Posted on 01/30/2009 10:54:50 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Since the Big Bang story of the origin of the universe has been refuted by a host of external observations and internal contradictions,1 secular science has been forced to postulate additional, exceedingly improbable events to keep it afloat. One of these is “inflation,” which attempts to explain the apparent uniformity of the universe.2 But new observations by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe are forcing cosmologists to revamp inflation, at the cost of inventing yet another miraculous event to prop it up...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Produce your proof or stop your accusations re lying.
Answer my questions first. I want to know your prior commitments on the subject to be FULLY on record and disclosed.
There has been zero young earth “evidence” produced by anyone who is not a disciple of Bishop Ussher...
There have been plenty of “Yabbuts” — but not a single shred of replicable or measurable actual evidence.
PS How long have you known DallasMike?
The light-year has everything to do with the fact that the universe is older than claimed in that mental barf performed by Bishop Ushher back in the 1600s.
How did light from stars/galaxies far more than 6000 light-years distant from us reach Earth?
==The light-year has everything to do with the fact that the universe is older than claimed in that mental barf performed by Bishop Ushher back in the 1600s...How did light from stars/galaxies far more than 6000 light-years distant from us reach Earth?
But what if the modern Big Bang cosmology is based on an ideology that artificially rules out distant starlight from reaching a young earth, a young solar system, and a young Milky Way?
Why should I answer your questions? You still haven't answered my question 'way back in #230 -- or DallasMike's multiple queries re your profession and educational background.
Good night.
Why on earth would the presence or absence of my educational or professional background cause you to shy away from moral, philosophical, or spiritual questions?
Before I retire for the evening, I'd like to ask,
Can anyone interpret this nonsense Yabbut; and is there even a shred of rational validity anywhere in it?
The elephant in the room that people usually miss when talking about YEC is, strange as it first would seem, eschatology. I think the main purpose of Young Earth Creationism is to validate the millennialist (Premillennialist , Postmillennialist) view of the Last Things. Premillennialism especially places earth history on a 7,000 year timeline. YEC is just an attempt to give millennialism (in particular premillennialism) "scientific" credibility.
Christians with an amillennialist view don't have history on a neat timeline and they don't profess to have special knowledge of the future (other than that Christ said he would return "quickly," but he did not give us his schedule) so the age of the earth is of little theological concern to amillennialists. And not all amillennialists are liberals. Not all millennialists believe in YEC, but many (especially premillennialists, do).
If you are a Christian who is basing your salvation (or at least your sanctification) on your correct reading of the "signs of the times" (rather than on the work of Christ) then you will be likely to adopt a YEC view because this fits in with your view of the future.
So while it is good to refute the young earth theory on a scientific basis, keep in mind that the true, usually hidden motivation of YEC is based on a peculiar eschatology.
I didn’t read any of that. I did read John chapter 6 this morning. I’ fixin to read Proverbs 3.
I concur that God would not create a hoax. So what’s with dinosaur fossils?
Your premise that we shouldn’t trust our own eyes is ridiculous to me.
Where did the creation story come from? Which prophet revealed it? I’m no theologian, but of all the times in the Bible when God spoke directly to someone, I don’t think it ever included specifics about creation. In the New Testament, our Lord refers to it almost not at all. That tells me that the “hows” of creation simply aren’t that important.
Having said that, let’s assume that God did sit down some wise men 6000 years ago and explain specifically how he made the Heavens and Earth. Their frame of reference would certainly be so limited that their retelling would be simplistic to say the least.
I’m not choosing science over scripture, because I don’t see any conflict.
This is a fine question, so let's look at the appearance. There are 13 year olds that are 6' and 180 lbs., but they are not men.
Let's do an exam.
-We X-ray the man and he has several healed broken bones that are indicative of having healed while he was still growing.
-His teeth are worn down in a manner than usually takes 40 years.
-He has arthritis in his hands.
-His vision has progressed so that he is now far sighted.
-His skin is wrinkled.
-He is mostly bald.
