BBC Nature - History of life on Earth Beginning of the Universe - Beginning of Time Dinesh D'Souza, debate at Tufts University (2007). Used by permission. Nothing we observe today existed prior to that exact moment. Further, it was something outside of time, outside of space, and outside of matter that caused all of this to come into existence. The realization that our universe started, and did not always exist, brings enormous challenges to nontheistic scientists. Are scientists certain of this Big Bang Theory? In this point of origin, all the mass in the universe was compressed into a single point of infinite density...smaller than a single atom.2 Then in a cosmic explosion--the Big Bang--the universe came into being. This eerily parallels the record, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth...and God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light."4 It came about not from matter, but from pronouncement. Instead, could our universe have come about through the laws of physics: such as gravity, electromagnetism, speed of light, etc.?
THE BIG BANG Chris LaRocco and Blair Rothstein present: The Hubble Telescope's deepest view of the universe teaches us about the beginning We certainly know that our universe exists, however, this knowledge alone has not satisfied mankind's quest for further understanding. Our curiosity has led us to question our place in this universe and furthermore, the place of the universe itself. We have, however, come a long way from the mystical beginnings of the study of cosmology and the origins of the universe. Although in this short chapter it will be impossible to tackle all of the questions concerning the creation of everything we know as reality, an attempt will be made to address certain fundamental questions of our being. One of the most persistently asked questions has been: How was the universe created? About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. The origin of the Big Bang theory can be credited to Edwin Hubble. or Literature Kaufmann, William J., III.
Fossil of ancient multicellular life sets evolutionary timeline back 60 million years -- ScienceDaily A Virginia Tech geobiologist with collaborators from the Chinese Academy of Sciences have found evidence in the fossil record that complex multicellularity appeared in living things about 600 million years ago -- nearly 60 million years before skeletal animals appeared during a huge growth spurt of new life on Earth known as the Cambrian Explosion. The discovery published online Wednesday in the journal Nature contradicts several longstanding interpretations of multicellular fossils from at least 600 million years ago. "This opens up a new door for us to shine some light on the timing and evolutionary steps that were taken by multicellular organisms that would eventually go on to dominate the Earth in a very visible way," said Shuhai Xiao, a professor of geobiology in the Virginia Tech College of Science. The discovery sheds light on how and when solo cells began to cooperate with other cells to make a single, cohesive life form.
What are scientific theories of creation? I don't know that you can put the Biblical account of Creation into a framework that would be acceptable to empirical testing and observations used in modern science...it was a super-natural event beyond the means to be tested just as the conditions prior to the Big Bang are unobservable and defy all known laws of physics.. All one can do is observe the evidences and see what they are most consistent with...special Creation or naturalistic, evolutionary origins....and they seem to point to special Creation. According to the Bible, God "spoke" all things into existence around 6000 years ago and a scientific case can be made that there are many evidences which agree with that if one removes naturalistic assumptions which guides much of modern science.
Waves from the Big Bang News News Features Nature Video Nature Podcast News from the Archive News and Views Books and Arts Fiction Top Content - Article Page Research integrity Don't let transparency damage science How can the research community protect its members from harassment, while encouraging the openness that has become essential to science? Nature Podcast This week... The computer that can play Go, a general 'ageing' factor, and the stolen library of John Dee. Timeline: The evolution of life By Michael Marshall There are all sorts of ways to reconstruct the history of life on Earth. Pinning down when specific events occurred is often tricky, though. For this, biologists depend mainly on dating the rocks in which fossils are found, and by looking at the “molecular clocks” in the DNA of living organisms. There are problems with each of these methods. Modern genetics allows scientists to measure how different species are from each other at a molecular level, and thus to estimate how much time has passed since a single lineage split into different species. These difficulties mean that the dates in the timeline should be taken as approximate. 3.8 billion years ago? This is our current “best guess” for the beginning of life on Earth. At some point far back in time, a common ancestor gave rise to two main groups of life: bacteria and archaea. How this happened, when, and in what order the different groups split, is still uncertain. 3.5 billion years ago 3.46 billion years ago
The Nature of Science and of Theories on Origins The Nature of Science and of Scientific Theories Science is our attempt to observe, understand, and explain the operation of the universe and of the living things it contains. Since a scientific theory, by definition, must be testable by repeatable observations and must be capable of being falsified if indeed it were false, a scientific theory can only attempt to explain processes and events that are presently occurring repeatedly within our observations. Theories about history, although interesting and often fruitful, are not scientific theories, even though they may be related to other theories which do fulfill the criteria of a scientific theory. The Nature of Theories on Origins On the other hand, the theory of creation and the theory of evolution are attempts to explain the origin of the universe and of its inhabitants. Thus the notion that evolution is a scientific theory while creation is nothing more than religious mysticism is blatantly false. . . . References 1.
