First I am positive Russell Humphries knows a lot more about astronomy and astrophysics than you.
First of all, Russell Humphreys (you spelled it wrong) is not a real scientist. He is employed by the Creation Science Institute. I cannot find any peer reviewed research paper he has ever published. Nor any legitimate cientist not employed by the same bunch who agrees with thim. He's a quack.
Second, his theories have been refuted by legitimate scientists. You would not understand the basic reasons, except possibly the one easily refuted by JPL. You can read that one in Wikipedia.
JPL has real scientists. They don't believe in talking snakes either.
You're telling me his credentials are not real? What school did he get his degrees from, then? As for JPL, I think he is a quack. We are now even.
Nope not even. You're still lost in fairyland.
First, JPL is not a "he." It's the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. That's the part that launches deep space probes. NASA thinks Humphries is a quack.
Second, just because one has a physics degree does not make one knowledgeable about cosmology. Most physicists spend their lives testing different metals for GE.
Third, has Humphries ever submitted a paper to a peer reviewed scientific journal like "Nature?"
Fourth, does he even belong to or attend the IAU?
That makes it four to zero for my side and against creationism. Winning arguments against you on this subject is like stealing candy from a baby.
Since you don't agree with him he's a quack? That's good.
Since Obama turned NASA into a Muzzie organization it has no credibility to me.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
