1. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    08 Jun '12 19:03
    Proof the Earth is about 6000 years old:

    YouTube

    A modern young David slaying the Goliath of evolution.
    He cuts the head off.
    There is no need for creationists to prove anything now.
  2. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    08 Jun '12 19:06
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    There is no need for creationists to prove anything now.
    There never was. 🙂
  3. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    08 Jun '12 20:30
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Proof the Earth is about 6000 years old:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L72h2R4FO0k

    A modern young David slaying the Goliath of evolution.
    He cuts the head off.
    There is no need for creationists to prove anything now.
    You're so dumb you don't realise when your beliefs are being mocked through parody.

    Did you spot his username?

    ExChristian88
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    08 Jun '12 23:38
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    You're so dumb you don't realise when your beliefs are being mocked through parody.

    Did you spot his username?

    ExChristian88
    That proves nothing because his presentation was accurate. I am open to hear you refute what he said. I don't think you can. Are you up to the challenge?
  5. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91531
    09 Jun '12 00:40
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That proves nothing because his presentation was accurate. I am open to hear you refute what he said. I don't think you can. Are you up to the challenge?
    Accurate?

    Dont you get it? It was a joke
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    09 Jun '12 01:021 edit
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    Accurate?

    Dont you get it? It was a joke
    Yes, it is a joke on the evolutionists. It is making fun of the evolutionists. Don't you get it? Anyway you have not refuted anything he has said. So do you have anything to contribute that is worth considering?
  7. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91531
    09 Jun '12 01:131 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Yes, it is a joke on the evolutionists. It is making fun of the evolutionists. Don't you get it? Anyway you have refuted anything he has said. So do you have anything to contribute that is worth considering?
    I was trying to point out that the guy who wrote that was probably joking .

    What can I contribute to this sublimely titled thread?

    I could juxtapose that title with my own, 6 year old, retort and say "God is Dead", but you really couldn't get into that spirit of that line of dialogue (I'm assuming) as say a buddhist ... or just about anyone else for that matter. Your one pointed focus makes it impossible for you to consider things like paradoxes, and such which requires you to embrace at least two points of view ... so I wonder. What makes you so anti-evolution?
    You scared your world view might get shattered? I would think this is a good thing. I've had my view smashed a few times and I can tell you , it was a very illuminating, uplifting experience every time 😉


    edit: and no, I am not in league with satan in any way 😉
  8. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    09 Jun '12 01:541 edit
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    I was trying to point out that the guy who wrote that was probably joking .

    What can I contribute to this sublimely titled thread?

    I could juxtapose that title with my own, 6 year old, retort and say "God is Dead", but you really couldn't get into that spirit of that line of dialogue (I'm assuming) as say a buddhist ... or just about anyone else ing experience every time 😉


    edit: and no, I am not in league with satan in any way 😉
    I know the young fellow on the video was joking. He was making fun of evolutionists. That was plain to see for any sane person not under the influence of Satan's lies. However,

    Proof the Earth is about 6000 years old:

    YouTube

    Still waiting for the refutation.
  9. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    09 Jun '12 02:14
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That proves nothing because his presentation was accurate. I am open to hear you refute what he said. I don't think you can. Are you up to the challenge?
    sure. present your case and we'll tear it down for you.
  10. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    09 Jun '12 04:53
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    sure. present your case and we'll tear it down for you.
    Proof the Earth is about 6000 years old:

    YouTube

    Still waiting for the refutation.
  11. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    09 Jun '12 17:21
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Proof the Earth is about 6000 years old:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L72h2R4FO0k

    Still waiting for the refutation.
    still waiting for you to make a case. i haven't heard any arguments from you yet. anytime you're ready, go right ahead.
  12. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    09 Jun '12 19:331 edit
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    still waiting for you to make a case. i haven't heard any arguments from you yet. anytime you're ready, go right ahead.
    He has one argument, one statement really, not an argument, 'god did it'.

    He is so dim he doesn't realize that kid's video is a parody. He can't tell real from not real. Pretty clear about that.
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    09 Jun '12 21:39
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    still waiting for you to make a case. i haven't heard any arguments from you yet. anytime you're ready, go right ahead.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

    From the article the main figures we need to consider are:
    1. Sun fusion rate - 620 million metric tons
    2. Mass-energy conversion rate - 4.26 million metric tons
    3. Age of the Sun - 5.57 billion years
    4. Mass of sun today - 2×10^30 kilograms

    To determine if the kid is right we need to calculate how big the Sun should have been 5.57 billion years ago. The kid said the sun was 6 billion years old verses 5.57 billion years old. The only other figure he stated was 5 million tons of hydrogen every second, which does appear to be an over-estimate of the 4.26 million tons stated by wikipedia. He appears to have rounded up instead of down. But the kid claims the Sun would have swallowed the Earth if it had been big enough to have had that much hydrogen a few million years ago using his figures.

    So can you calculate what the mass of the Sun was 5.57 billion years ago? It is now 330,000 times bigger that the Earth, according to this article.
  14. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    09 Jun '12 23:181 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

    From the article the main figures we need to consider are:
    1. Sun fusion rate - 620 million metric tons
    2. Mass-energy conversion rate - 4.26 million metric tons
    3. Age of the Sun - 5.57 billion years
    4. Mass of sun today - 2×10^30 kilograms

    To determine if the kid is right we need to calculate how big the Sun ...[text shortened]... .57 billion years ago? It is now 330,000 times bigger that the Earth, according to this article.
    Using the Wiki numbers for now as they look at cursory glance to be accurate...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

    A trivial calculation for anyone with any ability to do maths whatsoever will show that if the
    sun is converting mass to energy at a constant rate of 4.26E9 kg/s it will lose mass at a rate
    of appx...

    2.556E11 kg per minute
    1.534E13 kg per hour
    3.681E14 kg per day
    1.344E17 kg per year
    1.344E20 kg per Ka
    1.344E23 kg per Ma
    1.344E26 kg per Ga
    and 6.184E26 kg over a 4.6 Ga lifetime to present.

    Present mass appx 1.9891E30 kg which means assuming a constant mass loss rate at present
    levels means that the sun has lost a total of 0.031% of it's present mass.


    However even a basic knowledge of stellar mechanics would tell you that stars energy output
    (and rate of mass loss) is not constant and in fact increases over a stars lifetime.

    Thus the historic rates would have been lower and thus the total mass loss to date would also
    be correspondingly lower.


    EDIT: I should note however that the sun does have the additional mass loss mechanism of solar wind.
    However the mass lost from this is an equally tiny proportion of the suns total mass.
  15. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    09 Jun '12 23:44
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Using the Wiki numbers for now as they look at cursory glance to be accurate...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

    A trivial calculation for anyone with any ability to do maths whatsoever will show that if the
    sun is converting mass to energy at a constant rate of 4.26E9 kg/s it will lose mass at a rate
    of appx...

    2.556E11 kg per minute
    1.53 ...[text shortened]... uld have been lower and thus the total mass loss to date would also
    be correspondingly lower.
    You are trying to answer the wrong question. The question is how big was the Sun 4.57 billion years ago?
Back to Top