Shifting Clouds and Red Oorts

Posted by Worldview Warriors On Thursday, July 21, 2016 9 comments

by Steve Risner

After a short break (because life demands it on occasion), I'd like to continue on the topic of the cosmos—this awesome universe we find ourselves in and are blown away by. I mean, the universe is estimated to be about 20 quadrillion cubic light years in volume. I can't imagine a million of something and we're talking 20 million millions... uh... what? And that's just the estimated expanse that we can see! Who knows how large it actually is? No one but God alone, who built this awesome spectacle with His voice. According to Psalm 33:6, God is the star breather. Can you imagine that? A small star like our sun produces more energy than we could possibly use—like 35,000 times the amount we consume, and by “we” I mean all the people on earth that use electricity. So that's sorta big. And He breathed them from His mouth? Anytime you get to astronomical numbers, the human brain has no way to process the numbers we're talking about. A light year, a parsec, an astronomical unit—all these things are beyond our comprehension.

I say all this for a single purpose—to help you realize just how humbling a thing it is to be a human. We are a small little speck of flesh on a small little speck of dust in an ocean we call the universe that boggles the mind and, I'm sure, holds mysteries we haven't begun to imagine. Yet the God of this universe, the One who created this amazing, beautiful, gargantuan, beyond-human-comprehension place cares deeply about each one of us and wants each of us to know Him personally and intimately. That's not saying He wants us to be a part of a group or a society or “church” or organization. It means He wants to know us, period. Religion has a tendency to separate us from God. But He seeks a relationship. If your religion has left you feeling cold or doubting that the God you know created you, I would encourage you to seek a personal contact and call from Him. He's not interested in rituals and ceremony. He doesn't need mindless procedures and rights for you to come to Him. He's right here now with you if only you'd open yourself to Him. Call on His name and surrender to the Lord of heaven and earth.

Okay. Now that I've got that off my chest, let's get into this week's topics. This blog post will be similar to my last one in that it will cover a couple of topics: redshift and the Oort cloud.

What's redshift? Redshift is the shifting of light towards the red spectrum. Light travels as a wave, like sound. Different frequencies give us different colors just as different frequencies give us different tones of sound. If you've ever listened to a race car or an ambulance drive towards you and then pass you, you've heard with sound what we're talking about in terms of light. The pitch is higher and then as the source of the sound passes you the pitch changes to a lower tone. This is called the Doppler effect. The waves of sound get smashed together as the source travels towards you, making the pitch higher. As the source travels away, the waves get stretched out, producing lower sounds. This also can happen with other types of waves like light. If something is moving away from us very fast, it will produce a “redshift,” which means the light will be stretched out producing more of a red light. If the object is moving towards us, it will have a blueshift because it will shorten the wavelength towards the blue spectrum. Redshift is far more common than blueshift, but what is it a result of? Are these bodies simply moving in space? Is space expanding as many cosmologists suggest? Is it something else? There are many theories about this—some with far more acceptance than others. But acceptance is often times the result of worldview. It doesn't mean something is right, it just means it's popular.

There are several alternatives to the theory that do not necessarily correspond to the Big Bang (hence they are not popular). Stellar motion—that the celestial bodies are simply in motion is one very obvious explanation. The result of gravity on light from such enormous bodies is unknown as well. It's suggested that gravity could change the frequencies of light as it travels. There's also energy loss suggested as light travels such huge distances. This is believed to be able to alter the light's frequency. It's also been suggested perhaps light, as it travels such vast distances, slows down a little. This would result, it's alleged, in a redshift as well. I'm not suggesting that the commonly believed idea is incorrect. I am suggesting we just don't know. We really have no idea and to suggest we do means you've confused the limits of science with religious beliefs or philosophy. There are plenty of alternatives and perhaps none of the options I've mentioned is correct. Don't let someone tell you redshift supports the Big Bang and its humanist religion. It's simply not true.

