The Institute for Creation Research

Secular astronomers consistently say that heavenly features formed naturally, disregarding the One who said, "I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself."¹ This year brought its share of discoveries that confirm biblical creation's contention that God made the heavens supernaturally and recently.

Early this year, atheistic physicist Lawrence Krauss released a new book in which he described theories of how the universe could have come "from nothing." However, any attempt to do so redefines "nothing" to mean "something." All of Krauss' admittedly ingenious theories on this matter rest on this bait-and-switch fallacy. A news release about the book plainly admitted, "nothing doesn't mean 'nothing' anymore."² One must redefine reality to avoid its Creator.

The Big Bang notion also took more hits this year. One report described a handful of galaxies that had huge central black holes. Secularists calculate ways that randomized matter might spontaneously organize into galaxies with black holes comprising the usual 0.1 percent of a galaxy's mass. But new models must now try to explain black holes comprising 14 percent of the mass of these "oddball galaxies."³

Similarly, according to the Big Bang, binary stars could not orbit one another any faster than once every five hours in a universe that is supposedly 13.7 billion years old. No wonder secular astronomers expressed "complete surprise" when they found "something previously thought to be impossible"—binary stars with half the orbital period than what the Big Bang theory requires.⁴ Giant black holes and tiny orbital periods add to a long list of observations that confound the Big Bang's fictionalized history.

The researchers who described those nearby big black hole galaxies also identified similar-looking galaxies in distant space. But according to the Big Bang, faraway (and long ago) galaxies are supposed to look less evolved, and nearby (and recent) ones are supposed to look more mature. Instead, these and other galaxies look similar throughout space. If the universe is 13.7 billion years old, then why is there no evolutionary progression of stars and galaxies, and why do binary stars that require twice the length of time still shine in the night sky?

Other 2012 discoveries also confirm biblical creation's expectation of a young universe. For example, the "faint young sun" paradox remains unsolved. Briefly, if the earth is 4.5 billion years old, then it should not contain life because the sun would have been too faint back then to support it. Researchers resorted to sheer speculation, suggesting that long ago the sun experienced an unexpected and unexplained episode of bright burning. What are the odds that it produced just the right amount of heat and light for just the right length of time to enable life to evolve on planet earth—as if it ever could?⁵ Since the earth and sun were created during the same week, the faint young sun paradox is only a problem for Big Bang's time requirement.

Researchers also found methane lakes in the tropics of Saturn's moon Titan this year. The problem is that "tropical lakes on Titan should evaporate over a period of just a few thousand years."⁶ Of course, these are easy to explain in a solar system that is just a few thousand years old, but the lakes force those committed to billion-year-long histories to assert that Titan is somehow generating methane.

Astronomers found a similarly sticky situation on the distant planet named GJ 1214b. Estimates of its density strongly suggest that it is largely water. The problem is that it closely orbits its red giant star every 38 hours, keeping it a toasty 450 degrees Farenheit.⁷ That star should have burned away this steamy planet long ago. So, both Titan's lakes and GJ 1214b look very young.

But amidst all the astronomy news of this year, young-universe creation was most clearly confirmed by 2012 measurements of magnetic fields. Although scientists produced the most detailed map of the Milky Way galaxy, they still "have been puzzled over the origin of these galactic magnetic fields."⁸ The new measurements confirm a prediction by creation physicist D. Russell Humphreys, who wrote in 2008 that if God created galaxies "standing out of the water and in the water" as 2 Peter 3:5 explains, then they should have the same magnetic field that scientists now describe.⁹

Humphreys also predicted in 1984,¹⁰ based on his water-first creation model, that the planet Mercury's crust should show remnant magnetism from when it solidified only thousands of years ago under the then-high strength of its planetary magnetic field.¹¹ The strength of Mercury's crustal magnetic field was finally published in 2012, confirming recent creation and refuting old-age planetary evolution.

Expectations from a created cosmos are so well represented nowadays that it is becoming very easy to believe that the Lord was right—He alone, and not nature, "stretcheth forth the heavens."¹

References

1. Isaiah 44:24.
2. Cassis, N. Book explores discoveries in cosmology and how our universe could have come from nothing. Arizona State University news release, December 21, 2011. 
3. Texas Astronomers Measure Most Massive, Most Unusual Black Hole Using Hobby-Eberly Telescope. University of Texas at Austin News. Posted on utexas.edu November 28, 2012, accessed December 21, 2012.
4. 'Impossible' Stars Found in Super-Close Orbital Dances. Space.com. Posted on space.com July 25, 2012, accessed December 21, 2012. 
5. Thomas, B. Can Solar 'Belch' Theory Solve Sun Paradox? Creation Science Updates. Posted on icr.org March 21, 2012, accessed December 20, 2012. 
6. Griffith, C. A. et al. 2012. Possible tropical lakes on Titan from observations of dark terrain. Nature. 486 (7402): 237-239.
7. Thomas, B. Distant Watery Planet Looks Young. Creation Science Updates. Posted on icr.org April 4, 2012, accessed December 20, 2012. 
8. Scientists Chart High-Precision Map of Milky Way's Magnetic Fields. U.S. Naval Research Laboratory press release, February 3, 2012.
9. Humphreys, D. R. 2008. The Creation of Cosmic Magnetic Fields. In Snelling, A. A. (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Creationism. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship and Dallas, TX: Institute for Creation Research, 213-230.
10. Humphrey's, D. R. 1984. The Creation of Planetary Magnetic Fields. Creation Research Society Quarterly. 21 (3).
11. Purucker, M. E. et al. 2012. Evidence for a Crustal Magnetic Signature on Mercury from MESSENGER Magnetometer Observations. 43rd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Woodlands, TX: Lunar and Planetary Institute, 1297.

Image credit: NASA

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on January 2, 2013.