Jump to content


Photo

Looking For Single Greatest Evidence For Young Earth


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14 replies to this topic

#1 JC333

JC333

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Age: 17
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Near Washington D.C

Posted 15 February 2009 - 02:12 PM

I'm looking for someone to tell me what is the single most greatest evidence of there being a young earth?


Oh and shout out to Adam_777. He got me to join the forums. :D


-Matt :P

#2 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:31 PM

Hi JC333,welcome to the forum.



The only real difficult argument for creationists is distant starlight.You can find a list of good ones in the "Young Earth Age Correlations" thread.




Enjoy.

#3 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:32 PM

Hi Matt,

Welcome aboard. You're questions are going to be valuable here.

So, are you looking for the Magic Bullet? :P

Adam

#4 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:40 PM

Hi JC333,welcome to the forum.
The only real difficult argument for creationists is distant starlight.You can find a list of good ones in the "Young Earth Age Correlations" thread.
Enjoy.

View Post


http://www.evolution...t=0

That's a good link, Jason... :P

Hey Matt,

I want you to think about an idea that can help you sift through some info.

What's a bigger problem for who? Are evidences that correlate with an old earth more destructive to the young earth model or are evidences that correlate with a young earth more destructive to the old earth model?

Think that through a little and we can talk about both sets of evidences.

#5 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 16 February 2009 - 12:01 AM

Hi JC333,welcome to the forum.
The only real difficult argument for creationists is distant starlight.You can find a list of good ones in the "Young Earth Age Correlations" thread.
Enjoy.

View Post


With the idea I have come up with concerning the difference between eternity and non-eternity. I believe I have solved the distant starlight problem.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

With the Lord is being in eternity. Comparing one day here (non-eternity), to where the Lord is and showing there is a difference which means that all things concerning time was different. Time basically in this time line is connected to both age and measuring speed.

The first 6 days of creation were without sin. Making all 6 days of creation in eternity. When sin was committed, the laws of the universe changed to what we see and understand.

1,000 years = 365,000 days.

So the math equation broken down is comparing one day (where we are) to 365,000 days (where God is).

So if 1 day = 365,000 days. It means that all that is connected to time also changes in eternity in the magnitude of being 365,000 time faster.

So light = 299 792 458 m / s in our time line would be 299 792 458 m / s times 365,000 in eternity (where God is). Which equals light traveling at 109,424,247,170,000 m / s.

Aging would change also by speeding up. In one day a person could age 1 thousand years (365,000 days). But, if you add the theory of time dilation. Age gets cancelled out which makes that time line ageless. An ageless time line = eternity. Which explains what eternity is and how it works.

A possible example: When we are in a situation where we know we could lose our life. Ever notice how things seem to go in slow motion? Like when you are in a car accident and even though nothing has changed as far as time is concerned. Suddenly you find yourself watching it all happen as if time itself can be manipulated.

But what if this is your body preparing to release your soul into spiritual eternity? And what if because of that you actually get a glimpse into what eternity is by seeing the effects of time dilation (everything slowing down) in our universe because you have started the transition to being 365,000 times faster than the time that you are currently in. And even though you don't quite make the transition because you did not die, you get to see and feel the effects of it as an experience you will never forget.

But that is just my idea.

#6 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 16 February 2009 - 01:52 AM

With the idea I have come up with concerning the difference between eternity and non-eternity. I believe I have solved the distant starlight problem.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

With the Lord is being in eternity. Comparing one day here (non-eternity), to where the Lord is and showing there is a difference which means that all things concerning time was different. Time basically in this time line is connected to both age and measuring speed.

The first 6 days of creation were without sin. Making all 6 days of creation in eternity. When sin was committed, the laws of the universe changed to what we see and understand.

1,000 years = 365,000 days.

So the math equation broken down is comparing one day (where we are) to 365,000 days (where God is).

So if 1 day = 365,000 days. It means that all that is connected to time also changes in eternity in the magnitude of being 365,000 time faster.

So light = 299 792 458 m / s in our time line would be 299 792 458 m / s times 365,000 in eternity (where God is). Which equals light traveling at 109,424,247,170,000 m / s.