Could God create such a man? Of course he could, but why would He?
This is posted in the News forum, and you are the original poster of the thread. There are not limitations here like the Religion forum has about Caucus/Devotional threads. Any member in good standing can post to this thread within the posting guidelines.
A list of lies that god wold have had to provide if YEC was
.True.
1. The calculated speed of light is wrong. Light would have to travel at 1.0 x 10 to the 9th power faster than is calculated and observed to provide the images of the stars that we see each night.
Dinosaur bones are a lie. I own some trilobyte fossils, by the way. The number of fossils in our posession is in the 10s of millions, mostly fairly simplistic animals (the University of Missouri in 1968 had 2 million. Their collections has expanded dramaticfally since then.) If you go to some quarries whose rock is sedimentary, you can see thousands of fossils on a single boulder. If you break open the boulder, you will see another several thousands. They are not rare, by any stretch of the imagination. Is the Tyrranosaurus Rex a figment of God’s imagination? How about a pterosaur?
Decay rates of radio isotopes are a big joke played on us. And about 6,000 years ago decay rates were 1.0 X 10 to the 12th power faster. ( Don’t hit me on the math here, just an illustration..)
The red shift that is quite obvious when we look at galaxies outside our own is fake or is due to some reason other than receding galaxies. And that red shift is quite obvious. With a homemade spectrograph you could probably pick it up (amateur astronomers are exceptionally clever. You wouldn’t believe some of the handbuilt equipment that we use.)
(Our local group of galaxies show less recession from each other due to the gravitational attraction to each other. Our local group is also converging on a common point called “The Great Attractor”.)
The radio spectrum (think in terms of 400 MHz band) also runs at a speed much faster than light. We see many millions of light years in the radio spectrum. And we see in detail.
Xrays travel at a speed that are magnitudes greater than the speed of light.
In order to “prove” YEC, we have to dispense with all of these nasty factoids. In fact, we have to dispense with most of our current understanding of physics, chemistry and biology in order to make the data fit.
So...... if we do that, our conversation ends because our computers can’t work. They are based on our current physics and if we reject physics, this conversation that we are having is obviously another lie. It never happened.
(Note to Jesus and our Father. These points ar for illustration only. We know that You and Your Father never lie. Ever. Period, no exceptions.)
You see, I also perceive a 7,000 year period appointed to Adamic man (also an early Christian belief for hundreds of years) – but by my spiritual understanding that calendar didn’t start ticking down 6000 years + 6 days ago but rather it began at the moment Adam was banished to mortality (Genesis 4.)
This understanding of time has a counterpart in scientific theory, i.e. relativity. Time is relative to the observer traveling a worldline “in” space/time. For a photon traveling at the speed of light, no time passes (null path.) Moreover, from a perspective beyond space/time, time itself is merely a geometric property of a manifestation in space/time. (Tegmark’s Level IV Universe, et al)
By my understanding, the first three chapters of Genesis are written from the Creator’s perspective: namely, the Word (God) was in the beginning (John 1,) God was the only observer of Creation, that those Scriptures speak of the spiritual realm as well as the physical realm, that Eden was preeminently in the spiritual realm. For me, the location of the tree of life [midst of both Eden and Paradise] is particularly illuminating:
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God. – Revelation 2:7
Indeed, to me the physical realm is rich with analogical knowledge. The picture of the man is not the man but we can learn a few things about the man by observing the picture, the temple on earth is not the temple in heaven, etc. And we can absorb many spiritual truths by observing analogies and metaphors in the physical realm, e.g. Christ’s parable of the sower (Matt 13.)
The Jewish calendar also begins with Adam though I believe they begin counting when they believe Adam was created (as if he was created in the physical realm alone) and not when he fell. Since I perceive Genesis 1-3 speaking of both the spiritual and physical realms, and Adam being created in the spiritual realm and banished to the physical realm, I would not propose a birth date for him relative to our perspective “in” space/time.
