Re: Science Disproves Evolution

On Jul 9, 2:17 pm, Pahu <pah...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Missing Mass

Imagine seeing several rocks in outer space, moving radially away from
Earth. If the rocks were simultaneously blasted away from Earth, their
masses, changing velocities, and distances from Earth would have a
very precise mathematical relationship with each other. When a similar
relationship is checked for billions of observable galaxies, an
obvious conclusion is that these galaxies did not explode from a
common point in a huge "big bang" (a). It is even more obvious that if
such an explosion occurred, it must have been much, much less than
billions of years ago.

Evolutionists try to fix this problem in two ways. They assume the
universe is filled with at least ten times as much matter as can be
seen. This is maintained even though three decades of searching for
this "missing mass" have turned up nothing other than the conclusion
that it does not exist {b).

A second "fix attempt" assumes that the rocks (or, in the real
problem, all particles in the universe) were briefly, almost
magically, accelerated away from some point. This process, called
inflation, supposedly reached speeds billions of trillions of times
faster than the speed of light. An instant later, and for no apparent
reason, inflation stopped. All this happened by an unknown, untestable
phenomenon-not by a blast. Then this matter became controlled by
gravity after it reached just the right speed to give the universe an
age (based on one set of assumptions) of about 13.7 billion years.
This is called the "inflationary big bang." It was proposed by Alan H.
Guth in a paper titled "A Possible Solution to the Horizon and
Flatness Problem" in Physical Review, D, Vol. 23, 15 January 1981, pp.
348-356.

Such flights of imagination and speculation are common in the field
of cosmology.

a. This problem was first explained by R. H. Dicke, "Gravitation and
the Universe: The Jayne Lectures for 1969," American Philosophical
Society of Philadelphia, 1970, p. 62. Alan Guth's attempt to solve it
(see "c" below) led to the "inflationary big bang theory."

b. This missing mass is called dark matter, because it cannot be seen
and, so far, has not been detected. Candidates for "missing mass"
include neutrinos, black holes, dead stars, low-mass stars, and
various subatomic particles and objects dreamed up by cosmologists
simply to solve this problem. Each candidate has many scientific
problems.

One study of two adjacent galaxies shows they have relatively little
dark matter. [See Ron Cowen, "Ringing In a New Estimate for Dark
Matter," Science News, Vol. 136, 5 August 1989, p. 84.]

Another study found no missing mass within 150 million light-years of
Earth. [See Eric J. Lerner, "COBE Confounds the Cosmologists,"
Aerospace America, March 1990, pp. 40-41.]

A third study found no dark matter in a large elliptical galaxy, M105.
[See "Dark Matter Isn't Everywhere," Astronomy, September 1993, pp. 19-
20.]

A fourth study found no dark matter in the main body of our galaxy.
[See Alexander Hellemans, "Galactic Disk Contains No Dark Matter,"
Science, Vol. 278, 14 November 1997, p. 1230.]

A fifth study, after cataloging the positions and distances of 100
million galaxies, concluded that the needed mass does not exist. [See
Ron Cowen, "Whole-Sky Catalog," Science News, Vol. 155, 6 February
1999, pp. 92-93.]

Theories for the Evolution of the Solar System and Universe Are
Unscientific and Hopelessly Inadequate

http://www.creationscience.com/

Do you have any up-to-date references? Like ones from the current
millennium?

Kevin

.