We now move to the Oort Cloud. What's that? A fictitious place Jan Oort, an astronomer, theorized existed to solve the problem of comets. What's that, you ask? Essentially, comets get smaller and smaller all the time. Every time they pass the sun, they lose a great deal of matter. Over the billions of alleged years that the solar system has been here, those comets would have long since been dissolved into nothing. So why do we still see comets? There are something close to 3000 comets that have been tracked—2857 to be exact. That seems like a lot considering the solar system is so old. After almost 5 billion years, there really shouldn't be any left, so they say. But we have nearly 3000 that we know of. That seems like a discrepancy. So what's the answer? Easy: the solar system is only 6000 years old. Okay. That won't work with your average atheist, so here's their rescuing device: the Oort cloud. The Oort cloud is a made up place that supposedly exists beyond the outer limits of our solar system that contains trillions—yes, trillions—of icy fragments that apparently await their turn to dislodge from the group and make a few trips around the sun. I went to a page that had “facts” about the Oort cloud and it was absolutely hysterical. There wasn't a single fact in sight aside from the origin of the name. It was completely void of anything actually factual. It told us what it was and where it was and how it was formed and how much stuff is there, but I couldn't help but notice all the “it's theorized” and “it's believed” comments. In fact, not a single thing aside from the origin of the name was actually observable and scientific. There is literally no such thing as the Oort cloud. At least, if we rely on observation and scientific discovery, no such thing has even been accidentally found. No telescope has seen this place even though we can see billions of light years into the universe. The thing is, the Oort cloud isn't bad science. It's not science at all. It's a fairy tale made up to cover a huge hole in the Big Bang cosmology of humanism. The Big Bang isn't science either. This is what “scientists” teach students in school settings. This is what text books tell students is truth.

This sort of blatant abandonment of ethics and logic and science must stop. It's critical that such ideas be presented as such—ideas. These ideas, although they have no basis in reality in terms of observational facts, are fine to present to students. But let's present them as they are rather than solid science or founded at all. This is one of the most embarrassing issues for deep time proponents. This thing is hilarious to think of, but it's broadcast as a scientific fact. You can find pages called “Facts about the Oort cloud.” There are no facts. None.

The heavens declare the glory of God. God breathed the stars—bodies out in space that, at their smallest, produce more energy than we would need by 35,000 times. He's awesome. The universe is filled with proof of the living God and evidence for His greatness. Stars, comets, galaxies, nebulae—all these things are magnificent. And they demand we fall to our knees and worship the Almighty. Let's worship Him together!

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.


ashleyhr said...

"Don't let someone tell you redshift supports the Big Bang and its humanist religion. It's simply not true." That's your religiously motivated opinion. It's not a fact.

ashleyhr said...

"There is literally no such thing as the Oort cloud." That's not a fact either. It's your bigoted opinion trying to tell other people what to think.

A 4.5 bn year old solar system does not require any 'rescuing devices'. It's an inescapable fact. And my opinion on this matter if you call it that is not simply 'my' opinion but the opinion of scientists everywhere.

Piltdown Superman said...

This oort to know better. Those Big Bang concepts and rescuing devices are taken by blind faith, and cosmology is not only not astrophysics, it is not science, either. When you said you were laughing at the Oort cloud "facts", it reminded me of the guy who posted a comment at The Question Evolution Project taking me to task for daring to doubt the cloud. He said that the Voyager satellite passed through the Oort cloud, "physical actual documented science bro". (I posted a screen shot of this.) Not hardly! He doesn't even know his own mythology, because even if the thing did exist, V'ger would even reach it yet.

Steve said...

Ashley, once again, thank you for reading and your comments. My "religiously motivated opinion" happens to be supported by the facts. We have not observed anything like this mythical cloud and we don't need to. There is no reason for it to exist. You're almost beginning to sound like you get it--that this isn't science but religion. You're almost there and it's exciting to see you make these strides.
I actually did not tell anyone what to think. I only told them there is no such thing as this physical place no one has seen and there is no reason for. It's a rescuing device for atheism and is made up completely. That's what you are trying to push as science. It's nothing of the sort. Show me evidence for this place, please, or accept the fact that there is nothing scientific about it.
A pleasure, as always, Ashley. I greatly appreciate you keeping my writings in your reading list.

