How to explain 13.8 billion years?

dad · Feb 23, 2017

Queller said:
Barringer Crater in AZ, Chicxulub Crater in the Gulf, and Supernova remnants.

OK the Chicxulub formation could be a remnant of a fountain of the deep. The Barringer crater is only a mile or so across so I am not sure that helps you. As for SN remnants, you would need to know distances for starters. You do not. You have simply tried to impose the space and time realities of earth into deep space by pure blind faith. Ho hum.

Please don't waste my time with any claims about physical forces working the same in the past without some kind of evidence.

And over the years I been discussing this with you and seen others do so as well, you have never provided any such evidence.

dad · Feb 23, 2017

Queller said:
You're shifting the burden of proof. It is your claim that the physical forces of the universe worked differently in the past therefore it is up to you to provide evidence for that claim. Not the other way around.

You're shifting the burden of proof. It is your claim that the physical forces of the universe worked the same and were the same in the past therefore it is up to you to provide evidence for that claim. Not the other way around.

Otherwise you are relegated to the 'I don't know' dept! From that dept when one claims to know it is fake news.

Queller · Feb 23, 2017

netzone23 said:
13 billion years really? Cause I heard someone said it was more around 15 billion and then someone told me it more around 12 billion so which number is correct?

The currently accepted age of the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years, just as it says in the thread title.

Its like the age of the galaxies seems like a theory to me but thats crazy talk cause its not a theory.

Can you tell us what a theory is in science?

Science is great it tells us what the sun is made out of and what the moon is made out of and proves that there is no God since we all evolved correct?

I don't know who told you this but they are flat out wrong. Neither evolution nor any other scientific theory can tell us anything about the existence of God. God is beyond the realm of science.

I believe what the bible says if the bible says the world was created in 6 days then it was created in six literal days. God created Adam then that means humans didn't evolve but created. Then people say what about how old the universe is its billions of years? I tell them that science is wrong. People have been twisting science to prove christians wrong and to prove there is no God so why trust them when they say how old there universe is? If you start questioning the bible then you might as well place it with fairy tales. If you say the earth has to be older than six thousand years, so then you say the bible got that wrong since the earth is millions of years old. then you can say its impossible for Jesus to be brought back to life since science doesn't support miracles.

Believe the bible or not the earth was created in six literal days. The whole universe is around 6000 years old.
What is the sun really made of do we truly know? Or are we just guessing?

Are you even open to the possibility that you might be wrong with your interpretation of the Bible?

Queller · Feb 23, 2017

prodromos said:
Cap, I'm not sure what your point is. We were here to witness what happened last Thursday. We weren't here to witness what happened 6000 years ago.

Last Thursdayism is a hypothetical scenario in which God (or somebody's cat, I forget which) brought the world into existence last Thursday. Everything was created as is even you and your memories of anything prior to last Thursday. How would you prove it wrong?

It is the "appearance of age/maturity" argument (also known as the Omphalos Hypothesis) taken to the extreme.

JacksBratt · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
Because we don't have the originals of any of the books of Genesis. We are relying on copies of copies of copies and the fallible men who continually translated the previous copies.

Actually, the dead sea scrolls are very old copies of many of the books of the OT.

What is more important than this is the fact that Adam lived long enough to talk to Methuselah. Methuselah lived long enough to talk to Noah's sons. Shem lived long enough to talk to Jacob.

If you think about that, it shortens up the whole false "broken telephone" attitude toward the years of handing down a story.

Methuselah knew it as told by the original observer. Jacob heard it third hand.... pretty impressive.

Sorry, not copies of copies though.

Queller said:
Do you believe the devil took Jesus to a mountain high enough to see all the kingdoms of the world? If so, where is it?

So, you don't believe anything spiritual? Please tell me how this fits with your designation as a Christian.

Queller said:
Not a fool to believe the Bible but a little silly to accept an interpretation of the Bible that contradicts the evidence of God's fingerprints He left behind. Especially when that interpretation has no effect on salvation.

So, in other words your not a fool who takes the word of God over the musings of men?

Sorry, but, let God's word be true and every man a liar.

JoeP222w · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
Do you have any evidence that the basic physical forces of the universe worked differently in the past?

