Has Science Disproved Christianity?

Hasn't Science disproved Christianity?

Jim Mason, PhD Hasn't Science disproved Christianity?

No, it hasn’t! Outline

Age of the Earth

Evolution

The Big Bang

Outline

Age of the Earth radiometric dating geological column Evolution origin of life (abiogenesis) mutations and natural selection The Big Bang origin of the universe the distant starlight ‘problem’ This presentation contains slides that contain a lot of information! Viewer attention is advised! Creation Ministries International creation.com Creation Ministries International Featured article of the day

Creation Ministries International Store front page Creation Ministries International Store: resource listings

Your Name username@address.??? ANA NAN

Pass to next person Some things about Science What is science anyway?

“Science (from Latin scientia meaning ‘knowledge’) is an enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.” - Wikipedia accessed 2014/01/05 Some things about Science Not all science is the same

“The goal of physics is to understand the basic dynamics of the universe. Cosmology is a little different. The goal is to reconstruct the history of the universe.” Dr. Michael Turner, Theoretical Cosmologist University of Chicago Coined the term ‘Dark Energy’

Cho, A., A singular conundrum: How odd is our universe?, Science 317:1848– 1850, 28 Sept 2007. Physics Cosmology

“the goal … is to “The goal is to understand the reconstruct the dynamics of the history of the universe” universe.” Some things about Science Science is all about doing repeatable experiments

“… A basic tenet of science is that you can do repeatable experiments, …”

Dr. James Gunn, Professor of Astronomy Princeton University Co-founder of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

Cho, A., A singular conundrum: How odd Credit: Wikipedia; photo by ServiceAT is our universe?, Science 317:1848– 1850, 28 Sept 2007. Some things about Science Science is all about doing repeatable experiments

“Cosmology may look like a science, but it isn’t a science. A basic tenet of science is that you can do repeatable experiments, and you can’t do that in cosmology”

Dr. James Gunn, Professor of Astronomy Princeton University Co-founder of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey

Cho, A., A singular conundrum: How odd Credit: Wikipedia; photo by ServiceAT is our universe?, Science 317:1848– 1850, 28 Sept 2007. Physics Cosmology Is this really science?

“the goal … is to “The goal is to understand the reconstruct the dynamics of the history of the universe” universe.”

“you can do “you can’t do that repeatable [repeatable experiments” experiments]” Some things about Science

“The goal of physics is to understand the basic dynamics of the universe. Cosmology is a little different. The goal is to reconstruct the history of the universe.”

“Cosmology may look like a science, but it isn’t a science. A basic tenet of science is that you can do repeatable experiments, and you can’t do that in cosmology.’ Some things about Science

“The goal of biology is to understand the basic dynamics of living things. Evolution is a little different. The goal is to reconstruct the history of life on Earth.”

“Evolution may look like a science, but it isn’t a science. A basic tenet of science is that you can do repeatable experiments, and you can’t do that in evolution.’ Biology Evolution Is this really science?

the goal … is to The goal is to understand the reconstruct the dynamics of living history of life on things Earth. you can do repeatable you can’t do that experiments [repeatable experiments] Some things about Science Science cannot prove anything to be true

“The title of the 6 May News of the Week story “At long last, Gravity Probe B satellite proves Einstein right” (p. 649) made me cringe. I find myself frequently repeating to students and the public that science doesn’t “prove” theories. Scientific measurements can only disprove theories or be consistent with them. Any theory that is consistent with measurements could be disproved by a future measurement. I wouldn’t have expected Science magazine, of all places, to say a theory was “proved”.” The Editor’s response: “Bennett is completely correct. It’s an important conceptual point, and we blew it.”

