the “steady-state” theory died in the decade before this impact was written..in the 1960s..why would morris make it appear as though it were still thought of as a possibility of how the universe was created--even though he had to know it wasnt?..isnt lying a sin?..(and, btw, its been over three decades since then, but the ICR still hasnt given up on the “steady-state” theory

Both of these are evolutionary theories and each includes the "expanding universe" concept, according to which the galaxies are all rapidly receding from one another. The "steady-state" theory has also been called the "continuous creation" theory, attempting to explain the decay and disappearance of matter and energy by the continual evolution (not "creation") of new matter out of nothing.

again, read above..that did a decade earlier, but it didnt stop morris from using it..would you keep a book on evolution that used piltdown man as evidence?

The "big bang" theory is usually also known as the "oscillating universe" theory, supposing that the universe continuously alternates between processes of expansion and contraction and that its present expansion began with a super-dense state following its most recent contraction about twenty billion or so years ago.

now it is thought to have occured about fifteen billion years ago

Although no model of origins can be scientifically tested

if it is the case that they are not science, why do they attempt to place creation in schools?

since one cannot repeat history—any such model can be used to predict and correlate the observable data which result from that history. The model which most effectively does this is the one most likely to be correct.

not necessarily..it could just mean we have yet to discover that..essentially, the creationist argument against evolution is just that..it hasnt been discovered, it wont be, biblical creationism is right

Any evolutionary model of the universe must conflict with one of the most fundamental laws of science, namely the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

no, they dont..and i believe i have already gone over it

The steady state theory supposes that energy or matter somehow came into existence out of nothing far out in non-observable space.

the steady-state theory that was abanded over 30 years ago?

The Second Law says the universe must have had a beginning—otherwise it would already be completely disordered.

how did he come up with that?

The omnipotent, omniscient, eternal God of the Bible is the only Cause adequate to produce the universe as we know it.

i am sorry, but i dont see how--even if a god were necessary--he could decide that it had to be the god of the bible..it could be, for instance, the god of the koran..or another god..it could be a god nobody ever heard of

Why, for example, is the universe so big, and why are there so many different kinds of stars and galaxies and inter-stellar phenomena? Why are the moon and the other planets barren of life?

how did morris figure this out?..god tell him?

We can see a number of reasons for the visible stars at least. They are useful for light, for navigation and for chronology.

how are stars useful for light?

U.F.O. enthusiasts to the contrary notwithstanding, there is no evidence either in science or Scripture that biological life exists elsewhere in the universe.

but that does not mean that life does not exist elsewhere..just because something hasnt been discovered yet does not mean it never will be..there is evidence, btw, that life is at least possible

Thus the earth is unique in the solar system

what planets have an identical make-up?..every planet in this solar system is unique when compared to the other planets

So far as we can observe, there are not even any planets anywhere else,

WHAT?!..there are no planets beyond pluto?!..did i read that correctly?

Science Daily Article on new planet

let alone a planet equipped to sustain biological life.

who says biological life needs water?

And even if there were, with even the nearest star being four light-years distant, there is no rational possibility of our ever being able to communicate with such hypothetical space-people on such hypothetical planets.

i believe there is a good chance there is other life out there..i would not say there definitely is..and i would also say that i dont believe space aliens are traveling here from their home planets

Amazing though it may seem to evolutionary naturalists, the evidence favors the conclusion that man is unique in the universe

the “evidence” favors the conclusion that we have much more to discover in this universe..if we had traveled to many other planets, all with no evidence to say life exists, then it might be possible for morris to make that statement..however, we know very little about planets..the other planet we are most familiar with, mars, has some evidence that life is possible with “dry channels” and similar things..tell me what we know about the other planets in this universe beyond pluto..i feel safe saying it is virtually knowing

In the present economy of things, however, man is inescapably confined to only a tiny corner of the vast universe.

and if we lived in any other part of the universe, we could say “man is inescapably confined to only a tiny corner of the vast universe”..that statement has NO meaning..it reminds me of the following quote:

“it seems to me science has not explained why creation exists. why should all of these things have happened in just the right order in order to make life come about on this tiny planet in an off-hand corner of the milky way. they can’t explain that and, until they can, genesis still has something to say” ---carole fountain, professor of hebrew scriptures at andover newtown theological school, 2/20/99 A&E’s “mysteries of the bible”

that type of argument falls apart because no matter what part of universe we happened to live at, people like this would still try and make this argument

And now, in an almost unbelievable return to these ancient pagan mysteries, modern scientific speculations about the evolution of life in other worlds have been transmuted into a weird celestial drama of ancient astronauts, flying saucers, little green men and "chariots of the gods."

UFOs are likely caused by hallucinations that are caused by fatigue

They are, rather, "angels that excel in strength" (Psalm 103:20),

i am interested..since he has said that we dont know that there are no planets beyond this solar system(which is a lie), how can he come back and say this?..where is his evidence for that?..if you demand high evidence for things such as planets beyond this solar system(which there is plenty of it), how can you come back--with no evidence at all--and say angels exist

These are all real beings, living a real existence in this real physical cosmos.

again, if you demand high amounts of evidence for things like evolution(which there is), then how can you come back and say “these are real”?..is there some evidence i am missing?

complete version of impact #10

email me