Today’s New Reason To Believe

by Hugh Ross

Many independent sets of observations confirm that only about six percent of all the ordinary matter (neutrons and protons) in the universe is made up of stars and stellar remnants.¹ The other 94 percent is dark. While astronomers have verified that enormous quantities of ordinary dark matter exist as dispersed intergalactic gas, they have yet to positively identify a totally dark structure of galactic proportions.

The existence of ordinary dark matter structures on galactic, or at least dwarf galactic scales, is a crucial component of the biblically predicted big bang creation model,² which appears to best fit the observations, namely the cold dark matter big bang model. Therefore, the discovery of a dark matter structure of galactic proportions would be a big boost for a biblically consistent cosmic creation model.

A team of thirteen astronomers from Chile, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States found such a dark galaxy in the Virgo cluster of galaxies.³ In a low-resolution map of the Virgo cluster at radio wavelengths they found a neutral hydrogen line (21-centimeter wavelength) emitter with a broad line width that was unaccompanied by any light-radiating source. The team re-imaged that part of their map using the high-resolution Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope in the Netherlands. What they discovered was a dark, edge on, spinning disk manifesting the diameter and mass of a typical spiral galaxy. Furthermore, they noted that the luminous spiral galaxy, NGC 4254, is located very close to the dark rotating disk and possesses an “odd one-armed morphology” that can only be explained by a nearby massive perturber. The one possible candidate in the vicinity of NGC 4254 is the dark disk discovered by the team. Finally, the team confirmed that their discovered disk is indeed truly dark when they used the Hubble Space Telescope to search for possible faint stars associated with the disk’s 21-centimeter emission. They found none.

The team not only produced a convincing case for the existence of a “dark galaxy,” they also demonstrated that astronomers very likely have been overlooking the possible existence of dark galaxies elsewhere. They propose a targeted research program to search for and identify such galaxies. Such a program would enable astronomers to develop a much more detailed model for the creation and history of the universe and, consequently, more rigorous tests of the biblical cosmic creation model. We at Reasons To Believe are thrilled that doubts expressed by atheists and young-earth creationists about the dark matter component of the big bang creation model are being convincingly answered. We also predict that any forthcoming more-detailed models of the creation and history of the universe arising from future dark galaxy discoveries will prove to be a beautiful match with the Bible’s story of the universe’s beginning and development.

1. Masataka Fukugita and P. J. E. Peebles, “The Cosmic Energy Inventory,” Astrophysical Journal, 616 (December 1, 2004): 643-68.
2. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, 3rd ed. (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2001): 23-29.
3. Robert Minchin et al., “21 cm Synthesis Observations of VIRGOHI 21—A Possible Dark Galaxy in the Virgo Cluster,” Astrophysical Journal 670 (December 1, 2007): 1056-64.

David H. Rogstad, Ph.D.

Sometimes the things we search for turn up in the most unlikely places. Such may be the case in gaining information about the origin of life here on Earth. Perhaps the best place to look for it is on the surface of the Moon!

We have chemical evidence that primitive life was present here on our planet as early as 3.8 billion years ago. However, various weathering processes, such as the Late Heavy Bombardment, destroyed any fossils that may have remained. It turns out that the bombardment by asteroids that ruined the evidence on Earth may also have saved it. The asteroids that hit the Earth also blasted into orbit material from the planet, much of which ended up on the Moon. Since the Moon experiences very little erosion compared to Earth, a fair amount of that material should still be there.

Hugh Ross wrote an article last year where he discussed a variety of scientific reasons it would be a good idea to return to the Moon. While establishing a presence on the Moon can be quite expensive, it is far cheaper than going to other planets, and it can potentially serve as a base camp for easier exploration beyond the Moon. One of the benefits Ross discusses is the possibility of looking on the Moon for the fossils of life from early Earth.

