We found a splendid example of the advantage of creation science over plain old yucky science at the website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) in this new article: The Ever-Changing Big Bang Story. It’s by Jake Hebert. Jake is an ICR Research Associate who received his Ph.D. in Physics from the University of Texas at Dallas. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
Some say that Christians should re-interpret what Genesis states about the origin of the universe to match the claims of the Big Bang model. But which Big Bang model are they talking about? Several versions have cropped up since Georges Lemaître suggested the idea in 1931. Although these versions all say the universe expanded and cooled over many billions of years, they differ significantly in the details of events.
That’s the big problem with science — it keeps changing to accommodate new evidence. Creation science, on the other hand, is timeless! Jake’s article continues:
In 1979, physicist Alan Guth envisioned a major modification to solve a number of serious difficulties. He posited that shortly after the Big Bang, the universe supposedly underwent an enormous but extremely brief growth spurt called inflation. After this brief inflationary period, the universe continued to expand but at a slower rate. Inflation became an essential part of the Big Bang model.
He’s talking about cosmic inflation. See what we mean? Science is never the same! Skipping some speculation about the multiverse, we come to this:
The current version of the Big Bang model involves a number of quantities (such as “dark energy” and “dark matter”) that earlier versions did not have.
There are good reasons for that, but Jake doesn’t bother with them. It would ruin the narrative. Let’s read on:
Furthermore, the bizarre logical consequences of inflation theory are now leading some theorists to propose another version of the Big Bang called the Ekpyrotic Model. They speculate that the Big Bang was caused by a collision between two 3-D worlds (called “branes”) moving along a fourth hidden dimension.
Ooooooh — this is so confusing! Why would anyone want to abandon the timeless comfort of Genesis?
By the way, the ekpyrotic universe is currently a contender, but it’s a minority view. It’s the latest version of a cyclic model in which the universe oscillates between expansions and contractions. Jake continues:
Is there a lesson here? Secularists have long pressured Christians to compromise with these origins tales, yet the secular theorists themselves eventually abandoned them.
Hey, that’s right! Why abandon Genesis for the latest science, when before you know it, whatever new theory you’ve adopted will soon be abandoned! That’s crazy! Here’s how it ends:
Instead of trusting the changing, fallible stories of sinful men who were not present at creation, how much better it is to trust the written record of the One who knows all things, who never lies, and who was there — creating.
You gotta admit, dear reader — Jake has a good point!
Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.