Earlier this year to explain the origin of the universe, Hawking invokes “M-theory” which is really not a theory at all but rather a collection of different unproven ideas. In science daily, they claim they have the magic to create something out of nothing, naturally…
“The scientists and engineers have developed new equations that show how a high-energy electron beam combined with an intense laser pulse could rip apart a vacuum into its fundamental matter and antimatter components, and set off a cascade of events that generates additional pairs of particles and antiparticles.”
“But in a strong electromagnetic field, this annihilation, which is typically a sink mechanism, can be the source of new particles,” Nees said, “In the course of the annihilation, gamma photons appear, which can produce additional electrons and positrons.” A gamma photon is a high-energy particle of light. A positron is an anti-electron, a mirror-image particle with the same properties as an electron, but an opposite, positive charge.”
This isn’t exactly creating something out of nothing, is it? No, because that is going against natural law. So in turn, they do what Darwinian evolution does, you invent something and go from there without explaining how it got there in the first place. What created a high-energy electron beam to zap into existence, events that supposedly created particles and antiparticles?
Do you really call that science? Should these scientists be removed from their post? In Kentucky back in 2007, astronomer Martin Gaskell found himself as the leading candidate for directing the new observatory at the University of Kentucky. He claimed that evolution and the Bible were reconcilable (which they are not) and also suggested to his students to read intelligent design papers. This like creating something out of nothing became hype. Hiring a ‘creationist’ could be an embarrassment to the University, the establishment and special interest groups suggested. So the process of his removal was on!
Gaskell’s is taking the University to court with an allegation that the university violated the 1964 Civil Rights Act for discrimination against him because of his religion. The university did admit in a legal brief, that concerns over Gaskell’s views on evolution (it wasn’t dogmatic enough) played a role in the decision to chose another candidate.
Gaskell has a doctorate in his field, plus he had published extensively on various subjects such as black holes in space, and developed an observatory at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln atop a campus parking garage — an innovative approach UK (who rejected his hire based on his religious views) eventually would also use.
So there you have it, as long as scientists view evolution or naturalism as a dogma, you can invent anything, even zapping things out of nothing and calling it a major breaththrough, but when you have conducted real observations and nobody had a problem with your work before, but when an important job comes along, you are questioned because of doubts about your view on evolution and then rejected as a result. This is the movie “Expelled” all over again!