New Earth Creationism: Using Time Dilation to Reconcile the Biblical and Observed Timescales

[Bryar Kader]

I'm not sure in which book I've read it originally, but searching online I found these sources which affirm it:
Excessively Old "Ages" For Grand Canyon Lava Flows

The Fallacies of Radioactive Dating of Rocks

A Critique of ICR's Grand Canyon Dating Project

Here is an article that answers the research performed by Dr. Steve Austin. Basically, all he managed to do is confirm that the source Cenozoic lava flows, i.e. the mantle beneath the Grand Canyon, is older than the Cardenas Basalt Precambrian layer. The TalkOrigins article above indicates that Dr. Austin purposely sampled components of the cooled lava flows he knew would give him an older age than the Cardenas Basalt. This is a sampling error, not a true test of how radiometric dating holds up.

 

[Brightmoon]

And dating rocks that are thousand of years old or less with a technique normally used on billion year old rocks will give you a useless answer . It’s like measuring the width of an atom with a yardstick ( Meterstick) . The answer you’ll get isn’t wrong it’s just useless. Less than 1/16 of an inch is nowhere near the actual size of an atom and neither is a millimeter close to the size . Measuring with an inappropriate tool gives you silly answers . Creation science proponents count on laymen not knowing that !

 

[Oaktree125]

So I am brand new to the forum and I specifically joined so I could test this idea I have been developing for the past year. If I am way off base or if what I am saying sounds ridiculous, please let me know, but I think I may have an answer to why the time scales observable science and the bible are so out of sync, with one giving a universal age of ~14 Gy and the other an age of 6,000 yrs.
To begin, I must describe the phenomenon of time dilation for those of you who may not be familiar with it. Basically, when an object approaches light speed or approaches a massive object like a black hole, that object’s experience of time slows down in comparison with that of any outside observer. I am not a physicist, so again, if I am off base, please correct me. We can garner from scripture that the Almighty’s experience of time is different from our own current experience (Psalm 90:4) and that He is a being of light (1 John 1:5). When man was first created, he lived with the Almighty in the Garden of Eden, where he walked with, talked with, and interacted with Him on a daily basis (Genesis 2&3). This would indicate God and man shared a common experience in the Garden and therefore a common experience in the passage of time. Even after the Fall of Man in Genesis 3, a chapter later we learn that mankind still existed in the Lord’s Presence, as evidenced by Cain leaving the face and presence of the Lord when leaving the Land of Eden in Genesis 4. One could therefore make the argument that when one dwells in God’s presence, one’s experience of the passage of time would be the same as God’s experience, and therefore may be different from the experience of those outside of that presence.
To keep myself from rambling, I will summarize this idea and hopefully with discussion the various other facets of it will come to light. In essence, God created the Heavens and the Earth as one, with the Angels, Adam and Eve, and the animals to inhabit it, as described in Genesis 2 and 3 and alluded to in Ezekiel 28 and Job 38:4-7. After the Fall, the War in Heaven described in Revelation 12 erupted, resulting in the Earth becoming without form and void, as said in Genesis 1:2. God restored the Earth over seven days by His own experience and by the experience of Adam and Eve, as they still dwelt in God’s presence even after the Fall. However, those seven days of restoration would have looked like a time lapse film covering the course of 14 billion years of development till reaching the state of the universe we know and love today.
Due to the fact that the fall occurred prior to this regeneration, this hypothesis does not violate the “death before the fall” conundrum, even in the case of animal death. It respects observational science and the long ages it infers for the age of the Earth and Cosmos, while also respecting the Biblical seven day creation account.

Why specifically insert time prior to the Fall? It compresses the age of the universe into the Creation Days. But inserting time can also work by doing the same thing over the entire period of time from Creation to the Days of the Flood (replacement). Scripture is actually suggestive of this becuase the Flood resembles conditions in Gen1:1( like starting over). God is destroying the land with them (the airbreathers) and what better method than a gazillon years of plate tectonics? It is also why i suspect He sets the lifespan of man right before ....because He is going to doing something that expands the previous version of events. We observe long lives before Noah because they get stretched out therefore they are proof of relativity. Noahs bloodline preserves this original temporal status. God does it to save Noah from the implications of starting over. Divine providence is absent in the stretched era among the creatures and from their remains we observe a dog eat dog world. Where was God is all of that? Well He was judging the world and He told us what He was going to do and did just that. And amongst the layers we have the fossils of the people who did not stand upright before the Lord and while they sense the divine aspect they couldnt actually form connective religions -only dead ends. Therefore we see a kind of false religion and false history that records what was caused by man's sin which forced Gods judgment. It is what remains and remains in the past.

