Originally posted by RJHinds
All the stars they see were made 6,000 years ago. 😏
... NASA should not be considered an authority on the age of the earth and the universe.
Your claims are seriously detached from reality. NASA's measurements have been corroborated, at least in terms of order of magnitude, by every reputable astronomical university and research institute round the world.
They [NASA] are being deceived by Satan and his demons.
Your claim smacks of paranoia.
Originally posted by SuzianneI seen it on TV. What makes you think you know so much about it?
You really are thick as a brick, aren't you? Planned Parenthood does much, much more than just abortions. Many poor women in underprivileged areas depend on PP clinics for their primary healthcare. That is why they receive taxpayer dollars from the feds.
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayBy that logic, everything would be the same if the Big Bang had happened 6,000 years ago and no God were involved. But the available evidence does not support the 6,000-year hypothesis, with or without God.
Would all of your massively coherent evidence still be there if God created the universe
as a fully functioning system with everything going through their processes as they are now?
By massively coherent evidence I do not mean only light-year measurements about the current estimate of the size of the universe.
The decay of radio-active isotopes, the stratification of layers of ice under the polar ice caps, the rate of genetic mutations in plants and animals, tectonic and volcanic activity, the carving out of canyons and valleys, continental drift, alterations of Earth's magnetosphere, fossils of animals and plants long extinct, the composition of comets and other debris orbiting our sun, ... these phenomena and countless others fit into a pattern which together are solid evidence for deep time, orders of magnitude greater than a mere few thousands of years.
The list of such phenomena which presuppose deep time is really very long, and all of it would have to be differently explained if the Earth were only about 6,000 years old. There would have to be plausible explanations, in physics and astronomy and chemistry and biology and mathematics and zoology and so on and so on, across the board, to shrink deep-time explanations into a 6,000-year explanation.
There would have to be a plausible explanation how light could have traveled much faster than it does now, for the first 1,000 years or so, and then somehow slowed down to its present speed. There would have to be a plausible explanation how uranium and other radioactive isotopes could have decayed very much faster than they do at present, for the first 1,000 years or so, then somehow these chemical processes slowed down to their present rates. There would have to be a plausible explanation how layers of soil and ice built up at a very much faster rate than they do now, for the first 1,000 years or so, and then slowed to their present rate (sorry, a world-wide flood doesn't explain that, and there is no evidence for such a flood anyway). And so on and so on for each phenomenon which makes sense if one supposes deep-time but makes little sense if one supposes a span of only 6,000 years.
In short, the 6,000-year hypothesis requires that the basic laws of nature must have changed sometime in the last 6,000 years, and changed very radically, in order to account for the appearance of deep-time phenomena. And this radical change would, ex hypothesi, have occurred while humans were on the planet. But there is no physical evidence of such a radical change in the laws of nature, and no human record of such a momentous event.
Now, on the other side of the argument, there is only one piece of evidence for the 6,000 year hypothesis: a myth written in an era when people really had no idea how basic physical processes work. The people who wrote Genesis didn't even know about sperms and ova, much less about electromagnetism or the red shift of star light; and we're supposed to believe they knew about cosmology? Come on now, it's just not plausible.
Originally posted by KellyJayThis is the same thinking that prevents people from giving money to the homeless.
I think you are missing my point, they get federal funds so they can use those funds to
pay for the light bill instead of anything else, suggesting they are clean because they
have extra money to spend on anything is a sham. Every penny given they can use
for something else spares a penny from any other source. Meaning every dollar given to
them helps f ...[text shortened]... baby that is saving one, but that is just me....you think killing them
is doing what for them?
"They'll just spend it on alcohol."
Originally posted by moonbusWell said. That doesn't mean it will sink in, nor make a gnat's worth of difference to what he thinks.
By that logic, everything would be the same if the Big Bang had happened 6,000 years ago and no God were involved. But the available evidence does not support the 6,000-year hypothesis, with or without God.
By massively coherent evidence I do not mean only light-year measurements about the current estimate of the size of the universe.
The decay of radi ...[text shortened]... e're supposed to believe they knew about cosmology? Come on now, it's just not plausible.
Originally posted by moonbusBy that logic, with or without God sure, except why and how?
By that logic, everything would be the same if the Big Bang had happened 6,000 years ago and no God were involved. But the available evidence does not support the 6,000-year hypothesis, with or without God.
