[GunRunner]

So where do the majority of creationists throw their weight? Young earth creationism or old earth creationism?

6,000 years vs. 4.5 billion years isn't really within the margin of error. Someone is very, very, very wrong.

[circlecity]

"6,000 years vs. 4.5 billion years isn't really within the margin of error. Someone is very, very, very wrong."

According to general relativity both could be right. Time is relative.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”So where do the majority of creationists throw their weight? Young earth creationism or old earth creationism?
6,000 years vs. 4.5 billion years isn't really within the margin of error. Someone is very, very, very wrong. “

Nye brought up the rather obvious point that light from distant stars (that we see) takes millions of years (or more) to reach earth.

That is an obvious example where Young Earth narrative falls apart.

I read a creation book once that argued that God created the light on route so we could see it immediately, but if you can believe that then its perfectly logical to assume that he created everything on Earth to look old, as he did the star light (it also means the star light really doesn't come from stars), if that's your argument.

And if they believe that then Creation Science makes absolutely no sense at all, which is the case for the young Earthers obviously.

I guess they could argue that stars that are millions of miles away are really only a few miles away.