URCall: Blue Star-adjacent

From the ICR’s URCall series of videos, hosted by Markus Lloyd. “Blue Stars” (link)

Transcript:

Blue stars burn so brightly that they consume their fuel much faster than other stars. The hottest blue stars last only a few million years, and no astronomer has ever observed a new blue star forming. So, if astronomers are still seeing blue stars – which should have burned out a long time ago – how can the universe be billions of years old?

Continue reading

No More Stars?

Molecular cloud gives creationists the fingerIt’s time to return to another of the missed DpSUs. This one, as usual, is by Brian Thomas, and is called… No, don’t close the tab – it’s not another genetics article, I swear! It’s called Study: Star Formation Is Virtually Finished – so it’s about astronomy instead. Much better.

The topic is a study that inspected the quantity of light at a certain frequency associated with star formation from galaxies at different red shifts. They determined that star formation reached its peak eleven billion years ago (for context, the universe is in the order of 13.75 billion years old), and that from current trends it looks like only a further 5% of stars than those that exist today are yet to form. A sobering thought, but one that was apparently predicted – not that Thomas will tell you that. Continue reading

Blue Supergiants

Alnilam (Epsilon Orionis), lighting up NGC 1990As I said yesterday, in Blue Stars Confirm Recent Creation Jason Lisle outright denies the possibility of stellar formation. But he takes his time getting there.

Orion is one of the most well-known and easily recognized constellations of the winter sky. The three bright blue stars in Orion’s belt seem to draw our attention instantly. Such stars are a strong confirmation of the biblical timescale.

As is so often the case, Lisle’s idea of “confirmation of the biblical timescale” – strong confirmation – is just something that (he claims) the, ah, more commonly accepted timescales cannot explain. That’s all he has, really. All any creationist has. Continue reading

Star Struck – Quick DpSU

Blue straggler stars in the Milky Way (Click for larger image)

The Hubble Telescope captures blue straggler stars in the Milky Way bulge Credit: NASA, ESA, W. Clarkson (Indiana University and UCLA), and K. Sahu (STScl)

A survey of the centre of the Galaxy by Hubble has revealed a number of “Young Blue Stars”, which Brian Thomas claims could not exist in “standard long-age cosmologies”. They also don’t like the explanation for the star’s formation:

long-age astronomers have been forced to resort to a non-explanation that is indistinguishable from an appeal to magic: that blue stars somehow formed in the distant past through unknown, unobserved processes.

Actually, if you go look at the news release for the survey that Thomas links to, their explanation doesn’t seem to fit that description:

It is not clear how blue stragglers form. A common theory is that they emerge from binary pairs. As the more massive star evolves and expands, the smaller star gains material from its companion. This stirs up hydrogen fuel and causes the growing star to undergo nuclear fusion at a faster rate. It burns hotter and bluer, like a massive young star.

Make up your own mind…

The ICR also seems to have a problem with star formation in general:

The physical barriers to star formation by collapsing gases—the standard nature-only story of star formation—are prohibitive, because the denser a cloud of gas becomes, the more vigorously its particles repel one another.

*sigh* This is why you need to give ’em a good shock before they’ll collapse. See here and here.

They also argue that nobody has ever observed a star forming. What, exactly, is their definition of “observed”? Stars take time, a lot more time than we have been watching them. We can see, however, star nurseries – do these not count? Or are they disputing even that?

On a related note, the article admits that the stars are 26,000 light years away, still longer than their chronology allows. How do they explain them?

Why did I ask?

The scientific evidence shows, and the Bible clearly states, that blue stars were put in place on purpose recently.4

Naturally, the citation is to the Bible (there have been a lot of those lately):

“Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion” (Amos 5:8)

No mention of a purpose (or blue stars, or for that matter the whole starlight problem) there, and I have a hunch that he has misinterpreted the entire verse. Ah, well, no surprises here…