Share 0
A- A A+
Free Email News
The Creation Answers Book
by Various

US $14.00
View Item
Flat universe—shaky, not stirring news!

Flat universe—shaky, not stirring news!

Physicist Dr. D. Russell Humphreys comments on the “flat universe” media surge that occurred recently

May 12, 2000

“The preliminary report concerning this issue that recently appeared on this website summarized the general problems very well. I take all these news flashes on the big bang with many grains of salt anyhow, because within a few months they usually reverse themselves. Such reports are usually science-writer hype, trying to make something dull into grist for this week’s science column.

Great resource for refuting the ‘Big Bang’!
Starlight and Time

Starlight and Time
Dr D. Russell Humphreys

The Bible teaches that the universe is just thousands of years old, and yet we can see stars that are billions of light-years away. In his book, Dr Humphreys explains his new cosmology with an easy-to-read popular summary and two technical papers. Also available, a companion video in spectacular 3-D imagery how a big bang and creation cosmos differ and why evidence supports a recent creation of the universe!


“In this case, I consider the interpretation more shaky than usual. It’s based on the number and angular size of the ‘bumps’ in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). They assume:

  1. that the bumps occur in the source, not on the radiation’s trip to us, and

  2. that a particular version of the big bang is valid.

“Assumption (1) ignores articles in standard journals suggesting that tenuous but hot clouds of gas in the cosmos could perturb the CMB, causing the ‘bumps.’ That’s called the ‘Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect.’ I brought up that effect as a possible cause of the observed ‘bumps’ (the first time anyone did so as far as I know) in a November 1992 ICR Impact article called ‘Bumps in the Big Bang’ which you can find at the ICR website:

“Since then there has been a steady trickle of articles in the Astrophysical Journal which appear to confirm what I wrote. If that’s so, then the ‘bumps’ tell us nothing about the curvature of the cosmos.

“As for assumption (2), there are enough other possibilities for cosmologies that it, too, is very shaky. Somebody can very likely explain the data with a nonflat cosmos simply by tweaking another of the many ‘knobs’ on the theories.

“In other words, the theoretical connection between data and conclusion is not very robust at all, and it is hard to find a scientific justification for the degree of ‘hype’ surrounding this.”

– Dr. D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.
Louisiana State University

They say time is money. Well, this site provides over 30 years of information. That’s a lot of money and time. Would you support our efforts to keep this information coming for 30 more years? Support this site

Copied to clipboard
Product added to cart.
Click store to checkout.
In your shopping cart

Remove All Products in Cart
Go to store and Checkout
Go to store
Total price does not include shipping costs. Prices subject to change in accordance with your country’s store.