` J.K. HYDER ORIGIN & HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE

SELECTED QUOTATIONS BY EVOLUTIONISTS

Compiled by Dr. Henry M. Morris

Contents: A. = Cosmic Evolution

B. = Origin of Stars & Galaxies

C. = The Solar System

A. Cosmic Evolution:

1. Alfven, Hanes & Asoka Mendis, "Interpretation of Observed Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation," Nature, vol. 266 (April 21, 1977), pp. 698-699 (authors in Dept. of Physics, U Cal San Diego)

p.698 "The observed cosmic microwave background radiation, which has a high degree of spatial isopropy and which closely fits a 2.7K black body spectrum, is generally claimed to be the strongest piece of evidence in support of hot big bang cosmologies by its proponents."

p.698 "The claim that this radiation lends strong support to hot big bang cosmologies is without foundation."

2. Arp, H.C., Gurbidge, F. Hoyle, J.V. Narlikar, & N.C. Wickramasinghe, "The Extragalactic Universe: An Alternative View," Nature, vol. 346 (Aug 30, 1990), pp. 807-812.

p.809 "The microwave background has no imprints to mark the occurrence of such events, contradicting the theoretical expectations of a decade ago and causing theoreticians in recent years to search for variants of the Big Bang that avoid a confrontation with observation on this point. Our opinion is that avoiding confrontation with observation is not the hallmark of a good theory." ... In the Big Bang model, the microwave background came first & the galaxies second, whereas the observations suggest (almost to the point of compelling) the opposite."

p.810 "the present evidence does not warrant an implicit belief in the standard hot Big Bang picture."

p.811 "It is commonly supposed that the so-called primordial abundances of D, 3H3, 4He & 7Li provide strong evidence for Big Bang cosmology. But a particular value for the baryon-to-photon ration needs to be assumed ad hoc to obtain the required abundances. A theory in which results are obtained only through ad hoc assumptions can hardly be considered to acquire much merit thereby."

p.812 "... potentially observable & satisfy the repeatability criterion of physical theories. The Big Bang satisfies neither of these requirements, and hence as a scientific hypothesis fails to compete ..."

p.812 "Cosmology is unique in science in that it is a very large intellectual edifice based on a very few facts."

3. Burbidge, Geoffrey, "Why Only One Big Bang?" Scientific American (Feb. 1992), p. 120.

p.120 "Big Bang cosmology ... rests, however, on many untested and in some cases untestable, assumptions. ... reflects faith as much as objective truth."

p.120 "... there are good reasons to think the big bang model is seriously flawed."

p.120 "... The big bang ultimately reflects some cosmologists' search for creation and for a beginning. That search properly lies in the realm of metaphysics, not science."

4. Burbidge, Geoffrey, & Adelaide Hewitt, "A Catalog of Quasars Near & Far," Sky & Telescope (Dec. 1994), pp. 32-34. (Burbidge is Professor of Physics, UCSD)

p.32 "Either QSOs [QSO = Quasi-stellar object = quasar] come in an extremely wide range of intrinsic luminosities, as most people believe, or their redshifts do not indicate distance."

p.33 "Thus for us the only conclusion that can be drawn is that at least some QSOs are relatively nearby, and that a large fraction of their redshift is due to something other than the expansion of the universe."

5. Crowe, Richard A. "Is Quantum Cosmology Science?" Skeptical Inquirer (March/April 1995) pp. 53-54 (Crowe is Chairman of Physics & Astronomy, University of Hawaii)

p.54 "... speculative quantum genesis, which would have preceded the inflationary era?"

6. Darling, David, "On Creating Something from Nothing," New Scientist, vol. 151 (Sept 14, 1996)

p.49 "What is a big deal - the biggest deal of all - is how you get something out of nothing. Don't let the cosmologists try to kid you on this one. They have not got a clue either ... 'In the beginning,' they will say, 'there was nothing - no time, space, matter or energy. Then there was a quantum fluctuation from which ...' Whoa! Stop right there. You see what I mean? First there is nothing, then there is something. And the cosmologists try to bridge the two with a quantum flutter, a tremor of uncertainty that sparks it all off. Then they are away and before you know it, they have pulled a hundred billion galaxies out of their quantum hats."