Charles L. Bennett • Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University. • Principal Investigator of NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP). Charles L. Bennett, “Science Title Misstep”, Letter to the Editor, Science 332:1263, 2011 Example

If I eat a large pizza, then my stomach will be full

My stomach is full

Therefore I must have eaten a large pizza

all the ways my eating a large stomach could pizza ﬁlled observations/data mutations data consistent natural selection with theory #1 speciation data consistent with theory #2

data consistent cannot ‘prove’ with both theories either

new ✘ inconsistent observation/ with theory measurement

something required by or not possible and/or not implicit in the theory what is observed Some things about Science Falsifiability

A proper scientific theory should make falsifiable predictions that can be tested by repeated experiments

Karl Popper Some things about Science Data do not ‘speak for themselves’

“Data cannot speak for themselves; they have to be interpreted through a theoretical model. Some correlations are spurious and some are not: extracting inferences about causality requires an understanding of theory, statistics and how the data were collected.” Economists and their data (so, so much data); Dr. Stephen Gordon National Post, 6 March 2017 Département d’économique, Université Laval, Ville de Québec, QC Some things about Science The Ruling Paradigm Science is normally done under a “ruling paradigm” data are interpreted within a particular interpretative framework (theory) that is just assumed to be true

Data that are inconsistent with the theory are … treated as errors by the researcher, dismissed because the researcher is judged not to have appropriate credentials, dismissed because the researcher is considered to have Thomas Kuhn unacceptable political leanings or funding sources, or accommodated within the ruling paradigm by ancillary hypothesis

Accumulated inconsistencies eventually cause the ruling paradigm to be replaced Is this really science?

the goal … is to The goal is to understand the reconstruct the dynamics of … history of … you can do repeatable you can’t do that experiments [repeatable experiments] interpretation interpretation theory/ruling paradigm theory/ruling paradigm speculation speculation presuppositions presuppositions Mainstream presuppositions & ruling paradigms

Ruling Paradigms The Big Bang Universality of laws of The Nebular Hypothesis physics Uniformitarian geology Abiogenesis Evolution

Naturalism/Materialism Man defines truth Biblical presuppositions & ruling paradigms

Ruling Paradigms • 6, 24-hr days • life created each after its own kind Universality of laws of physics … • about 6,000 yrs ago … except when augmented by God’s • initial perfection spoiled by sin direct action • global flood about 4,500 years ago i.e. miracles as recorded in the Bible • humans all descended from two people and spread around the world post-Babel The Word of God (Bible) is true God defines truth Impact of presuppositions: Naturalism/Materialism The origin of the 747 Happened Happened by design by accident Naturalism/ Materialism Impact of presuppositions: Naturalism/Materialism The origin and diversity of life Happened Happened by design by accident Naturalism/Materialism Dr. Richard Lewontin 1929 - Evolutionary Geneticist Harvard University

“We take the side of science [materialism] in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, ….. in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Dr. Richard Lewontin 1929 - Evolutionary Geneticist Harvard University

“It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot let a Divine foot in the door” Dr. Richard Lewontin 1929 - Evolutionary Geneticist Harvard University

Materialism Naturalism Age of the Earth How do you know how old something is? Have a written record attesting to its history

The most reliable way to know how old something is is to have written record from a reliable witness or recorded by a reliable scribe on behalf of a reliable witness

This is exactly what Genesis is regarding the origin of the universe/earth/life: the witness is God the scribe is Moses ∼6,000 years

The age of the earth is 4.54 ±0.05 billion years (4.54 x 109 ±1%). … This age is based on evidence from radiometric dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Wikipedia: Age of the Earth last accessed 2019/09/26 The age of the earth is 4.54 ±0.05 billion years (4.54 x 109 ±1%). … This age is based on evidence from radiometric dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Wikipedia: Age of the Earth last accessed 2019/09/26

Which shooter is more accurate? The age of the earth is 4.54 ±0.05 billion years (4.54 x 109 ±1%). … This age is based on evidence from radiometric dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

Wikipedia: Age of the Earth last accessed 2019/09/26 Radioactive Decay Process

Radioactive Parent Element

Half-life: T½ Decay

Stable Daughter Element

The length off time for 1/2 the amount of parent present to change to daughter Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half-lives)

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P 40

10 7 Ratio of daughter to parent to of daughter Ratio 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Number of Half-lives Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half-lives) Assumptions in radiometric dating

zero rock is a daughter closed constant at start system half-life

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P Calibration

“Calibration … is the comparison of measurement values delivered by a device under test with those of a calibration standard of known accuracy. “

“The calibration standard is normally traceable to a national standard held by a National Metrological Institute.”

