Nebular Hypothesis Vs. Six-Day Creation

Can creation really be proved by science? This is a question that has been debated for many years. Many people just assume that creation is just based on faith and that evolution is based on scientific facts, but that’s not always the case. They have this slogan that says, “Evolution is science, and creation is religion” (Evidence for Creation). Scientific evidence is consistent with the belief that the physical universe was designed by God.

Throughout history, science has always faced challenges from outside groups who work to mold science to their beliefs, ignoring evidence and commonly held facts. Following in the legacy of the flat world and an Earth centered Universe, young Earth creationists bend science to fit their explanations of the Earth’s origin and timeline. Evidence for the ancient age of the Earth is present in every discipline of Earth science and directly refutes claims made by young Earth creationists. It is important to examine these claims and rebut them, as their denial of proper scientific understanding hampers progress and has wider implications for the future of our society.

The old-Earth evolution and young-Earth creation debate has been one that has gone on for centuries. Each viewpoint seeks to give an answer to life’s most difficult questions or origins and how the Earth came to be what it resembles today. While the Young Earth viewpoint has remained constant and unchanged throughout the centuries the Old Earth view seems to be continually evolving as new discoveries tend to discredit previous assumptions. One certainty is that both viewpoints take a dogmatic stance against each other in regards to the interpretation of scientific evidence. The purpose of this paper is to compare old-Earth and

There are many topics that science and religion have opposing views on and continue to debate. One of these subjects that has received a great deal of attention and has placed an enormous wedge between the two realms is the varying opinions concerning the creation of the universe. For nearly a century, scientists have explained this phenomenon with the Big Bang theory, whereas spiritual thinkers have long placed their faith in the Genesis creation account. Both submit valid arguments, however, it is ultimately up to each individual to decide which testimony to accept as truth and to consider if it is possible that both opinions could co-exist.

The story of Creation in the Bible begins with God creating a human in his own image, naming him Adam. He created a human to carry out his commandments and to be good. Then, God created Eve, a companion for Adam. Adam and Eve were persuaded by Satan, in the form of a serpent, and took a bite out of the apple that God told them not to eat. When God found out, they were banned from the Garden of Eden. In Mary Shelly’s, Frankenstein, Victor constructs a monster as a template for a new race that would worship him. Unfortunately, Victor did not think past the moment of birth, and the monster, who should have been Victor’s Adam, instead associated more with Satan. Unlike the creation story of Adam and Eve, the creation story of Frankenstein is one that goes horribly wrong due to the pursuit of knowledge.

It was Shapley’s argument that some of the stars in the spiral nebulae had to be huge because of how bright they were and that they had to be very far away. He was correct in this argument; however Curtis was also correct that the same stars might be doing something different than what Shapley thought they were. Curtis suggested that these stars could be undergoing something new and different. Today we call the anomaly that the enormous stars were having a supernova. It had been known for a while that some stars go nova when they are dying, however these supernova were a different class by

The story of creation begins with Genesis 1 and 2, it explains how the world and it’s living inhabitants were created from God’s touch. From Genesis 1 we see how the sky, seas, land, animals, and mankind were created. However Genesis 2 focuses more on the first of mankind, known as Adam and Eve and how they are made to be. In this paper I will compare Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 and what the main idea for creation is in each one, however in my opinion there is no contradiction between the two. Genesis 2 merely fills in the details that are "headlined" in Genesis 1.

Parenago 1802, a member of the ∼1 Myr Orion Nebula Cluster, is a double-lined, detached eclipsing binary in a 4.674 d orbit, with equal-mass components (M2/M1=0.985±0.029). Here we present extensive V IC JHKS light curves spanning ∼15 yr, as well as a Keck/HIRES optical spectrum. The light curves evince a third light source that is variable with a period of 0.73 d, and is also manifested in the high-resolution spectrum, strongly indicating the presence of a third star in the system, probably a rapidly rotating classical T Tauri star. We incorporate this third light into our radial velocity and light curve modeling of the eclipsing pair, measuring accurate masses (M1=0.391±0.032, M2=0.385±0.032 M⊙), radii (R1=1.73±0.02, R2=1.62±0.02 R⊙), and temperature ratio (Teff,1/Teff,2=1.0924±0.0017). Thus the radii of the eclipsing stars differ by 6.9±0.8%, the temperatures differ by 9.2±0.2%, and consequently the luminosities differ by 62±3%, despite having masses equal to within 3%. This could be indicative of an age difference of ∼ 3 × 105 yr between the two eclipsing stars, perhaps a vestige of the binary formation history. We find that the eclipsing pair is in an orbit that has not yet fully circularized,

In the early millennia of the solar system, the Earth was in an inchoate state.

“Young-earth creationists believe that the creation days of Genesis 1 were six (24 hour) days, which occurred 6,000-12,000 years ago. They also believe that about 2,300-3,300 years before Christ, the surface of the earth was radically rearranged by Noah’s Flood.”

Discoveries of what were termed “nebulae” began in the early 17th century. The first of these discoveries was the Orion Nebula, which looked like a normal star to the naked eye. French scholar Peiresc discovered it in 1610 using one of the first telescopes to be made. Later, in 1656, Christiaan Huygens observed the interior of the Orion Nebula and determined that it consisted of a compact quadruple star system instead of a singular star. During the 18th and 19th century, nebulas were discovered even though astronomers were mainly scanning the sky for comets. Some major astronomers who contributed greatly to the discovery of nebulas, among other things, during the 18th and 19th century were Messier and the Herschel family. Though the instrumentation available to astronomers during the 18th and 19th century were highly advanced compared to earlier times, they weren’t advanced enough to detect the motion of extragalactic objects or their composition. This lack of precision instrumentation, and thus the dissociation from motion of stars/star-clusters/nebulae, were the main reasons astronomers during this

Several unresolved problems remain concerning the Orion Nebula. The fate of the protoplanetary disks, for example, is presently impossible to predict. Without a more detailed understanding of how planets actually form, it cannot be assumed that the events within the Orion Nebula are analogous to the events that led to the formation of the planets in the solar system. Furthermore, the detection of water in the nebula has revealed the need to revise the theory of star formation to

Approximately 1,000 years ago the pattern of mass loss suddenly changed, and the Cat's Eye Nebula started forming inside the dusty shells. It has been expanding ever since, as discernible in comparing Hubble images taken in 1994, 1997, 2000, and 2002. The puzzle is what caused this dramatic change? Many aspects of the process that leads a star to lose its gaseous envelope are still poorly known, and the study of planetary nebulae is one of the few ways to recover information about these last few thousand years in the life of a Sun-like

Within the constellation of Orion is what appears to the human eye as a hazy star, but is in fact the Orion Nebula, a cosmic cloud composed of dust and brightly glowing gas around 20-30 light years in diameter. This nebula, often called M42 or NGC 1976, is one of the most studied stellar ‘nurseries’ and is located in the Orion constellation, a part of the ‘sword’ hanging from the three-starred ‘belt,’ approximately 1,500 light years away from Earth.

The “young earth creationist” perceptive is the result of a historical-grammatical reading of the description of the early Earth in the Bible or the Islamic Qur’an, which both contain similar accounts of a six-day creation, Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, and Noah’s flood (Biblical