Home / Science VS Evolution / PDF /Encyclopedia /Pathlights Home / Bookstore


Scientists tell us still more about stellar evolution. Such theories cannot explain how stars and galaxies were formed. There never was a Big Bang, and stars cannot evolve from gas. Evolutionary theory is a myth. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.

CONTENT: Scientists Speak about Stellar Evolution - 2

Globular Clusters - There is no way that these stellar objects ought to exist
Galactic Rotation and Mass - Major problems exist which are unsolved
First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics - These laws totally annihilate the possibility of evolution development
Black Holes - These theoretical extremes do not exist in reality
Conclusion - We need to face up to the truth; many scientists have

This material is excerpted from the book, ORIGIN OF THE STARS.
. An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.
You will have a better understanding of the following statements by scientists if you will also read the web page, Origin of the Stars.


Globular clusters are composed of millions of stars packed into large balls. There is no way that this could happen, by evolutionary principles, which maintain everything is the result of a series of random accidents.

"The globular clusters range in size from a few tens of thousands to over a million stars. No stable stellar aggregates have been found between this size and the multiple star systems consisting of a few stars separated by very short distances comparable to the diameters of planetary orbits . . This is a very striking situation for which present-day astronomical theory has no explanation."—*Dewey B. Larson, Universe of Motion (1984), p. 39.

"The strong implication that our galaxy's population of globular clusters is not an integral part of the galaxy leads to the hypothesis that the globular clusters had an origin different from the rest of the galaxy. This is contrary to current astronomical theory."—*W.R. Corliss, Stars, Galaxies, Cosmos (1987), p. 10.

". . The failure of globular clusters to collapse gravitationally, given the stellar densities at their cores and the force of gravitation. Globular clusters are considered to be very old astronomical objects, and theory predicts they should have collapsed long ago. The structure and dynamics of globular clusters have been observed with high precision. The apparent long life of globular clusters is contrary to the dictates of the theory of gravitation. Globular clusters do not rotate at rates sufficient for centrifugal force to be a factor."—*William Corliss, Stars, Galaxies, Cosmos (1987), p. 14.

"The problem is that only one force of any significant magnitude, that of gravitation, has been definitely identified as operative in the clusters. In as much as the gravitational force increases as the distance decreases, the force that is adequate to hold the cluster together should be more than adequate to drew the constituent stars together into a single mass, and why this does not happen has never been ascertained. Obviously some counter force is acting against gravitation, but the astronomers have been unable to find any such force."—*D.B. Larson, Universe of Motion (1984), p. 29.


Stars in galaxies orbit around the center too rapidly for the galaxies to hold together, yet they remain together. In addition, there is the missing mass problem. A full 97 percent of the mass needed to hold galaxies together is missing.

"Galaxy rotation and how it got started is one of the great mysteries of astrophysics. In a Big Bang universe, linear [straight line, non-turning] motions are easy to explain: They result from the bang. But what started the rotary motions? To convert linear motions to rotary ones usually takes some trickery."—*Dietrick V. Thomsen, "Galaxies that Came in from the Cold," Science News, 128:316 (1985).

"The first hint that something was amiss in the universe came 50 years ago. Astronomer Fritz Zwicky noticed some peculiar goings-on in a rich group of galaxies known as the Coma cluster, located 300 million light-years from Earth. The galaxies were moving about in the cluster much faster than expected.

"Zwicky added up all the light being emitted by the cluster and realized that there was not enough visible matter to bind the galaxies together, yet the cluster was obviously not flying apart. Where was this other mass that was providing the gravitational glue [to keep the fast moving outer stars from flying out of the galaxy]? It seemed to be missing—hence the tag `missing mass."—Marcia Bartusiak, "Missing: 97% of the Universe," Science Digest, 91:51, December 1983.


These laws totally annihilate all possibility of evolution from simple to complex in the universe or on our planet.

"The Second Law therefore implies that as energy is being transformed throughout the universe, entropy is increasing. These Laws [the First and Second Laws] argue strongly for a created universe."—W. Stansfield, The Science of Evolution (1977), p. 57.

"The conservation of energy—one of the most cherished principles of physics— is violated in the Big Bang model. Since the left-handed side of Einstein's equations has zero divergence, it follows that the source on the right-hand side must have zero divergence. On the other hand, the energy density in the big bang model is positive definite. Thus it is impossible for matter to come into existence without violating energy conservation."—*J. Narlikar and *N. Padmanabhan, "Creation-field Cosmology: A Possible Solution to Singularity, Horizon, and Flatness Problems," in Physical Review D, 32 (1985), p. 1928.


The black hole theory is ridiculous also. It is a theoretical extreme which has no real existence.

"A black hole is defined as a clump of matter which has been so compacted that its gravitational field has overwhelmed all other forces so that its escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. Nothing can escape a black hole, at least not a massive black hole.

"In order to save the Big Bang cosmology are we to believe that the universe escaped from out of its own Schwarzschild radius or that the physics of black holes does not work for the universe?"—Gerardus D. Bouw, "Cosmic Space and Time" in Creation Research Society Quarterly, June 1982, p. 31.


There is only one solution to the problem of star and galaxy formation.

"The trouble is that no current theoretical model of the evolution of the universe seems to fit all of the observations without at least some inconsistencies. Cosmologists find they must labor to squeeze their poet theories into the steadily tightening strait jacket of observational data."

"I'm completely mystified how the present-day structure [of the universe] has come to exist without having left some trace at the level of sensitivity that we know we have with our apparatus. There should have been some kind of energy release [after the Big Bang]. But there isn't anything there."—*Ivars Peterson, "Cosmic Evidence of a Smooth Beginning," in Science News, 137:36 (1990), pp. 184, 36.

"There is one theory, of course, that does fit all the known facts of physics, chemistry and astronomy, without exception. Furthermore it is the simplest and most direct system of cosmogony that could be devised. For this reason alone it should be considered the most probably correct theory. In addition, it is a theory which follows most naturally from the implications of the two universal laws of thermodynamics.

"This is the theory of special creation. By this theory, the universe in all its amazing size, variety and complexity came into existence at some time in the past (possibly quite recently) completely and perfectly functioning throughout, during a period of direct creation by its omnipotent and eternal Creator."—*Harold C. Urey and Paul A. Zimmerman, quoted in H.M. Morris, W.W. Boardman and R.F. Koontz, Science and Creation (1971), pp. 92-93.

"Everything points with overwhelming force to a definite event or events of creation at some time or times not infinitely remote."—*James Jeans, Eos or The Wider Aspects of Cosmogony, p. 35.

"Like most scientists, Einstein included, I have an almost religious belief in a basic underlying order—a belief that natural forces are just manifestations of some deeper thing."—*William Kaufmann, "Luminous Reputations" in Science Digest, Vol. 89, No. 1 (1981), p. 8.

"An undevout astronomer is mad."—*Charles A. Young, quoted in *Isaac Asimov's Book of Science and Nature Quotations, p. 29.

"For myself, faith begins with the realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for it is incontrovertible that there is intelligence—an orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of the most majestic statement ever uttered—`In the beginning God.' "—Arthur Compton, Chicago Daily News (1936).

"This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."—Isaac Newton, Principia (1687).


Forward to the next topic in this series: RECENT HISTORY OF COSMOLOGICAL THEORIES which reveals the strange origins of these astronomical theories.