Cosmos: A Space Time Odyssey is the Obamacare of science. Proponents of universal health care promised the impossible: insuring tens of millions more people who would get better coverage at less cost. Those impossible claims proved, well, impossible to deliver.
Like Obamacare, Cosmos tells tall tales. It presents a worldview asserted to be scientifically sound – proven to be true – despite the impossibility of science to ever prove its accuracy.
The Big Lie
The Big Lie is a propagandistic term invented by Hitler, who wrote that people are inclined to believe a “colossal” lie because “It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”
Satan’s biggest lie is denying the existence of God even though the heavens and the earth testify to His existence and glory. The host and producers of Cosmos have fallen for that lie and they present several colossal lies of their own in this series: among them, the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution.
Cosmos treats those two theories – both of which deny the existence of a Creator God – as if they were scientific fact despite the fact that science is literally incapable of ever proving those theories to be true.
Why are those theories unprovable? Because no one living here today was alive at the birth of the universe or the birth of life. Science observed neither event and can never recreate either event.
In explaining the existence of a creation without a Creator and of life without a Life-giver, Cosmos upends reality.
Moreover, in denying the existence of a Creator and a Life-giver, Cosmos contends that the Earth is insignificant and humanity is inconsequential. As a direct consequence of those conclusions, animal rights activists, population control proponents, and the environmental movement wage war on mankind in the interests of saving the planet and non-human life from human beings.
Godlike Powers
The very first words of the series reiterate Carl Sagan’s famous epigram: “The cosmos is all there is, or ever was, or ever will be.”
Those pseudo-religious words are catchy, but are they true?
Sagan’s words mirror and mock the biblical identity of the God he denies. Revelation 1:8 says, “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”
But could Sagan be right? “The cosmos is all there is, or ever was, or ever will be.”
How could anyone possibly know? In order to know, one would have to have experienced the cosmos in all of its fullness from beginning to end – every second of every particle in every portion of the cosmos.
Only God could do that!
But the producers of Cosmos can’t see that because in accepting Sagan’s assumption, they deny the very existence of the spiritual realm, a realm which cannot be measured or quantified.
Objectivity Redacted
Choosing to deny even the possibility that there might be a Creator is a theological decision, not a scientific one.
The Cosmos host, Dr. Tyson, offered “a simple set of rules: test ideas by experiment and observation, build on those ideas that pass the test, reject the ones that fail, follow the evidence wherever it leads and question everything.”
Sounds great. But science cannot observe the origin of either the Earth or of life. Science cannot replicate either. Science cannot do what Tyson claims it should do.
Tyson repeatedly asserts “question everything,” without questioning his own worldview, assumptions, and conclusions.
Tall Tales
Using slick visuals to capture the imagination, Cosmos tells one big lie after another – all unprovable, untestable, unbelievable. (Except, people tend to believe big lies because they seem too big to be wrong.)
One such tale is that the infinite universe sprang from the infinitesimal. Tyson claimed, “Our entire universe emerged from a point smaller than a single atom. Space itself exploded in a cosmic fire, launching the expansion of the universe and giving birth to all the energy and all the matter we know today.”
This is the wonder of creation without the wonderful Creator.
Which requires greater faith: a staggeringly immense universe of beauty, intricacy, structure, design, and order purposefully created by a wise God out of nothing – or, out of nothing, everything spontaneously and randomly appeared, with design, with order, but without the existence of a higher being?
Consider, what science does observe is entropy: order decaying into chaos – the exact opposite of how the cosmos should be if the Big Bang and evolution were true.
Where did the order come from? Why is it decaying now? Science cannot say, though Christians know.
Another Tyson tall tale: “every living thing is a masterpiece written by nature and edited by evolution.”
Tyson has excised the Creator from the equation, transforming a personal and providential God into an impersonal and mindless process – evolution in nature.
Notice the poetic structure of his scientific claim. Tyson has imbued nature with the ability to write, and evolution with the ability to edit, the “masterpiece” of the cosmos.
