Origins

If you look at the subject of origins with some common sense/basic logic, things become very apparent.

1 The Big Bang. It is said that there is ‘no such thing as a free lunch’, but if you accept the Big Bang origin you get the whole universe & everything in it free, out of nothing.

There is a law of physics that states, matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed. This invalidates the Big Bang theory. Nothing could have ever made something, only someone (God) could create. If it did occur then all you would get would be a mass of gas expanding & separating forever.

Why would you get the ‘Bang’? If the mass of everything in the universe appeared in one spot then this would be the perfect conditions for a Black Hole, an entity where the gravity is so strong that nothing (not even light) can escape.

2 The formation of stars. A mass of gas would not spontaneously come together to form a star. If you compress gas the outward pressure increases. Think how strong compressed

gas cylinders have to be. If a balloon bursts the gas in it blows out.

Evolutionists say that the gravity of other stars can overcome this problem, but if you need

stars to make stars how did the first stars originate?

3 The formation of planets. If a supposed rotating mass of gas & dust doesn’t all fall into the star then it should form planets with standard orbits & standard rotations.

If this was not pulled into the star central in the solar system it could feasibly form planets with standard orbits, rotations & composition. Planets in our solar system are very different in their orbits & rotations, also in composition.

4 The origin of moons. There is no generally accepted model for this as all the methods proposed have significant faults.

5 Origin of life. Evolutionists claim that life appeared by the random combination of chemicals. Again this spontaneous generation violates a law of science. Only existing life gives rise to new life. The probability of the basic chemicals coming together is so utterly bizarre that it is impossible.

6 Development of life.

Darwinsaw small changes in creatures & these combined to produce the major differences present in creatures around the world. The driving force was thought to be natural selection. However this [interestingly proposed by creationists well beforeDarwin] is not a creative process, it is conservative. It works against any abnormalities. Any feature out of the ordinary is eliminated from the population. When evolutionists realised this they introduced neo-Darwinian, random mutations in creatures. This may sound reasonable but the fatal flaw is that random mutations cannot add to the information within living cells. No increased in information has ever been found.

Look at the fossil record say evolutionists, this shows a progress from simple life forms to complex. However everything appears fully formed, there are intermediate forms, no transitions from one form to another.

There should be literally millions of examples of examples of one creature changing into another, but none have been found.

Stephen Martin