The current Jewish year is 5769. If we perceive the Sabbath as also prophecy (Colossians 2:16-17) and Christ’s thousand year reign on earth (Revelation 20:16) as fulfilling the Jewish belief that the Messiah is a man anointed by God who shall rule Israel at peace with her neighbors, then using the Jewish calendar, Christ is due to return again in approximately two centuries and change.
The Christian calendar however accounts for approximately 6,000 years having passed and thus Christ is due at any time.
That said, man is prone to error and both should be seen as estimates. The main difference between them is that the Jewish calendar (which was revised within a few centuries A.D.) counts 5 Persian emperors over 53 years as compared to the Christian calendar which counts 13 Persian emperors over 207 years.
==Can anyone interpret this nonsense Yabbut; and is there even a shred of rational validity anywhere in it?
It’s actually a quite legitimate question. For as it turns out, modern Big Bang cosmology is indeed based on an ideology that a priori rules out distant starlight from reaching a young earth, a young solar system, and a young Milky Way.
==1. The calculated speed of light is wrong. Light would have to travel at 1.0 x 10 to the 9th power faster than is calculated and observed to provide the images of the stars that we see each night.
You obviously are not acqainted with creationist cosmology, otherwise you wouldn’t be using such outdated arguments. And speaking of cosmology, the modern Big Bang theory has a light problem of its own:
In the big bang model, the universe begins in an infinitely small state called a singularity, which then rapidly expands. According to the big bang model, when the universe is still very small, it would develop different temperatures in different locations (Figure 1). Let’s suppose that point A is hot and point B is cold. Today, the universe has expanded (Figure 2), and points A and B are now widely separated.
However, the universe has an extremely uniform temperature at great distance— beyond the farthest known galaxies. In other words, points A and B have almost exactly the same temperature today. We know this because we see electromagnetic radiation coming from all directions in space in the form of microwaves. This is called the “cosmic microwave background” (CMB). The frequencies of radiation have a characteristic temperature of 2.7 K (-455°F) and are extremely uniform in all directions. The temperature deviates by only one part in 105.
The problem is this: How did points A and B come to be the same temperature? They can do this only by exchanging energy. This happens in many systems: consider an ice cube placed in hot coffee. The ice heats up and the coffee cools down by exchanging energy. Likewise, point A can give energy to point B in the form of electromagnetic radiation (light), which is the fastest way to transfer energy since nothing can travel faster than light. However, using the big bang supporters’ own assumptions, including uniformitarianism and naturalism, there has not been enough time in 14 billion years to get light from A to B; they are too far apart. This is a light travel-time problem—and a very serious one. After all, A and B have almost exactly the same temperature today, and so must have exchanged light multiple times.
Big bang supporters have proposed a number of conjectures which attempt to solve the big bang’s light travel-time problem. One of the most popular is called “inflation.” In “inflationary” models, the universe has two expansion rates: a normal rate and a fast inflation rate. The universe begins with the normal rate, which is actually quite rapid, but is slow by comparison to the next phase. Then it briefly enters the inflation phase, where the universe expands much more rapidly. At a later time, the universe goes back to the normal rate. This all happens early on, long before stars and galaxies form.
The inflation model allows points A and B to exchange energy (during the first normal expansion) and to then be pushed apart during the inflation phase to the enormous distances at which they are located today. But the inflation model amounts to nothing more than storytelling with no supporting evidence at all. It is merely speculation designed to align the big bang to conflicting observations. Moreover, inflation adds an additional set of problems and difficulties to the big bang model, such as the cause of such inflation and a graceful way to turn it off. An increasing number of secular astrophysicists are rejecting inflation for these reasons and others. Clearly, the horizon problem remains a serious light travel-time problem for the big bang.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-starlight-prove
What is your understanding of time with respect to Adam’s existence before he was “banished to mortality”?
Your typification of one part in 105 variation in CMB temp being a small variation is a human viewpoint. The variation is actually quite large.
Which is why the BB theories (there are more than one) are constantly being reworked to accomodate new, more accurate data as I have stated before.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.