In arguing with creationists, you hear a lot of bizarre claims,
and reasoning that is completely unburdened by fact or reason. I
was recently talking with a creationist who liked to delve into
arguments that had more bearing on astronomy than biology (they
are quite fond of this, as I`m sure many of you know). He said
that if the universe was really billions of years old, the whole
night sky should be lit up with supernovae. Of course, I told
him that the light from those supernovae takes tens or hundreds
of millions of years to reach earth (sometimes longer) and that
in and of itself disproves his claim about a young universe.
However, even taking into account how long it takes light to
reach the earth from distant supernovae, why is it that we don`t
see more than we actually see? I understand that they can often
oushine whole galaxies when they are spotted. I certainly don`t
think this joker`s claims have any merit, but I would like to
present him with more evidence than I have so far.