"You cannot fudge this by appealing to quantum mechanics. Either there is nothing to begin with, in which case there is no quantum vacuum, no pre-geometric dust, no time in which anything can happen, no physical laws that can effect a change from nothingness into somethingness; or there is something, in which case that needs explaining."

7. Davies, Paul C., "What Hath COBE Wrought?" Sky & Telescope (Jan 1993)

p.4 "... quantum cosmology must be regarded as highly speculative .."

8. Dingle, Herbert, Science at the Crossroads (London: Martin, Brian & O'Keefe, 1972)

pp. 31-32 "In the language of mathematics we can tell lies as well as truths, and within the scope of mathematics itself there is no possible way of telling one from the other."

9. Guath, Alan H., "Cooking Up a Cosmos," Astronomy, vol. 25 (Sept 1997)

p.54 "... the big bang theory implies that the entire observed universe can evolve from a tiny speck ... in the inflationary theory the universe evolves from essentially nothing at all, which is why I frequently refer to it as the ultimate free lunch."

10. Hawking, Stephen W., A Brief History of Time (New Your: Bantam Books, 1998), 198 pp.

p. vii "... I chose theoretical physics, ... it is all in the mind."

p.102 "... the second law of thermodynamics. It states that the entropy of an isolated system always increases ..."

11. Horgan, John, "Big-Bang Bashers," Scientific American, vol. 257 (Sept 1987) pp. 22-24

p.22 "...One group of critics ... asserts that red shifts are not necessarily a relic of the big bang's continuing outward thrust." ...

"Arp says he has observed many objects with red shifts that do not conform to the Hubble relation. He maintains that quasars, for example, whose large red shifts suggest they are the most distant objects in the universe, are actually no more distant than galaxies and are probably offshoots of them."

p.24 Theorists are particularly disturbed ... by the growing evidence of large scale inhomogeneity in the universe's structure, which conflicts with the uniformity of the cosmic background radiation."

12. Hoyle, Sir Fred, "The Big Bang under Attack," Science Digest, vol. 92 (May 1984)

p.84 "... the main efforts of investigators have been in papering over holes in the big bang theory, to build up an idea that has become ever more complex and cumbersome ... a sickly pall hangs over the big bang theory."

13. Lerner, Eric J., "The Big Bang Never Happened;," Discover, vol. 9 (June 1988), pp 70-79

p.72 "In the past few years astronomers have discovered still larger clumps: huge aggregates of matter that span a billion light-years or more, stretching across a substantial fraction of the observable universe. These observations conflict with all current versions of the Big Bang theory, which do not explain how a smooth explosion could have produced clumps of such size. Moreover, if such clumps exist, Einstein's equations do not require the universe to have once been confined to the head of a pin."

p.76 "If the megaclumps are real - and the evidence suggests they are - there is a growing consensus that, as Silk put it, 'all the conventional dark-matter theories are in deep trouble.'"

14. Lerner, Eric J., "COBE Confounds the Cosmologists," Aerospace America, vol. 28 (March 1990), pp. 38-43

p.38 "Most cosmologists believe the universe came into being 15 or 20 billion years ago in a tremendous explosion they call the Big Bang."

p.38 "Theorists hoped that these traces would be detected by the sensitive instruments of COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer), a satellite launched last Nov. by NASA. To their surprise, however, the preliminary data from COBE, announced in Jan, show none of these hypothetical relics of past explosions. There now seems no way to reconcile the predictions of any version of the Big Bang with the reality of the universe that we observe, no way to get from the perfectly smooth Big Bang to the imperfect lumpy universe we see today. As one COBE scientist, George Smoot of the Univ. of Cal. at Berkeley, put it, 'Using the forces we now know, you can't make the universe we now know."

