Secrets of the dinosaur mummy

The Australian ^ | December 04, 2007 | Nicola Berkovic

[Diamond]

I liken that to buying lingerie and leaving it in the backseat of your car to test your wife's faith in you!

You don't suppose my wife would listen to me if I told her homocide is a sin, do you?

I haven't meant to abandon the thread - I'm just preoccupied with working on an upcoming Christmas Concert. While I have a chance let me say that I generally agree with your comment that the dating methods don't agree with each other on a young earth model either. I think there is something 'wrong' or out-of-wack with the dating methods, particularly the farther back you extrapolate.

btw, I don't think C-14 dating proves that the world must be older than the 6000 years.

Cordially,

[ahayes]

You don't suppose my wife would listen to me if I told her homocide is a sin, do you?

I suggest calling long distance to explain this to her. ;-)

[allmendream]

What about light from an object a hundred million light years from earth reaching us, what do you think that tells us about the possible age of the heavens?

[Diamond]

What about light from an object a hundred million light years from earth reaching us, what do you think that tells us about the possible age of the heavens?

I think such phenomena could potentially be explained by reference to relativity and gravitational time dilation in the beginning, but for detailed analysis you would have to ask someone a lot smarter than I am.

Cordially,

[allmendream]

The opinion of Astrologers is that it means the universe is at least a hundred million years old. They know all about relativity and time dilation also, but to a relatively stationary observer, a light year takes light one year to traverse. So if by ‘ask someone a lot smarter than I am’ you mean ‘Ask for the expert opinion in the field’ then the expert opinion is that it would mean the heavens are at least a hundred million years old.