Category Archives: Science

Moon Landing Anniversary Free Fire Zone

Fifty years ago today, the Apollo 11 mission landed men on the Moon for the first time, and Neil Armstrong famously stepped onto the Moon’s surface and declared: “That’s one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.”

The anniversary is dominating the news — rightfully so — and the only creationist activity has been a few pathetic attempts to give their “creation science” credit for the accomplishment.

Because there’s no creationist news out there, let’s have another Intellectual Free-Fire Zone. We’re open for the discussion of pretty much anything — science, politics, economics, or even astrology, theology, mythology, and sociology — as long as it’s tasteful and interesting. Banter, babble, bicker, bluster, blubber, blather, blab, blurt, burble, boast — say what you will. But avoid flame-wars and beware of the profanity filters.

We now throw open the comments to you, dear reader. Have at it!

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

The Space Program Confirms the Bible

Everyone is aware that this week is the 50h anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. Today we’ll bring you the reaction of Jason Lisle — the creationist astrophysicist. He used to work for ol’ Hambo’s Answers in Genesis, but he left there to go with the Institute for Creation Research. Now he’s on his own. He just posted this at his website: One Small Step. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Fifty years ago, on this week, human beings walked on the surface of the moon. I have always considered this to be one of the greatest technological achievements of mankind. The ancients could have only imagined what it would be like to leave our terrestrial home. But that changed in July 1969 when men left the Earth and walked on another world. This feat was made possible by the combined efforts of our finest minds, strong determination, and of course, the Christian worldview.

Ah yes, the Christian worldview is what made it possible. Jason explains:

For roughly six thousand years [since creation week, presumably], humanity was confined to this terrestrial sphere. Many ancient pagan religions considered outer space to be the realm of the gods. The Greeks and Romans thought that the planets actually were gods, and we still refer to the planets by their Roman names. [Jason has a footnote here which says: The exception is the planet Uranus which is named after a Greek god.] For human beings to penetrate the divine realm was virtually unthinkable. However, Christian thinking eventually permeated and forever changed the science of astronomy.

Then he runs through the usual list of early scientists like Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, etc. We’ve dealt with lists like that before — see, e.g.: Did Science Originate with Creationists?

After that, Jason tells us about the history of the space program, which goes on for pages. You can click over there to read all that if you like. Then he really gets mystical:

Sending men to the moon has to be one of the greatest technological achievements of mankind. To think that human beings have travelled 240,000 miles into space and walked on another world boggles the mind. It is so extraordinary that some people have to ask, “did it really happen?” In one sense, I get it. The event is so amazing it is hard to believe. Then again, many of the events of the Bible are extraordinary. Can you believe that the entire Earth was once flooded with water? Can you believe that the entire universe was spoken into existence by God in six days? Can you accept that God Himself became a man, died in our place, and rose from the dead?

That’s one of the most amazing paragraphs we’ve ever encountered. And there’s more to come. Jason continues:

Like the moon landing, many of the events recorded in the Bible are so far outside our everyday experience that many people find them difficult to accept. I freely admit that it is extraordinary that God created the universe in six days, and it is extraordinary that men have walked on the moon. But an important consideration when we consider the possibility of extraordinary claims is this: “what is the alternative?” The only thing more unbelievable than these events is if they didn’t happen.

Think about it. If the universe is not the creation of God, then all of the complexity and patterns we see in nature are just accidents. Now that is truly absurd! If the Earth were not flooded with water, then why do we find water-deposited rock layers full of fossils covering the continents, and hundreds of flood legends from cultures all around the world? Are these things just an astonishing coincidence? That would be far more unbelievable than a worldwide flood.

Skipping a bit, we read on:

The moon landings are a triumph of Christian thinking. This isn’t to say that everyone involved in the moon program professed a saving faith in Christ. Some did, some did not. But all involved had to think in a Christian way in order to succeed. That is, they had to assume that the universe operated in a lawlike fashion as if upheld by the mind of God. The whimsical gods of pagan religions won’t do; they were inconsistent and would change their mind. And atheism gives no reason to expect any consistency in nature whatsoever. Everyone involved in the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs had to either knowingly or unwittingly rely upon God’s promise to uphold nature in a consistent fashion (Genesis 8:22).

It’s surprising that NASA doesn’t make everyone sign a statement of faith, like ol’ Hambo does. Another excerpt:

The biblical worldview and no other can justify our confidence in the science that made the moon landings possible. Hence, the success of such missions is actually a demonstration of the truth of the Bible.

Here’s Jason’s final paragraph:

Of course, the Apollo program confirmed some of the specific claims of the Bible as well. While many pagan religions accepted the celestial objects as gods, the Bible teaches that the luminaries are mere objects: inanimate creations of God and not divine (Genesis 1:14-19). This may be why God created them on day 4 rather than day 1. Furthermore, we now have photos of the Earth from space, confirming the biblical teaching that the Earth is round (e.g. Job 26:10, Isaiah 40:222). [No, The Earth Is Flat!] The famous Earthrise photo also shows that the Earth hangs upon nothing, just as the Bible teaches in Job 26:7. The Apollo program confirms what all science confirms: the Bible is true.

What can we say as an appropriate end to this post? Nothing coherent, really. And on the internet, no one can hear you scream.

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

A Dialogue with Jason Lisle

We are once again visiting the website of Jason Lisle — the creationist astrophysicist. He used to work for ol’ Hambo’s Answers in Genesis, but he left there to go with the Institute for Creation Research. Now he’s on his own.

