Hugh Ross received a B.S. in physics and a Ph.D. in astronomy at the University of Toronto, and then worked here (at Caltech) for a few years as a postdoc. This was during the sixties. More recently, his primary occupation has been to argue that modern discoveries in astronomy and physics not only prove the existance of God, but also verify the creation account given in the first chapter of Genesis. He has has written several books, and has formed an organization, Reasons to Believe, and has attracted a number of scientists to work with him and spread the message.
Ross's claims fall under two catagories: First, he argues that the universe are fine-tuned for life, and that this implies a creator who designed the universe for life, because if there were no intent to form life, the likelihood of getting such a fine-tuned universe would be so tiny as to be effectively zero. Second, the first chapter of Genesis accurately describes what modern astronomy, physics, and cosmology have learned about the origin of the Universe.
Unfortunately, it takes a certain amount of expertise in physics to see the falsity of Ross's claims, and Ross speaks to the general populace, not to the physics community. He exploits the expected lack of knowledge of his audience; he can say the most outrageous things, and his audience doesn't know to refute him. Sometimes, there are people in the audience who know better, but who are taken by surprise, and so are unprepared to refute him -- me, for example, in 1990.
However, the easiest way to refute Ross on Genesis is simply to READ the first chapter. Whenever I see someone assert something such as, "The Fourth Day in Genesis is about the Earth's atmosphere becoming transparent," I want to scream, "It doesn't SAY that!"