Creationist Astronomy (Rational Analysis): Promo!

I bought recently 3 creation astronomy books that claim to explain astronomy and astrophysics while remaining within the realm of creationism.

I found it extremely fascinating.

So I hereby declare a new project: I'm going to read through these books as much as I can without frustrating myself beyond belief, and post random videos analyzing their claims rationally and scientifically.

I need a title for the new miniseries, so feel free to post ideas in the comment section.

The three books are:
1. "Design and Origins in Astronomy: Volume2" by Don B. DeYoung and Emmett L. Williams (Publisher: Creation Research Society Books)
2. "Astronomy and the Bible: Questions and Answers" by Donald B. DeYoung (Foreword by John C. Whitcomb), Publisher: Baker Books House)

3. "Our Created Moon: Earth's fascinating Neighbor", by Don DeYoung and John Whitcomb (Publisher: Master Books)

Enjoy!

~moo

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• creation
• astronomy
• rational
• thinking
• skeptic
• skepticism
• astrophysics
• analysis
• mooeypoo

[dechha1981]

Been a while. I can't put my finger on it but you look different somehow.

[mooeypoo]

changed my glasses ;)

[gunapie]

Great to see you agian Mooeypoo! Yes you are right, the books are Crap, however, In the field of intuitive science (mysticism,i.e., the search for the great by the little) there is the concept that the universe is evolved out of unqualified consciousness and that the force that binds the consciouness is not a blind force like electicity, because it acts on the body of consciousness. You my refer to my video or look into Brahmacakra (circle of creation).

[mooeypoo]

Yes, the question is not whether or not a god is plausible, the question is how much science is there in these books.

The answer is quite less than you'd want, considering the fact they CLAIM to be scientific.

Notice that I didn't pick purely theistic books, I picked books that claimed to be scientific. We'll see about that, won't we...

[jaredcormier]

"Intelligently Created Universe? Or not."

[mooeypoo]

That's actually "ICU" which is where I think I'm going to end up in if I keep reading...

[brainworm1]

it's not bias. creationism has already proven to be a bunch of crap.

[fs3d]

"You are seriously fucked up."

Projection.

"I humbly suggest-"

You are NOT humble. You are ARROGANT.

"You require The AIDS Myth-"

And right there, you prove you are nothing more than a Redneck with FAR too much time on his hands. AIDS is a MYTH? No... You're mad.

"If you don't watch[SNIP!]then you are just a sack of shit."

Then I must be a sack of shit... But those of us who have not had a full frontal lobotomy already probably know better.

[jknengr796]

@SqueakerAlpha You are wrong!!! "...Then set the sun and planets orbitting it." No, you set the stars and planets on the dome or firmament that covers our flat earth. Also, there are no galaxies far away. Andromeda (not counting the Magellanic Clouds orbiting ours) is the only one that can be seen with the naked eye from a dark location. It is nothing more than a smudge in the firmament created when God slipped with the paint brush.

[troyeckhardt]

Haughty, surly, and generally unpleasant.

[SqueakerAlpha]

Creation astronony is easy. Put earth in the center , immovable , and on several pillars. Then set the sun and planets orbitting it. Then galaxies and so on . The galaxies far away need to move really fast :) Keep asking yourself what 2+2 = and when you really have to think about that STOP READING creationist books, your brain is going on holiday !

[northreal]

Read the science before you comment on it.

[huntmatuk]

I don't think that her method of analysis is not scientific. It's more a cynical view on textbooks which were written by VERY religious people to try and make the world fit their belief and not the not the other way around.

With this in mind I believe she is very justified in calling them crap before reading them.

[seanspicka423]

WTF?! this came up as a related video about skateboarding

[zorasterman]

I am certainly not pro-creationism, but I find it amazing how you label books "crap" BEFORE you have studied their arguments. Perhaps you are, after all, more suited to the religious approach than the scientific one?

[fs3d]

"well, I'm sorry I put you even more off from learning, you seem to think you know it all already. "

More Projection. I will continue learning until the day I turn into a corpse and DON'T get magically raptured away by some fictitious Jesus character. You will NOT. You believe you have ALL the answers because Jesus saved you, right? That's the sign of a fundamentalist. That's the sign of someone like you.

[stupidtreehugger]

well, I'm sorry I put you even more off from learning, you seem to think you know it all already.