Overwhelming Evidence for an Old Earth

[Clockstopper]

For anyone searching for "facts" pertaining to science perhaps a little advice. If you want to learn about science then I suggest you turn to real scientists who write peer reviewed articles that are openly challenged by the scientific community. Stay away from propaganda pieces that are simply designed to prey on the weak minded.

For those of you wise enough to not listen to him, understand that even some who favorably sought out the peer-reviewed process that it has become corrupt.

YouTube - BBC Horizon - Science Under Attack 5/6

By our resident genius evolutionist will probably ignore this information just like he did the one on geology that I provided earlier.

Oh, but he's so interested in the 'facts' now isn't he?

 

[Mallon]

If everyone here is close-minded except you, Clockstopper, why are you the only one refusing to discuss the issues?

 

[ghendricks63]

For those of you wise enough to not listen to him, understand that even some who favorably sought out the peer-reviewed process that it has become corrupt.

YouTube - BBC Horizon - Science Under Attack 5/6

By our resident genius evolutionist will probably ignore this information just like he did the one on geology that I provided earlier.

Oh, but he's so interested in the 'facts' now isn't he?

Interesting choice of a man to try to make a point. This is what Sir Paul Nurse believes with regards to the scientific process.

"Ever since Sir Isaac Newton's times, scientists have worked in the same sort of way:
They show a great respect for experiment and observation,
They don't cherry pick data,
They take a skeptical approach to what they do.
And then scientists work together to get a consensus as to what should be believed
And that generates very reliable knowledge and that reliable knowledge drives innovation."

I'm glad you brought him into the conversation because he definitely re-inforces my point.

THANKS!!

 

[CryptoLutheran]

This has been very enlightening.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[crawfish]

Do all YEC's get their debate style from here?

YouTube - The Parrot Sketch

 

[Mikecpking]

Been there. Done that.

What you are saying is utter nonsense.

Engineers canyon, so named by the Army Corps of Engineers after the eruption of Mt. St. Helens in Washington state in 1980. It was one of two canyons carved out by the volcanic blast and it took less than a day to form.

Varves, 25 ft deep and hundreds of layers thick that evolutionists claim are laid down one yr at a time over millions of years took only hours to form at Mt. St. Helens.

Evolution is such a huge joke that after Christ returns people will only laugh at those who ever believed in such a stupid theory.

There is a world of difference from marine sedimentary rock and volcanic ash deposits which anyone with knowledge in geolody can tell the difference. You could read up on the subject by implying all who don't believe the same way as you as 'stupid' before making such crass remarks.

 

[juvenissun]

Those references to 'shadows' refer to our understanding of God and his word and the revelation in scripture itself. The mistake creationists seem to make is thinking their understanding of scruipture that is infallible while dismissing the evidence of science we can see and test.


Unfortunately we have only started.

Not to dismiss the evidences, but to go beyond the evidences.

I remembered the time when I was not able to do that. It was hard for me. I could not just dismiss the evidences. So I lived a life like a person with dual personality. One part of me lived in faith, and on the other part, I need to hide out the faith and work with science. Thanks to the Lord that I overcame that stage.

 

[Assyrian]

You certainly seem to dismiss the evidence for the age of the earth. I can understand your being torn between faith and science, but I don't think the answer is denying reality. God is bigger than our struggles with science and what we learn about science is only telling us about the universe he created.

 

[juvenissun]

You have just revealed a profound ignorance of geologic science. You really should read up a little before you repeat these silly and long debunked claims by young earthers. The fallacy of this comparison can easily be taught to high school kids in basic geology class.

(particularly to Assyrian) Here we have an example of ignoring the evidence, rather than facing the evidence.

So, anybody, please tell me why should the glacial varves be annual? Why couldn't it be monthly, weekly or even daily? Each collapsing (carving) on the glacial front is likely to make one varve layer.