Funny how little things align when you turn around your assumptions.
So i agree that some form of time displacement is encouraging...

 

[mindlight]

So I am brand new to the forum and I specifically joined so I could test this idea I have been developing for the past year. If I am way off base or if what I am saying sounds ridiculous, please let me know, but I think I may have an answer to why the time scales observable science and the bible are so out of sync, with one giving a universal age of ~14 Gy and the other an age of 6,000 yrs.
To begin, I must describe the phenomenon of time dilation for those of you who may not be familiar with it. Basically, when an object approaches light speed or approaches a massive object like a black hole, that object’s experience of time slows down in comparison with that of any outside observer. I am not a physicist, so again, if I am off base, please correct me. We can garner from scripture that the Almighty’s experience of time is different from our own current experience (Psalm 90:4) and that He is a being of light (1 John 1:5). When man was first created, he lived with the Almighty in the Garden of Eden, where he walked with, talked with, and interacted with Him on a daily basis (Genesis 2&3). This would indicate God and man shared a common experience in the Garden and therefore a common experience in the passage of time. Even after the Fall of Man in Genesis 3, a chapter later we learn that mankind still existed in the Lord’s Presence, as evidenced by Cain leaving the face and presence of the Lord when leaving the Land of Eden in Genesis 4. One could therefore make the argument that when one dwells in God’s presence, one’s experience of the passage of time would be the same as God’s experience, and therefore may be different from the experience of those outside of that presence.
To keep myself from rambling, I will summarize this idea and hopefully with discussion the various other facets of it will come to light. In essence, God created the Heavens and the Earth as one, with the Angels, Adam and Eve, and the animals to inhabit it, as described in Genesis 2 and 3 and alluded to in Ezekiel 28 and Job 38:4-7. After the Fall, the War in Heaven described in Revelation 12 erupted, resulting in the Earth becoming without form and void, as said in Genesis 1:2. God restored the Earth over seven days by His own experience and by the experience of Adam and Eve, as they still dwelt in God’s presence even after the Fall. However, those seven days of restoration would have looked like a time lapse film covering the course of 14 billion years of development till reaching the state of the universe we know and love today.
Due to the fact that the fall occurred prior to this regeneration, this hypothesis does not violate the “death before the fall” conundrum, even in the case of animal death. It respects observational science and the long ages it infers for the age of the Earth and Cosmos, while also respecting the Biblical seven day creation account.

You raise an interesting point. The difference between the apparent age of the universe and its revealed age troubles many believers. Space time dilation, some version of quantum entanglement, the creation of light in transit from Supernovas that never existed except as light shows for earth, deep space acceleration of photons or sudden jumps are all ways to dodge the idea of an old universe. It is all speculation in the end and we cannot say for sure. There is no certainty till we visit the places we see.

 

[Brightmoon]

And none of those dodges to show a young universe work . There’s always an insert-magic-here quality about creationist pseudoscience that makes mainstream scientists laugh at it as both pointless and ridiculous. Mainstream science just works period.

 

[Job 33:6]

So I am brand new to the forum and I specifically joined so I could test this idea I have been developing for the past year. If I am way off base or if what I am saying sounds ridiculous, please let me know, but I think I may have an answer to why the time scales observable science and the bible are so out of sync, with one giving a universal age of ~14 Gy and the other an age of 6,000 yrs.
To begin, I must describe the phenomenon of time dilation for those of you who may not be familiar with it. Basically, when an object approaches light speed or approaches a massive object like a black hole, that object’s experience of time slows down in comparison with that of any outside observer. I am not a physicist, so again, if I am off base, please correct me. We can garner from scripture that the Almighty’s experience of time is different from our own current experience (Psalm 90:4) and that He is a being of light (1 John 1:5). When man was first created, he lived with the Almighty in the Garden of Eden, where he walked with, talked with, and interacted with Him on a daily basis (Genesis 2&3). This would indicate God and man shared a common experience in the Garden and therefore a common experience in the passage of time. Even after the Fall of Man in Genesis 3, a chapter later we learn that mankind still existed in the Lord’s Presence, as evidenced by Cain leaving the face and presence of the Lord when leaving the Land of Eden in Genesis 4. One could therefore make the argument that when one dwells in God’s presence, one’s experience of the passage of time would be the same as God’s experience, and therefore may be different from the experience of those outside of that presence.
To keep myself from rambling, I will summarize this idea and hopefully with discussion the various other facets of it will come to light. In essence, God created the Heavens and the Earth as one, with the Angels, Adam and Eve, and the animals to inhabit it, as described in Genesis 2 and 3 and alluded to in Ezekiel 28 and Job 38:4-7. After the Fall, the War in Heaven described in Revelation 12 erupted, resulting in the Earth becoming without form and void, as said in Genesis 1:2. God restored the Earth over seven days by His own experience and by the experience of Adam and Eve, as they still dwelt in God’s presence even after the Fall. However, those seven days of restoration would have looked like a time lapse film covering the course of 14 billion years of development till reaching the state of the universe we know and love today.
Due to the fact that the fall occurred prior to this regeneration, this hypothesis does not violate the “death before the fall” conundrum, even in the case of animal death. It respects observational science and the long ages it infers for the age of the Earth and Cosmos, while also respecting the Biblical seven day creation account.

