Evidence: Missing Stage Three Supernova Remnants

On rare occasions, stars will erupt in massive explosions called supernovae, and the stellar material that is ejected from these explosions form debris fields that expands with time, known as supernova remnants.  The size of these debris fields tell us how long ago the stars exploded.  Interestingly, astronomers have observed plenty of supernova remnants that are hundreds of years old even thousands of years old, yet astronomers have observed suprisingly few supernova remnants that millions of years old.[1] With radio telescopes, these remnants in our galaxy should be visible for more than a million years.  However, the supernova debris fields that are seen generally account only for the past 7,000 years.[2]  Of course, to those that affirm the authority of Scriptures, this will come as no surprise, but to those that believe that the universe is billions of years old, this presents a unresolved challenge to their world view.

Supernova remnants are generally categorized into 3 stages according to energy output, which is roughly a function of age.  In general, first stage supernova remnants are less than 1000 years old.  Second stage supernova remnants are generally believed to be between 1,000 and 1,000,000 years old, and third stage supernova remnants would be more than 1,000,000 years old.

How many supernova remnants do we actually observe?  Have a look at the following table.[3]

What does this tell us about the age of the universe?  The absence of an abundance of observed third stage supernova remnants tells us that this universe is thousands of years old not billions of years old.  This is clearly evidence against a very old universe.

Again, as we saw on the Creation per Scriptures page, Mike Riddle explains it this way.

To reach a correct conclusion, we must evaluate all of the evidence, and the absence of third stage supernova remnants stands as evidence that the universe is not as old as some believe it is. 

And remember, as Shaul pointed out in his letter to the Romans (Romans 10:11), “the Scripture says, ‘Whoever puts his trust in Him shall not be put to shame.’”

---

UPDATE

It is important to note that a few stage 3 supernova remnants have been discovered, but a number of assumptions have been made to calculate their ages, which I would call into question.

An abstract for the oldest known supernova remnant (SNRs) can be found here.  http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...563..816S

I have the following concerns.

1. Because this anomaly was discovered at the outer edge of the galaxy, I am not convinced that the explosive energy of a supernova event would not push the lighter elements of the outer galaxy further and faster than predicted.  In summary, I am scrutinizing the math that would determine the age of this SNR and have reached out to accomplished creation-affirming scientists for their input as well. 
2. Based on the rate of which we see supernova events, we should see in excess of 5000 stage 3 supernova remnants instead of merely a few.  So, although evolutionists believe that the discovery of just 1 supernova remnant is sufficient to defeat this argument, they are overlooking and have not adequately responded to the great mystery associated with the fact that so few alleged stage 3 supernova remnants have been discovered. 

Concerning that supernova [GSH 138-01-94], one must first understand how it's age was established.  They took its expansion distance (180 parsecs, or about 5.5 x 10^15 kilometers) and divided it by its current expansion velocity (adjusted by a reasonable amount of deceleration as it expanded) and arrived at 4 million years.  In other words, time equals distance divided by the time it took to travel that distance (adjusted by a slowing down parameter).

Now you need to read what Dr. Brown wrote on pages 328-332.  If the universe was stretched out during the creation week and after the supernova exploded, the above calculation is not valid. 

Carefully consider all the evidence Dr. Brown presents that shows that the universe has been stretched out.

CSC reiterates what I have suspected regarding the assumptions made in the mathmatics.  The rate of expansion of this SNR may not have remained constant, yet the age was calculated as a constant possibly yielding an inaccurate estimate of its age. 

Furthermore, CSC points out evidence for a repeated stretching out of the universe, which would also skew the appearance of age.  We will explore this evidence further soon.

Check back often for updates!