnetic fields are generated. Planetary magnetic fields are understood to require some degree of tilt to sustain currents flowing through the liquid metal deep inside the planets (in Saturn’s case, thought to be liquid metallic hydrogen). With no tilt, the currents would eventually subside and the field would disappear.”

This is a common pattern with models that hold to the old age assumption, spacecraft which explore interesting parts of our vast solar system come back with data that contradict previous models held for many years which put scientists into rescue mode. Without these type of missions, it would be extremely difficult to tell what is really happening in the universe. And of course, NASA scientists would make these models sound like they are so well grounded and sound. Back to Jupiter, there are more discoveries to reveal…

What Juno did discover was very interesting, one of the best scientific discoveries of 2017!

There is a lot of strange deep motions going on which requires further exploration. Other discoveries by Juno include:

“Juno’s camera has revealed numerous bright cyclones of a variety of appearances – some appear sharp, some have clear spirals, some are fluffy and diffuse, and the largest is some 1400km across. That’s about the same distance between London and Majorca. These bright storms sit on top of dark clouds, giving the appearance of “floating” on a dark sea…”

Perhaps someday a second spacecraft which is smaller than the mothership will be released and take measurements and pictures as it heads into the largest planet in the solar system! While the mothership continues its study of the planet for many days to come. Obviously, Juno will collect more surprises for evolutionists in terms of their models. Juno’s mission has been a great success so far and planetary evolution is not required for this mission, the engineers at NASA are one of the best in the world. That is where the taxpayer money should go when exploring the great unknown, for the most part not always, creating models before observation data comes in anyone can do, but not everyone can build, launch, and drive a spacecraft into a precise orbit to explore the vast unknown like engineers can!

Evolutionists Use Propaganda Tactics

When Barack Obama became President in 2008, he eventually became known as the first “social media” President. Cass Sunstein who worked within the Obama administration, who was in charge of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, suggested a plan to undermine opposition by paying people to go online to promote their political agenda using propaganda tactics. Social Media like twitter, facebook, and youtube were altering trends and information in favor of certain candidates like Hillary Clinton.

But in 2016, a major surprise happened in the United States. A businessman who was considered to be the least electable among both Democrats and Republicans with no political experience won the election! Shortly after the election, there was talk about how misinformation which became known by liberal media outlets as “fake news” helped Donald Trump get elected and would later be used as a label against them by the new President himself!  

Hillary supporters like the Washington Post, NY Times, CNN and others were set on a mission, demonize the newly elected President of the United States, also demonize major political and conservative figures who oppose their viewpoints which would result in more control over the flow of information.  They believe by controlling the flow of information would condition people to see things their way. Facebook and Google which have become one of the major hubs people use to obtain information helped Hillary’s campaign. Facebook began to block conservatives from trending even though it was a popular subject matter and Google was rearranging its search engine results for more positive aspects of Hillary. Eventually, Google defunded conservative news and commentary on youtube because Trump was elected!

Twitter had its own trending arrangement. It would filter out certain words for example if those words contained “Trump is great” and someone tweeted you a message that contained those words, Twitter would block you from seeing the message. The bottom line is this if people choose to get their information through certain media whether that be social media or regular media, and depending on its ownership, which the majority of it is liberal, they are going to manipulate the information that you are getting. So one has to weed out the good from the bad.  

Jimmy Fallon was under siege by liberals who said he was too soft with Trump on his show and later on some liberals complained that he wasn’t political enough on his show meaning he wasn’t being anti-Trump enough. It wasn’t like he was a pro-Trump supporter, rather, he far from it but prior to the criticism, his comedy wasn’t as political as other talk show hosts.  Fallon later said he was sorry to have Trump on his show in the first place and promised to be more anti-Trump. If Donald Trump didn’t get elected this wouldn’t have been an issue. Ellen who said she would never have Trump on her show because she wouldn’t have anyone on her show whom she didn’t like. Ellen actually did have Donald Trump on her show but that was before he was elected so she must have liked him then.

