5 Greatest Bits of Creationist Science
People take a very dim view of Creationism because it's, you know, wrong. I'm not saying that there's no God and that He had nothing to do with the way things turned out, I'm just saying that asking Biblical literalism to be considered science is like my daughter insisting Harry Potter is her brother. I'm glad you like a book and all, folks, but eventually you have to walk outside and smell the gravity.
Amy Watts via Wikipedia Creationist car spotted on Broad Street in Athens, Georgia.
That said, just because someone believes a wrong thing doesn't make them a dumbass, and more importantly it doesn't make the thing they believe in not awesome as hell! I've got a running offer with hard-line conservative Christians that I will totally trade them acceptance of gays and lesbians for acknowledging that dinosaurs and man coexisted. My friends get church weddings, and all I have to do is look at pictures of tyrannosaurs with saddles on them? Where do I sign?
Today I wanted to look at some of the scientific theories Creationists have tried to forward to explain away the science debunking a Young Earth model. In many cases, their theory is better than real life.
White hole cosmology: When people clash about the age of the Earth with Creationists they usually use the fossil record and stuff like that because it's really hard to argue with giant skeletons. However, there is also something called the starlight problem. What it means is that we know the universe is more than 6,000 years old because since the speed of light is constant, we can measure the distance of interstellar objects based on how long it takes the light from those objects to hit us.
Alain R via Wikipedia Simulated view of a black hole in front of the Large Magellanic Cloud
Creationist Russell Humphreys decided to tackle the starlight problem and how to resolve it with Biblical literalism in his 1994 book Starlight and Time. His theory? That God created the world inside of a black hole, subjecting Creation to massive time distortions so that billions of years might pass outside the black hole while only a few days would pass within it. This would, he said, explain why quasars and such are so much older than the Young Earth he believes in. It doesn't because his math has more errors in it than a Cubs game, but the image of God tinkering with the planet inside a black hole workshop is metal as hell.
Anisotropic synchrony convention: Another attempt to explain away the starlight problem is anisotropic synchrony convention. The idea behind this theory is that light does not travel at a constant speed. Instead, it moves toward us at infinite miles per hour, but away from us at 1/299,792,458 of a second. That's why we can see objects that the speed of light should indicate are billions of light years away on a Young Earth.
Friendlystar via Wikipedia
The weird part about this theory is that it can actually work within the realm of known physics. It's basically impossible to test if light travels faster one way than another due to the problem of perfectly synchronizing clocks to measure it. Therefore, we just sort of assume that light does in fact maintain constant speed because even though you can make this idea work, it turns relatively simple equations into pointlessly complicated ones.
Piece continues on next page.