15. Linde, Andre, "The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe," Scientific American, vol. 271 (Nov 1994), pp. 48-55

p.48 "The first, and main, problem is the very existence of the big bang. One may wonder, What came before? If space-time did not exist then, how could everything appear from nothing? What arose first: the universe or the laws determining its evolution? Explaining this initial singularity - where and when it all began - still remains the most intractable problem of modern cosmology."

p.54 "The inflationary theory itself changes as particle physics theory rapidly evolves. The list of new models includes extended inflation, natural inflation, hybrid inflation & many others.

16. Moon, Parry, & Domina Eberle Spencer, "Binary Stars & the Velocity of Light," Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. 43, no. 8 (August 1953), pp. 635-641 (Moon was at MIT, Spencer at U. of Conn.)

p.635 "Abstract. The acceptance of Riemannian space allows us to reject Einstein's relativity and to keep all the ordinary ideas of time and all the ideas of Euclidean space out to a distance of a few light years. Astronomical space remains Euclidean for material bodies, but light is considered to travel in Riemannian space. If this way the time required for light to reach us from the most distant stars is only 15 years.

p.639 "... the method of this paper leaves astronomical space unchanged but reduces the time required for light to travel from a star to the earth"

17. Narlikar, Jayant, "Was There a Big Bang?" New Scientist, vol. 91

(July 2, 1981), pp. 19-21

p.21 "... the big-bang picture is not as soundly established, either theoretically or observationally, as it is usually claimed to be."

p.21 "... the actual measured temperature of 3 K is itself something of a mystery ... To astrophysicists, however, the observed energy density of the background radiation suggests other coincidences. This energy density is not too different to the energy densities observed in other astrophysical phenomena in the Universe, such as starlight, cosmic rays, galactic magnetic fields & so on. Does this mean that the microwave radiation also is of astrophysical origin and is not a relic of the big-bang?"

18. Narlikar, Jayant, "Challenge for the Big Bang," New Scientist, vol. 138 (June 19, 1993), pp. 27-30.

p.27 "... Many astronomers & physicists today ... believe that the Universe was created at one instant in a hot explosion, called the big bang, & that the basic structure of matter was decided in the first billion-billion-billion-billionth part of a second. But this hypothesis has serious deficiencies, which the results from the satellite COBE have only served to highlight."

p.28-29 "There are 3 major problems with the big bang model:

First, as a theory of physics, it breaks a cardinal rule by violating the law of conservation of matter and energy. At the instant of the big bang the entire Universe is created in what is known as a singular event, or 'singularity.' Physics is believed to apply only after this instant.

Secondly, the microwave background is believed to be the strongest evidence for the big bang. Yet such a fundamental feature of the radiation as its temperature cannot be deduced from any calculations of the early Universe. Its value is assumed.

Third, ... big bang cosmology is supposed to explain the origin of most light nuclei. But although it can with some success explain the formation of helium and deuterium, it runs into problems with ... nuclei such as lithium, beryllium and boron. ... it forces astronomers to suggest that the 'dark' matter thought to make up most of the mass is in some exotic form.

(Fourth) ... the most popular version of the big bang model, that involving inflation, implies a total age for the Universe that is uncomfortably small compared with the ages of our Galaxy of globular clusters and other galaxies.

The knots into which big bang theorists have tied themselves in the post-COBE era ..."

19. Oldershaw, Robert L., "The Continuing Case for a Hierarchical Cosmology," Astrophysics & Space Science, vol. 92 (May 1983), pp. 347- 358 (Oldershaw was at Dartmouth College)

p.354 "Both the 'Big Bang' model and the theoretical side of elementary particle physics rely on numerous highly speculative assumptions. Extrapolating back and forth between the present state of the observable universe and an ultimate cosmological singularity involves an incredible amount of faith in the completeness of our physical knowledge."

p.356 "The deviations from a simple black-body spectrum, the indications of anisotropy and the fact that the energy density of the microwave background is suspiciously close to that of other non-cosmological phenomena (such as the energy densities of starlight, cosmic ray particles & galactic magnetic field) all serve to strengthen the hypothesis that this radiation [3 K] also has a non-primordial astrophysical origin."[meaning not related to the big-bang]