Wikipedia (accessed 2017/08/07) There are no “calibration standards of known accuracy” “traceable to national standards held by a National Institute” for millions/ billions of years of age!

Calibration

“Calibration … is the comparison of measurement values delivered by a device under test with those of a calibration standard of known accuracy. “

“The calibration standard is normally traceable to a national standard held by a National Metrological Institute.”

Wikipedia (accessed 2017/08/07) Common radiometric chains

Igneous & metamorphic rocks

238U 235U 40K 87Rb 147Sm

206Pb 207Pb 40Ar 87Sr 143Nd

4.5 B 710 M 1.25 B 47 B 106 B commonly used for volcanic rocks 40K 1.25 billion 89% 11% years 40 Ca 40Ar assumed that previous Ar boils off from molten rock ‘radioage’ is from time rock solidifies Mt. Ngauruhoe NZ lava dating results

Eruption K-Ar Radioage (Ma) <0.27 1949 1.0 ±0.2 <0.27 4 0.8 ±0.2 1954 1954 1.3 ±0.2 3 eruption 3.5 ±0.2 2 1949 1975 <0.27 eruption eruption 1975 1.0 ±0.2 of years millions 1 Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half lives)

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half lives)

Amount 16 8 8 16 4 20 2 22 1 23 D Ratio 0 0.5 1 2 3 5 7 11 15 23 P 40

1011 Ratio of daughter to parent to of daughter Ratio 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Number of Half-lives Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half-lives) Assumptions in radiometric dating

zero rock is a daughter closed constant at start system half-life ✘

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P Common radiometric chains

Igneous & metamorphic rocks

238U 235U 40K 87Rb 147Sm

206Pb 207Pb ✘40Ar 87Sr 143Nd

4.5 B 710 M 1.25 B 47 B 106 B Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half-lives) Assumptions in radiometric dating

zero rock is a daughter closed constant at start system half-life ✘

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P Isochron Dating Radioactive P another stable isotope Parent of the same element Non-Radiogenic RadiogenicStable S D ‘Sister’ Daughter multiple samples of the same rock with possibly different starting mixes

BUT … ratio S/D assumed to be the same for all samples at formation

D P measure and for each sample S S Time 0 1 2 3 4 (half-lives) Assumptions in radiometric dating

zero rock is a daughter closed constant at start system half-life ✘

ratio S/D same for all samples at formation

Amount 16 0 8 8 4 12 2 14 1 15 D Ratio 0 1 3 7 15 P Isochron Dating

⇒ “ a g e” R1 Slope = D/S

R2 = P/S Common radiometric chains

Igneous & metamorphic rocks

238U 235U 40K 87Rb 147Sm

206Pb 207Pb ✘40Ar 87Sr 143Nd

4.5 B 710 M 1.25 B 47 B 106 B 87Rb 47 billion β- Rb-Sr years

86 Sr 87Sr

147Sm 106 billion α Sm-Nd years 144 Nd 143Nd 238U 4.5 billion 238 206 U- Pb years

204 Pb 206Pb

235U 710 million 235U-207Pb years 204 Pb 207Pb 1240 ± 84 Ma 1655 ± 40 Ma

86Sr/87Sr 143Nd/144Nd Rb-Sr Sm-Nd

87Rb/87Sr 147Sm/144Nd

1883 ± 53 Ma

Pb-Pb Technique Sm-Nd Mt.lava NZ Ngauruhoe dating results Rb-Sr K-Ar Radioage (Ma) Radioage 3.5±0.2 0.8±0.2 1.0 ±0.2 1.0 1.3 ±0.2 ±0.2 1.0 <0.27 <0.27 <0.27 197 133

millions of years 200 100 150 50 K-Ar Rb-Sr Sm-Nd Mt. Ngauruhoe NZ lava dating results Technique Radioage (Ma) <0.27 1.0 ±0.2 <0.27 0.8 ±0.2 K-Ar 1.3 ±0.2 4000 Pb-Pb 3.5 ±0.2 3000 <0.27 These should 1.0 ±0.2 2000 agree Rb-Sr 133 Sm-Nd 197 of years millions 1000 Rb-Sr Sm-Nd Pb-Pb 3908 K-Ar 1240 ± 84 Ma 1655 ± 40 Ma