 

[Greg1234]

I do not understand how people can believe in a Young Earth when there is Overwhelming evidence for an Old Earth. For example look at the Grand Canyon. Young Earth people say it was carved out in recent history, in the last 13,000 years. Ok, I can accept that, but look at what was carved out. The Grand Canyon is made in layers that obviously took a very long time to be formed. In fact often layers had to be broken down from a solid rock to a very fine partical, so it can be layed down as a layer. Geological evidence shows this earth has been around for a long time. The young earth theory has been shown not to be true for over 100 years now. Often it was Christians trying to show a young earth that discovered that the earth is actually very ancient.

In 2 Peter 3:8 you have that a thousand years are like a day, and a day is like a thousand years to the Lord. The only way I see a thousand years elapsing without conferring that effect on an entity is for that entity to be outside of time. A thousand seems arbitrary, meaning the author could have chosen a million or more but still show that time is of no essence. Perhaps that is the message: a creation which does not conform to nor is it mediated by time on earth. Since the creation is not in accordance with time then it cannot be made through the physical construct of time.

Within Darwinism you have the same thing. There are fossils of modern man discovered in rock older than 200000y. As a result, you may have to differentiate between YMD(young man Darwinists) and OMD (Old Man Darwinists). There is only one option though.

 

[realtruth101]

So, rather than lying in scripture God lies to us through nature?

nobody is lying to you, what verse or passage are you thinking about, that could possibly be denoted in the creation story as a lie, God created everything, there is no break down on exactly how or what he used to make everything, He's God, he really doesn't even need anything to start with, just His word can bring things into existance, you on the other hand feel when God said let there be light, the sun and stars needed time for the light to get here, but If you knew Him you would understand when He said let there be light the light didn't need millions of years to travel, It was there as He spoke it. Time is something we are trapped in, God is not trapped or bound by Time, humans always equate everything with time, God says our lives last but a vapor, in the grand scheme of things. I personally think He created the world in such a way, as to fulfil the passage where he makes the wise look foolish, many of you think you are wise, but the bible will prove to be a better guide then the science of today

 

[Greg1234]

You certainly seem to dismiss the evidence for the age of the earth. I can understand your being torn between faith and science, but I don't think the answer is denying reality. God is bigger than our struggles with science and what we learn about science is only telling us about the universe he created.

You seem torn between your faith in Darwinian evolution and science. Remember that God is bigger than that.

 

[juvenissun]

You certainly seem to dismiss the evidence for the age of the earth. I can understand your being torn between faith and science, but I don't think the answer is denying reality. God is bigger than our struggles with science and what we learn about science is only telling us about the universe he created.

I never deny the radiometric dates. I even believe that they "work" if we understand how to interpret them. However, the radiometric dates never meant to prove the true age of anything. They just provide timing marks for events. People called them absolute ages. But they are, in nature, a more precise relative ages, only saved the tedious work of correlation by having a more coherent internal system.

 

[Assyrian]

I never deny the radiometric dates. I even believe that they "work" if we understand how to interpret them. However, the radiometric dates never meant to prove the true age of anything. They just provide timing marks for events. People called them absolute ages. But they are, in nature, a more precise relative ages, only saved the tedious work of correlation by having a more coherent internal system.

See? You deny the precise ages given by radiometric dating and only accept them as relative dating. Of course they do give us relative dating too, but because we know the precise half lives of the isotope we know the absolute ages too.

 

[Clockstopper]

I'm chilling out.

 

[Clockstopper]

nobody is lying to you, what verse or passage are you thinking about, that could possibly be denoted in the creation story as a lie, God created everything, there is no break down on exactly how or what he used to make everything, He's God, he really doesn't even need anything to start with, just His word can bring things into existance, you on the other hand feel when God said let there be light, the sun and stars needed time for the light to get here, but If you knew Him you would understand when He said let there be light the light didn't need millions of years to travel, It was there as He spoke it. Time is something we are trapped in, God is not trapped or bound by Time, humans always equate everything with time, God says our lives last but a vapor, in the grand scheme of things. I personally think He created the world in such a way, as to fulfil the passage where he makes the wise look foolish, many of you think you are wise, but the bible will prove to be a better guide then the science of today

Thank you for that , realtruth. I appreciate it.

