Astronomy

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Conservative (talk | contribs) at 02:47, June 27, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Astronomy is "the study of objects and matter outside the earth's atmosphere and of their physical and chemical properties." [1] It has been studied since ancient times, forming a major part of the religions of many early civilizations such as the Egyptians and the Aztecs. The great stone henge at Stonehenge in England is also thought to be an astronomical observatory. The handing down of complex astronomical teachings shows these early civilizations must have had formalized systems of education.

Astronomy was crucial to the development of safe and accurate navigation for ships, and observations of the movement of heavenly bodies helped lead to the theories we now call physics. In fact, much of astronomy today relies physics, thus many astronomers are considered astrophysicists.

Young Earth Creationism View

Young earth creationist scientists state that the first law of thermodynamics and second law of thermodynamics argue against an eternal universe and they also claim that these laws point to the universe being supernaturally created. [2] [3] [4] Also, these scientists assert the theory of evolution has had considerable influence on fields outside of biology and this includes the field of astronomy. [5] For example, it is common for astronomers to refer to the "evolution of the universe".[6] Young earth creationist scientists believe the evolutionary view has had a negative effect on science of astronomy and that materialistic explanations of the the origins of various astronomical bodies are insufficient and counter evidence.[7] [8] In addition, creationists often cite the secular scientific literature in order to make the case that materialist explanations of various astromical bodies are inadequate:

“...most every prediction by theorists about planetary formation has been wrong.” Scott Tremaine, as quoted by Richard A. Kerr, “Jupiters Like Our Own Await Planet Hunters,” Science, Vol. 295, 25 January 2002, p. 605.Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag
“We cannot even show convincingly how galaxies, stars, planets, and life arose in the present universe.” Michael Rowan-Robinson, “Review of the Accidental Universe,” New Scientist, Vol. 97, 20 January 1983, p. 186.

Also, these scientists advance a number of reasons for the earth and universe being approximately 6,000 years old,[9] [10] [11] and raise a number of objections to claims of an extremely old age for the earth and the universe.[12] [10] [13] Young earth creationist scientists also contest the Big Bang Theory stating that it is scientifically unsound. [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

In regards to the question of how one can see starlight from millions of years of light years away, young earth creationists scientists commonly mention two things. First, these scientists assert that the Big Bang Theory has a star light-travel time problem and cite the work of Dr. Charles W. Misner. [19] Secondly, creationist Barry Setterfield has proposed that the speed of light was faster in the past. [20] Thirdly, the work of young earth creationist scientist Dr. John Hartnett is cited who proposes a young earth creationist cosmology that rejects an a priori methodological naturalism approach to the question of how one can see starlight from millions of light years away. [21]

Problems for Young Earth Creationism

Because velocity = distance/time, a young earth creationist wishing to postulate a universe of approximately 6000 years old faces a number of problems if one uses an a priori methodological naturalism approach to the issue:

1. If they accept that the speed of light is indeed a constant 299,792,458 meters per second (approximately 186,282.3 miles per second), then they must argue for massive and systemic error in the measurement of distance between Earth and the vast majority of the observable universe.

2. If they accept that the measured distances are correct, then they must argue for a catastrophic miscalculation of the speed of light.

References

External Links

The NASA Homepage
The NASA Planetary Photojournal
American Astronomical Society
British Astronomical Association
A guide on how to start