86Sr/87Sr 143Nd/144Nd Rb-Sr Sm-Nd

87Rb/87Sr 147Sm/144Nd

2000 1883 ± 53 Ma All 1800 7 x 10-3

the 1600 Pb-Pb 8 x 10-6 same 1400 rock! 1200 2 x 10-9

1000 Common radiometric chains

Igneous & metamorphic rocks

238U 235U 40K 87Rb 147Sm

✘206Pb ✘207Pb ✘40Ar ✘87Sr ✘143Nd

4.5 B 710 M 1.25 B 47 B 106 B Radiogenic helium dating Uses decay of 238U to 206Pb in Zircon Zircon crystal structure excludes 206Pb includes 238U 8 alpha particles per 238U-206Pb decay Helium nuclei alpha particles attach to electrons become Helium atoms Helium atoms very small noble gas do not form chemical compounds diffuse readily Uses Zircon crystals obtained from US national laboratory that was drilling a deep borehole in New Mexico Sent to independent lab for analysis measured amount of 238U, 206Pb, He Expected amount of He

238U 206Pb 4He U-Pb radioage: 1,500 ±20 Ma Observed amount of He

238U 206Pb 4He Calculations in 2000

factor of 100,000 Measurements in 2003 Calculating for best fit to data ...

Age = 5,681 ± 2,000 yrs uniformitarian assumption

present 0.4945201 0.75 U at time t U at 238 0.5 6000 years ago 0.4945206 Amount

4500 years go 0.25 0.4945205

Time before present (billions of years) 0 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 uniformitarian accelerated

1 0.9999998

0.85 Measurable quantities (relative isotopic abundances) are identical in this period U at time t U at

238 present 0.7 Amount

0.55 0.4945206 0.4945205 0.4945201

To 1 at 4.5 billion ybp Time before present (years) 0.4 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Geological column Law of superposition

600 Nicolaus Steno ‘The past history of our globe must be explained by what can be seen to be happening now. …

No powers are to be employed that are not natural to the globe, no action to be admitted except those of which we know the principle’ James Hutton Naturalistic 1726-1797 “Origin” : 1859 Uniformitarianism

Hutton, J., Theory of the Earth with Proof and Illustrations 1795; cited in: Holmes, A., Principles of Physical Geology, 2nd edition, Thomas Nelson & Sons, London, p. 43, 1965 The Grand Canyon thickness / today’s rate of deposition = time for deposition depth / today’s rate of erosion = time for erosion

1000 m / 1 mm per yr = 1 million years

Evidence: many thick layers of rock; abundant erosion Interpretative framework: uniformitarianism Presuppposition: Naturalism Uniformitarianism: an application

Observations in the morning: 1. snow on the ground = 1 m 2. rate of fall = 1mm/hr

Using the Uniformitarian Assumption: Time to accumulate current snowfall = 1m/1 mm/hr = 1000 hours = 6 ✘weeks written record for the preceding evening: 1. snow on the ground = none 2. no snow falling Mt Saint Helens—rapid layer formation Mudﬂow

many ∼3 hours layers

Ash fall

Uniformitarian paradigm Reality slowly rapidly 1-2 layers per year pyroclastic ﬂow still water horizontal deposition time deposition time count layers 3 hours many years Nicolaus Law of superposition Steno

It should also be remembered that Steno's law is a statement of relative time, not absolute time: two rock layers, in principle, could have formed millions of years apart or a few hours or days apart. Steno himself saw no difﬁculty in attributing the formation of most rocks to the ﬂood mentioned in the Bible. www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/steno.html accessed 2014/07/12 Nicolaus Law of superposition Steno

“ … he noticed that, of the two major rock types in the Apennine Mountains near Florence, the lower layers had no fossils, while the upper ones were rich in fossils. He suggested that the upper layers had formed in the Flood, after the creation of life, while the lower ones had formed before life had existed. www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/steno.html accessed 2014/07/12 Resources

•56 pages full-colour •Fascinating articles •Current discoveries •All disciplines •Children’s section •No paid advertising •Delivered quarterly to your door #1 Equipping Tool!