According to quantum theory; every photon of light 'knows' what every other photon of light is doing at any given moment.

Hmm, sort of like our Lord; "I am the light of the world." His light is everywhere (omnipresent). How long does it take light to get from the Quasar Markarain 205 to earth? Well, how long does it take for Jesus to get from heaven to earth or earth to heaven? That depends upon how far and how fast God has stretched (expanded) the universe since creation. It is not a problem for Him. It is only a problem for us in that we are not certain about the length of space nor the time involved...yet.

But that stretching (expansion) means that both the 15 billion light yr measurement and the 6,000 yr biblical age of the earth can both be right at the same time. Both are probably reasonably close.

 

[Assyrian]

(particularly to Assyrian) Here we have an example of ignoring the evidence, rather than facing the evidence.

So, anybody, please tell me why should the glacial varves be annual? Why couldn't it be monthly, weekly or even daily? Each collapsing (carving) on the glacial front is likely to make one varve layer.

How would collapsing glacial fronts manage to sort annual pollen variation into the right layers? How do daily and weekly varves end up with volcanic ash layers that match historic eruptions when read as annual varves? Why do varves match the Carbon 14 dating close enough to calibrate it and fit the Carbon 14 calibration from tree rings?

 

[Smidlee]

Pre aged is a nice way to say lied don't ya think? If you want to believe God formed Adam as a grown man man fine...but what you won't find in that grown man is history. No scars from childhood, no memories of growing up, etc. This is simply not the case with the age of the earth and universe. To find evidence of events that happened long before you believe God created the heavens and the earth is make God out to be a liar. Super novas we have witnessed that we know happened hundreds of thousands of years ago would literally have to be lies God built into the tmeline of light travel. Earth geologic and fossil history would mean God has set up His entire creation as a huge deception...a sham if you will. "Appearence of age" is different than actual history written by God and placed in His creation. God is not a liar. Young Earth/Universe theories though demand that we accept that He is exactly that.

This would not be so if God intended His creation to be beyond human understanding. I do agree the Earth appears to be old but appearances can sometimes to deceiving.

The appearance of deception is not necessary cause by an act of deception. Deception could be very well caused by how we see things. For example, If men learn 200 years from now we were dead wrong about something it doesn't mean we were deceived by God or by anyone else.

Just look back 150 years ago, was there anyone back then would dream that we would find rotary motors in living cells? Back then to them the cell looked so simple but that was a deception cause not by God or man but lack of their understanding. The living cell was just as complex 1000 years ago as it is today.

 

[mark kennedy]

I do not understand how people can believe in a Young Earth when there is Overwhelming evidence for an Old Earth. For example look at the Grand Canyon. Young Earth people say it was carved out in recent history, in the last 13,000 years. Ok, I can accept that, but look at what was carved out. The Grand Canyon is made in layers that obviously took a very long time to be formed. In fact often layers had to be broken down from a solid rock to a very fine partical, so it can be layed down as a layer. Geological evidence shows this earth has been around for a long time. The young earth theory has been shown not to be true for over 100 years now. Often it was Christians trying to show a young earth that discovered that the earth is actually very ancient.

I have never had a problem with an old earth, I am a YEC by default. What I have never found is a reason that the age of the earth has anything to do with the creation of life on this planet.

 

[ghendricks63]

I have never had a problem with an old earth, I am a YEC by default. What I have never found is a reason that the age of the earth has anything to do with the creation of life on this planet.

I think you will find very few old earth Christians who believe age means anything with regards to God's miracle of creation. That argument seems to be much more of a YEC complaint.