Speed of light question caught on Phy.org forum:

Originally posted by twhitehead
I thought you were quite clear too, but then you denied having said what I thought you said, so I am asking for clarification.

You said:
[b]Or when they were created the light stream that would have taken billions of
years was made at the same time,

This to me says that you consider it possible for light to have been created in space in such a way that it looks to us like it is coming from stars.
Is this what you meant or not?[/b]

The universe when it was created was done as a watch gets made, all the
pieces were put in place and it works. Adam when he was a made was not
put together as a baby but an adult, so yes looking at him at the time he
was made would have been to look like some one older than he really was.

The light from the stars and the stars were created at the same time as they
were to be signs for us. Again, what good would a sign be if we have to wait
a very long time to see them?

Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
The universe when it was created was done as a watch gets made, all the
pieces were put in place and it works. Adam when he was a made was not
put together as a baby but an adult, so yes looking at him at the time he
was made would have been to look like some one older than he really was.

The light from the stars and the stars were created at the same ...[text shortened]... us. Again, what good would a sign be if we have to wait
a very long time to see them?

Kelly

God could have fooled me...

He actually created things so as it would appear that the laws of physics actually worked. And everything just to fool us. Why didn't I think of that? 🙄

Originally posted by KellyJay
The light from the stars and the stars were created at the same time as they
were to be signs for us. Again, what good would a sign be if we have to wait
a very long time to see them?

Kelly

You seem to be carefully avoiding actually being specific. Are you or are you not suggesting that it is a possibility that the light was created by God in transit as if it came from stars?

If you are, then do you admit that anything 'seen' by observing such light, did not in fact exist?

Would you also allow the possibility that fossils were also created as fossils rather than them being proof of creatures past?
Is it equally possible that the whole history of the planet could be part of the fabricated watch?

Science is the work of the devil and exists only to tempt the righteous into oblivion. Do not be fooled.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You seem to be carefully avoiding actually being specific. Are you or are you not suggesting that it is a possibility that the light was created by God in transit as if it came from stars?

If you are, then do you admit that anything 'seen' by observing such light, did not in fact exist?

Would you also allow the possibility that fossils were also cre ...[text shortened]... t equally possible that the whole history of the planet could be part of the fabricated watch?

I've been specific.
You can read and post what you find confusing.
If you want to change the subject to fossils just know you are doing just that.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I've been specific.
You can read and post what you find confusing.
If you want to change the subject to fossils just know you are doing just that.
Kelly

Weasel words do not make for an argument. You attempt to point out logical flaws in the position others have taken, but their position is taken on the basis of careful measurement and study. Yours on the basis of a quick guess made by a medieval ideologist hacks' reading of some geneologies in the Old Testament. Do not pretend that it is they who have made a quick and foolish choice. The prayers of your left brain may well be answered by your right brain but will still not change the fact that the world is patently older than 6,000 years.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I've been specific.
You can read and post what you find confusing.
If you want to change the subject to fossils just know you are doing just that.
Kelly

I did read what I found confusing, and in the hope of clarifying rephrased it a bit and asked for clarification.
Will you answer the questions or not?
There are three basic questions:
1. Do you consider it a possibility that starlight was created in such a way that it appears to have come from an actual star.
2. Do you realize that this means that the apparent star observed when looking at the starlight did not exist.
3. Do you accept the possibility that similar observations of a non-existent past may be possible in other circumstances? (I gave fossils as an example).

Originally posted by twhitehead
I did read what I found confusing, and in the hope of clarifying rephrased it a bit and asked for clarification.
Will you answer the questions or not?
There are three basic questions:
1. Do you consider it a possibility that starlight was created in such a way that it appears to have come from an actual star.
2. Do you realize that this means that the ...[text shortened]... s of a non-existent past may be possible in other circumstances? (I gave fossils as an example).

1. Do you consider it a possibility that starlight was created in such a way that it appears to have come from an actual star.

You didn't understand the answer I gave for that question?
My answer from before:

The universe when it was created was done as a watch gets made, all the
pieces were put in place and it works. Adam when he was a made was not
put together as a baby but an adult, so yes looking at him at the time he
was made would have been to look like some one older than he really was.

2. Do you realize that this means that the apparent star observed when looking at the starlight did not exist.

No, it simply means that the light and the star were created at the same
time.

3. Do you accept the possibility that similar observations of a non-existent past may be possible in other circumstances? (I gave fossils as an example).

You have some text that says we are going to find fossils? If not I think it
is a good assumption to take all we find as something that occured after
the beginning of all things.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
1. Do you consider it a possibility that starlight was created in such a way that it appears to have come from an actual star.

You didn't understand the answer I gave for that question?
My answer from before:

The universe when it was created was done as a watch gets made, all the
pieces were put in place and it works. Adam when he was a made was no ...[text shortened]... mption to take all we find as something that occured after
the beginning of all things.
Kelly

Let me comment the answers of Kelly:

(1) He was asked about if the starlight was created in flight. He answer that Adam was constructed as a whatchmaker construct a watch. I don't think he understood the question.

(2) On this one he answers as he beievd that the speed of light is infinit, or instantaneous. His frist 'no' and his following answer contradicts eachother in the distance of a few words.

(3) This answer make me think that KJ thinks that god created the fossils at its proper place, at the correct sediment layer only to fool evolutionists into believe that evolution is the correct theory. Why should He do that? What purpose does this serve?

KellyJay shows himself as the ultimate extrem creationist, the most extrem imaginable. As from the psychological vewpoint I am very much interested how he came to be this kind of christian.

Originally posted by KellyJay
1. Do you consider it a possibility that starlight was created in such a way that it appears to have come from an actual star.

