Hubble Constant Contradiction and the Big Bang
It is pretty much a given that the universe is expanding, but cosmologists are puzzled by conflicting calculations on the Hubble constant. This is used to support the Big Bang. The numbers from the direct and indirect methods should agree, but calculations provide two different results.
The Hubble constant is important because secularists hang their hats on it for determining the age of the universe. Although the contradiction has been known for a long time and many cosmogonists don't pay it no nevermind, new calculations are more difficult to ignore; the narrative drives the evidence again. One scientist followed the lead of other evolutionists, both cosmic and biological, by saying the problem is "exciting". They should be delirious with joy, then, because we have seen that the Big Bang is saturated with difficulties, but secularists offer jejune explanations. These scientists need to cowboy up and admit that they are attempting to deny the work of our Creator.
 |
| Credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech /STScI (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) |
To read the rest, click on "Big Bang Hubble Contradiction Confirmed". For a related and more detailed article by a creation astronomer, click on "The Newest Finding on the Expansion of the Universe".Using data obtained from the Hubble Space Telescope, astronomers have confirmed a contradiction between two different estimates of the Hubble constant—an extremely important number in cosmology.Secular scientists claim the universe is expanding as a result of a “Big Bang” 13-14 billion years ago. The inference of an expanding universe is based on the fact that the light spectra from distant galaxies have been “redshifted” to longer wavelengths. Some creation scientists think this interpretation of the redshift data is correct, while others do not. Even if the universe is expanding, this doesn’t necessarily demand a Big Bang explanation.