No. Likewise there is no evidence of Uniformitarianism either, only assumptions.

prodromos · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
Last Thursdayism is a hypothetical scenario in which God (or somebody's cat, I forget which) brought the world into existence last Thursday. Everything was created as is even you and your memories of anything prior to last Thursday. How would you prove it wrong?

It is the "appearance of age/maturity" argument (also known as the Omphalos Hypothesis) taken to the extreme.

Ah, thank you.
Since the Scriptures don't suggest in the slightest that God created the universe last Thursday, I believe we can safely dismiss taking that argument to such a silly extreme.

BobRyan · Feb 24, 2017

prodromos said:
Ah, thank you.
Since the Scriptures don't suggest in the slightest that God created the universe last Thursday, I believe we can safely dismiss taking that argument to such a silly extreme.

True.

Every argument against "God did something" can imagine some sort of extreme "God did it again 5 minutes ago but is hiding it from us" straw man. And that includes things like the incarnation, bodily resurrection of Christ,, resurrection of Lazarus, miracles in the Bible, world wide flood, giving of the TEN commandments etc.

Every time God is shown to have "done something" an atheist could respond with some sort of straw man. And they often do. There is no "news" there.

BobRyan · Feb 24, 2017

dad said:
You're shifting the burden of proof. It is your claim that the physical forces of the universe worked the same and were the same in the past therefore it is up to you to provide evidence for that claim. Not the other way around.

Otherwise you are relegated to the 'I don't know' dept! From that dept when one claims to know it is fake news.

Actually that is not the claim of the Big-Bang-atheists. Their claim is that there were "entirely different laws of physics" back with the big bang happened -- so then "no gravity" and no electromagnetic forces in the first few moments of the "big bang" but then all these forces of nature - 'suddenly came into existence' once the big bang got going and temp went up high enough, and space-time fabric had expanded out far enough.... "as the story goes".

Same box of crackerjacks used for life "self organizing" from abiotic matter.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

dad said:
Nope! Many of them may have not even gotten out of orbit when being ejected in the flood year and flopped back. Most of them fell in the former state and one feature of that state was that rocks did not get hot as they now do.

Too bad you have no evidence of the "former state" and no evidence to support your claim that rocks did not get as hot as they now do.

You simply look at the present rules and try to mold the reality of the past to them.

Because I have seen no credible evidence to support the idea that the physical forces of the universe worked differently in the past.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

BobRyan said:
There is nothing that shows this to be fact. There are at least three sources for craters on earth. Two of them are at the flood when a spike in asteroid hits may have been accompanied with large eruptions on earth that also resulted in craters as large objects were cast out from the surface and sank back down into the ground when they fell. None of which would have resulted in a "molten earth". Though I do grant you it makes for "good stories".

We already have one "dad" who makes wildly unsupported claims about multi-million-ton rocks being ejected from the earth and falling back to earth. Do we really need two?

Why on earth would a multi-million-ton rock be vaporized after falling only a few miles into miles-deep water? And since it wouldn't be vaporized, where is the impactor that formed the Chicxulub Crater? It is estimated to have been at least 6 miles across.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

dad said:
OK the Chicxulub formation could be a remnant of a fountain of the deep.

So where is the impactor? A 6 mile diameter, multi-million ton rock falling into several miles of water is not going to be vaporized.

The Barringer crater is only a mile or so across so I am not sure that helps you.

If the Chicxulub Crater and the Barringer Crater were formed during the Flood (not to mention other such as the Vredefort Crater and Sudbury Basin), why weren't they worn away equally as the waters left the earth?

As for SN remnants, you would need to know distances for starters. You do not. You have simply tried to impose the space and time realities of earth into deep space by pure blind faith. Ho hum.

Distance isn't remotely the problem for Supernova Remnants (SNRs). SNRs take millions of years to form. In a 6,000 year-old universe, why do we have any SNRs at all?

Please don't waste my time with any claims about physical forces working the same in the past without some kind of evidence.

And over the years I been discussing this with you and seen others do so as well, you have never provided any such evidence.