There were rumors of Jay Leno being replaced despite being number one in the ratings for 20 years and even on his last week of the show he was still number one because he was too critical of former President Obama. In 2008 on CNN, Chevy Chase made an interesting comment, he stated that he used his position which was on a popular tv-show called, “Saturday Night Live” in order to help elect Jimmy Carter in the 1970’s. How did he do that?  “I just went after him,” Chase said. He wanted Ford out of office and since he had millions watching him, he thought, “why not do it?”

Chevy Chase went on to say, you think we meaning the stars on Saturday Night Live are just mocking these political figures like Sarah Palin because she is funny? No Chevy, I don’t! They are doing for propaganda purposes to advance a certain political agenda to their viewers. This is why there was so much pressure of Fallon to be way more anti-Trump than he wanted to be, this is why Ellen started to say that she didn’t like Trump so the President wouldn’t be invited on her show despite him being on her show prior to his election! This is why Jay Leno was replaced, he wasn’t advancing their political agenda the way they wanted it.

This is why former DNC Chairperson, Donna Brazile, did not apologize at first, for leaking CNN’s debate questions and topics to the Hillary Clinton campaign during the Democratic primary, rather she denied it. Later on, she finally admitted to the leaking of debate questions and three days went by before she finally gave an apology. And lastly, when there was no more use for her, she threw Hillary under the bus by writing in her book that Hillary and the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders!  And it wouldn’t be just Hillary, if Bernie was the nominate without collusion on who was going to win the candidacy, Donna would have gladly leaked CNN’s debate questions to his campaign as well and never admit to such an unethical deed unless she was caught for the sake of helping the DNC remain in control of the government! 

It’s another reason why she continues to undermine the Presidency of the United States with her allegations. By suggesting there was meddling by Russians with the Trump campaign that somehow put him over the top with a victory while never mentioning that her own party along with Hillary’s campaign hired Russia through a law firm to find dirt!  Which was compiled into a dossier which was later then leaked to the media on Russian collusion with Donald Trump that has to lead nowhere after a year as far as criminal activity or charges were concerned. If anything, it’s against US laws for a campaign to hire foreigners in that sort of operation as well as funneling money through a law firm to do it rather than reporting it! Brazil continues with the propaganda as she believes it will help her cause and her party but the responses towards her haven’t been all that positive, telling her she should get over it, her party lost, we have future elections.  

Propaganda is not confined to news outlets, political campaigns, late night talk show hosts, but Hollywood as well who are also invited and attend the White House Correspondents Dinner.  The dinner is supposed to be for serious journalists rather than entertainers. But as we can see, it is a blur now between the two but they share one major thing in common and that is propaganda. One name has dominated the headlines in recent times and that is Harvey Weinstein who is an American film producer and former film executive. On the latest count, 91 women have come forward to accuse him of either sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape. Weinstein had two lives, one was making profits off of producing movies many of which advanced his other life and the other was going after women who were not interested in him.

Weinstein went as far as hiring an army to protect him which included a high-level law firm who would then hire former government spies for the purpose of finding dirt on his victims which later would be used against them. Even in his contract with his company, it said he couldn’t get fired if he paid settlements with his own money to women. His law firm which also represented a major newspaper in the United States would attack reporters or editors who tried to talk to some of his victims. An ex-Jewish spy befriended one of the victims by pretending to be a victim herself. The spy would then obtain weaknesses from the victim and then reported it to Weinstein who would later use it against his intended target. This is not a movie, this has been going on with Weinstein for many years!

Women were not the only victims in Hollywood, but young children as well and it might be worse. Horror stories of young kids being molested by adults in Hollywood who took advantage of their Hollywood ties as well would groom the kids as victims. Even went so far as making movies such as two older men living with one younger child whom they were not related to as a family. The production wasn’t intended to make huge profits but rather used as propaganda in order to try and change the culture’s view of their narrative which was a sexual perversion.

The latest propaganda movie which has been already been declared an Oscar candidate is to be released on November 24, 2017, which is…“Call Me By Your Name” where it depicts a relationship with a 24-year-old man with a 17-year-old boy. There are perverts in Hollywood who don’t care about sexual assault or sexual harassment who believe adults can have romantic relationships with kids. The movie attempts to normalize the behavior in our culture along with grooming future victims for themselves. Hollywood has used numerous movies to advance not just certain behavior but also certain political agendas which they believe will help them normalize their sexual perversion. 

