Since I think it’s really important to practice Proverbs 18:17, I did some background research.
The first thing I notice is that the CreationWiki article on red shift quantization relies on unpublished research from no earlier than 14 years ago. The published sources it cites are from even farther back, decades earlier. Thus the sample sizes relied upon are tiny and subject to sampling bias.
I continued by looking through credible sources identified by a Google search. What I found it this: Now that robust samples (for example from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey) are available and properly cataloged, the quantization effect has largely disappeared. To the extent red-shift quantization of quasars does exist, there are good explanations for it:
- massive-scale supergalactic structures
- quantum mechanics-based quantization of H emission spectra
I quote from a recently minted astrophysics Ph.D:
Throughout the 2000’s conflicting results were published using the same data. The conflict seems to center on the selection effects of the surveys, and the corrections applied to account for them. I did a quick search for ‘redshift quantisation’ on the Arxiv and found no papers since 2009, which suggests the supporting data has been comprehensibly discredited, or explained away by natural mechanisms.
There are two explanations for the quantization that do not require exotic cosmologies. The first is the large scale clustering of galaxies that traces the cosmic web. The walls and filaments formed in this web leads to groupings of galaxies around specific redshifts along the line of sight. The second explanation is the quantisation of emission from Hydrogen, known as the Lyman series. Since photons can only be released with certain energies, the measured redshifts are also quantised (this is only true in low pressure and temperature environments, otherwise pressure and thermal broadening occur).
Source
The supposed problem of red-shift quantization was a great sound bite from a “creation science” website that seemed to make sense. However, the problem disappears upon careful examination by the scientific community.
This is consistent with my experience with “creation science”: it produces pithy sound bites, but falls apart upon careful examination.
I do not have time to carefully examine every point you made, my friend @cewoldt . Now that I have given you an example of how you can put Proverbs 18:17 into practice, though, you can apply the practice yourself. It will take some time and effort, but you can do it. And if you find anything confusing, there’s a good community here that can help answer your questions.
Best,
Chris