Is that the best you can do, copy what I said? A reasonable adult would provide evidence instead of childish repetition.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

JacksBratt said:
Actually, the dead sea scrolls are very old copies of many of the books of the OT.

What is more important than this is the fact that Adam lived long enough to talk to Methuselah. Methuselah lived long enough to talk to Noah's sons. Shem lived long enough to talk to Jacob.

If you think about that, it shortens up the whole false "broken telephone" attitude toward the years of handing down a story.

Methuselah knew it as told by the original observer. Jacob heard it third hand.... pretty impressive.

Even three or four people is enough to break the telephone chain.

Sorry, not copies of copies though.

Then where are the originals?

So, you don't believe anything spiritual? Please tell me how this fits with your designation as a Christian.

Of course I believe in the spiritual. What does that have to do with the question I asked? Are you claiming that Satan's temptations of Jesus were not literal events? How do you know?

So, in other words your not a fool who takes the word of God over the musings of men?

Sorry, but, let God's word be true and every man a liar.

God's word is true. Man's interpretation of that Word is fallible.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

prodromos said:
Ah, thank you.
Since the Scriptures don't suggest in the slightest that God created the universe last Thursday, I believe we can safely dismiss taking that argument to such a silly extreme.

Why should we dismiss it? It is exactly the same argument as claiming that God created light on the way to earth or that God created earth with an appearance of age/maturity. Why should we dismiss one and not the other?

prodromos · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
Why should we dismiss it? It is exactly the same argument as claiming that God created light on the way to earth or that God created earth with an appearance of age/maturity. Why should we dismiss one and not the other?

One is supported by Scripture, the other is not.

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

JoeP222w said:
No. Likewise there is no evidence of Uniformitarianism either, only assumptions.

So you're assuming non-uniformitarianism? How is that any better than what I am being accused of?

Here's one explanation of why the speed of light, at least, must have remained close to the same throughout history.

When we look at a distant star we see it as it was when the light left it, regardless of how long the light took to reach us. A number of stars and other objects behave as very accurate clocks, due to pulsation, rotation or orbital revolution. If the velocity of light was much higher in the past, then we would consistently find that such “clocks” would appear to be ticking much slower at greater distances than in our neighborhood, as one would get a slow motion effect. This is not the case, unless you go to distances of billions of light years, where is this is observed, but due to the expansion of the universe. In fact as the light with time left the “clocks” would be slowing down, we would consistently see such clocks speeding up. This is not observed. Source

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

prodromos said:
One is supported by Scripture, the other is not.

The idea that God created light in transit and created the earth with an appearance of history is supported by Scripture? Do you have chapter and verse to support that rather extraordinary claim?

BobRyan · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
We already have one "dad" who makes wildly unsupported claims about multi-million-ton rocks being ejected from the earth and falling back to earth. Do we really need two?

Do you have a "down scale" version of how a world wide flood "works"? Shall we "yield to your expertise" in that area or just stick with the Bible.

There is an interesting choice indeed.

Why on earth would a multi-million-ton rock be vaporized after falling only a few miles into miles-deep water? And since it wouldn't be vaporized, where is the impactor that formed the Chicxulub Crater? It is estimated to have been at least 6 miles across.

I would never argue against there being a ton of guesswork and guestimates in the alternatives you suggest. Certainly... myriads of them.

BobRyan · Feb 24, 2017

Queller said:
The idea that God created light in transit and created the earth with an appearance of history is supported by Scripture?

The Big Bang idea that the fabric of space time "expanded faster than the speed of light" -- is supported by experiments in the lab???

Queller · Feb 24, 2017

BobRyan said:
The Big Bang idea that the fabric of space time "expanded faster than the speed of light" -- is supported by experiments in the lab???

You have a real problem answering simple, straightforward questions, even when they're posed to other people don't you? Are you and dad related?

What makes you think experiments must be conducted "in the lab"?

How to explain 13.8 billion years?

Undefeated!

Undefeated!

I'm where?

I'm where?

Searching for Truth

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Junior Member

Junior Member

I'm where?

I'm where?

I'm where?

I'm where?

I'm where?

Senior Veteran

I'm where?

I'm where?

Junior Member

Junior Member

I'm where?

Similar threads