You didn't understand the answer I gave for that question?
My answer from before:

The universe when it was created was done as a watch gets made, all the
pieces were put in place and it works. Adam when he was a made was no ...[text shortened]... mption to take all we find as something that occured after
the beginning of all things.
Kelly

So in your theology the stars and the whole universe came into being at once, presumably with effect before cause, since what you are suggesting is the universe popped into place as if it were 10 billion years old or whatever but the light from a given star had to have been placed in all places at once, then started propagating from its proper positions, in other words, a star at position A which happened to be 5 billion light years away popped into place with all of its light that would have traveled in all that time simply put into place and the universe just started being the universe at that point? So light would had to have an infinite velocity but only at the start, putting effect before cause. Is that the gist of it?

How would such a god get things going and all those fossils in place and all the light looking like it was coming from when and where it was supposed to be coming from, but for all life forms in the universe. It seems to me to be possible for a god with infinite powers to do as you suggest FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW but how could such a god arrange it to fool beings say 10 billion light years away from us and they went through their evolution or whatever you want to call it but light for them would seem oddly skewed as if we were the most important ones in the universe to fool. What about the other life forms that surely exist, they can't all be fooled at the same time, the patterns of effect before cause would show up on the others.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You didn't understand the answer I gave for that question?

No, I do not understand it, hence my repeated requests for clarification and your repeated attempts at avoiding clarifying.

No, it simply means that the light and the star were created at the same time.
Let me explain as you don't seem to get it:
We see what appears to be a star exploding 1 billion light years away. An astronomer concludes that up until 1 billion years ago there was a star, but since then, there wasn't.
Under your suggestion that the light was created in transit at a more recent date, that star never existed. We are seeing a star that never existed and an explosion that never took place.
To put it in your analogy:
Adam has a scar on his left leg from a hunting expedition that he never went on as a child. He also has memories in his head of the hunting expedition and is still scared of warthogs. Without childhood memories, the watch is not complete.

You have some text that says we are going to find fossils? If not I think it
is a good assumption to take all we find as something that occured after
the beginning of all things.
Kelly
So God only invented a history of the universe for some items (stars) because he needed to put some text about it in the Bible? Or are you saying that all observable history can be regarded as valid unless there is text that contradicts it in which case it may be suspect? In fact the text in question (that we will see stars) is not even in contradiction with the existence of stars it is the rest of genesis that suggests a young universe that creates the contradiction.
I disagree. I think that if there is good reason to doubt our observations of stars then we should have equally good reason to doubt our observation of fossils. If God went to the trouble of making up an imaginary history of billions of years for billions of galaxies each containing billions of stars, billions of planets, and billions of billions of rocks, then a couple of fossils on earth would not be too difficult.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So light would had to have an infinite velocity but only at the start, ....

Infinite velocity light would not work. It would give us a static picture of all stars further than the age of the universe in light years. Instead, we see a dynamic universe with pulsars and exploding stars billions of light years away.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, I do not understand it, hence my repeated requests for clarification and your repeated attempts at avoiding clarifying.

[b]No, it simply means that the light and the star were created at the same time.
Let me explain as you don't seem to get it:
We see what appears to be a star exploding 1 billion light years away. An astronomer concludes tha ...[text shortened]... d billions of billions of rocks, then a couple of fossils on earth would not be too difficult.[/b]

What you see are stars and star light, the billions of years is between your
ears.

Your Adam story comes from where, the same place you get the billions of
years, between your ears? Anyone anywhere talking about memories that
they never had? God didn't invent the billion year history, that is your
doing and others who think they know what occured so long ago as if they
were there or know what happened because they can look at something
in the here and now, and that means they grasp what occured billions of
years ago.

God spoke things happened you can accept it or reject it, or make up
something or believe something someone else says. You know as well as
I do science does not address the beginning of all things, it can only start
in-process at the Big Bang, if you have another theory, fine lets hear it.
I'm sure someone's imagination will some day suggest it all could have
happened some other way to.
Kelly

Originally posted by sonhouse
So in your theology the stars and the whole universe came into being at once, presumably with effect before cause, since what you are suggesting is the universe popped into place as if it were 10 billion years old or whatever but the light from a given star had to have been placed in all places at once, then started propagating from its proper positions, in ...[text shortened]... ll be fooled at the same time, the patterns of effect before cause would show up on the others.

I'm suggesting it was created, and all the parts were doing their part as
they should for it to do one thing we all agree it does, support life here.
You assign 10 billion years, that is your number! You can support it any
way you want, but it is a still between the ears, reality does not require
you to be right or wrong in your assumptions for it to be what it is! So if the
universe is 7K or 10B our thoughts on how old it is right or wrong are just
that, our thoughts. If God created the universe and you mis-read the
universe around you, to bad, if God didn't and I get it wrong, oh well.

Fossils are another topic.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
What you see are stars and star light, the billions of years is between your
ears.

I never claimed billions of years. I only claimed that it appears to be billions of years. You have not disputed the apparent distance to the stars. You have suggested that a star that appears to be billions of light years away is in fact billions of light years away, does currently exist, but was created more recently than the time it would take for light to get from it to us and that the light we see was created in transit as if it came from the star (which it didn't).
I am pointing out that anything seen by observing the light in question, did not exist and constitutes an invented history.

God didn't invent the billion year history, that is your
doing and others who think they know what occured so long ago as if they
were there or know what happened because they can look at something
in the here and now, and that means they grasp what occured billions of
years ago.
It was your claim not mine that God invented a billion year history. The fact that you did not realize what you were claiming in your watch analogy does not make the invention mine.
I don't claim to 'grasp what happened' I am merely pointing out that it looks to me like the light in the sky at night is coming from stars whereas you are telling me that it isn't and that almost everything I see up there is part of a non-existent history.