Re:Low View of Creation's capabilities

Howard J. Van Till (110661.1365@compuserve.com)
Sun, 13 Sep 1998 18:52:14 -0400

Vernon Jenkins wrote:

"But Howard, for some 99.999999% of alleged geological time man has had
neither understanding of, nor direct access to, these parameters. You
are surely not offering the fact of these linkages as firm evidence for
the constancy of all, or of any one of them over the period before
measurements became possible. I have already suggested that this
represents a fundamental and staggering 'act of faith' on the part of
evolutionary scientists. How can it possibly be otherwise?"

REPLY: Perhaps I did not sufficiently communicate the import of these
linkages. Any change in the values of nuclear decay rates requires a
corresponding change in one or more of the fundamental constants. This
would, in turn, affect the nature and behavior of everything, including the
specific properties and behavior of atoms, molecules, etc. It would take
very little modification in any one of the constants, for instance, to make
life of any sort impossible. Even atomic energy levels and atomic spectral
lines would be different.

Is the acceptance of the constancy of these parameters (we do call them
'constants,' after all) nothing more than a "staggering act of faith"?
Indeed it is, Vernon. The question of the temporal history of these
parameters is something of great interest to the physical sciences.
Whatever the case--variable or constant--we want to know. There is no
vested interest on one outcome over the other. There is no conspiracy to
favor a conclusion of constancy.

The *conclusion* of constancy is based on numerous independent
considerations having nothing to do with biotic evolution or wishing to
have an old universe. If you doubt this you will simply have to undertake
an extensive study of physics, astronomy, cosmology, etc. (Even a reading
of _The Fourth Day_ would be a start:)

Let me here offer just one example. Perhaps other contributors on this list
would be interested in offering others.

Let's take an example from astronomy. Looking at very distant objects
forces us to look at things as they were when the light first left them,
not as they are now. In that sense we _do_ have direct access to lots of
activity in the Creation at times much before now. When we look at distant
galaxies, even those located billions of light-years away, we see series of
spectral absorption lines that can be recognized as having been caused by
the familiiar elements, exhibiting the same proprties and behavior patterns
billions of years ago as they do now. This indicates that the values of the
fundamental constants were the same billions of years ago as they are now.

Howard Van Till