Creation Science Rebuttals

     The young earth creation science magazine Creation ran an article in their March 2005 issue which tells about secular scientists which are blasting the big bang theory.¹

    This article is actually a follow-up to a previous Focus news article in the September 2004 issue of Creation.  The author, Carl Wieland, starts out by lambasting other Christians who have in his mind compromised, and accepted old ages and the big bang.  He makes several claims that accepting the big bang is contrary to the Bible.  He says that the sequence of big bang events is "incompatible with the Bible.  This is not true at all.  It is incompatible with a young earth interpretation of the Bible.  However, one can accept the big bang and a literal reading of Genesis.  Wieland simply does not understand old earth belief.  In reality, though, I'm certain he does understand it, however, he cannot admit that it is possible, because that opens the door for old earth belief.

The Issue

      Wieland goes on to say that there are strong signs the big bang is failing.  Unfortunately for Wieland (and young earth belief), the big bang is strong, and has done nothing but grow stronger over the past 30 years.  Despite the claims of young earth creation science over the last few decades, the big bang is very healthy.

     At the heart of Wieland's claim is an open letter written to the scientific community by 33 leading scientists.  In this letter the scientists reject the Big Bang.  I was able to find a copy of this letter online, dated from May 2004.  You can read it here.  It was originally published in New Scientist on 22 May 2004. 

     The Answers in Genesis web article fails to mention the reason the scientists wrote the letter.  The 33 scientists are not proposing that the earth is young...they accept that the universe is billions of years old.  They are proposing alternate theories to the Big Bang, namely Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model.  As the open letter states, both hypothesize an evolving universe without beginning or end.  In essence, their theories eliminate the "beginning" which the Big Bang proposes, hence you eliminate God.  With no beginning, you don't need a "beginner."   The real issue for the scientists is funding dollars for research, which usually goes to Big Bang research.  Therefore, this open letter is all about money.  The 33 scientists who doubt the big bang are still old earth scientists who are merely proposing an old earth alternative to the big bang.

Conclusion

     Big Bang believers have nothing to worry about.  The theory is as strong as it ever was, and it continues to be confirmed by observational data.  Young earth creation science would dispute this, of course, but their criticisms of the big bang have all proven to be empty.  For those interested in these alternative cosmologies, I encourage you to read the links below.

¹  Creation Magazine, Volume 27, Issue 2.  Published on the web at www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v27/i2/bigbang.asp