Ok, before moving on, I want to make it clear that this is not a political blog per say nor a Hollywood review of movies and its workers, but the reason why I brought this up is the fact that evolutionists try and do the same thing with their narrative of what they call science! They campaign for evolution, Hollywood produces very one-sided presentations of evolution in their fictional stories, mainstream media which includes newspapers, magazines, and tv. Fox News will give evolution great media coverage without questioning it. However, with Fox News sometimes the hosts do not always agree with evolution but the rest of mainstream media is fully pro-evolution. Not only with evolution but certain political issues as well.

Even though there is so much propaganda with evolution either through the media or public education, campaigners for evolution are stunned that so many continue to reject the theory! Ryan Dunk from Syracuse University wrote in his blog…

“Despite over a half-century of education reforms aimed at better science instruction, nearly 40 percent of Americans reject the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution.”

 Making an implication that Darwin-skeptics are science deniers which isn’t true:

“It is our hope that these studies, followed by a larger study comparing science and non-science students, will help us to develop curricular interventions that can meet students where they are and help lead them towards an understanding and acceptance rather than denial of scientific knowledge.”

The scientific method consists of a method of a procedure consisting of systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses. There is nothing wrong with the scientific method mentioned above that would be anti-biblical.

We observe many advances in science concerning technology, robotic machines, smartphones, self-driven cars, and in about 10-12 years from now most cars get their power from electricity whether that be 100 percent or hybrid, the days of gas cars will eventually be eliminated. The days of humans driving cars will also eventually be eliminated.  And so much more!

Dunk’s accepted method for teaching evolution which is common today in public schools uses a grotesquely exaggerated representation of the data. Calling evolution “the unifying explanatory framework of biology”…Things like medical science and biomimetics have no use for evolution. Some may give credit to evolution, but that is different than actually using it in the research. Molecular biology is another one when it comes to describing molecular machines, evolution has no use. Molecular biology is the biology of the future!  

So where does the issue come from? It’s origin, it boils down to, do you believe nature comes from God or evolution? Fatty oil for example which is known to degrade quickly be able to preserve itself through massive environmental changes, as well as longevity for millions of years or things like activity on Pluto so far away from the sun, is still billions of years old rather than frozen and inactive because of its old age located in a cold environment.  Observations in our solar system have confirmed youthfulness because of things like activity on planets and moons. along with the rings of Saturn. If anything, a young universe does and will show more interesting stuff than an old frozen one!

Observations here on earth also indicate youth rather than 4.5 billion years old. Those who teach evolution generally will hype the Green River varves in Wyoming as evidence for an old earth. However, there are well-preserved fish and birds located throughout the sediments which don’t indicate annual deposits. Their presence indicates a catastrophic burial. Evolutionists have argued that high concentrations of alkaline were also present in the water which made it possible to preserve the dead animals. That explanation is not realistic because high concentrations of alkaline would disintegrate the dead animals. Do you know what alkaline is used for? It’s commonly used for dishwashers for its ability to cut grease! It’s not a preservative by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn’t fit basic chemistry in that way! And lastly, the consistency across the formation, there is none, which leads one to a conclusion that annual deposits are not happening. 

There is plenty of evidence of a young earth and universe but for this post I went over just a few of them and perhaps someday, more of them will be posted, moving on…

Evolutionists do not want the public to believe intelligent design namely, God is responsible for nature and the universe. They want evolution to be their God sort of speak. Even though there is a lot of evidence which contradicts their theory, they require unconditional acceptance like a cult would require.  Since 1998, it is taught as an irrefutable fact rather than a theory that can be questioned. 

Evolutionists want students to deny the abrupt appearance of complex body plans found in the fossil record, how intelligent designs relate to nature and God, living fossils, the origin of consciousness, human exceptionalism and so on…! The explanations in evolution resemble science fiction movies rather than actual science. Science is a great tool to gain information, Evolution is a tool which uses propaganda tactics that leads to nowhere but it is assumed to be everywhere by its followers!  

