How can YEC's ignore ALL the data of old Earth?

Originally posted by RJHinds
God took care of that. Remember the earth was made out of the water. 😏

If God took care of it then we return to the problem of a young earth being made to look old. You cannot avoid this problem if you insist on a 6000 year old universe.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Information from ancient astronomy and astrology seems to indicate the stars were closer to the earth in the ancient past or else they had much better eyes than we do today.

The difference would have been a LOT more than 'the stars seemed closer'. There would have been no night and no day. The stars would have fried the Earth because all those stars would have been so close we would have been in a sea of stars probably a dozen or more of them between here and Mars.

Also, you think they had better eyes. The real reason was skies were much clearer then because there was a lot less pollution in the atmosphere. Try doing astronomy in downtown Philly.

Originally posted by DeepThought
If God took care of it then we return to the problem of a young earth being made to look old. You cannot avoid this problem if you insist on a 6000 year old universe.

I don't see a problem with God's creations looking old to men today. God created the fruit trees with fruit and the seeds in them in one day. God created most of the animals and man, male and female, in mature form, not as babies, in a day. So I see no problem in God creating the whole universe in the same way.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I don't see a problem with God's creations looking old to men today. God created the fruit trees with fruit and the seeds in them in one day. God created most of the animals and man, male and female, in mature form, not as babies, in a day. So I see no problem in God creating the whole universe in the same way.

If the universe looks like it is 13 billion years old but is in fact only 6,000 years old then God is deceiving us. Why the deceit?

Originally posted by sonhouse
The difference would have been a LOT more than 'the stars seemed closer'. There would have been no night and no day. The stars would have fried the Earth because all those stars would have been so close we would have been in a sea of stars probably a dozen or more of them between here and Mars.

Also, you think they had better eyes. The real reason was sk ...[text shortened]... ecause there was a lot less pollution in the atmosphere. Try doing astronomy in downtown Philly.

You forget that the stars were not made until the forth day. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
You forget that the stars were not made until the forth day. 😏

So, what, everything was fried on the fourth day instead of immediately on the first day? Where's the evidence that all of creation was fried some 6000 years ago?

Originally posted by DeepThought
If the universe looks like it is 13 billion years old but is in fact only 6,000 years old then God is deceiving us. Why the deceit?

I don't see any deception by God. God told Moses to write down the information so that we can know the approximate age of the earth. Man has not always believed the earth was 4 billion years old. That only came about after the theory of evolution when longer periods of past time was needed.

One can not tell the difference by just looking between a 6,000 year old earth and a 4 billion year old earth. The same goes for a 60 million year old dinosaur bone and a 4 thousand year old dinosaur bone.

Originally posted by C Hess
So, what, everything was fried on the fourth day instead of immediately on the first day? Where's the evidence that all of creation was fried some 6000 years ago?

I did not say everything was fried on the forth creation day. I said the stars were made then.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not say everything was fried on the forth creation day. I said the stars were made then.

How far from earth would all the billions upon billions of stars in the universe have been on the fourth day, and why don't you think that that would have any physical consequences on this corner (or center I suppose?) of the universe?

Also, why have some stars clumped together fairly close to earth, producing a different center in our galaxy, while other stars have clumped together so far away from us we can just barely figure out that they're out there, with all the stars in between forming countless galaxies of their own?

Originally posted by DeepThought
If the universe looks like it is 13 billion years old but is in fact only 6,000 years old then God is deceiving us. Why the deceit?

Because if there is a god he is a little shyte.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Because if there is a god he is a little shyte.

It all boils down to the fact that YEC's are too pig headed to see the forest for the trees. They refuse to see that a deity able to create whole universes with a thought would have ZERO motive to fool such creatures as humans and all the other intelligent life forms around the universe, whatever and wherever they are.

It goes back to the central arrogance of the religious set, that humans are so high up the spiritual ladder this deity HAS to fool them.

It is utter nonsense, of course.

A deity bringing into life an entire universe would be so far above any life forms brought forth inside that universe it would be like humans having an ant colony.

YEC's cannnot accept that, thinking humans are just WAY to high on the spiritual totem pole for that to happen.

We would be ants to such a deity and it would have zero motive for making a 6000 year old universe just LOOK 13 billion years old.

This is the modern equivalent of the 500 year old flat Earthers who would not accept the obvious, that the world is round.

SAME THING AS YEC's.

Originally posted by C Hess
How far from earth would all the billions upon billions of stars in the universe have been on the fourth day, and why don't you think that that would have any physical consequences on this corner (or center I suppose?) of the universe?

Also, why have some stars clumped together fairly close to earth, producing a different center in our galaxy, while other ...[text shortened]... t that they're out there, with all the stars in between forming countless galaxies of their own?

Only God knows.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Only God knows.

So, you're take on this is that no matter what we see that contradicts the genesis, that's just how god did it, and who knows why or how? See, I'm fine with that, but you're the one claiming that we can use science to support the bible, when we obviously can't. Intelligent design is creationism in disguise, and creationism is so far removed from science and rational thinking that it's laughable.

Originally posted by C Hess
So, you're take on this is that no matter what we see that contradicts the genesis, that's just how god did it, and who knows why or how? See, I'm fine with that, but you're the one claiming that we can use science to support the bible, when we obviously can't. Intelligent design is creationism in disguise, and creationism is so far removed from science and rational thinking that it's laughable.

I agree that creationism requires intelligent design. However, science means knowledge. Rational thinking and knowledge are necessary for intelligent design. So they are all connected. It is the science fiction of the theory of evolution over billions of years that does not fit with reality that is laughable and stupid.

Some evolutionists have said that we must remind ourselves that things in nature that appear to be designed really were not, but just evolved magically to just appear designed. This seems like self deceit to me.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I agree that creationism requires intelligent design. However, science means knowledge. Rational thinking and knowledge are necessary for intelligent design. So they are all connected. It is the science fiction of the theory of evolution over billions of years that does not fit with reality that is laughable and stupid.

Some evolutionists have said th ...[text shortened]... ere not, but just evolved magically to just appear designed. This seems like self deceit to me.

Magically? Show me the link to whatever evolution scientist who said that. Magical is reserved for the religious set, not science.