…and this is a 
Bizarro astronomy
Category: Creationism
Posted on: December 10, 2007 4:15 PM, by PZ Myers
OK, astronomers and physicists, get to work. This movie is supposed to be a refutation of modern science, but it's full of bogus claims like, 'Since 98% of the sun is hydrogen and helium, the earth ought to be 98% hydrogen and helium.' There is a lot of similar trivially idiotic nonsense, all marshaled to support the false contention that if science can't explain it, then god must have done it, but here's the thing: almost none of it is in the Index to Creationist Claims. We need an update!
Politics
Comments
Beautiful animations though.
I wonder whom they stole that from?
Posted by: Arnaud | December 10, 2007 4:32 PM
Okay, I only made it through the first 24 seconds. "The only other option is that it was created?" Wow. Explosion, or TEH HAND OF GOD. It's nice when things are narrowed down for you like that. I wish ALL my choices only had two options.
Not.
Posted by: Form&Function | December 10, 2007 4:45 PM
It's bizarre how they trot out all these random "facts" (planets have different rotations, moons orbit in different directions) to attack standard astronomy, when I can't for the life of me see why a Creator would want to make such a mess. I find it fascinating that, historically, the religious have moved from the heavens needing to be perfect in order to reflect God (perfectly circular orbits, crystalline spheres, Platonic solids), to the heavens being a random assortment of unconnected phenomena in order to reflect God.
Posted by: Tulse | December 10, 2007 4:47 PM
We also have Sal Cordova invoking quantum physics for "Advanced Creation Science".
Posted by: Blake Stacey | December 10, 2007 4:49 PM
Wow... claim the earth should be 98% gas one minute, then claim gas giants should dissipate the next minute... which is it, guys? Do you think you might have contradicted yourselves in your very own video?
(Of course the answer has to do with the velocity of light gas atoms and molecules at a given temperature vs the escape velocity due to the planet's gravity. Earth has relatively low gravity, so H and He aren't gravitationally bound, but on Jupiter they mostly are.)
And what's any of this got to do with explanations of biodiversity? Oh, right, to creationists, evolution = evil scientific bogeyman.
Posted by: Zombie | December 10, 2007 4:52 PM
Gaaa! Turn it off! Turn it offffff!
"If the solar system evolved, all planets should revolve [different word, creationitwits] in the same direction"?
Oh, no - the planets revolve both ways. The planets have caught teh gay. They need Jesus.
Billions and billions of fallen worlds! Turn it off! Augh!
;-)
Posted by: Kristine | December 10, 2007 4:52 PM
The creationists are always calling scientists and atheists arrogant know-it-alls, but they discredit scientific theory and claim that God "did it" on the basis that the scientists admit they can't explain everything - and they can. I need to go eat lots and lots of chocolate now and get those endorfins a-workin'...
Posted by: Lucy | December 10, 2007 4:55 PM
Okay, I lied. I had to keep watching.
"Scientists have no answer for why some planets have rings."
Completely aside from the fact that the statement itself is just wrong, what's the creationist "answer"? God just likes ringed planets, except when he doesn't? WTF?
Posted by: Form&Function | December 10, 2007 4:56 PM
when I said "and they can", I meant the creationists claiming that they (the creationists) can.
Posted by: Lucy | December 10, 2007 4:57 PM
#8: "God just likes ringed planets, except when he doesn't?"
Obviously you've never read the lost book of Moses:
"And the Lord spoketh unto Moses, and said, 'Verily, sometimes I feel like a nut, sometimes I don't.'"
Posted by: gg | December 10, 2007 5:03 PM
I really don't have the patience to deal with those idiots right now (thanks to those of you who do because it's important to keep an eye on them) so here's something that they need to see, mainly just to lighten up, no pun intended:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oyz7e8iQ6Uo
Posted by: Mena | December 10, 2007 5:04 PM
Oh my. I made it through the first one, but when they claimed that the reason scientists don't accept the anthropic principle is because they don't want accountability, I had to shut it off.
