Andromeda

[AV1611VET]

Point (3) is definitely falsifiable, the science shows this premise is wrong as explained in this post.

Fair enough.

I can live with that.

There's other ways God could have done it.

Maybe I should start a challenge thread on the Star of Bethlehem?

You know?

The one that first appeared and led some men to Jerusalem?

Then disappeared and reappeared later, leading them to a specific street address in Bethlehem?

Let's see what your charts and graphs have to say about that!

 

[AV1611VET]

I might add that the days in Genesis might not be 24 hour days, since the sun wasn’t created or put in its place until day 3 or 4.

That reminds me of a creationist test I once made up:

1. Define Embedded Age.
2. Explain the difference between creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex materia; and give two examples of each.
3. Why is "heaven" singular in Genesis 1, but plural in Genesis 2?
4. Eden in the Bible is known as __________ on a secular map.
5. Put the following in order that they appeared in the universe: whales, stars, trees, sun, land, sea, outer space.
6. What day was Adam created on?
7. Was the universe created a closed system and, if not, what kind of energy did it run off of? if it was created open, what closed it?
8. Describe terra aqua and what kind of water it consisted of and why.
9. Photosynthesis required light from the sun prior to the Fall. true or false?
10. Explain how a 24-hour day could transpire before the sun was created.
11. Explain the difference between "miracles" and "magic."
12. What literary device reconciles Genesis 1 and Genesis 2?
13. When discussing Creationism, why should one never let himself stray from Genesis 1 or 2?
14. What was the first object in the universe that had mass?

 

[Jerry N.]

That reminds me of a creationist test I once made up:

1. Define Embedded Age.
2. Explain the difference between creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex materia; and give two examples of each.
3. Why is "heaven" singular in Genesis 1, but plural in Genesis 2?
4. Eden in the Bible is known as __________ on a secular map.
5. Put the following in order that they appeared in the universe: whales, stars, trees, sun, land, sea, outer space.
6. What day was Adam created on?
7. Was the universe created a closed system and, if not, what kind of energy did it run off of? if it was created open, what closed it?
8. Describe terra aqua and what kind of water it consisted of and why.
9. Photosynthesis required light from the sun prior to the Fall. true or false?
10. Explain how a 24-hour day could transpire before the sun was created.
11. Explain the difference between "miracles" and "magic."
12. What literary device reconciles Genesis 1 and Genesis 2?
13. When discussing Creationism, why should one never let himself stray from Genesis 1 or 2?
14. What was the first object in the universe that had mass?

It is a wonderful set of questions, and I can’t answer many of them. I was a proponent of the gap theory, until my wife set me straight, since she speaks Hebrew. I still lean that way, but I’m less sure. I’m sure that Moses wrote down what God told him, but one speaks at the understanding level of the listener, in this case, Moses. It is all true, but it is just a preface to the important parts of the Torah. The details in relation to modern thought and discoveries were not considered, but it is fun to think about it. The question is of authority in the debate of evolution and creationism—science or the Bible. I go with the Bible, but I disagree with some who think everything in the Bible is of equal inspiration.

 

[sjastro]

I reread your post, and I must say that I haven’t done calculus for over 40 years. However, I would say that point 3 is also unfalsifiable. It assumes that God could not move light or solid objects faster than the speed of light, but God determined the speed of light. I might add that the days in Genesis might not be 24 hour days, since the sun wasn’t created or put in its place until day 3 or 4. Anyhow, the original creation light may have been well past the earth at that time.

The idea of starlight created independent of the stars emitting them was cooked up by YECists so that the universe can be much larger than 6000 light years diameter without violating its 6000 year old age.
They even gave it a sciency sounding name the ”light created in transit” hypothesis. Technically it is not a hypothesis as there is not a shred of evidence which supports it.

As mentioned in post #16, the 'hypothesis' leads to an equivalent scenario of an infinitely old universe where the starlight from all stars has reached the Earth.
This allows the 'hypothesis' to be set up as a null hypothesis which is falsifiable.

• Null hypothesis (H₀): Light-in-transit creation → all Earth-directed photons from all stars at arbitrary distance exist from t = Day 4.
• Prediction under H₀: Sky brightness should follow an Olbers-type divergence (infinite universe) or at least scale linearly with the chosen artificial cutoff radius (finite universe).
• Observed: The night sky is far below the level predicted by a uniform light-in-transit universe as demonstrated in post #16.

 

[Jerry N.]

The idea of starlight created independent of the stars emitting them was cooked up by YECists so that the universe can be much larger than 6000 light years diameter without violating its 6000 year old age.
They even gave it a sciency sounding name the ”light created in transit” hypothesis. Technically it is not a hypothesis as there is not a shred of evidence which supports it.

As mentioned in post #16, the 'hypothesis' leads to an equivalent scenario of an infinitely old universe where the starlight from all stars has reached the Earth.
This allows the 'hypothesis' to be set up as a null hypothesis which is falsifiable.