20. Oldershaw, Robert L., "What's Wrong with the New Physics?" New Scientist, vol. 128 (Dec 22/29, 1990), pp. 56-59.

p.56 "During the past decade or so, two worrying trends have emerged in the two areas of physics that claim to explain the nature of everything - particle physics and cosmology. The first trend is that physicists are increasingly devising mathematically elegant hypotheses, which they say are 'compelling' but which nevertheless cannot be verified by experiments or observations. The second trend is that theorists are becoming reluctant to give up their elegant notions, preferring to modify the theory rather than discard it even when observations do not support it."

p.57 "... hypotheses of the 'new physics' that suffer from a lack of testable predictions. Some that come to mind are the existence of 'hidden dimensions,' 'shadow matter,' 'wormholes' in space-time and the 'many worlds' interpretation of quantum mechanics.'

p.58 "The big bang cosmological model has several serious problems and the inflation hypothesis ... was brought in to rescue it. When the original inflation model ran into contradictions, it was replaced by a modification called the 'new inflation.' When further problems arose, theorists postulated yet another version called 'extended inflation.' Some have even advocated adding a second inflationary period - 'double inflation.'"

p.59 "First, the big bang is treated as an unexplainable event without a cause. Secondly, the big bang could not explain convincingly how matter got organized into lumps (galaxies & clusters of galaxies). And thirdly, it did not predict that for the Universe to be held together in the way it is, more than 90 % of the Universe would have to be in the form of some strange, unknown dark form of matter."

p.59 "Theorists also invented the concepts of inflation and cold dark matter to augment the big bang paradigm and keep it viable, but they too have come into increasing conflict with observations. In the light of all these problems, it is astounding that the big bang hypothesis is the only cosmological model that physicists have taken seriously."

21. Peratt, Anthony L., "Not with a Bang," The Sciences (Jan/Feb 1990), pp. 24-32 (Peratt is a physicist at Los Alamos National Lab., NM)

p.24 "Cosmology has become much more sophisticated since the 16th century, but the medieval dodge still applies; by adding enough epicycles - or their modern ad hoc counterparts - it is always possible to 'force reality to take the shape of [the] model.'"

p.26-27 "... the big bang ... it is still just a theory."

"... proponents of the big bang have lately been forced to acknowledge a growing number of inconvenient observations, and older but still nagging difficulties with the model have refused to go away. ... for instance,

astronomers have noticed numerous cosmological objects whose enormous red shifts may be intrinsic properties of the objects themselves: if the red shift is no longer a reliable demonstration of an expanding universe, the big bang model is left without the phenomenon it was invented to explain.

... some of the most prominent aftereffects of the explosion have been difficult to reconcile with the observation. For example, the motions and shapes of galaxies and clusters of galaxies cannot be explained by the action of gravity alone, as the big bang model seems to require. To save the basic gravitational mechanism of the big bang itself, astronomers have postulated a variety of exotic but invisible subatomic particles that could fill the interstellar and intergalactic voids with dark but massive amounts of matter."

p.27 "Even this ad hoc dark matter, however, cannot account for the enormous superclusters of galaxies astronomers have charted in recent years. ... discovered a super supercluster nearly 2.5 billion light-years long; to grow to such a scale under the force of gravity alone would have taken more than 100 billion years, 5 times longer than the big bang model allows. Furthermore, if the universe turns out to be clumpy on this scale, where is the large-scale uniformity presumed by the big bang? Even the smooth background of cosmic microwave radiation, whose detection was once taken as proof of the big bang, does not presuppose an explosive beginning."

p.32-2 "One criticism of the big bang ... challenges the idea that the observed pattern of red shifts is evidence for the expansion of the universe. If the universe is expanding, a high red shift should indicate a greater distance from the Earth. But Halton C. Arp of the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics ... has noted numerous objects in the past two decades whose red shifts do not seem to correlate with distance.

