LOADING...

Creation vs Evolution ♦ Big Bang

“Population III” stars

Astronomers are dividing the stars into categories, depending on various factors. One of these factors is related to the composition of stars. Mainly, they consist of hydrogen and helium, but also other heavier elements are there in very small quantities.

Because Big Bang theory stipulates that at the beginning there was only hidrogen, helium and an insignificant quantity of lithium, this means that the first stars should not contain metals at all. These stars are named “population III” stars. Then, through nuclear fusion and other reactions, heavier elements are generated. These elements are then sent into space through solar winds and supernovae eruptions and new stars are formed with small quantities of metals in their compositions. Those stars are named “population II” stars. By the same process, other stars could be formed with more metals in their compositions, gathered together in another category named “population I” stars.

So, the Big Bang model considers the amount of metals inside of a star, as a representation of age. The less metal is found, the older the star is. While this interpretation looks interesting, it is only a presumed relation between the age of that star and the quantity of metal included.

But, the biggest issue is that instead of having a lot of “population III” stars, there are none! The astronomers are seeking to find them, but until now there is no real evidence of the existence of such metalless stars. While this is a real problem for the Big Bang model, the creationist model has no problem with it. God created all the stars in the way he wanted to, so it is ok to have similarities and differences in their characterization. Even if astronomers will eventually find “population III” stars, the creationist model still has no problem. The fact that there are stars with no metal, other stars with just a little quantity of metal and others with more metal inside, this is no proof for their age and order of formation.

So, did the Universe start with the Big Bang? Well, the absence of the “population III” stars contradicts it. By reading the next articles, you will understand that creation is the best explanation, and this is what really happened!


Read external full articles

Have Astronomers Finally Found Population III Stars?

by Dr. Danny R. Faulkner, https://answersingenesis.org/

Does the Big Bang Fit with the Bible?

by Dr. Jason Lisle, https://answersingenesis.org/

Have Population III stars finally been discovered?

by Dr. John G. Hartnett, https://creation.com/

Universe’s “First” Stars Are Missing?

by Dr. Jake Hebert, https://www.icr.org/

Research Topics:

It is the most common explanation for the origin of our Universe. But is it “science” or “science fiction”?

Fossils are like “photos” of a lost world. They can “speak” without words, but with strong evidence. Is it really for Evolution?

Our origins define not only our past, but also our present and our future. What do we have in common with apes? Do we have a common ancestor, or a common creator?

Biology and Chemistry have provided a lot of incredible findings in the past decades. Instead of supporting evolution, they prove an intelligent designer.

Since it was discovered in 1869, DNA has fascinated the scientific world and proves to be the best information storage system. There is no naturalistic mechanism to explain its existence.

Rock layers cover vast regions and form the Earth’s crust. While secular scientists are very confident that they were deposited during long geologic ages, a lot of evidence has been brought to support the contrary.

Math is defined as the science and study of quality, structure and space. It is one of the most powerful tools used in different domains, and it is proof of an intelligent designer!


Search on
Science Response Project: