Phil and Skye share conference experiences, singer-songwriters wear spacesuits, and What’s in the Bible becomes a best-seller! AND the latest photos from the Hubble Telescope set off another discussion on faith, science, and atheism! Whoopee!
Listen to the episode | Download to the episode | Find this episode on iTunes
Hutchmoot! I have yet to hear the show, but it does my heart good that you have connected to some of my favorite music. 🙂
Did they let you play the infamous ukelele with them?
I just have to thank you for the ways you have encouraged and challenged me through your podcast. As a mom of 3 young children I want to say thank you for reminding me to laugh and not take myself too seriously while at the same time to hold fast to Christ and guard my day-by-day communion with Him above all else. I grew up in Canada and learned to play ukulele in my Grade 6 music class so hearing Plinky Pete brings back great memories! I love Andrew Peterson’s music – especially his Christmas album – thank you for ringing the bell for these artists and authors. And thank you for Buck Denver and What’s in the Bible – our entire family laughs and learns the truths of God’s word together with you. We’re ordering the Christmas DVD today. Thank you for walking in obedience with the Lord – we are blessed by His work in you.
Hi Phil, great stuff again, but it’s time for another science spot from the guy who can’t tweet…
Coming from the UK, we don’t have so many Young Earth Creationists, so maybe in the US the movement has some excesses that we don’t get to see from over here. Even so, I think you were a little hard on us, because in general I find that maintaining a YEC position requires a much fuller understanding of the science than is needed just to swallow the conventional view. The Big Bang hypothesis is a case in point. It’s easy to forget that no-one has observed the expansion of the universe directly in any way at all. What we observe is a spectral red-shift in the light coming to us from starts and galaxies which, for the relatively few, relatively nearby objects that can have their distances measured by other techniques such as Cepheid variables or parallax, appears to correlate with distance (i.e. more distant objects appear to have more red shift). To go from there to the Big Bang requires a couple of leaps of logic – firstly you have to assume that the only explanation of the redshift is that these items are travelling away from us at increasing speeds (which is possible, but by no means certain), and then you have to make the entirely metaphysical assuption that an observer anywhere in the universe would see the same effects – the so-called Strong Copernican Principle. Only with these assumptions can you then solve the equations and conclude the Big Bang; take the same observations and the same equations but with different assumptions and you’ll get an entirely different view of the universe.
That’s ‘stars and galaxies’, of course, not ‘starts’. There ought to be a way of editing these comments..!
Of the new and older podcasts I have heard so far, this is one of the best.