ORIGINS: 3 proofs that need to be confirmed

From: Stephen Lovell (
Date: Sat May 18 2002 - 19:32:42 EDT

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Science, Women, and Paul"

        I am trying to find and pass on a message to a Christian who will be able
    to understand the short letter below; a man who will have gleeful insight
    into it, put his arms around it, confirm it, and communicate that
    confirmation. Itís one thing to do the research, itís entirely another to
    have it confirmed. I know that not everyone will have the breadth to fully
    appreciate whatís been written, but if you would, communicate this letter to
    others. Perhaps someone may communicate to such a man. I believe this
    will serve a good purpose in the Lord. It may also be useful for Christians
    to read this, and take what they can from the letter.

        In Christ, Steve.


    Dear reader,

        This letter is not an idle speculation, but the result of more than 30
    years of careful research into the word of God. I ask, in the name of
    Jesus, that it be read with integrity, and, if having found it to have
    worth, that you communicate it to others. For any who may have the ability
    and means to confirm what has been written, please do so, and send that
    confirmation to others.

       When I was a young lad, I noticed that there was a strong and
    disrespectful disagreement about the method of creation between proponents
    of the Bible, and the mainstream scientific community. What struck me most
    strongly about this was that those who accepted the Bible had not used the
    Bible. They had not looked at the statements about the creation in Genesis,
    and developed math from that. It seemed plain to me that there were two
    parts to evolutionary doctrine: organic evolution, and physical evolution.
    If the tenets of physical evolution were proven invalid, then organic
    evolution would also be untenable. For, organic evolution depended
    absolutely on having a great amount of time for little changes to

        I began by studying the first few sentences of Genesis, and found that
    the word commonly translated as brooded was from an ancient Hebrew word
    meaning to press down on. There was a simple equation that fit the
    question, ìWhat happens to a particle when it is put under pressure, and
    then released?î. I worked with the insights that came out of that equation
    for many years. Along the way I remembered my original objective, and so
    put together three simple and confrontational proofs.

        More than anything I suppose, the arrogant attitude of the scientific
    community had made a deep impression on me. The attitude of ìwe know
    everything, and we did not need to learn from God to gain that knowledgeî,
    and ìweíre sure, because weíve talked with each other, and mutually
    validated our beliefs.î So the first proof deals with the major mystery of
    the previous century: the Tunguska explosion.

        On June 30, 1908 there was an explosion in the Tungus region of Siberia.
    The explosion knocked down trees in over 2000 square kilometers of land.
    In China, those who saw it said that it appeared that the sky had split in
    half. For the next two nights the northern skies were so bright that people
    in Europe were able to read without artificial light. No acceptable
    explanation of this mystery has yet been communicated.

        The answer to this riddle is found in Australia. The Henbury Craters are
    the other end of this event. A seismic investigation to the north of the
    craters will reveal that the craters are the ends of shafts of crushed rock,
    bearing on a strike of 14 degrees, 35 minutes NNW. In brief, this was an
    occurrence of the physics that normally manifests itself in the planetary
    magnetic field, momentarily increasing in extent. Material was ejected from
    the earthís interior both to the north, and to the south. To the north, the
    ejected material was seen two nights after the event as Comet Morehouse,
    1908 III, the aptly denominated ìnew cometî. This physics manifests itself
    more frequently on the sun, where it is seen as sunspots.

        No math is required to recognize that inertia is then not a constant of
    nature, and, with only minor extension of reasoning, neither is gravity, nor
    rotation on the Solar System scale. So these beliefs so basic to the
    scientific community are not correct, and those things which were assumed to
    be simple structural constants are found instead to have complexity, and
    dynamic aspects.