Fatty Oil Discovered In A Fossil

The earth is young, some of its processes are much quicker than evolutionists want to believe because their assumption is that the earth is billions of years old along with evolution moving at a very slow pace. If that is the case, why are scientists discovering soft tissue in fossils which they assume are many millions of years old? Prior to 2007, they didn’t even attempt to look for it. Soft tissue was discovered by accident in a T-Rex. Now a new discovery surfaces which have absolutely stunned them! 

“As a rule, soft parts do not withstand the ravages of time; hence, the majority of vertebrate fossils consist only of bones. Under these circumstances, a new discovery from the UNESCO World Heritage Site “Messel Pit” near Darmstadt in Germany comes as an even bigger surprise: a 48-million-year old skin gland from a bird, containing lipids of the same age.”

 Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum

“As shown by our detailed chemical analysis, the lipids have kept their original chemical composition, at least in part, over a span of 48 million years. The long-chain hydrocarbon compounds from the fossil remains of the uropygial gland can clearly be differentiated from the oil shale surrounding the fossil,”

Mayer claims this is a very rare occurrence, or really? They never tested the fossils for soft tissue prior to 2007, how does he know its rare? Oh, the age assumption! How can organic material which is known for decomposing within weeks, sometimes years last many millions of years? How is that possible? It takes a lot of faith and denial of what goes on in the real world to believe in evolution. Here comes an unproven invention of how…

“It is possible that hey hardened into nore [sic, more] decomposition-resistant waxes under exclusion of oxygen. In addition, the researchers assume that one of the properties of the preen oil played a role that is still shown by modern birds today – its antibacterial components. They may have been the reason that after the bird’s death only few bacteria were able to settle in, preventing the full-on decomposition.”

Nobody will be able to test such an explanation but from human experience, we all know that soft tissue degrades quickly! And even with the earth was billions of years old, evolutionists claim the earth went through extreme climate changes over a course of millions of years and if this was true, it would have affected the soft tissue.  

And there is another thing, this fossil doesn’t show any evolution because this ancient bird had a gland that is identical to modern birds of today. Overall the ancient bird is not that much different than we see today and yet it is assumed to be 48 million years old with fatty oil still present. Any common sense would tell you the remains indicate the bird did not fossilize very long ago! It confirms creationism, not evolution! Not long ago more soft tissue was discovered in a turtle claimed to be 54 million years old! The list continues to grow. 

We live in exciting times, a young earth will provide a lot of information from the past that normally evolutionists assume should have been gone a long time ago because of their view on materialism moving very slowly. 

We Give Thanks To Remarkable Discoveries

It is thanksgiving in America, a time where families and friends get together and give thanks. This tradition came about in 1621 when colonists and Wampanoag Indians shared an autumn harvest feast together which later became known as Thanksgiving. However,  it wasn’t until during America’s Civil War in the 1800s when Lincoln made it a national holiday.

As Christians, we thank God for our faith, we thank God for various things we have in life. One of the things that we should be thankful for is a young earth because it makes science that much more interesting. We can expect to find a lot more activity in our solar system in which to study with our space probes than if the universe was very old. Organic material like protein being discovered on a regular basis. For example, North Carolina State University discovered a dinosaur known as Mongolian oviraptor found protein from its sheath!

“During preparation of the specimen, the scientists noticed that there was a thin lens of white material extending beyond one of the bony claws on a forelimb that differed in texture and color from both the sediment and the bone. It was also located where a claw sheath would be.”

“After the calcium was removed, the antibodies reacted much more strongly, indicating the presence of beta-keratin and preservation of original molecules.“

The conventional wisdom is right, organic material doesn’t last millions of years, only thousands. In another discovery, a bird which has been dated by evolutionists to be 130 million years old discovery soft tissues namely protein.

