Starlight & Time: Solving the Puzzle of Distant Starlight in a Young Universe
This book is based on the scientific idea (which has been well supported by research) that the elapsing of time is relative in relation to various factors. Which would mean that when a day passes on earth countless years would pass trillions of miles away. This then of course destroys the idea that starlight couldn't arrive on earth unless liberal theology or evolution were true. As with all books that uphold Genesis this book is being unfairly criticized. Both from evolutionists\liberal theologians who refuse to accept any evidence that can be harmful to there outdated theory and by ignorant laymen who will both lie (for example: claiming he states the speed of starlight is not constant which is a theory he criticizes in this book and claiming scientists have refuted and rejected this book when scientists have largely accepted this work who have not flushed their brains down the toilet for evolution's sake and claiming he doesn't believe his own research and claiming redshifts ext refute the book though he directly addresses this in the book) and flat out reject it on any grounds no matter how irrational because they can't reject the liberal\evolutionary ideas they've been brainwashed to believe in government schools. This is quiet simply a great book on the sciences of astronomy and physics (Dr. Humphreys having a Ph.D. in physics) and a great application of the science of relativity in relation to time. A great read. (Note: This book's appendices are readable papers on the topic and add to the chapters bringing the book to 128 pages even though it looks much smaller on the CBD site.)
February 2, 2010
Most of these reviewers are clueless. There is as much a problem for evolutionists as there is for creationists when we speak of starlight time. How old is the earth according to evolutionists? Depending on the mood they are in about 14 billion years. How far away are some stars 80 billion light years. HHHHMMMMMM
February 24, 2009
1. Humphreys himself admits that cosmology is not his field of physics and that in his field they do not use the general theory of relativity.2. Those who are experts in this field have found unrepairable errors and fundamental misunderstandings in the ideas of this book, and have published refutations.3. In a more recent defense called "New Vistas of Spacetime Rebut the Critics", HumphreyS quietly abandons key ideas that were presented in the book "Starlight and Time". Under scrutiny, even Humphreys does not stand by key points of the theory of the original book! His attempts at revision are also fatally flawed.It is sad to see that this book is still sold. Humphreys is outside of his field and those who understand this subject well have consistently found his understanding to be incorrect.The problem is not that he is controversial. The primary problem is that he does not understand the theory that he is incorrectly trying to use, and even some who are committed to the young earth position have come to acknowledge this.
November 6, 2004
I appreciate Dr. Humphrey's attempt to develop a model of the cosmos which is in harmony with the Bible. Unfortunately the model is flawed scientifically and does not agree with astronomical evidence, eg, redshifts and the degree of time dilation among other issues.See the works of Christian astronomer, Dr. Hugh Ross, for a model that is in agreement with both the Bible and the scientific evidence.
September 24, 2003