By massively coherent evidence I do not mean only light-year measurements about the current estimate of the size of the universe.
The decay of radi ...[text shortened]... e're supposed to believe they knew about cosmology? Come on now, it's just not plausible.
With or without God there is the question of where did everything come from, even without
God in all theories I have seen except those that assume the universe is eternal that is
never addressed. What comes is well this turned into that, the singularity changed as the
Big Bang occurred which means there was always everything, except it was within this
other state, and that other state was some place it could be in, the Big Bang occured so
it expanded into either previously unoccupied places, or it simply expaned as if the sceen
on a monitor had more pixels added or its resolution became better. If there was this
nothing then something what changed when nothing could happen?
As I pointed out to you, the rates and distances you are going on about would be there
no matter how it all began, which means if it is a young universe would they be good
markers to use for age?
Light would not have to travel faster if light was created the same time the star was so that
it could be seen on the planet. The laws don't have to change only the assumptions about
what they prove about time.
Originally posted by SuzianneBefore Jesus Christ entered my life I used to do a lot of things that I'm now ashamed of
This is the same thinking that prevents people from giving money to the homeless.
"They'll just spend it on alcohol."
and having a good time was always at the top of the list before Jesus. Yes, if I was given
extra money what money I had and the new money would be looked at as one group to
do with as I will to promote and satisfy my desires. You think it isn't so?
You can give to the homeless in ways that would prevent them from buying alcohol and
help them, but if they can make it work to their advantage to aquire what they desire,
they will. That is not a slam on homeless, we all act that way.
Originally posted by KellyJayThat kind of last thursdayism only works for one perspective, you also have to specify humans are the only intelligent beings in the universe AND that humans are rated SO special an entire setup was arranged just to fool US here in century 20 and 21. century 19,18 and back they would not have known about the god conspiracy. So WE in century 21 are the oh so special ones that your god designed the universe just so, light photons created extremely carefully to fool us and that of course says there must not be intelligent life anywhere else in the universe because they would have been hip to the scam, by seeing from a different perspective.
By that logic, with or without God sure, except why and how?
With or without God there is the question of where did everything come from, even without
God in all theories I have seen except those that assume the universe is eternal that is
never addressed. What comes is well this turned into that, the singularity changed as the
Big Bang occurred which m ...[text shortened]... e planet. The laws don't have to change only the assumptions about
what they prove about time.
It just gets more and more ridiculous to think humans are so high on the totem pole of life that a deity would go to THAT much trouble just to fool ONLY us here in century 21.
Can't you see the ridiculousness of that argument?
Originally posted by moonbusI did not say there was any problem with NASA's measurements. They could be correct for all I know or care. That is not my point. The point is they can not determine age by measuring distance or by measuring the speed of light today. They were not there in the beginning and can only speculated about the beginning of the universe. 😏
Originally posted by RJHinds
[b] All the stars they see were made 6,000 years ago. 😏
... NASA should not be considered an authority on the age of the earth and the universe.
Your claims are seriously detached from reality. NASA's measurements have been corroborated, at least in terms of order of magnitude, by every reputable astronomical ...[text shortened]... They [NASA] are being deceived by Satan and his demons.
Your claim smacks of paranoia.[/b]
Originally posted by moonbusNone of your so-called evidence is worth a hill of beans in determining the age of the earth. 😏
By that logic, everything would be the same if the Big Bang had happened 6,000 years ago and no God were involved. But the available evidence does not support the 6,000-year hypothesis, with or without God.
By massively coherent evidence I do not mean only light-year measurements about the current estimate of the size of the universe.
The decay of radi ...[text shortened]... e're supposed to believe they knew about cosmology? Come on now, it's just not plausible.
Originally posted by sonhouseIf you could give me your views on how everything got here we could talk, if not even your
That kind of last thursdayism only works for one perspective, you also have to specify humans are the only intelligent beings in the universe AND that humans are rated SO special an entire setup was arranged just to fool US here in century 20 and 21. century 19,18 and back they would not have known about the god conspiracy. So WE in century 21 are the oh so ...[text shortened]... e just to fool ONLY us here in century 21.
Can't you see the ridiculousness of that argument?
views on the beginning are a version of thursdayism! You just push them out further
away than I do. Do you have an explanation on where everything came from?