“New research from North Carolina State University, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Linyi University has found evidence of original keratin and melanosome preservation in a 130-million-year-old Eoconfuciusornis specimen. The work extends the timeframe in which original molecules may preserve, and demonstrates the ability to distinguish between ancient microstructures in fossils.” -Science Daily

Since there isn’t a wide range of calcium or cysteine found in dead birds of the most recent till 130 years back the hypothesis for trying to keep this fossil million of years old is dead in the water. But with common sense along with reality, these discoveries are possible because the earth is young confirming the Bible! And so, we give thanks :)

Mark Armitage vs California State University

When Mary Schweitzer first discovered soft tissue in a T-Rex back in 2005, she encountered much criticism but later on her discovery was vindicated. Unlike Mark Armitage who got fired in 2014 from the University for his research which was published in a peer-preview paper which went international.

“Yet no one else has lost a position over such a paper. So the question is: Why did Armitage alone get fired? There must have been something else.” 

How many creationists discover soft tissues in fossils and publish their findings in secular peer-review papers? The firing of Mark Armitage was on the basis of religious discrimination which was groundbreaking without a doubt in order to set an example for future creation scientists who are thinking of publishing their findings while working for a University as a creationist. I will get more into his case in a moment. I would like to introduce Mark to those who are unaware of him as well as reminding those on who he is.

Mark Armitage  was a microscopy laboratory director at the University of California which duties included teaching students on how to use very complex equipment. He also has 30 publications to his credit. It was 2012 when he made a stunning discovery. In a horn of a  Triceratops horridus specimen assumed to be 65 million years old in the framework of evolution, not reality. The horn was 48 inches long which contained soft tissue that was about to become bone and what is really interesting it was discovered in the presence of bacteria, insects, and plant material. Organic material degrades very rapidly especially when you have bacteria, and insects present. This is a fact!  Mark goes into great detail on his amazing discovery in the video below…

On to Mark Armitage’s case, the paper in question which leads to his firing at the University was first published in American Laboratory magazine in that same year when he made the discovery then in 2013,  the discovery was published in a peer-reviewed journal called, Acta Histochemica where he made no mention of creationism nor a young earth in his conclusions. It was all about what he had found in the fossil! Yet, not long after that he was fired with some lame excuse that there was a lack of funding to pay for his salary and a need for his services (teaching students on how to use very complex equipment).

Superior Court Judge Dalila Lyons issued in July a tentative ruling against the university’s request for summary judgment. And in October 2016 it was announced that the university settled out of court paying Mark Armitage 15 times more than his annual salary. Apparently, the university had plenty of funds for a huge cash settlement which could have been used for his salary. It was a clear win for Armitage and creationists who pursue jobs in the field of science at universities!

On a side note, here is another video which refutes old earth creationists who have embraced the time frame of evolution (but not evolution itself) on the preservation of soft tissue…

Cosmologists Are Lost In the Dark

Ever since two rescue theories such as dark matter and dark energy were proposed and have been studied many times over using some of the most advanced and expensive equipment known to man has yet to lead to any sort of breakthrough. Many articles have been appearing lately in the last few months about their “lack” of knowledge and their inability to directly detect it.

Here are just a few of them…

The search for dark matter

“What we do know about dark matter comes from the ways it’s influenced the universe nearly as far back as the Big Bang. Like paw prints left by an elusive animal, the cosmos is full of signs of dark matter’s existence, but we haven’t actually seen the creature itself.”

“So far, not a single experiment has yielded a definitive trace of dark matter.”

Dark Matter Just Got Murkier

“We have never directly observed dark matter, but we know a great deal about what it must be: It must be massive (because it affects the rotation of galaxies); it must be electrically neutral (because we can’t see it); it must be different from ordinary matter (because we see no evidence for it interacting with matter in the usual ways); and it must be stable (because it has existed since the dawn of the universe). These properties are unequivocal.”

“However, we don’t know exactly what it is.”

