Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!pesnta!pertec!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 44)
Message-ID: <389@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 20:02:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: kontron.389
Posted: Fri Jul 19 20:02:47 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 06:14:19 EDT
References: <402@iham1.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Irvine, CA
Lines: 75

> 
>      THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE
> 
> I.  (Life Sciences): THE THEORY OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS INVALID.  (See
>     1-36.)
> 
> II. (Astronomical Sciences): THE UNIVERSE, THE SOLAR SYSTEM, AND  LIFE
>     WERE RECENTLY CREATED.
> 
>     A.  NATURALISTIC EXPLANATIONS  FOR  THE  EVOLUTION  OF  THE  SOLAR
>         SYSTEM   AND   UNIVERSE   ARE   UNSCIENTIFIC   AND  HOPELESSLY
>         INADEQUATE. (See 37-56.)
> 
>     B.  TECHNIQUES THAT ARGUE FOR AN OLD EARTH ARE EITHER ILLOGICAL OR
>         ARE BASED ON UNREASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS. (See 57-67.)
> 
>     C.  MOST DATING TECHNIQUES  INDICATE  THAT  THE  EARTH  AND  SOLAR
>         SYSTEM ARE YOUNG.
> 
>        84.  The sun's radiation applies an outward force on very small
>             particles  orbiting the sun. Particles less than 100,000th
>             of a centimeter in diameter should have been ''blown out''
>             of  the  solar system if the solar system were billions of
>             years old. These particles are still orbiting the sun [a].
>             Conclusion: the solar system is young.
> 
>             a)  Stuart Ross Taylor, LUNAR SCIENCE: A POST-APOLLO  VIEW
>                 (New York: Pergamon Press, Inc., 1975), p. 90.
> 
You assume that there is no new source of small particles.  Comet tails,
for one, are a plausible source.

>        85.  Since 1836, over one hundred different  observers  at  the
>             Royal Greenwich Observatory and the U.S. Naval Observatory
>             have made DIRECT visual measurements  that  indicate  that
>             the  sun's  diameter  is  shrinking at a rate of about .1%
>             each century or about five  feet  per  hour!  Furthermore,
>             records   of  solar  eclipses  indicate  that  this  rapid
>             shrinking has been going on for  at  least  the  past  400
>             years  [a].  Several INDIRECT techniques also confirm this
>             gravitational collapse, although these  inferred  collapse
>             rates  are  only about 1/7th as much [b,c]. Using the most
>             conservative data, one must  conclude  that  had  the  sun
>             existed  a  million years ago, it would have been so large
>             that it would have heated the  earth  so  much  that  life
>             could  not  have  survived.  Yet, evolutionists say that a
>             million years ago all  the  present  forms  of  life  were
>             essentially  as  they  are  now,  having  completed  their
>             evolution that began a THOUSAND million years ago.
> 
>             a)  G.B. Lubkin, ''Analyses of Historical Data Suggest Sun
>                 is  Shrinking,''  PHYSICS  TODAY,  September 1979, pp.
>                 17-19.
>             b)  David W. Dunham ET. AL., ''Observations of a  Probable
>                 Change  in  the  Solar Radius Between 1715 and 1979,''
>                 SCIENCE, Vol.210, 12 December 1980, pp. 1243-1245.
>             c)  John Gribben and Omar Sattaur, ''The  Schoolchildren's
>                 Eclipse,'' SCIENCE 84, April 1984, pp.  51-56.
> 
>                                  TO BE CONTINUED
> 
You are assuming that the shrinkage rate is constant (gee, and I thought
creationists didn't believe in uniformitarianism!).  Analysis of what
appears to be the results of solar flares on the surface of the Moon
suggest considerable variability in the Sun's output.  A reduction in
solar energy output would cause a reduction in diameter (less light and
radiation pressure exerted on the photosphere); an increase in solar
energy output would cause an increase in diameter.  The changes in
climate which have been observed just in the last 600 years suggest
the Sun's output is subject to frequent change.

> 
>       III.  (Earth Sciences):
> 				Ron Kukuk
> 				Walt Brown