In my last note I mentioned just a few reasons that we can believe that there is a God using only science, but sometimes you run into problems. My problem again deals with space but this time it deals with the anthropic constant of the speed of light. We know the speed of light does not change from its value of 299,792,458 meters per second. If the universe were as young as Creationists believe then how would starlight be at the earth, but if it were as old as Darwinists believe then why is there the presence of blue stars? This causes a problem on both Creationist and Darwinist side of science.

I have been reading a lot about this issue called the distant starlight problem. Let me just say that we should accept that science is secondary to our acceptance of scriptural inerrancy. Paul F. Taylor used the best wording to another object we should keep in mind between operational science and origins science, “We need to be aware of the difference between operational science and origins science. Operational science is the result of experimental data or observations taken in the present, subject to peer review, and capable of repetition. Origins science is an extrapolation of presently observed phenomena into the past, in a manner which is not repeatable.” Pretty much anything in this field of study is a theory or a model and not necessarily true.

There are many theories which have major downfalls in trying to explain the distant starlight problem. One popular, problematic “solution” is called the in-transit model. We can only see stars because their light has reached us but some stars are millions or billions of light years away. The in transit model says that since God can make things with the appearance of age then he created the light from these stars in-transit. But there is one HUGE problem with this theory that makes it unacceptable. We would be looking at events that never happened in this case. We would see light from a star that the star itself never admitted thus we would be seeing a star that doesn’t yet exist or movies of events that never actually happened in history. It would be against God’s character to show us these movies of fictional time. It would be like God lying to us and as we know God keeps his promises and does not lie.

Then on the other side of the debate we have Darwinists saying that it is simple, give light enough time and it will reach us, problem solved. The furthest light we can see is around thirteen billion light years away, thus the universe is about thirteen billion years old. But we have reasons to believe this is not true either. There is the problem of blue stars.

We have reason to believe that stars are only a phenomenon of when the universe was created. For stars are made almost entirely of Hydrogen and helium gas. The combined mass of these gases give stars strong gravitational pulls, which prevents gas from dispersing into space. It is believed that nebula are birth places for stars for they are a “cloud” of extremely low-density hydrogen and helium gas. Just condense this gas and then gravity would keep the gas together and then you would get a star. However, gas has a tendency to want to expand, not contract. If gas did start to compress under spontaneous circumstances then pressure would increase, and so would the magnetic field and rotation speed, all these factors would strongly resist any further compression and no star could be born. Plus we have a class of rating stars; for stars like the sun, which consist of about 2% metals (anything heavier than helium), they are classified as population I stars. Some stars have fewer metals maybe one hundredth of the amount in population I stars then these are called population II stars. Lastly, if stars are constantly being made then we should have population III stars in which there is essentially no metals at all, the problem is that there are none of these stars. This goes back to disproving the universe is static as I also shed reasonable doubt of in my last note.

Now that I have explained why stars are most likely a phenomenon from the creation we come back to the problem of blue stars. Blue stars are blue because they burn hotter than the sun and because they burn hotter, they burn up their fuel quicker as well. Astronomers estimate that hot blue stars could last but a few million years at most. Since blue stars are found in virtually all spiral galaxies including our own, this can tell us that they are not living up to the Darwinist time scales. If the universe is billions of years old and new stars are not being born then how are there blue stars in our galaxy which is postulated to be over a billion years old? This could not happen, for even if they did exist and given the large amounts of time it would take for their light to reach us then in a couple million years their light would come and pass from our sight and there would be absolutely no blue stars, especially in our own galaxy.

We have the possibility of the universe being billions of years old now pretty discredited but that still does not answer how we have starlight striking the earth if the universe isn’t billions of years old. The question is: how is there light hitting the earth from galaxies millions and billions of light years away? We know that the universe has relatively young qualities, and that just giving billions of years doesn’t solve problems, it only creates more. Right now I believe we can say we just don’t know enough about this issue and is something that science is not yet able to understand. We try and try but every scientific model has some fatal blunder in its logic that it falls apart.

We know that the light is here, we know that speed of light is constant in a vacuum and can only slow down due to it passing through a substance. Previously, I thought that the earth was around before the seven day creation period (to allow the light to hit it before the development of life on earth). But the conflicting evidence of blue stars presented a challenge to that belief, and if the estimates of the earth’s age of being 10,000 to 7,000 years old by some Christian scientists are true, it raises the question of how light could already be here.

This is only a small argument about a bigger picture of an infinite God. It amazes me what an incredibly intricate universe we do have, no matter how old it is. To quote a phrase from the light bulb in The Brave Little Toaster, “Fact is…we just don’t have enough facts.” Some things are not intellectually able to be processed because “without faith it is impossible to please [understand] God” Hebrew 11:6. No matter if Darwinist science or Christian science has the time scale right God is still ALWAYS glorified by his awesome creation.