Aging would change also by speeding up. In one day a person could age 1 thousand years (365,000 days). But, if you add the theory of time dilation. Age gets cancelled out which makes that time line ageless. An ageless time line = eternity. Which explains what eternity is and how it works.

A possible example: When we are in a situation where we know we could lose our life. Ever notice how things seem to go in slow motion? Like when you are in a car accident and even though nothing has changed as far as time is concerned. Suddenly you find yourself watching it all happen as if time itself can be manipulated.

But what if this is your body preparing to release your soul into spiritual eternity? And what if because of that you actually get a glimpse into what eternity is by seeing the effects of time dilation (everything slowing down) in our universe because you have started the transition to being 365,000 times faster than the time that you are currently in. And even though you don't quite make the transition because you did not die, you get to see and feel the effects of it as an experience you will never forget.

But that is just my idea.

View Post


Thats a great idea.The last post I made in the link above claims to have proven time dilation.It's actualy about supernova remnants,but I don't know enough about the subject (the math is way beyond me) :( so I left for you guys to look at.






Thanks.

#7 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 16 February 2009 - 12:59 PM

With the idea I have come up with concerning the difference between eternity and non-eternity. I believe I have solved the distant starlight problem.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

With the Lord is being in eternity. Comparing one day here (non-eternity), to where the Lord is and showing there is a difference which means that all things concerning time was different. Time basically in this time line is connected to both age and measuring speed.

The first 6 days of creation were without sin. Making all 6 days of creation in eternity. When sin was committed, the laws of the universe changed to what we see and understand.

1,000 years = 365,000 days.

So the math equation broken down is comparing one day (where we are) to 365,000 days (where God is).

So if 1 day = 365,000 days. It means that all that is connected to time also changes in eternity in the magnitude of being 365,000 time faster.

So light = 299 792 458 m / s in our time line would be 299 792 458 m / s times 365,000 in eternity (where God is). Which equals light traveling at 109,424,247,170,000 m / s.

Aging would change also by speeding up. In one day a person could age 1 thousand years (365,000 days). But, if you add the theory of time dilation. Age gets cancelled out which makes that time line ageless. An ageless time line = eternity. Which explains what eternity is and how it works.

A possible example: When we are in a situation where we know we could lose our life. Ever notice how things seem to go in slow motion? Like when you are in a car accident and even though nothing has changed as far as time is concerned. Suddenly you find yourself watching it all happen as if time itself can be manipulated.

But what if this is your body preparing to release your soul into spiritual eternity? And what if because of that you actually get a glimpse into what eternity is by seeing the effects of time dilation (everything slowing down) in our universe because you have started the transition to being 365,000 times faster than the time that you are currently in. And even though you don't quite make the transition because you did not die, you get to see and feel the effects of it as an experience you will never forget.

But that is just my idea.

View Post


It's a good idea, and the great thing about it is that it effects other ideas and you can test it. One of the ideas it effects is Fine-structure constant. You can plug in the number you've got for the speed of light and see how it should effect the fine structure constant, then you can look at the universe and see if what it predicts is reflected in reality.

#8 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 16 February 2009 - 01:11 PM

To get a handle on the issue of aging the earth we have to consider what our assumptions are. For starters, if I'm speaking with a fellow Bible believing Christian I think the eyewitness testimony in scripture is the best starting point for exploring the age of the earth since we would both assume the infallibility of scripture. We would have to carefully use exegesis and recognize when we are tempted to use eisegesis to draw out of scripture what may not be there.

However, if I'm talking with someone who doesn't share the axiom that scripture is infallible we would have to look at what the material sciences are saying. We would have to carefully separate facts and assumptions and scrutinize the interpretations.

There are many pieces of evidence that are cleverly covered up with excuses because an old universe is most often assumed today and not predicted. So when evidences are discovered that are bad for the old universe model the finding is usually crammed into the model through some ad hoc interpretation or just so stories. One of my personal favorites is the Oort cloud.