This sounds like a nice idea on the surface, but it's hard to work out when you actually try explaining it's details.

For example, there was death of animals on earth, long before there were people. And yet above you appear to suggest that Adam and Eve were in the garden, pre-fall.

God is also generally considered to be beyond space and time. By suggesting that God functions in accordance with time and space, we might be putting ourselves in an awkward position of making God out to be something that operates within space and time, which might confine Him. Space time bends, does God bend too? How would that relationship work?

And changing of time might demand changing of speed, to an outside observer. But we aren't outside observers, we live on earth too. So who would the outside observe be? God? And yet, God was interacting with Adam, not in deep space but on earth, so how could God be an outside observer?

I think it's easier to start with questions and derive answers later, rather than trying to use answers to derive questions.

 

[Job 33:6]

Observable science doesn't give you a long time. When scientists claim an age of millions and billions of years then it is always based on certain assumptions. You cannot make claims about the far past without assuming that processes have always been the same and - in the case of dating methods - that you know the original concentration of certain elements (which is set to 0). Observable science has shown multiple times that the assumptions made in those dating methods are wrong, but because no other theory allows the long periods of time that are needed for soup-to-man evolution the secular scientists still cling to those dating methods. It has nothing to do with observed facts though.

If you want to date the earth's (and even universe's) age on process clocks there are about 100 methods to do that. Roughly 95% of those methods give you a very short time, only 5% allow billions of years (which are the radioisotope dating methods).
Just to give a few examples of other process clocks:
The measurement of the earth's magnetic field revealed a decrease by half every ~1400 years. The upper limit is therefore 20,000 years. Counting supernova remnants gives evidence for 7,000 years only. Measuring the mud on the ocean's floor leads to an upper limit of 65,000 years. Using the salt in the sea to determine the age will result in a limit of 62 million years (assuming there was no salt in the sea at the beginning), still very far from the claimed 3.5 billion years. The amount of nickel in the oceans limits the age to 9,000 years, sedimentation offers 26,000 years, the earth's population allows claims for 8,000 years, the amount of helium in the atmosphere results in an upper limit of 161,000 years, the life-time of the rings of Saturn allow an age of 18,000 years. Life-time of comets suggests 9,000 years, cooling of the earth's surface leads to a limit of 50 million years and the mississippi delta gives evidence for about 10,000 years.

I don't know where people keep getting such bizarre ideas. Like, who taught you that there was an upper limit of magnetic pole reversals at 2,000 years? This is misinformation at the least, and just a poor education.

Do we just ignore magnetic reversals?

 

[Brightmoon]

As far as death happening after the fall. That means that Adam and Eve had syndactyly because that how fingers and toes form. Cells die between the fingers to separate them. You can see this in any vertebrate fetus that has digits .

 

[mindlight]

And none of those dodges to show a young universe work . There’s always an insert-magic-here quality about creationist pseudoscience that makes mainstream scientists laugh at it as both pointless and ridiculous. Mainstream science just works period.

No actually you do not know any better than a magician. The further out we go or back in time we go this is even more the case. Facts can be demonstrated with repeatable experiments. There are no facts about this just guesses.

 

[Brightmoon]

No actually you do not know any better than a magician. The further out we go or back in time we go this is even more the case. Facts can be demonstrated with repeatable experiments. There are no facts about this just guesses.