        I pose two questions. What physics would account for the cause of the
    explosion in the Mahabharata, or the means of destruction of the cities of
    the plain? What physics accounts for the sun and moon standing still in the
    days of Joshua, or again when the shadow returned backward in Hezekiahís

        The second deep impression Iíve gained over the years was of how content
    people were to unreasonably take a firm stand on what their family or
    community accepted, even if it was only an attitude of ìWho can know?î.
    There are many religions, each claiming to be right, and the scientific
    establishment knows no God. True followers of Christ base their response on
    reason, mainly keyed from three points of view: (1) the Bible critically
    deals with real and important issues, (2) the Bible presents principled
    teaching, from principled foundations, and (3) the Biblical progression of
    manís relationship with God follows well understood developmental stages:
    first obedience and trust, followed later by recognition of sacrifice,
    faith, love, patience in well-doing, and hope for a good reward; the same
    stages children go through in their relationships with their parents. The
    second proof then relates to the physical aspects of the account of creation
    found in Genesis.

        In the last few years astronomers have accumulated data on supernovae.
    This data, which includes highly accurate position information, is freely
    found in numerous places on the web. Take the following 6 pairs of
    supernovae as examples:

            2001jf 1999fi 2001fm 2002N 2001hn 1999fj
            2001jh 2001hm 2001jg 2001hl 2001fi 2001fb

    Using no more than pencil, graph paper, and a ruler, these can be entered as
    points on a graph, and lines drawn through the pairs will be found to
    intersect (near 2 hours, 20 minutes 10 seconds, 0 degrees North 37 minutes
    19 seconds). Five of the pair intersect within one arc second square, the
    sixth is not far away. What the reader may recognize is that each of these
    pairs lie on great circles, that one, or both, of the supernovae are only
    reflections, and that the intersection is one of two points on a great
    spherical mirror, either the reflecting far point, or the reflecting near
    point. Using a large number math package (for high accuracy) and spherical
    trigonometry, it will be found that many of the recorded supernovae are only
    reflections, and that there are a large number of these great circles
    intersecting in the two reflection points. Even if a few of these pairs are
    found to be only coincidental, the large number of intersections defies

        But look at the dates. The pairs are often within the same year of
    discovery, or only a year or two apart. And, since supernovae quickly fade,
    this means that the speed of light, which was assumed to be a constant, is
    not a constant at all. Certainly the speed of light seems to be a constant
    within our solar system (except if youíve already logically caught
    differently in the earlier proof), but now there is evidence that the speed
    of light is much greater outside the small structure of the solar system.
    Does, in fact, the speed of light increase greatly from structure to
    structure: from solar system to galaxy, from galaxy to galactic cluster,
    from Ö

         Consider again an expansion of those things which were created by
    pressure. Any inhomogeneity in those particles that were created would be
    greatest at the smallest scale. Therefore any physical mechanism which
    imposed a uniform local state and would have been initiated by
    inhomogeneity, would have occurred at the smallest scale. So the creation
    sequence of structural states would have been from the smallest scale to the
    largest scale. As well, the subsequent creation of larger structural states
    would have imposed cumulative changes to the earlier, smaller structural
    states. A lot of words to say: the creation sequence of Genesis is
    confirmed: first the earth, then the sun and stars begin nuclear burning as
    the gravitation increases as another state was created. And so the
    sequence in Genesis, of periods of darkness and light, refer not to physical
    24 hour days (though that might have been the case, I know not), but rather
    to the increasing scalar development of the universe during which the laws
    of nature were changing.

        Thus the creation steps of the Bible are verified. We see design, not
    accident, with structures of scale, and with different laws pertinent to
    different structures and scales. We, and the Universe we live in, were
    created. The Universe was not just something that existed, wherein we just
    came along. Who is God? Jehovah of the Bible.

        And the dating mechanisms of physical evolution? Without constants, they
    are all invalidated.

        Again, I will pose two questions. What was the shape of the lens, and
    what was itís refractive index, that caused the Great Siberian Darkness of
    1938? And, what physical phenomena would account for the darkness at the
    crucifixion of Jesus?