"Quasars, for instance, have such large red shifts that they would seem to be the most distant objects in the universe. But Arp and an independent observer, Jack W. Sulentic of the University of Alabama, have found that some quasars appear in the vicinity of nearby galaxies with much smaller red shifts. If quasars and the nearby galaxies are connected, the two objects could not be moving at greatly different speeds; more likely their red shifts - and possibly all red shifts - result from something other than a rapid retreat from the Earth.

One possibility is that the quasars are shrinking; red shifts can be caused not only by receding objects but also by contracting or pinched ones. A third mechanism, proposed in 1987 by Emil Wolf of the U. of Rochester and confirmed in laboratory experiments, is that certain forms of coherent light can shift as the light propagates through space."

22. Peterson, Ivars, "State of the Universe: If not with a Big Bang, Then What?" Science News, vol. 139 (April 13, 1991), pp. 232-235

p.235 "The standard, hot Big Bang has many rivals: plasma cosmology, a steady-state universe, a cold Big Bang, chronometric theory, a universe modeled on fractal geometry ...

23. Powell, Corey S., & Madhusree Mukerjee, "Cosmic Puffery," Scientific American, vol. 275 (Sept 1996), pp. 20,22

p.22 "... Each refinement of the big bang delves deeper into abstruse theory, which grows progressively harder to prove or disprove."

24. Puthoff, Harold, "Everything for Nothing," New Scientist, vol. 127 (July 28, 1990), pp. 52-55 (Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas)

p.55 "... where did the Universe come from? ... what started the big bang? Could quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as well? Edward Tyron of the City University of New Your thought so in 1973 when the proposed that our Universe may have originated as a fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as 'simply one of those things which happen from time to time.' This idea was later refined & updated within the context of inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunneling from literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. ...

highly speculative ..."

25. Schilling, Govert, "Quasar Pairs: A Redshift Puzzle?" Science, vol. 274 (Nov 22, 1996),

p.1305 "Halton Arp of the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics ... has spent more than 25 years asserting that quasars, objects most astronomers believe are at the far edges of the universe, are actually the companions of relatively nearby galaxies. If he is right ... The astronomical ruler, called redshift, that places the quasars and the galaxies at very different distances would be in jeopardy - and so would many of cosmologists' basic beliefs about the universe.

26. Tyron, Edward P., "What Made the World?" New Scientist, vol. 101 (March 8, 1984), pp 14-16. (Tyron is a Professor of Physics, Hunter College & CUNY)

p.14 "In 1973, I proposed that our Universe had been created spontaneously from nothing (ex nihilo), as a result of established principles of physics."

p.15 "my proposal of creation ex nihilo was accompanied by a prediction that our Universe is finite & hence 'closed.'"

p.15 "So I conjectured that our Universe had its physical origin as a quantum fluctuation of some pre-existing true vacuum, or state of nothingness."

p.16 "... the 'hot big bang' was preceded by a 'cold big whoosh.'"

27. Weisskopf, Victor F., "The Origin of the Universe," American Scientist, vol. 71 (Sept/Oct 1983), pp. 473-480. (Weisskopf is Professor Emeritus & Former Head, Physics, MIT)

p.474 "It should be emphasized that all discussions of the development of the cosmos are rather hypothetical, because it is very hard to make empirical observations regarding the totality of the universe, and therefore we do not know whether we have caught the real facts. No existing view of the development of the cosmos is completely satisfactory, and this includes the standard model, which leads to certain fundamental questions & problems."

p.480 "The theory of the inflationary universe is still beset with a number of difficulties."

p.480 "Indeed, the Judeo-Christian tradition describes the beginning of the world in a way that is surprisingly similar to the scientific model. Previously it seemed scientifically unsound to have light created before the sun. The present scientific view does indeed assume the early universe to be filled with various kinds of radiation long before the sun was created. The Bible says about the beginning: 'And God said, Let there be light, and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good.'" [Genesis Ch 1: v3,4]