. Unlike you I’ve got a science degree and I do I think I know what is and isn’t scientific . Your definition of science is 1 unworkable and 2 right out of the creationist pseudoscience playbook.

you certainly can tell what happened in the past by examining the evidence in the present. These are the Fighting Dinosaurs, A velociraptor and a ceratopsian . The velociraptor decided it wanted lunch and the ceratopsian wasn’t agreeable . The ceratopsian broke the velociraptor’s arm . How do we know that even though it happened millions of years in the past ? We know that because the broken arm is still in the ceratopsian’s beak . How do we know that the velociraptor wanted a fresh lunch ? The foot claw is near or in the ceratopsian’s gut. Now they already had been having a bad day when a sandstorm covered them .

Here’s things about the past that we already know just from this one fossil
1 velociraptors lived at the same time as ceratopsians
2 velociraptors lived in some of the same places as ceratopsians
3 velociraptors preyed on ceratopsians
4ceratopsians could defend themselves against predators
5 sandstorms were nasty back then too
6 these 2 died from the sandstorm not from the fight. The injuries aren’t severe enough to cause immediate death


If you could figure all this out just from seeing this fossil , then your central premise of we can’t figure things out from “ historical science” is wrong . In other words, we didn’t have to be there!

( note that I put “ historical science “ in quotes as this is a creationist pseudoscience term and real scientists don’t use it)

 

[Job 33:6]

There are also cases of fossils of predators having fossils of prey, in their digestive tracks, dating back to the cambrian.

Reconstructing the diet of a 505-million-year-old arthropod: Sidneyia inexpectans from the Burgess Shale fauna - ScienceDirect

So literally in the oldest macro invertebrate fossils we've ever discovered, death was a part of creation.

 

[mindlight]

View attachment 284693 . Unlike you I’ve got a science degree and I do I think I know what is and isn’t scientific . Your definition of science is 1 unworkable and 2 right out of the creationist pseudoscience playbook.

you certainly can tell what happened in the past by examining the evidence in the present. These are the Fighting Dinosaurs, A velociraptor and a ceratopsian . The velociraptor decided it wanted lunch and the ceratopsian wasn’t agreeable . The ceratopsian broke the velociraptor’s arm . How do we know that even though it happened millions of years in the past ? We know that because the broken arm is still in the ceratopsian’s beak . How do we know that the velociraptor wanted a fresh lunch ? The foot claw is near or in the ceratopsian’s gut. Now they already had been having a bad day when a sandstorm covered them .

Here’s things about the past that we already know just from this one fossil
1 velociraptors lived at the same time as ceratopsians
2 velociraptors lived in some of the same places as ceratopsians
3 velociraptors preyed on ceratopsians
4ceratopsians could defend themselves against predators
5 sandstorms were nasty back then too
6 these 2 died from the sandstorm not from the fight. The injuries aren’t severe enough to cause immediate death


If you could figure all this out just from seeing this fossil , then your central premise of we can’t figure things out from “ historical science” is wrong . In other words, we didn’t have to be there!

( note that I put “ historical science “ in quotes as this is a creationist pseudoscience term and real scientists don’t use it)

2 creatures fighting buried by sudden catastrophy is what I see. Which is exactly the same as you described and is the creationist explanation for formation of fossils. Maybe it was too much to say there is nothing we can see, but there is nothing here affirming either evolution or an old earth.

Science should stick to facts. Scientific training appears to have extended its scope to what properly belongs to historical investigation but has imported a lot of false assumptions and ideology into the indoctrination of its,students. In a similar way the error of medieval scientists was to stray beyond facts into realms better interpreted by revealed texts.

 

[The Liturgist]

all of these ideas ( note that I didn’t say facts) are from creationist pseudoscience organizations that don’t actually use science. None of them are true! . They all rely on the fact that laymen tend to misunderstand science and misuse science facts.

Also I would stress that one doesn’t need the psuedoscience to believe in either young earth creationism, or my own preference of theistic, God-guided evolution of the cosmos, which I feel the scriptural creation account is the only religious account of creation which could not only conceivably be interpreted as a decent metaphorical allegory of what happened, but also is a very good allegorical explanation of the scientific process in its own right, which in no sense denies the Christian principle of creation ex nihlo.

Also bravo your posts on general relativity, which is often struggled with around here.

 

[Bryar Kader]

There are also cases of fossils of predators having fossils of prey, in their digestive tracks, dating back to the cambrian.

