Dan Phelps despatched me a hyperlink to a horrible, terrible video of the Solutions in Genesis astronomers babbling about how the JWST proves the universe is younger. I do know, that’s simply nuts, however what else are you able to count on from AiG?
Fortuitously, Dan gives an outline, so I don’t have to look at it. You don’t must both.
Younger Earth Creationist Astronomers Declare Victory for Creationism Due to the Findings of the James Webb House Telescope
Our favourite Younger Earth Creationist (YEC) astronomers have lastly mentioned the James Webb House Telescope (JWST) at size. On Wednesday 9/14/22 on Fb Dr. Danny Faulkner and Rob Webb of AiG, and Dr. Jason Lisle (previously of AiG, now on the Biblical Science Institute) focus on the early findings of the JWST for a full excruciating hour. See: https://fb.watch/fymizG2T2H/ .
Faulkner and Lisle have PhDs in astronomy. Rob Webb, just lately was employed by AiG as a preacher/scientist and has expertise in aerospace engineering, serving to design a number of completely different spacecraft (therefore his AiG nickname “Rocket Rob”). Their “dialogue” consists principally of self-congratulation and varied claims that each new discovering helps Younger Earth Creationism together with having mild from galaxies billions of sunshine years away attending to Earth in 6,000 years (a miracle!). Their self congratulations are based mostly on the truth that astronomers are revising their concepts about how shortly galaxies and heavy parts shaped within the early universe due to new knowledge from JWST findings. This motley crew appear to be gloating that different astronomers are, gasp!, doing science. A lot of the remainder is preaching/scripture quoting and, at about 23 minutes in, claiming a nefarious conspiracy of morally questionable “secular astronomers” based mostly on their “worldview.” Most astronomers I do know are reasonably upright residents. The exceptions know who they’re ;-).
About 32 minutes in Drs. Lisle and Faulkner joke about lifeless Democrats voting in Chicago, and Dr. Lisle claims “lifeless individuals vote Left.”
In Dr. Faulkner’s esteemed scientific opinion God solely created life on earth, not elsewhere (~36 minutes in). Nonetheless, he intones, this solely contains “bodily life like us; I’m not speaking about spirit beings like angels and demons, and so forth.” (Is that this video from the thirteenth century?). Then, after a dialogue of exoplanets, Dr. Faulkner additionally tells us that God will destroy stars and galaxies when he creates a “new heavens and a brand new Earth” (~39 minutes). Golly wow! Fortunately, Dr. Faulkner goes on to rebuff a web based questioner who asks concerning the Flat Earth, giving Biblical and scientific causes the traditional Bible-based cosmology is unsuitable. Dr. Faulkner has even written a thick tome concerning the topic (on the market on the Creation Museum and Ark Park, in addition to on-line). The three gents then focus on Flat Earth Idea and the psychology of the cultish habits behind it for a bit. They seem oblivious to the irony, that, despite their training, selling a 6,000 12 months outdated universe and Earth. Once they agreed that it’s a “psychological problem,” I ended the video for a couple of minutes out of necessity. I couldn’t resolve to chortle or cry, so I took a rest room break.
Close to the tip (~53 minutes) Dr. Lisle bemoans that mainstream science is ignoring his declare that he predicted the findings of the JWST. He goes on to assert that science itself wouldn’t be attainable if the Bible weren’t true. Lisle then posts the inane cartoon under (my screenshot) insulting scientists and clever individuals in addition to complicated evolution and cosmology/cosmogony.
The video ends with mentions of books they’ve on the market and the Creation Museum planetarium.
However, you ask, what concerning the biologists? We’ve got to show to the Institute for Creationist Analysis, which employs essentially the most appallingly terrible man with some credentials in biology, Jeffery Tomkins. I’ve mentioned Tomkins a number of occasions earlier than, and I’m bored with. He’s extremely dishonest fellow whose whole experience is about distorting the scientific proof in ways in which anybody who is aware of the sphere sees is unsuitable, however he throws round technical phrases that make lay individuals suppose he’s sensible. It’s a basic pseudoscientific transfer.
I’m spared the ache of working by way of Tomkins’ lies by Dan Cardinale, who explains how his arguments about junk DNA are completely bogus.