Subscription $7.50 billed every 3 months

• Hard Copy • Digital Copy (view on up to 5 devices) • First issue FREE! • FREE DVD! Fill in the front and back Fill in the front and back

Your Signature today’s date

Recipient’s name Your name Recipient’s address Your address

Recipient's phone # Your phone # Recipient’s email address your email address Fill in the front and back Recipient’s name Your name

Recipient’s address Your address

Recipient's phone # Your phone # Recipient’s email address your email address

Take your completed form to the book table to get your free gift Evolution

Beware the fallacy of equivocation

Evolution = change over time Evolution = change over time + descent from common ancestor Evolution = change over time + descent from common ancestor + abiogenesis “highly Creation energetic Abiogenesis chemistry”more complex becomes incrementally lifestarts extremely simple and

“0.5 billion years” 6 days increasing/improving geneticinformation Last Universal Created Kinds Common Adam Eve Ancestor life starts complex Man etc & geneticallyFeline perfect Canine Equine “3.8 billion years” Mutations & FALL Mendelian after the Fall inheritance genetic information ∼6,000 Natural decreasing/degrading years Selection

To d a y ’s s p e c i e s To d a y ’s s p e c i e s

spread around all descended from one man and one earth from ME/NA woman though the people on the ark Abiogenesis: The Miller-Urey Experiment

(lightning)

(solar energy) (storm) Dr. Hubert Yockey Physicist & Information Theorist

“The origin of life by chance in a primeval soup is impossible in probability in the same way that a perpetual machine is in probability. The extremely small probabilities calculated in this chapter are not discouraging to true believers … [however] a practical person must conclude that life didn’t happen by chance. … The belief that life on earth arose spontaneously from non-living matter, is simply a matter of faith in strict reductionism and is based entirely on ideology. … Although, at the beginning, the paradigm was worth consideration, now the entire effort in the primeval soup paradigm is self- deception based on the ideology of its champions.” Yockey, H.P., Information Theory and Molecular Biology, Cambridge University Press, UK, p. 284-336, 1992. Paul Davies “While amino acids are written into the laws of nature .. proteins are not” “throwing energy at amino acids won’t make proteins any more than putting dynamite under a pile of bricks will make a house” “We now know that the secret of life lies not with the chemical ingredients but with the logical structure and organizational • Physicist arrangement of the molecule” • Research areas • Cosmology “biological information is not encoded in the • Quantum field theory • Astrobiology laws of physics and chemistry … (and it) • Academic appointments cannot come into existence spontaneously” • Arizona State • Cambridge • U of Adelaide “There is no known law of physics able to • Macquarie Univ create information from nothing.” • U of Newcastle “The origin of life in a primeval soup is impossible …” “highly “proteins are not Creation energetic Abiogenesis [written in the laws of ✔ chemistry”more complex becomes incrementally ✗ physics and chemistry].” lifestarts extremely simple and “Biological information … “0.5 billion years” cannot come into existence 6 days ✗ spontaneously.” increasing/improving geneticinformation Last Universal Created Kinds Common Adam Eve Ancestor life starts complex Man etc & geneticallyFeline ✔ perfect Canine Equine “3.8 billion years” Mutations & Mendelian after the Fall inheritance genetic information ∼6,000 Natural decreasing/degrading years Selection

To d a y ’s s p e c i e s To d a y ’s s p e c i e s

spread around all descended from one man and one earth from ME/NA woman though the people on the ark Mutations

“ … a mutation is a change of the existingnucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism.”