That was some concentrated, industrial-strength stupid. Just...wow.
Posted by: Sophist, FCD | December 10, 2007 5:11 PM
Can I just hope that was a spoof of creationists, or would that be burying my head in the sand?
Posted by: Karey | December 10, 2007 5:20 PM
Building a spinning planet like jupiter poses a challenge to evolutionists?! What does natural selection have to do with planetary formation?
Just when you think creationists have hit the limits of stupidity, they just try harder and surprise you again!
Posted by: santiago | December 10, 2007 5:33 PM
The next-to-last (can I say "penultimate" here?) video on that page uses the second law of thermo extensively. Duane Gish claims that stars are always being destroyed, but nothing ever gets created anymore.
Except, in all their pretty graphics, their own title slide (the one that says Astronomy - Physics) is a famous Hubble image showing a stellar nursery, where stars are currently being formed, right now.
And isn't that one guy the peanut butter guy, who says that a jar of peanut butter disproves abioenesis?
Posted by: Curt Cameron | December 10, 2007 5:39 PM
#8: "God just likes ringed planets, except when he doesn't?"
"Most planets just couldn't pull off that look, while Saturn looks just fabu. My line is all about balance and staying true to yourself!" ~God in his interview with Vogue
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/09/26/050926sh_shouts
Posted by: Lucy | December 10, 2007 5:39 PM
Lucy, that was priceless.
Thanks for that.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 10, 2007 5:50 PM
Apparently two moons revolving around a single planet in different directions is clear evidence of Gawd. Or maybe that was the presence of ring systems.
Ugh, must lie down to counteract the effects of all that *headdesk* action.
Posted by: Beth B. | December 10, 2007 5:55 PM
Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh,
I think that my brain just crashed.
Why PZ,why have u ruined my day..I was doing so
well...
Jokes apart, these fools are obviously clueless about what they are saying. A two-year toddler can make more sense than these nutters.
Open Question for homeschooled/ "religious school"ed audience:
Are you taught anything at all ? Even a well-informed and curious 8 year old can demolish this mound of cowshit.
(**Still waiting for brain to come up**)
Posted by: astrolieber | December 10, 2007 6:09 PM
The YouTube link provided by SadlyNo reveals that the auteur who uploaded this wonderful work, one 'BereanBeacon', has a total of 720 videos to his credit. That's, like, more than Lucas & Spielberg & Hartley put together!
A whole new volume of the Index to Creationist Claims may have to be written just for this one person. Let's hope that he(?) is wealthy enough to be sued for the nursing home care to be required by his rebutters.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | December 10, 2007 6:14 PM
I feel like that guy at the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" whose head melts. Curse you, PZ Meyres.
(Although, to be fair, it's not your fault that I watched more than about 10 seconds of the first one, let alone three.)
Posted by: noncarborundum | December 10, 2007 6:21 PM
Pursuant to #4: Also, note that Sal Cordova thinks he's DISCOVERED the link between Fourier series and quantum mechanics. LOL. How old is this guy, anyways? He sounds like a 16-year-old taking introductory physics.
Posted by: octopod | December 10, 2007 6:23 PM
If its perfect......god did it
If its really F'd up.......only god could do it
good stuff here.....by good, i mean really bad:
http://eternal-productions.org/
Posted by: CleveDan | December 10, 2007 6:24 PM
From the Index:
'Evolution teaches that we are animals and should behave as such'
Does the God squad think we are something other than animals? I don't know much about their wacky beliefs...
Posted by: Caveat | December 10, 2007 6:32 PM
Re: #34
How exactly does evolution teach a "should"?
Posted by: noncarborundum | December 10, 2007 6:35 PM
For crying out loud, it didn't. "Evolved" doesn't simply mean "not created".
"Creationists are not just more stupid than we suppose, they are more stupid than we can suppose."
