Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
36 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,495 Year: 18,531/19,786 Month: 951/1,705 Week: 203/518 Day: 27/50 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the creation science theory of the origin of light?
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 39 of 297 (621978)
06-29-2011 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by SecondPeterThreeFive
06-29-2011 3:55 PM


What was the speed of light 2 billion years ago? (On the other hand, there CAN exist sufficient data to show that it is changing. This is a point about sufficiency of data to prove a long-term or a short-term change. I am not arguing for or against CDK.)

So what does the creationist theory say as it pertains to the speed of light? How can we test this theory? What experiments can we run to determine if the speed of light has changed in the past, if that is what the creationist theory proposes?

Assuming redshift is entirely due to recessional speed also leads to some fairly incongruous conclusions, like the idea that the expansion of the universe (if it is expanding) is accelerating. Really? How? By what process?

How does the creationist theory of light explain the relationship between the redshift of a galaxy and the distance to the galaxy as measured by standard candles (e.g. type Ia supernovae)? How does the creationist theory of light explain the changes in gravitational lensing due to dark matter:

quote:
In a method similar to taking an X-ray of the body to reveal the underlying skeleton, the technique, known as weak gravitational lensing, allows astronomers to see how light from distant galaxies is bent and distorted by the dark matter as it travels towards earth.

They can then map the dark matter structures, which make up 80 per cent of the universe.

The study leader Tim Schrabback said: "What we tested is how the structure of the universe grows with time. If the universe expands then the gravitational lensing changes because the distance between the objects has changed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...d-proves-Einsteins-theory.html


I said nothing about atheism. I simply said that "something (atheism, creationism, naturalism, Hinduism) does not become science merely because a scientist adopts it as his faith."

We aren't talking about faith. We are talking about the data that the creationist theory of light must explain within a testable framework, otherwise called a scientific theory. Let's ignore all of the modern theories that scientists have put forth to explain this data. Tell us how the creationist theory of light explains this data.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by SecondPeterThreeFive, posted 06-29-2011 3:55 PM SecondPeterThreeFive has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Butterflytyrant, posted 06-30-2011 12:37 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 54 of 297 (622095)
06-30-2011 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Minority Report
06-30-2011 5:42 AM


Re: Moderator on Duty
There are creationist theories about light, such as that proposed by Russell Humphreys in his book 'Starlight and Time, solving the puzzle of distant starlight in a young universe'. Also another by John Hartnett in his book 'Starlight, time and the new physics'.

What testable predictions do these theories make, and how does one test them? For example, from my experience the theory put forth by Humphreys requires that distant galaxies be blue shifted. They are exactly the opposite. They are red shifted.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Minority Report, posted 06-30-2011 5:42 AM Minority Report has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019