Everything came from “NOTHING”?

Eric Hovind September 15th, 2010

In his latest book The Grand Design, Steven Hawking writes, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.”

This statement flies in the face of everything we know in science today. Many evolutionists don’t even believe this or at least admit that there is a serious problem when it comes to getting something from nothing. According to evolution, chemical evolution can take place in stars because of “fusion.” However, now we have a very serious chicken and egg problem. Which came first—the stars to form the elements, or the elements to form the stars?

Here are a few quotes about star formation:

“The silent embarrassment of modern astrophysics is that we do not know how even a single one of these stars managed to form.”1

“No one has caught a molecular cloud in the act of collapsing.”2

“Precisely how a section of an interstellar cloud collapses gravitationally into a star—a double or multiple star, or a solar system—is still a challenging theoretical problem …  astronomers have yet to find an interstellar cloud in the actual process of collapse.” 3

“The origin of stars represents one of the most fundamental unsolved problems of contemporary astrophysics.”4

“Nobody really understands how star formation proceeds. It’s really remarkable.”5

II Peter 3 is coming to light more and more! People are willingly ignorant!

  1. Martin Harwit, “Star Formation: Naissance et Enfance des Etoiles,” Science 231 (7 March 1986):1201-1202
  2. Ivan Peterson, “The Winds of Starbirth,” Science News 137, no. 26 (30 June 1990): 409
  3. Fred L. Whipple, The Mystery of Comets (Washington, D. C. : Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985), 211–213
  4. Charles J. Lada and Frank H. Shu, “The Formation of Sunlike Stars,” Science 248, no. 4955 (4 May 1990):564
  5. Roger A. Windhorst, as quoted by Corey S. Powell, “A Matter of Timing,” Scientific American 267 (October 1992):30