The latest at his website is Denouncing Science. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Our critic this week is Jake who is upset that I supposedly denounce science. Have a look at his message (in purple text) along with my comments.

We’ll skip the purple text, and simply identify who is speaking in this momentous exchange. It begins with Jake, Jason’s critic:

[Jake:] You make my head spin. [Hee hee!] You simultaneously use science to make your point and then denounce it when it disagrees with your scripture.

Wow! Powerful stuff! But Jason can handle it. He says:

[Jason:] I do use science to make many points. But where have I ever “denounced” science? On the contrary, I endorse the scientific method for testing truth claims involving the consistent and repeatable present operation of the universe. [The present, not the past.] I expect such consistency because God has promised to uphold His universe in a consistent way for our benefit (e.g. Genesis 8:22, Jeremiah 33:25). On what basis do you justify the scientific method?

[Jason continues:] I reject pseudoscience such as flat-earth, astrology, neo-Darwinian evolution, and deep time [Amazing!] because none of these things can be demonstrated by the scientific method or justified by any rational reasoning. But I endorse all things that can be empirically demonstrated in the present by observation and experimentation.

Incredible stuff, huh? But Jason isn’t finished responding to Jake’s first question. He goes on:

[Jason:] Second, what makes you think that science disagrees with Scripture? On the contrary, the Bible is the basis for science [Link omitted]. There is nothing that is actually testable and observable in the present that is contrary to Scripture. Can you think of any?

Well, dear reader, can you think of anything to respond to Jason’s challenge? You’ll have your chance later. Now it’s Jake’s turn:

[Jake:] If you don’t “believe” in science it’s awfully hypocritical of you to reap all the benefits it’s provided mankind.

[Jason:] I do believe in the scientific method since it is predicated on the truth of the Bible. But if you reject the truth of the Bible, and therefore have no basis for justifying the scientific method, then isn’t it rather hypocritical of you to reap all the benefits it has provided mankind?

Can you imagine trying to have a conversation with someone like that? Ah well, it continues:

[Jake:] Your beliefs are dangerous and ignorant to such a degree that I have to believe your [sic] trolling.

[Jason]: If people are just chemical accidents, why be concerned about what is supposedly “dangerous?”

This is going nowhere. We’ll give you only one more exchange — and in Jake’s part, the [sic] is supplied by Jason. We assume Jake meant to say “plenty of evidence.” Here ya go:

[Jake:] There is of [sic] evidence, peer reviewed to refute all of your claims.

[Jason:] For example? If there is peer-reviewed evidence to refute all of my claims, then why didn’t you provide any? Did you know that the scientific evidence presented at the Biblical Science Institute [Jason’s website] is peer-reviewed?

That’s enough! It’s difficult to imagine debating with someone like that, which is why we always recommend avoiding such encounters. We’re grateful to Jason for supplying some good evidence to back up our position.

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

Creationist Wisdom #969: Scientists Create Nothing

This is your lucky day, dear reader. We have a second letter-to-the-editor for you. This one appears in the Waco Tribune-Herald of Waco, Texas. The letter’s title is God help scientists (it’s the second letter at that link), and the newspaper doesn’t have a comments feature.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote her by using her full name. Her first name is Peggy. Excerpts from her letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, some bold font for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Here we go!

Have you ever considered that scientists create nothing but seem to be given credit for everything? [Huh?] Some examples: Scientists who discovered gravity, electricity, fire, oil, natural gas, metals, etc., did not create them but only discovered them and proceeded to find uses for them. Inventors of things like automobiles, airplanes, rockets, large sailing ships did not create the laws that govern them. These were already in force which in turn made these things possible.

Wowie — Peggy is correct! Scientists don’t create anything! All they do is discover things that were already created. Then she says:

Someone saw mention in the Bible of rivers in the oceans and proceeded to map out these currents, which are used to move vessels through the ocean with less outside power.

Peggy is probably thinking of Benjamin Franklin. His Wikipedia write-up mentions his work on the Gulf Stream — but they don’t mention any biblical inspiration. After that she tells us:

From the Bible comes this question: Where were you when I hung the earth on nothing? The flat-earth folks finally had to admit that this presents an important truth.

Peggy’s quote is difficult to find. She may be thinking of Job 26:7, which says: “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.” But we can’t be sure. Anyway, the bible is unquestionably a flat Earth book — see The Earth Is Flat! She continues:

Scientists have also discovered many other laws. Another from the Bible, “like begets like.” Women are especially grateful for this assurance that when they give birth, it will not be to a monkey, puppy or kitten.

Well, yeah! What pregnant woman isn’t grateful to know that her offspring won’t be a squid? Let’s read on:

Especially useful are the laws of how things relate to one another which are used to predict future events such as the weather.

The laws of “how things relate to one another”? What are those? Who knows? Who cares? Here’s another excerpt:

There is enough information on these things to fill many books, but you get the point. All these things were created by a creator before they were discovered by man.

What’s the point here? We agree that the universe existed before scientists began to observe and understand it. But so what? Where is Peggy going? She finally explains it at the end of her letter:

How can any scientist be an atheist when he constantly uses laws already established in his work of invention and discovery?

Peggy has it all figured out. Scientists are just a bunch of plagiarizers, who refuse to give credit where it’s due. Scoundrels, all of them!

Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article