What Came Before the Big Bang? It is cosmology’s most fundamental question: How did the universe begin? The question presupposes that the universe had an actual starting point, but one might just as well assume the universe always was and always will be. In that case, there would be no beginning whatsoever — just an ever-evolving story of which we’re catching a mere glimpse. “We have very good evidence that there was a Big Bang, so the universe as we know it almost certainly started some 14 billion years ago. But was that the absolute beginning, or was there something before it?” But now Vilenkin says he has convincing evidence in hand: The universe had a distinct beginning — though he can’t pinpoint the time. Throughout his career, including the 20-plus years he has directed the Tufts Institute of Cosmology, Vilenkin has issued a series of wild, dazzling ideas, though from the outside he looks neither wild nor dazzling. Yet this brilliant career might never have happened. Back to the Big Bang That would soon change.
Commonly found fossils | National Trust Belemnites 'If you find a bullet-shaped fossil you could well have found the remnants of an ancient squid. These fossils are called belemnites.' says our wildlife and countryside officer Pete Brash. Ammonites 'Ammonites look a lot like coiled snail shells, but they were actually sea predators,' says our expert Rod Hebden. The ammonite was a tentacled sea creature that lived between 400 and 66 million years ago, similar to today's nautilus but more closely related to octopuses and squid. Ammonite fossils can be found in Dorset, and you can see two polished ammonites at Arlington Court, in Devon. Devil’s Toenails (Gryphaea) Although these commonly found fossils look like the claw of an ancient animal or, indeed, a devil, they were created from oysters that once lived on shallow sea beds. They are between 200 and 66 million years old, relics of a time when what is now the land in Britain was covered by the sea, and are particularly common on the coast of Yorkshire. Sea sponges and sea urchins
Evolution Science and Creation Theology 63 High Street, Grantchester Cambridge CB3 9NF England (This paper is dedicated to the memory of David Stove.) In writing an article on the theology of human evolution I must first declare that I have no expert knowledge, either as theologian or as evolutionary scientist (I am a physicist); but I have been concerned to advocate the theory of evolution in the face of modern 'creation scientists', once as an atheist and now as a Christian. This debate is too often conducted as a scientific debate, which it is not. On one side of the argument are those who believe that man has evolved by a continuous chain of reproduction, over millions of years, from far simpler creatures. In the Bible we find two ways of explaining what is happening. The idea, that God works through earthly happenings that to us have earthly explanations, is one that is familiar to all Christians. Let me place the issue in a wider perspective. Having been very general, let me now become specific.
Big Bang finding challenged Planck Collaboration (ESLAB2013) Cross-checks of gravitational-wave results used this galactic-dust map from the Planck satellite. The astronomers who earlier this year announced that they had evidence of primordial gravitational waves jumped the gun, two independent analyses suggest. The papers, published on the arXiv preprint repository, propose that the original analysis did not properly account for the confounding effects of galactic dust. Although further observations may yet confirm the findings, independent researchers now say they no longer think that the original data constituted significant evidence. “Based on what we know right now, we have no evidence for or against gravitational waves,” says Uroš Seljak, a cosmologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and co-author of one of the latest studies1. But the new analyses suggest that the twisting patterns in the CMB polarization could just as easily be accounted for by dust in the Milky Way1, 2.