• Null hypothesis (H₀): Light-in-transit creation → all Earth-directed photons from all stars at arbitrary distance exist from t = Day 4.
• Prediction under H₀: Sky brightness should follow an Olbers-type divergence (infinite universe) or at least scale linearly with the chosen artificial cutoff radius (finite universe).
• Observed: The night sky is far below the level predicted by a uniform light-in-transit universe as demonstrated in post #16.

I wasn’t familiar with the YEC theory, and I have my doubts about the universe being 6000 years old. Adam was created around 6000 years ago, but it doesn’t follow that everything else is only 5 days older. Everything you wrote seems fine, but I was trying to nudge the discussion in a new direction. Since God can do whatever He wants, I get the feeling that there must be some overlap between evolution and creation, which is why I find these threads so interesting. My wife has to use a microscope on a daily bases, and the complexity of the tiny creatures is fantastic. As an engineer, I can’t image that there wasn’t divine design. Entropy is a very strong “force.” Everything falls apart and decays with time, and I am supposed to believe that evolution is an exception.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

The only way to explain it theoretically is that time in our Solar System passes VERY slowly compared to the time outside of our Solar System which passes VERY quickly.

... I think.

You are kidding me! This answer coming from the same guy who was arguing with me over the absolute validity of the theory of evolution. You are very confusing. Surely, you have a more scientific explanation for this than what you gave here. Here is one you can look into Michael Heiser view of the cosmos. Hopefully, I'll have remembered this correctly. Heiser believes God created the Universe a long time ago but it sat there with no meaning and undefined.

So, the light from the Andromeda Galaxy had time to travel to Earth before God gave function to the objects in the Universe (which is in Genesis)

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You are kidding me! This answer coming from the same guy who was arguing with me over the absolute validity of the theory of evolution. You are very confusing. Surely, you have a more scientific explanation for this than what you gave here. Here is one you can look into Michael Heiser view of the cosmos. Hopefully, I'll have remembered this correctly. Heiser believes God created the Universe a long time ago but it sat there with no meaning and undefined.

So, the light from the Andromeda Galaxy had time to travel to Earth before God gave function to the objects in the Universe (which is in Genesis)

I was giving an answer as the per the specifications that AV put forward, ludicrous as they are. I don't at all agree with AV's claim that the universe was created 6000 years ago but has everything in it looking billions or millions of years old because he said God did it that way.

So yes, I am kidding you.

 

[AV1611VET]

Here is one you can look into Michael Heiser view of the cosmos.

This is where I come in with one of my favorite mantras.

Where the Hebrew differs from the King James, the Hebrew is wrong.

In your video, Heiser is appealing to the Hebrew word "bara" to say it means "creation ex nihilo."

He then points out that the Hebrew says Adam was created "bara" or out of nothing, which contradicts chapter 2, which has Adam being created from the dust of the ground.

To reconcile this, Heiser says "bara" cannot mean "creation ex nihilo."

And this is my point:

"Bara" could very well mean "creation ex nihilo," but was not the word Moses wrote down, when he edited Genesis 1.

Somewhere along the line of time, the word Moses used -- (whatever it was) -- got Arab-phoned to "bara" via a copyist not paying attention, and ended up in Strong's Concordance as such.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

Where the King James differs from the Hebrew, the Hebrew is wrong.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Bara in Welsh means 'bread'.

 

[AV1611VET]

Bara in Welsh means 'bread'.

Interesting, in light of my raisin bread challenge.

Have you seen it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Interesting, in light of my raisin bread challenge.

Have you seen it?

You bring it up every chance you get...

 

[AV1611VET]

You bring it up every chance you get...

Thanks for the opportunity!

 

[Yttrium]

And... I've just wasted my time typing this, didn't I?

Nah, it's useful to the casual reader. I might add that we can see a fair amount of light bending, which wouldn't happen with AV's direct wormhole thing.

 

[Jerry N.]

The only way to explain it theoretically is that time in our Solar System passes VERY slowly compared to the time outside of our Solar System which passes VERY quickly.

... I think.

Good idea, but I don't think it can be proved. Could Voyager 1 tell us something?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Good idea, but I don't think it can be proved. Could Voyager 1 tell us something?

I was honestly being facetious since I do not, in any way shape or form, accept nor agree with nor believe in AV's claim that God created the world 6000 years ago but made everything else to look like it been here for millions or billions of years.

 

[Jerry N.]

I was honestly being facetious since I do not, in any way shape or form, accept nor agree with nor believe in AV's claim that God created the world 6000 years ago but made everything else to look like it been here for millions or billions of years.

Sorry, I missed the joke.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Sorry, I missed the joke.

There's no good way to make a text based comment come across as a joke without either too many emojis (even one can be too much sometimes) or using stuff like /JOKING or /SARCASM at the end, so I don't blame you for not seeing the joke.

 

[Jerry N.]

There's no good way to make a text based comment come across as a joke without either too many emojis (even one can be too much sometimes) or using stuff like /JOKING or /SARCASM at the end, so I don't blame you for not seeing the joke.

Thanks, I feel better.