While there is little doubt among scientists that exploration of the surface of the Moon will yield some material originally from Earth, there has been some concern whether any life present in that material would be obliterated by its eventual impact with the Moon. The impact would not only break up any larger meteorites but would cause intense heating and melting on the surface of the impactor. Questions about the extent of this damage motivated a recent computation project by a research team led by Ian Crawford and Emily Baldwin. A less technical discussion of their results can be seen here.

The scientists used commercially available software to calculate the peak pressures that a meteorite experiences when landing on the surface of the Moon to determine the likelihood of its survival. Their results confirm earlier estimates that substantial survivability is to be expected, especially in the case of lower velocities or glancing impacts. Crawford and Baldwin discuss some possible ways for locating these materials on the surface of the Moon. In agreement with Ross, they conclude that the search for Earth remnants during any future lunar mission would be of scientific value. As Ross points out, such a mission “realistically could help settle one of the great controversies of our time, namely the creation/evolution debates.”

Previously Posted on March 31st, 2008 by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

Through a variety of means astronomers have determined that a black hole exists at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. The latest and most definitive measurement puts the mass of that black hole at 3,600,000 times the mass of the Sun.¹

The Milky Way Galaxy’s central black hole by itself is not dangerous to life on Earth. It is too far away to pose a significant source of gravitational disturbance. What does pose a risk for Earth life, though, is the gas, dust, and stars that swirl into the maw of the black hole. As this material nears the event horizon of the black hole, the black hole’s intense gravity causes up to ten percent of the mass of this material to be converted into deadly radiation. Fortunately, for life on Earth, especially the more radiation-sensitive advanced life, the deadly radiation doesn’t prove lethal. The solar system maintains an orbit about the center of the Milky Way Galaxy (MWG) that keeps it within the plane of the Galaxy where a thin dust layer blocks out almost all the radiation emanating from the central black hole.

As enormous as the MWG’s central black hole measures to be, it is tiny by comparison with other comparably sized spiral galaxies. (For a number of reasons advanced life is possible only within a medium-sized spiral galaxy².) The MWG’s sister galaxy, the Andromeda Galaxy, possesses a central black hole that weighs in at 140,000,000 times the mass of the Sun.³ That’s 39 times the mass of the MWG’s central black hole!

The greater the mass of a galaxy’s central black hole the greater the amount of deadly radiation that will arise from material being sucked into it. In the case of the Andromeda Galaxy the radiation problem is compounded. Recent observations of the nucleus of the Andromeda Galaxy show that huge reservoirs of gas exist in the immediate vicinity of the central black hole.⁴ These reservoirs imply that far more material is spiraling into the event horizon of the Andromeda Galaxy’s central black hole than is the case for the MWG’s central black hole. So, not only does more deadly radiation arise from the Andromeda Galaxy’s central black hole because of its greater mass but also because of its greater supply of infalling material.

As noted in a previous edition of Today’s New Reason To Believe, for medium-sized spiral galaxies the Andromeda Galaxy is typical whereas the MWG is rare. The MWG has suffered no major merging events with other galaxies over the past ten billion years. Consequently, its central black hole is relatively tiny and the amount of gas available for feeding its central black hole remains small. The unique characteristics of the MWG’s central black hole provides yet one more set of scientific evidences for the supernatural, super-intelligent design of the Milky Way Galaxy for the benefit of advanced life.

1. F. Eisenhauer et al., “SINFONI in the Galactic Center: Young Stars and Infrared Flares in the Central Light-Month,” Astrophysical Journal 628 (July 20, 2005): 246-59.
2. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, 3rd ed. (Colorado Springs, NavPress, 2001): 176-78.
3. Ralf Bender et al., “HST STIS Spectroscopy of the Triple Nucleus of M31: Two Nested Disks in Keplerian Rotation Around a Supermassive Black Hole,” Astrophysical Journal 631 (September 20, 2005): 280-300.
4. Philip Chang et al., “The Origin of the Young Stars in the Nucleus of M31,” Astrophysical Journal 668 (October 10, 2007): 236-44.