Cosmological Faith
Yet another Tyson fantasy: “Our ancestors worshipped the sun. They were far from foolish. It makes good sense to revere the sun and stars because we are their children. … We are made by the atoms and the stars [and] our matter and our form are forged by the great and ancient cosmos of which we are a part.”
The Big Lie on steroids. We are “children” of the stars? We “are forged by the great and ancient cosmos?” Poetry? Yes. Scientific? No.
Stripping God out of existence, evolutionists imbue nature with divine power. They deny the existence of the One who created everything out of nothing but they have faith in evolution and in nature. However, the whole of creation testifies to the existence of a Creator, not the absence of one.
Science and Faith
Cosmos not so subtly likens Christianity to primitive pagan religions. Contrary to history, Cosmos presents faith as inalterably opposed to science, whereas, Christian faith has actually been the inspiration and motivation for many of the major scientific advances of the past millennium.
But Cosmos substitutes the Christian faith of the founders of science for a faith in something that is not science (while calling it science). It has faith in materialistic theories of the universe, not in science.
Claiming Christianity has always opposed science and martyred its leaders, Cosmos attempts to demonize and silence people of faith, even likening us to Nazis and calling us “science-deniers” (equivalent to Holocaust-deniers).
It is their denial of God and of the spiritual realm which animates their unscientific, materialistic worldview. In denying the spiritual dimension, they negate the meaning and purpose of life. If God does not exist, then man is unimportant. Cosmos actually dwells upon the non-special nature of humanity.
One wonders why this so appeals to them? Could it be that the absence of God and the insignificance of man absolves them of accountability?
If there is no God, then there is no moral law.
If there is no moral law, then there are no absolute values.
If there are no absolutes, then we can live life as we choose.
The Cosmos Right Side Up
But Cosmos has it backwards!
The biblical paradigm reveals that all of creation testifies to God’s existence and to His glory. Yet, despite the unfathomable power, wisdom, and glory of a God who can create out of nothing a universe that seemingly has no end, that God chose to fashion human beings in His image so that He might have fellowship with us.
The universe did not randomly materialize out of nothing by itself and life did not appear by chance on our planet for no purpose. Rather, the Creator brought the cosmos into existence to proclaim His existence, and He breathed life into us that we might worship Him and have eternal fellowship with Him.
The Big Lies of the big bang and evolution obscure the incredible truth that God has revealed through His creation, His Bible, and Jesus Christ. Those lies deprive people of the knowledge of God and of the relationship that He wants to have with them.
Far from the purposeless human existence propounded by Cosmos, we should rejoice every day for the gift of life that God has granted us and the relationship that we can now have with Him.
Now that is a cosmic truth.
Update. Nine Scientific Facts Prove the “Theory of Evolution” is False.
Scientific Fact No. 1 – Birds Prove Natural Selection is Naturally Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 2 – Species Without a Link Prove Evolution Theory is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 3 – Missing Inferior Evolutionary Branches
Scientific Fact No. 4 – Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 5 – Human Egg and Sperm Prove Evolution is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 6 – DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 7 – Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 8 – Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong
Scientific Fact No. 9 – Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Resource: Answers in Genesis special section on Cosmos: A Space Time Odyssey at http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation-debate/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey.
Update: Scientists discover God.
Update: Science concedes Earth must have had a Creator.
Best-selling author Eric Metaxas wrote in the Wall Street Journal article “Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God” (Dec. 25, 2014): “In 1966 … astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion – 1 followed by 24 zeros – planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion – 1 followed by 21 zeros – planets capable of supporting life. … But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. … As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely bubkis – 0 followed by nothing. …”
Eric Metaxas continued: “What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. … Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: ‘In light of new findings … we should quietly admit that the early estimates … may no longer be tenable.’
“As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero. … In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. … Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life – every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing. Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? … At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? …”
Eric Metaxas ended: “Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that ‘the appearance of design is overwhelming’ … Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said ‘the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator … gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.’”
BrotherWatch 