Originally posted by twhitehead Humphreys model includes a multi-billion year old universe and you appear to accept it. Saying that you won't use that clock simply shows you don't understand relativity. 🙁
Humphreys' model does not include a multi-billion year old universe, if the clock of Genesis is used. That is the only clock that counts. I have not accepted Humphreys' model as fact. It is just a better hypothesis than many others.
Originally posted by twhitehead You do know that if you use an 'argument from Education' you will lose big time?
It would be trivial to find someone with better than a PhD in Physics that says Humphreys is wrong. Humphreys himself admits that his qualifications are not best suited to his claims.
Weii, I shall await you to find someone with better than a PhD in Physics to prove Humphreys wrong.
Originally posted by Suzianne Except that the earth IS younger than other parts of the universe by some 8 billion years. They estimate the age of the sun at 5 billion years with perhaps 5 billion more years to go. I mean clearly, the earth is not the youngEST thing in the universe, but it's a lot younger than the Big Bang.
I'm not saying this is caused by some weird time effects caused by stretching of spacetime, though.
They can estimate all they want and still be off by billions of years.
Originally posted by Suzianne Except that the earth IS younger than other parts of the universe by some 8 billion years.
Yes of course. And time is relative, so some parts of the universe are older than others. But this of course means any claims in the Bible that God did such and such at such and such a time must be relative to a given location. This however becomes a bit of a problem if it says God did such and such at such a time over a vast area (such as creating stars and galaxies) since there is no universal clock to measure against. RJ of course has decided that it must be referring to a clock placed on earth and doesn't really care whether a clock placed on a distant star has gone through billions of years.
Originally posted by twhitehead Yes of course. And time is relative, so some parts of the universe are older than others. But this of course means any claims in the Bible that God did such and such at such and such a time must be relative to a given location. This however becomes a bit of a problem if it says God did such and such at such a time over a vast area (such as creating stars ...[text shortened]... doesn't really care whether a clock placed on a distant star has gone through billions of years.
I say there is no clock at all. Day, morning, evening. These are conventions, so that early man could understand the concepts. Could Moses understand relativity? Probably not. Could he understand morning and evening? Of course. The rest is all just fluff that doesn't mean much. Clock here, clock there, who cares. There is no clock.
Originally posted by Suzianne I say there is no clock at all. Day, morning, evening. These are conventions, so that early man could understand the concepts. Could Moses understand relativity? Probably not. Could he understand morning and evening? Of course. The rest is all just fluff that doesn't mean much. Clock here, clock there, who cares. There is no clock.
Originally posted by RJHinds Who Cares? So what?
The Instructor
Thinking people care.
If your god created us with brains it is disrespectful not to use them.
And without centuries of thinking you would be living in a cave with no
knowledge of god (nobody invented writing) wondering where your next
meal was coming from and how come your neighbours with sharp sticks
ate better than you.
Originally posted by wolfgang59 Thinking people care.
If your god created us with brains it is disrespectful not to use them.
And without centuries of thinking you would be living in a cave with no
knowledge of god (nobody invented writing) wondering where your next
meal was coming from and how come your neighbours with sharp sticks
ate better than you.
Originally posted by wolfgang59 Thinking people care.
If your god created us with brains it is disrespectful not to use them.
And without centuries of thinking you would be living in a cave with no
knowledge of god (nobody invented writing) wondering where your next
meal was coming from and how come your neighbours with sharp sticks
ate better than you.
This is right on.
But contrary to what some people think, this doesn't mean that these same people who use their advanced brains shouldn't believe in God.
Originally posted by stellspalfie the lack of evidence should be enough for an advanced brain to be at least skeptical about the existence of a god.
But there is an abundance of evidence for God. Some of that evidence has already been posted before. There is no evidence that God does not exist, however.
14 Nov '13 16:58
YouTube
Starlight
Back to Top