        The third deep impression Iíve gained over the years is how often there
    are people who continue to hang on to former beliefs. There will obviously
    then be those that say, ìBut if there were enough time, then with an
    accumulation of small changes, might not organic evolution still be valid,
    and all this just some accident?î. If you and I were to walk along a desert
    ravine and find a clay pot, one of us might think it to be some natural rock
    formation. But if the other were to turn it over, and find the potterís
    fingerprint crisp and clear, it would convince us both. So this third proof
    addresses the age of the earth.

        There are three major outstanding problems in the Geophysics of the
    earth. First, the continental shapes and distribution pattern on the
    surface of the earth have been a puzzle for many decades. Second, the cause
    of lineaments, great cracks through the crust of the earth, remain a
    mystery. These are the more puzzling because of their implied sudden
    occurrence, considering how so much great plastic deformation is seen,
    especially in the metamorphic rocks. Though maybe not of common knowledge,
    lineaments, and particularly the intersections of lineaments, are well known
    by geologists, having been found to be useful in discovering many rich
    mineral deposits. These lineaments are of two basic types, stress relief
    and tension. The stress relief lineaments occur on a finer scale, varying
    from as little as 160 feet to 60 miles apart. The great tension lineaments
    are easily seen in their great scale on detailed maps of the earthís sea
    floor. Third, the physical cause of the flood in the days of Noah remains

        All three of these have the same cause. Take a globe in your hands, and
    turn it to look at the Northern Pacific Ocean. The landmasses to the east
    and west show an interestingly symmetric pattern. That pattern can be
    recognized by using a little spherical trigonometry in a spreadsheet
    package, and plotting the results. Take the equatorial and polar radii of
    the earth, and build a math model of the earthís radius at various positions
    of latitude and longitude. Then compute and plot what the net change in
    radii would be for each position if the pole were to change position.
    Whether you changed the polar position by 10 or 20 or 30 degrees or more,
    the same pattern would present itself. Much of the continental margins fall
    on the line of change. You can then easily perceive the great tension
    rifts, and understand the immediate cause of lineaments, and grasp how
    devastating and real the story of the flood was. Itís true that there is
    more to the complete math than that. Youíd want to know the positions of
    the moon and sun, and their effect. Youíd want to know the effects of
    crustal rebound. Youíd want to know that the physics of seemingly spherical
    bodies is neither radially uniform, nor axially uniform, but that the
    mathematical physics acts along significantly curved surfaces tangential to
    the polar axis. That would help you better comprehend the apparent push
    down of the Arctic region, and push out of the Antarctic region. It would
    also help you better understand why the Southern Hemisphere seemingly
    reversed pattern. And the change of pole position, oblateness, and
    curvature, would enlighten your understanding of the cause of mountain
    building, just as crustal rebound would enlighten your understanding of the
    reason for the ring of fire, the ring of volcanic activity that bounds the
    Pacific Ocean.

        So then, no great time passed, nor was there little change by little
    change, but rather the earth is still fresh and well defined, and shows the
    makerís mark. Who is God? Jehovah of the Bible.

        Both historical and prophetic event phenomena match consistent with
    changes of state in the Solar System, as from the loss or gain of a planet,
    not just in the Old Testament (at the time of the Flood, the tower of Babel,
    and the Exodus), but even more so in the New Testament (look at the
    prophecies in the Matthew, Mark, Luke, and especially Revelations). When do
    lifespans change? When are there massive earthquakes, and every mountain
    and island moved, and when is the calendar system changed? When do the
    speed of light and the gravitational constant change, so that the sunís
    surface radiation significantly dims or brightens? And when do the clouds
    recede, and when does the earthís atmosphere expand, so that orbital trash
    is swept up and burnt? And who spoke of these things long before the
    mechanisms were known? Who is God? Jehovah of the Bible, and Jesus, His

    Written April 18, 2002 by Stephen Lovell.

    MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 18 2002 - 21:49:07 EDT