“Mutations result from un-repaired damage toexisting DNA or to existing RNA genomes, errors in the process of replication,of existing DNA or from the insertion or deletion of existing segments of existingDNA.” “Mutations may or may not produce discernible changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism.” Mutations do not create new genetic information introduce errors into existing genetic information Impact of Mutations

Mutations affect the fitness (i.e. survivability) of an organism

“One of the earliest theoretical studies of the distribution of ﬁtness effects was done by Motoo Kimura, … His neutral theory of molecular evolution proposes that most novel mutations will be highly deleterious, with a small fraction being neutral. Hiroshi Akashi more recently proposed a bimodal model for the DFE, with modes centered around highly deleterious and neutral mutations. Both theories agree that the vast majority of novel mutations are neutral or deleterious and that advantageous mutations are rare, which has been supported by experimental results.” Wikipedia accessed 2017/09/12 The distribution of ﬁtness effects of mutations in vesicular stomatitis virus

advantageous lethal neutral mutations mutations mutations

deleterious mutations

Illustration from Wikipedia (downloaded 20140301 credit Fiona126 40

0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 Fitness of 10 individuals over 13 generations

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6 Fitness

0.4

0.2

0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Number of generations no beneficial “Mutations may or may not mutations produce discernible changes in the selectable observable characteristics mutations (phenotype) of an organism.”

a few beneficial mutations selectable mutations

Dr. John Sanford Probability vs ﬁtness effect Fitness vs generation 1.0 1 0.8

0.6

0.8 0.4

0.2

0.0 0.6 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0

0.4

0.2

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Mutations act to drive species to extinction!

Sanford et al, Mendel’s Accountant: a biologically realistic forward-time population genetics program, Scalable Computing: Practice and Experience,Volume 8, Number 2, pp. 147–165. 2007 Natural Selection

No new genetic information only different combinations of existing genetic information

Natural selection reduces information! Natural selection reduces information!

Result: loss of genes for short and medium length hair Result: species goes extinct! Mutations & Natural Selection

Mutations are inexorably degrading our genetic information 100 – 300 per person per generation (Dr. S. Kondrashov) The decrease in viability is 1-2% per generation J. F. Crow, Prof Emeritus, Univ of Wisconsin – Madison, 1997

Natural selection cannot reverse or even stop this process Almost all individual mutations are only slightly deleterious It is the accumulation that does the damage “With mutation accumulation the extinction time is just slightly longer than 100 generations” Higgins K. and Lynch M. 2001

Genomes are continually deteriorating, not getting better “The origin of life in a primeval soup is impossible …” “highly “proteins are not Creation energetic Abiogenesis [written in the laws of ✔ chemistry”more complex becomes incrementally ✗ physics and chemistry].” lifestarts extremely simple and “Biological information … “0.5 billion years” cannot come into existence 6 days ✗ spontaneously.” increasing/improving geneticinformation Last Universal Created Kinds Common Adam Eve Ancestor life starts complex ✗ ✗ Man etc & geneticallyFeline ✔ perfect Canine Equine “3.8 billion years” Mutations & Mendelian after the Fall inheritance genetic information ∼6,000 Natural decreasing✔/degrading years Selection

To d a y ’s s p e c i e s To d a y ’s s p e c i e s

spread around all descended from one man and one earth from ME/NA woman though the people on the ark Mitochondrial Y-chromosomeY-chromosomal “Eve”DNA “Adam”DNA

XY XX XY XX

XY XX All modern humans come from one female

All modern humans come from one male XY XX Reed DL, Smith VS, Hammond SL, Rogers AR, Clayton DH (from en.Wkipedia.org) evolutionary interpretation

130,000 yrs @ 30 yrs/generation ⇒ 4,333 generations @ 1% loss of ‘fitness’ per generation ⇒ current ‘fitness’ of ∼10-19

Reed DL, Smith VS, Hammond SL, Rogers AR, Clayton DH (from en.Wkipedia.org) Biblical interpretation 4,500 4,500

4,500 4,500 4,500

∼6,000 years ⇒ ∼155 generations (from genealogies) @ 1% loss of ‘fitness’ per generation ⇒ current ‘fitness’ of ∼ 21%

Reed DL, Smith VS, Hammond SL, Rogers AR, Clayton DH (from en.Wkipedia.org) “The origin of life in a primeval soup is impossible …” “highly “proteins are not Creation energetic Abiogenesis [written in the laws of ✔ chemistry”more complex becomes incrementally ✗ physics and chemistry].” lifestarts extremely simple and “Biological information … “0.5 billion years” cannot come into existence 6 days ✗ spontaneously.” increasing/improving geneticinformation Last Universal Created Kinds Common Adam Eve Ancestor life starts complex ✗ ✗ Man etc & geneticallyFeline ✔ perfect Canine Equine “3.8 billion years” Mutations & Mendelian after the Fall inheritance genetic information ∼6,000 Natural decreasing✔/degrading years Selection To d a y ’s s p e c i e s ✔ To d a y ’s s p e c i e s ✔ spread around all descended from one man and one earth from ME/NA woman though the people on the ark Resources