-- chuko
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | December 10, 2007 6:40 PM
The video is an aberration, since it makes a bunch of new crap up. Until now it has always seemsed as if creationists are always behind on the times. Sal thinks he's "discovered" the connection between the Fourier transform and quantum physics, putting him about a century back. Some creo (or at least biblo) writers appear to be stuck on cover designs from 1982. It's like we're all going backward and forward at the same time...or maybe I'm just high.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | December 10, 2007 6:45 PM
My favorite quote: "Growing a large gaseous planet posses an insermountable hurdle for evolutionists"
Of course. Biological evolution contains elaborate explanationitory models of planetary formation. And if there is anything wrong with what Darwin wrote about Saturn, then dogs could not become cats.
And all those SHOULDs that are easily refuted by a basic understanding of physics! AAAGH!
"According to evolution, if people came from apes, there SHOULD not be any more apes..."
Posted by: JakeS | December 10, 2007 7:39 PM
Beyond the content, didn't anyone else find it extremely amusing that this guy couldn't even convert the original video directly, but ended up taking a video of his monitor while the original was playing?
Posted by: Thanny | December 10, 2007 7:50 PM
>We need an update!
Who's responsible for the ICC? Would it work if those reading this with relevant training just sent in e-mails to TalkOrigins?
Posted by: Chris Hallquist | December 10, 2007 8:44 PM
"And the Lord spoketh unto Moses, and said, 'Verily, sometimes I feel like a nut, sometimes I don't.'"
ahh hahaha, I just wet myself.
Posted by: Michael B. | December 10, 2007 9:40 PM
Creationists talking out of their Uranuses again.
And this is news?
Posted by: Azkyroth | December 11, 2007 1:00 AM
Ooh! I want to play this game, too!
"Since oranges are citrus fruits, apples ought to be citrus fruits."
"Since motorcycles have two wheels, DVD players ought to have two wheels."
"Since basketballs are round and orange, horses ought to be round and orange."
"Since French people speak French, Chinese people ought to speak French."
"Since dogs occasionally eat their own feces, humans ought to occasionally eat their own feces."
etc., etc., etc.
Posted by: Dan | December 11, 2007 1:16 AM
I had to stop watching that, I though blood would start coming out of my ears.
Posted by: qedpro | December 11, 2007 1:53 AM
Is this someone's entry for a "How much bollocks can you talk in 3 minutes and 38 seconds" competition?
My input gain turned itself right down. I'm sure there were pictures on the screen and sounds coming from the speakers ..... but none of it was making any sense!
Posted by: AJS | December 11, 2007 11:04 AM
"Ooh! I want to play this game, too!
Since oranges are citrus fruits, apples ought to be citrus fruits.
Since motorcycles have two wheels, DVD players ought to have two wheels.
Since basketballs are round and orange, horses ought to be round and orange.
Since French people speak French, Chinese people ought to speak French.
Since dogs occasionally eat their own feces, humans ought to occasionally eat their own feces." ~Dan
Since most people in Germany are of the Aryan race, everyone else should be of the Aryan race! What? What'd I say?
And you're welcome Brownian. :P
Posted by: Lucy | December 11, 2007 9:54 PM
That video simply proves that creationism really does rot your brain, and how. My daughter knew more than those idiots when she was still in primary school. I know with any average when applied to a population, such as intelligence, you expect some to be way below the mean, but that far below it. Is it possible to be that stupid and still be able to function day to day, apparently so.
Posted by: John Phillips | December 12, 2007 11:11 AM
Curt Cameron @ 15:
Errrm, not strictly true, Cameron. That slide shows stars being formed, yes, but not "currently".Lacking tachyonic telescopes, we can't assuredly say what's happening there "currently".
Anything from a supernova to a passing super-black-hole may have disrupted the nursery by now.
Or perhaps God, having in the meantime created the Earth, has now simply shut down the nursery and erected a sign in ten-light-year-high letters saying, "Gone fishing in M31, behave yourselves 'til I get back!"
(That's the wonderful thing about sheer unfounded speculation: anyone can have a go at it.)
Posted by: Pyre | December 13, 2007 9:53 PM