Reconstructing the diet of a 505-million-year-old arthropod: Sidneyia inexpectans from the Burgess Shale fauna - ScienceDirect

So literally in the oldest macro invertebrate fossils we've ever discovered, death was a part of creation.

http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/products/archives/BC52.PDF
I encourage all of you guys to read this newsletter put out by Dr. Gerald Aardsma. He makes the observation that death, animal or human, prior to the fall is inconsistent with Biblical creation, but at the same time that there is evidence of death in the fossil record that greatly predates Adam. He reconciles these two seemingly contradictory points by arguing that the Fall itself was what created the fossil record. While at first glance this statement seems rather Gosseian (referencing Philip Gosse’s Omphalos Theory), he does not state that the history of the fossil record is not true history as Gosse does, but rather it records how the very nature of creation itself, past and present, was altered as a consequence of Adam, Eve, and Lucifer’s sin.

 

[Oaktree125]

Also I would stress that one doesn’t need the psuedoscience to believe in either young earth creationism, or my own preference of theistic, God-guided evolution of the cosmos, which I feel the scriptural creation account is the only religious account of creation which could not only conceivably be interpreted as a decent metaphorical allegory of what happened, but also is a very good allegorical explanation of the scientific process in its own right, which in no sense denies the Christian principle of creation ex nihlo.

Also bravo your posts on general relativity, which is often struggled with around here.

Is ex nihil Creation mandatory given the presence of "the waters" which part to reveal land? Im thinking more ex omnibus like from 'all potentials' in the manner quantum mechanics indicates (IMU) since i.e. the measure of the electron magnetic moment is the sum of all contributions not the raw classical value. If it is not strictly held then having the sun appear later makes more sense if there is some integrated backdrop and things are being 'called up' (named) from it or 'observed by God" which resembles Christian 'calling'. Just a thought....

 

[Bryar Kader]

Is ex nihil Creation mandatory given the presence of "the waters" which part to reveal land? Im thinking more ex omnibus like from 'all potentials' in the manner quantum mechanics indicates (IMU) since i.e. the measure of the electron magnetic moment is the sum of all contributions not the raw classical value. If it is not strictly held then having the sun appear later makes more sense if there is some integrated backdrop and things are being 'called up' (named) from it or 'observed by God" which resembles Christian 'calling'. Just a thought....

What you are describing bears a resemblance to Exemplar Creation, described in the link below;
Exemplar Creation: A Stunning New Interpretation of Genesis
While I don’t necessarily ascribe to this model, it is none the less intriguing and thought provoking!

 

[Oaktree125]

What you are describing bears a resemblance to Exemplar Creation, described in the link below;
Exemplar Creation: A Stunning New Interpretation of Genesis
While I don’t necessarily ascribe to this model, it is none the less intriguing and thought provoking!

Thanks for that and Id like to make one point separately for the group that articles states "I certainly agree – to a point – that God can do anything he wants and it is foolish to limit his infinity with our finite thinking; I am always hesitant to definitively rule anything out. But when there is no evidence for such speculations either in science or Scripture, and the only reason such speculations are even proposed is to explain evidence that seems to conflict with the Bible, perhaps that unfalsifiable skepticism that is applied to the evidence should also be applied to our translated interpretations of that Bible – surely God could have done whatever he wanted regarding the uncertainties of one just as well as the other." and all my assertions will be that God does something SPECIFIC, and consistent, on purpose as part of the message of salvation and Him choosing to limit His activity is strictly in order to communicate. My ideas are not fundamentally limiting to the power of God and we have to be careful to see that defining mechanisms are inclusive to the purpose of Scripture....

So I have a problem with expanding Creation directly given the information in the second account that says no seeds grew, no rain, and no man was there to work the soil.... there is also light but no sun that has to provide gravitational energy over the expanded eras. So by Scriptural fact Im forced to think

That the Fall was produced by an excursion from God's authority. By Scripture again we are told that it culminates in The Flood. The reason the Flood happens is a global excursion from God's authority and therefore 2 sources are created. that is why i think 2 separate histories are being fielded and no matter how mind bending it might be to imagine I think it was the result of supragenius intelligence. Revealing a sole source and sole purpose in it is restorative. It might take a universal language like science (aka Tower of Babel) to demonstrate that the sole source is and has been carried through by God- and Scripture is actually pre-retrodictive of it. Thus we expect 2 sources of information that have vague resembles and one is merely an excursion in time that was forced to solve the problem.
So in case you didnt catch that in my mumbo jumbo "what happens in the Flood..." was 'a record' of God dealing with that 2nd authority and is a historical remnant across time rather than a moment in it due to the divine presence- at scale -on earth....which might = your 'mass' necessary for time dilation.