10 billion years Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

“… But there is a very real problem in explaining how it got started in the first place. You cannot fudge this by appealing to quantum mechanics10 billion. years Either there is nothing to begin with, in which case there is no quantum vacuum, no pre-geometric dust, no time in which anything can happen, no physical laws that can effect change David Darling form nothingness into somethingness; BsC Physics or there is something, PhD Astronomy in which case that needs explaining.” On creating something from nothing, New Scientist 151(2047):49, 1996 Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation Introduced in 1980s to solve • The Horizon Problem • insufficient time to establish observed homogeneity • The Flatness-Oldness Problem • space is Euclidian (flat, not curved) • The Magnetic Monopole10 billion Problem years • should be lots; there are none

Characteristics • Time: 10-36 — 10-32 sec • Impact: volume increase x 1078 • Initiating event: unknown

Credit: Cirone-Musi, • Propelling force: unknown Festival della Scienza • Terminating cause: unknown Dr. Roger Penrose • Empirical evidence: none "inflation isn't falsifiable, • Testable by repeatable experiments: no it's falsified.” CMB @50 conference, Princeton, 2015 An Open Letter to the Scientific Community Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004 http://blog.lege.net/cosmology/cosmologystatement_org.html

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed - inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. …. But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. …. What is more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation.

Initial signatories: 33 scientists from 10 countries; now 0ver 500 “It is found that each test which has been designed shows the [Big Bang] to fail such that the [Big Bang] model needs to be discarded.”

ICRAR = International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, Curtin U & UWA, Perth, WA Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) ✘ radiation from ✘ “waters above” ✘

God “stretches out the heavens”

God speaks & creates • water on day 1 • the expanse on day 2 • the Earth on on day 4 day 3 • the Sun, Moon & stars on day 4 6,000 years Radiation from the waters CMBR above 6,000 yr expansion size stretching out The Big Bible the heavens ?

time

“Afterglow” of the Big Bang CMBR 13.8 Ga expansion size The Big✘ Bang inflation✘ 10-32 sec

✘ time How do we see those distant stars?

‘White Hole’ cosmology Dr Russell Humphreys gravitational time dilation ‘New Physics’ cosmology Dr John Harnett based on Carmeli’s model acceleration-induced time dilation ‘timeless zone’ cosmology Dr Russell Humphreys based on Einstein’s equations gravitational time dilation Asynchronous Simultaneity Convention Dr Jason Lyell based on Einstein’s equations inﬁnite one-way speed of light ‘Creation Time Coordinates’ cosmology speed time of light

observer

spatial dimension at constant time

volume of space in which light Future light cone emitted at E at time zero can be seen at any time t in the future volume of space in which light Past light cone emitted in the past can be seen at E at time zero volume of space in which light Future light cone emitted at E at time zero can be seen at any time t in the future

volume of space in which light Past light cone emitted in the past can be seen at E at time zero Creation Time Coordinates Events are synchronous Day 4 if they happen at the same time in this coordinate system

Earth Resources

Natural Selection Genetics and DNA Answers to the The Origin of Life 60 most The Fossil Record frequently The Geologic Record Radiometric Dating asked questions! Cosmology Ethics and Morality “.. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, ...” (1 Peter 3:15 NIV)

“We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (2 Cor 10:5 NIV) The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve 1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25 Amount remembered

0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time after learning (e.g. days) The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve 1.00

0.75

0.50 review

0.25 Amount remembered

0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time after learning (e.g. days) The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve 1.00

0.75 review

0.50

0.25 Amount remembered

0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time after learning (e.g. days) The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve 1.00 review

0.75

0.50

0.25 Amount remembered

0.00 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Time after learning (e.g. days) Resources

No, it hasn’t!