Taking Back Astronomy: The Heavens Declare Creation

This is a very interesting book. From a formal point of view it is simply outstanding, with a very nice layout and wonderful pictures of the Universe. Substantively, the book makes a very important point that I would like to mention.We all interpret the evidence according to our world view. If one starts from naturalist assumptions about the Universe (v.g. the Universe is all there is; the Universe arouse by itself and is evolving), one will naturally try to explain the data according to this model, accomodating by adding assumptions, explaining away or even dismissing all evidence that doesn't immediately fit.There are many scientific problems with the naturalistic evolutionary model of the Universe (v.g. where did matter and energy come from? What caused the alleged Big Bang? Was there an early inflation of the Universe? If so, what started it? And what stopped it? Why are galaxies quantized? Why do "earlier" galaxies look mature? Why are comets still moving around? Why are nebulas expanding? What caused nebulas gravitational collapse? Where did the moon come from? Where was the moon 2 billion years ago? Why is there a "faint Sun" paradox?). In spite of the huge scientific problems facing the naturalist evolutionary model of the Universe, from which the above mentioned are but a few examples, the naturalists will hold on to this paradigm, even if it means building a precarious castle of assumptions over assumptions. The reason for that is that this model is the only alternative they have to creationism. If they abandon their model they will become creationists, something they want at all costs to avoid. For many naturalists promoting this model is the only way to advance their academic carriers and to get a pay check from their superiors. It also avoids being ridiculed by other naturalists. When one doesn't side with God, one is always afraid not to be accepted by others.Naturalism has no scientific basis. Many observations do indeed point towards the existence of design features in the Universe, as even british atheist astronomer Roger Penrose has recently admitted in a BBC Prime interview. He admitted that it is entirely possible to build a totally viable and observation-based model of the Universe in which our galaxy comes in the center of the Universe. He also admitted that if we go back in time we will find more and more order, and less and less chaos, which is another way to admitt that the Big Bang model is far from being a satisfactory explanation for the Universe.Very often we see naturalists discarding scientific observations that point to design features of the Universe, just because they are a priori commited to explain how things developed "naturally". Well, that's not really science. That's ideology!Creationists start from the assumption that the Universe is not all there is, and that it was designed for a purpose. They accept the Bible as the revelation of the Creator and build from that pressuposition. That doesn't mean that the Bible is a scientific book, whose verses are expected to describe all the details of the Universe. It simply means that the Bible provides the leading assumptions from where true knowledge can be accomplished.Naturalists reject all design assumptions as a way to do science. Creationists reject all naturalistic assumptions as a way to do science. Naturalism assume that there is no God or if there is one, his action remains totally irrelevant and undetectable. Creationists assume that there is a God, and a very active One. Different world views lead to different scientific views and ways of interpreting the same data.In my opinion, biblical creationism, with its model of Creation, Fall, Flood, Babel, Dispersion, etc., is more plausible and complete than naturalism, because it explains the origin of matter, energy, time, space and information (v.g. DNA), and can also accomodate both evidence of design (v.g. the fine-tuning of the Universe for Life) and evidence of decay (v.g natural disasters; predation; suffering; death).Naturalism has no way to explain the origin of the Universe and Life, nor can it explain their design features, which becomes a very serious problem, especially when naturalists themselves (v.g. Dawkins; Sagan) admit that evidence of design is overwhelming and that the DNA of a cell has much more information than the whole Library of Congress. Time and chance are not enough.The Bible tells us that the Universe is much more complex than we will ever be able to understand. That's why we should trust God's Word (and not fallible human ideas) as a starting point for our being and our thought. Both will have only meaning if they are sustained by God's Word.Science has not any alternative to death and decay. Naturalist scientists can only delay decay when they introduce intelligent design. Genetic entropy and genetic engineering are a good example of this.God has a clear alternative do death and decay, as was made clear through Jesus Christ's ressurrection with an incorruptible body (an historical fact that was witnessed by many who were willing to sacrifice their lives to proclaim it). This history changing event has shown, to all who are willing to see, that there is hope and life beyond death. God has demonstrated, in front of many witnesses, that He can generate life from non-life. Miller and Urey didn't even come close to that! Nor has anyone else after them.