B. Origin of Stars & Galaxies:

28. Carr, Bernard, "Where is Population III," Nature, vol. 326 (April 30, 1987), pp. 829-830

p829 "A recent paper by Cayrel adds an interesting twist to speculation on the whereabouts of those most elusive of astronomical objects, Population III stars. These are the stars of zero metallicity which must have formed before the Population I stars in galactic disks and Population II stars in galactic halos. The existence of such stars is inevitable because metals can be made only by stars themselves (unlike some of the lighter elements, such as helium & deuterium, which are produced through cosmological nucleosynthesis in the Big Bang). Thus, the first stars must have contained no metals at all. One might expect Population III stars to have the same sort of distribution of masses as stars forming today, in which case some should be small enough (smaller than .8 M. where M. is the mass of the Sun) still to be burning their nuclear fuel. The problem is that despite extensive searches, nobody has ever found a zero-metallicity star."

29. Frenk, Carlos, & Simon White, "More Missing Matter Mystery." Nature, vol. 317 (Oct 24, 1985), pp. 670-671

p.671 "The realization that we still do not know what makes up most of the Universe has thrown astronomy off the track of normal science and into a crisis."

30. Weinberg, Steven, "Origins," Science, vol. 230 (Oct 4, 1985)

p.16 "The theory of stellar evolution allows one to deduce the age and the initial composition of the stars in each cluster from the observed relation between these stars' colors & luminosities. The result is that these clusters are very old, much older than our own sun, indeed the oldest objects in our galaxy. If fact there seems to be a problem here - the oldest globular clusters appear to be about 15 to 20 billion years old, older than the most popular estimates for the age of the universe, which centers on 10 billion years."

p.16 "It is also a bit disturbing that all these estimates of the ages & compositions of the stars rest on elaborate calculations of what is going on inside them, but all that we observe is the light emitted from their surfaces."

31. Windhorst, Roger A., as quoted in Corey S. Powell, "A Matter of Timing," Scientific American (Oct 1992) [Windhorst at Arizona State U]

p.29 "Nobody really understands how star formation proceeds"

C. The Solar System:

32. Bondi, Herman, "Letters Section," New Scientist (Aug 21, 1980; quote by Karl Popper, reference to)

p.611 "As an erstwhile cosmologist, I speak with feeling of the fact that theories of the origin of the Universe have been disproved by present day empirical evidence, as have various theories of the origin of the Solar System."

33. Boss, Alan P., "The Origin of the Moon," Science, vol. 231 (Jan 24, 1986), pp. 341-345

p.345 "Although we will never be able to state with absolute certainty that we know the origin of the moon, the giant impact hypothesis may well be the most probable one."

34. Drake, Michael J., "Geochemical Constraints on the Origin of the Moon," Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 47 (Oct 1983), pp 1759-67

p.1759 "Although it has been 14 years since the first lunar samples were returned to Earth by the Apollo 11 Mission, the origin of the moon remains unresolved."

35. Hecht, Jeff, "The Making of a Moon," New Scientist, vol. 155 (Aug 2, 1997)

p.8 "The leading theory of how the Moon formed is in trouble. A physicist announced this week that if it was born after a planet-sized body collided with the Earth in its youth, as many scientists assumed, the Earth & Moon should have far more angular momentum than they do today."

36. Kerr, Richard A., "The Solar System's New Diversity," Science, vol. 265 (Sept 2, 1994), pp. 1360-1362

p.1360 "'The most striking outcome of planetary exploration is the diversity of the planets,' ... If you look at all the planets and the 60 or so satellites, it's very hard to find two that are the same.'"

p.1360 " ... the challenge will be to understand how, as Stevenson puts it, 'you can start out with similar starting materials and end up with different planets.''

37. NASA, Mars & Earth (US GPO, NF-61, Aug 1975), 8 pp

p.1 "It is important to be aware that there is no one theory for the origin and subsequent evolution of the Solar System that is generally accepted. All theories represent models which fit some of the facts observed today, but not all."