Steve said...

Piltdown, thanks! I appreciate you reading my work and commenting. It is sorta funny someone would suggest Voyager made it to the Oort Cloud. The cloud is believed to be 40,000 or more AU from the sun while Voyager has just barely made it to 120 AU. Not even close. That's almost 5 billion miles compared to a little over 1 million miles if I did the math right quickly there. But the thing is their religion needs this place and ours does not. And our faith happens to be well supported with the facts.

Larry said...

Wow this post shows how much the Oort Cloud vernacular has intertwined itself into modern astronomy. I had absolutely no idea that the cloud was a fictional place. I assumed it to be real by how it was presented in posts and articles. I never really sat back and thought about how the Oort theory was needed to solve a huge hole in the secular idea of the origins of the universe. I need to be more vigilant of the "theories" presented as fact while learning this hobby of astronomy.

ashleyhr said...

"My "religiously motivated opinion" happens to be supported by the facts." What are you talking about (the Big Bang theory or the Oort cloud or both)? What 'facts'? None I politely suggest - just your extrabiblical faith. And please do your own work online or in cosmology/astronomy books if you really want to search for why scientists hypothesise the Oort cloud. Clue - it explains the abundance of comets we see, nothing more nothing less. And the directions from which they approach the inner solar system. It's totally rational and completely in line with the scientific method. God may even have created it.

I am arguing for science not religion. You are pretending to arguing for science in this instance but I'm afraid you are doing no such thing. You are the one writing dogmatic blogs - not me.

I am not moving towards your dishonest position on some science matters. Not remotely.

Steve said...

Thanks, Larry, for reading and commenting. We've all been told a great deal of stuff as though it were solid, observed fact when it's really a story that helps them cover for their biased religious position. We need to be diligent to study these things for ourselves, seek alternative opinions, and not just take the humanist's word for it. They misrepresent reality at every turn and they have to--their faith is based on tale that cannot possibly be true.

Steve said...

Ashley, for goodness sake. Grow up a bit. I didn't post your last comment since it had nothing to do with this conversation and was just a childish attack. You've never been censored for the content of your posts. You have had comments rejected because of their insulting or name calling and nothing more. This last one was close but I allowed it because I wanted to respond. The content is rarely anything troubling and is generally stuff we've all heard a thousand times before.

My opinion on the Big Bang AND the Oort Cloud is founded in the facts--neither has any merit as a scientific theory and neither has observational data to support it. And the Big Bang especially has so many catastrophic issues, it's hilarious intelligent people (and some not so intelligent) will believe it just to not believe the Truth.

You said, "... it explains the abundance of comets we see, nothing more nothing less."--this is interesting. You see, this is what I said and you're trying to correct me by saying it. Now, it's true I didn't say "nothing more or less" because that's actually a spin. I didn't spin the info. I said that the Oort Cloud is a rescuing device to explain why we have so many comets--over 2800 in fact--because if the solar system is anywhere near as old as they claim (without proof mind you) then these comets would all have been exhausted by now. Hence, they make up a place called the Oort Cloud.

As far as trajectory being used to calculate a place of origin, that's based on the presupposition. And knowing their orbital path doesn't actually tell you where they originated anyway. It does tell you where it's been but not where it started. The truth is, we have no idea where most if not all comets came from and can only guess. My worldview and my belief is supported by the facts. Yours is supported by made up places and theories that like to defy the laws of physics (which for someone who only believes such laws govern the universe is a problems). Which seems more likely?

Try not to give yourself too much credit. I do sincerely appreciate your time and the fact that you read my work. I don't appreciate you acting like you're censored when you're clearly not and that you're comments are some sort of slam dunk and this makes all creationists quake in their boots. That's a hoot! I love it.