Undeniable facts proving that the billions of years idea is full of holes. Remarkable discussion for the average person and for the educated Scientist.

I couldn't figure out who the target audience for this book is. At times, it reads like it is aimed at bright high school students, and at other times, it gets fairly technical, at least in terminology. I also find that his writings are confused about whether they are aimed at Bible-believers, or at those who don't accept the Bible. There are beautiful photos of various celestial features, sometimes with explanations, sometimes not. The book itself is a work of art, which may be aesthetically pleasing, or not, with its layout and other aspects, but at times the background interferes with the readability of the text. I always cringe when I see pages with a black background, because I know if I touch them, I will leave a visible smudge mark, and I hate that! A few of the pages in this book were like that.The substance of the book consists mainly of various examples of why the universe cannot be all that old. These examples are quite fascinating, and some of them definitely make a very old universe and a very old earth impossible. The organization of the material, however, is, to my mind, quite haphazard. It's almost as if it is really a collection of articles from a magazine, without this fact being admitted. I often found redundancies, and the issue of God would pop up unexpectedly, or not, and in general, I just found that the whole thing wasn't particularly coherent. The information in there is very, very important and should give anyone pause, and it's worth reading for the information, but don't expect to come away being satisfied that this book was written to be helpful to you as a particular reader. Like I said, I'm not sure who his target audience truly is. The organization of a coherent argument is this book's biggest lack. I hope the author will revise it with this in mind, and organize the material in a way that flows, in the future. I definitely feel the book has offered NO plan for taking back astronomy at all, and I think this needs to be addressed. Also, I feel rather strongly that it puts the cart before the horse. Taking back astronomy should be the goal, which means looking for truthful answers and conclusions. The appreciation of the existence of God will come naturally, if the focus is on evaluating the evidence ACCURATELY, and not on some other agenda. Restore the integrity of science. The rest of it will come. Three stars for useful and excellent information, but because of how disorganized it is, not my top rating.

If I could give this book 10 stars, I would. It is a good introduction to astronomy from both a scientific and Christian perspective. As a Bible-believing Christian, I love the way that Dr Lisle uses the Bible to show the Biblical basis for the idea that the earth is about 6000 years old. He also gives a strong scientific basis for a "young earth" including the rapidly decaying magnetic field of the earth, the moon's moving away from the earth, and the weakening magnetic fields of the planets, just to name a few examples. It is also written on 2 levels, with 'basic" stuff on a white background and "advanced" stuff on a darker background. The basic truths require very little physics if any to understand, and even the "advanced" stuff only takes a basic knowledge of physics to understand. It also has a lot of end notes and a good index. It is not as thorough a book as some of his others (like The Ultimate Proof of Creation, which is a good apologetics book) but then it is meant to be a more general, short introduction to astronomy from the Christian perspective! It also has a lot of good logical arguments for creation in it and also shares the Gospel-as it shows how the real purpose of the heavens and their design is to show people that they must trust Jesus as their Savior and Lord to get to heaven!

The photos look amazing and the author makes some very good points. It's probably not that well written to be truthful and he jumps about a bit but overall it's pretty good.

A very well put together book.Outstanding quality for the money.

Astrophysicist Jason Lisle has given a clear, simple presentation of the amazing world of planets, stars and galaxies interpreted from an understandable Biblical worldview. He shows some of the fundamental inconsistencies that invalidate secular worldviews from which spring evolutionary, Big Bang models of the origin of the cosmos.Highly recommended.

A great read. All glory to God of the heavens!

Um texto claro e objetivo, com ilustrações belíssimas, descrevendo as maravilhas do Universo: estrelas, galáxias, cometas, planetas e tudo mais, e como nele podemos detectar evidências claras da obra de um gênio, que tudo fez, e os fez prontos, e recentemente.