The dark universe

“The existence of dark matter has been inferred from the motion of stars since the 1930s, but its nature remains a mystery. The dark-matter particle posited by the most popular theory has not been shown to exist — if it is to make an appearance, it may be now or never. The search is narrowing and the possibilities are dwindling; physicists may soon have to move on to alternative explanations”

“Explaining dark energy is even tougher. The discovery of the accelerating expansion of the Universe in 1998 called for a driving force that opposes the pull of gravity (S205). At the heart of attempts to characterize this energy is a deceptively simple question: is dark energy constant? Finding out will require looking back in time, to the birth of the Universe” 

Something is wrong with dark matter

“The LUX measurement is simply the most recent and most powerful of a long line of searches for dark matter. They found no evidence for the existence of dark matter and were able to rule out a significant range of possible WIMP properties and masses.”

Dark Matter and The Big Bang

This may surprise some but it wasn’t proposed by an atheist nor an agnostic, nor some sort of special interest group but rather a Belgian Jesuit priest living in the 1920s, who was an astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Leuven. He was the first to propose the expansion of the universe. A couple of years later it was Edwin Hubble who declared the expansion of the universe which was predicted by Einstein’s theory of gravity, and general relativity, more than a decade earlier. However, this caused a problem for those who believed the universe was eternal which including Einstein. So he did was like what most evolutionists do in this situation when observational data conflict with their theory, Einstein came up with a rescue hypothesis ( cosmological constant ) in order to keep the universe eternal.

But the rescue hypothesis didn’t hold up instead evolutionists began to propose “constant density” whereby increases in the matter just pops into existence spontaneously. Eventually, it changed in 1965 with the discovery of the cosmic microwave background (CMB), a low-level, nearly uniform radiation permeating the universe from all directions.

The Big Bang Theory took hold and replaced the old theory in the mid 60’s after the discovery of CMB despite opposition from those like  Fred Hoyle who said…

“[The Big Bang] is an irrational process that cannot be described in scientific terms … [nor] challenged by an appeal to observation.”

Changing The Big Bang Theory Back To Eternal

The reason for the opposition much like Einstein was the fact that the Big Bang Theory gave the universe a beginning and when you have a beginning, you require a cause for that beginning to happen whereas eternal, there is no such cause required because it’s always there and things can evolve from it. This type of explanation for how the universe evolved are much easier to create a storyline when the tools and material are already created into existence. For example, Stephen Hawking came up with the idea of universal quantum singularity, where there was no origin in time which makes it basically eternal. He described our universe having many different histories (multi-universes) and we are supposedly just some of them! Unlike in Creationism where there was a beginning and will be an end, this is called, “finite”.

By no means does these newer theories solve anything as far as the Big Bang goes…Major questions remain and are just a few of them…

1. “How did nature choose the specific laws which control the universe, as deduced from observation?”
2. “How did the universe start off with an initial state in such a high degree of homogeneity?”
3. “Why, after 13.8 billion years since the big bang, is not the universe in thermal equilibrium?”

 

What about Dark Energy?

Dark energy was invented because the universe was moving apart faster than astronomers had predicted, and dark energy was created in order to explain the mystery. This is very common in theories pertaining to its supposed evolution. When observational data doesn’t match up with their beliefs, they involve new things to solve problems in their story but that doesn’t make it factual in fact it opens up more complexity as we shall see in a moment.

In Conclusion

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed despite all the new technology—inflation, dark matter, and dark energy which is what holds the whole theory together because without them there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory.

For instance, In 1978, Princeton physicist Bob Dicke along with other scientists noticed the universe is finely tuned, “too perfect” in their opinion for something to have been created by random natural causes. A little bit too much, the universe tears itself apart, a little bit too less of an expansion and the whole universe collapses. It had to be finely precise without a reason to do so. Sounds complicated? Indeed! One of the things I have always stressed in this blog when a theory becomes more and more complex, it is usually an indicator that the theory is not based on reality.

“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”

Romans 1:21 KJV

Cosmology guru Alan Guth eventually invented the hypothesis known as “inflation” however, he was unable to figure out how to stop it once it got started. Over time others joined in and came up with ideas of their own. What seemed to be the greatest problem-solving idea which kept the Big Bang Theory alive was falsified a year later when it failed to produce a smooth universe. This was not the end for inflation rather it required a rescue device to save it. So inflation which is needed to keep the Big Bang alive needed saving itself. Otherwise, as Guth knew but despised, the evidence does in fact point to an intelligent designer namely God :)