Posted Image

A runner up in dismissed evidences is the presence of Carbon 14 in diamonds and coal and really everything organic no matter how old it is assumed to be.

http://www.evolution...?showtopic=1143

You will find excuses for why these don't point to a young universe but you must scrutinize these excuses because they are almost always ad hoc interpretations upon ad hoc interpretations.

Matt,

Watch this little clip about radiometric dating. Let it draw you in and explain how radiometric dating works based on current orthodoxy and belief that the earth is billions of years old:

1920gi3swe4

Now watch this video and you'll get a feel for why consistent results don't automatically prove that your assumptions and interpretations are necessarily right:

_ICcfbqUFZo

Do you remember how I said even consistent results don't prove an old earth. That's another myth, that radiometric dating produces consistent results. The reason published works are consistent is because anomalies are thrown out or excuses are made to explain why the results don't line up with orthodoxy. The KBS Tuff is a good example of hand waving attempts to cover up problems:

http://www.answersin...v17/i3/pigs.asp

Adam

#9 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 16 February 2009 - 01:37 PM

Do you remember how I said even consistent results don't prove an old earth. That's another myth, that radiometric dating produces consistent results. The reason published works are consistent is because anomalies are thrown out or excuses are made to explain why the results don't line up with orthodoxy. The KBS Tuff is a good example of hand waving attempts to cover up problems:

http://www.answersin...v17/i3/pigs.asp

Adam



Thanks Adam,thats one of my favorite articles from Marvin Lubenow.

Roger Lewin wrote about it too and said that 41 radiometric dates were taken and they ranged between 200,000 and 213,000,000 years old.Only once did they get an age of 2.6 million so they threw the other 40 dates away.

I thought you were supposed to go by the majority of the data.







Thanks.

#10 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 16 February 2009 - 02:25 PM

I thought you were supposed to go by the majority of the data.
Thanks.

View Post

Wasn't it "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again"?

#11 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 16 February 2009 - 02:32 PM

Wasn't it "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again"?

View Post


:(

#12 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2469 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Real Science Radio.
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 16 February 2009 - 02:45 PM

I'm looking for someone to tell me what is the single most greatest evidence of there being a young earth?
Oh and shout out to Adam_777. He got me to join the forums.  :P
-Matt  :(

View Post


My favorites are the two pinned topics in this forum:

Helium in Zircons

Carbon 14

Fred

#13 performedge

performedge

    Don - a Child of the King

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Carolina
  • Interests:Being a logician. Debating the origins controversy. Going to heaven. Taking others with me. Seeing the creator.
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Rock Hill, SC

Posted 17 February 2009 - 11:52 AM

I'm looking for someone to tell me what is the single most greatest evidence of there being a young earth?

View Post

Hi Matt:

I'm not trying to be facetious here, but quite frankly the greatest piece of evidence that the earth is young is the Bible. Please never forget that every word spoken by God is the greatest evidence, no matter what mankind may say to the contrary.

God told Abraham he would make him a great nation. Then He asked him to sacrifice his only son after years of infertility. Abraham only had the testimony of God to hold onto and trust. And what God said was true. It always is.

The bible reveals a young earth from its geneologies. It can be trusted like a rock solid foundation.

And please remember, most evidence is not empirical. A forensic evidence case can be very convincing that the defendant committed a crime. But it only takes eye witness testimony to overturn every single piece of scientific evidence if the defendant was not at the scene of the crime. It is vitally important to remember that eye witness testimony is always the most valuable evidence. It's just not scientific evidence.

Now if you want my favorite piece of scientific evidence, it is by far polonium halos in granite rocks. This evidence has been presented in multiple scientific peer reviewed journals, and still has never been refuted by any scientific publication.

Radio Halos

#14 JC333

JC333

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Age: 17
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Near Washington D.C

Posted 17 February 2009 - 07:34 PM

Thank you all for the responses. Ikester, very interesting post. Definitely some good food for though :)

#15 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 17 February 2009 - 07:54 PM

Thank you all for the responses. Ikester, very interesting post. Definitely some good food for though :)

View Post

Is that it? You're letting us get off too easy. :)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users