Are creationists dwindling in number?

[Northwest Savant]

Do you seriously think that polling agencies have not adapted their methods of polling over the years?

The more obvious answer is that education is winning the day. It is getting harder and harder to hide one's head in the sand.

What does education state is the actual age of the universe?

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, how did the young people change during this period of time? Which one is changing faster?

The internet is a source of education for those that want to learn.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What does education state is the actual age of the universe?

A rather poorly worded question, but the universe as we know it is about 13.8 billion years old:

Big Bang - Wikipedia

 

[Northwest Savant]

A rather poorly worded question, but the universe as we know it is about 13.8 billion years old:

Big Bang - Wikipedia

Well, I thought you might look to more recent educational resources that narrow the big bang to 13.799±0.021 billion years. The "about" is in that +/- .021 or 21 million years old. Pretty precise, huh? But your 13.8 billion years will work, as long as your meaning of "about" is within a reasonable amount of time, let's say less than a billion years of inaccuracy.

When I was in college 35 years ago, "education" stated that the age of the universe was about 9 billion years old using the Harwit model and a Hubble constant of 75. After the Hubble telescope provided some deep field images, certain quasars in those images appeared to be older than the universe itself. Soon afterward, the age of the universe and the big bang theory had changed almost miraculously by new scientific data. That was when I started to doubt scientific theories ofthe universe. Even today, there are some models that suggest that there was no big bang,and that the universe has always existed.

I bring this to your attention, because your reliability in "education" and wikipedia, leads me to believe that you therefore have determined that the universe is 13.8 billion years old. Something even more educational will be occuring soon. A new space telescope, the JWST is scheduled to be launched in October of 2018. The Hubble telescope was restricted by how far in the past it could view images. This is because of the red shift in the light sources moving away from the earth. The JWST will be using infrared image viewing so that light sources in the infrared range will become viewable. Why is this important? Should the data from the infrared images similarly show that star systems exist in which stars were created more than 13.8 billion years ago, then "education" will be proven false. However, no scientists will consider the big bang theory false. No, it will be changed to conform to an adjusted theory that continues to disprove the existance of God. I hope at that time, you will consider looking into the possibility that the Bible has been true all along. I did. All you have to do is promise to yourself that if that JWST proves wikipedia wrong, I will come back to this forum and start asking for evidence that the Bible is true.

See ya in 2018!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, I thought you might look to more recent educational resources that narrow the big bang to 13.799±0.021 billion years. The "about" is in that +/- .021 or 21 million years old. Pretty precise, huh? But your 13.8 billion years will work, as long as your meaning of "about" is within a reasonable amount of time, let's say less than a billion years of inaccuracy.

When I was in college 35 years ago, "education" stated that the age of the universe was about 9 billion years old using the Harwit model and a Hubble constant of 75. After the Hubble telescope provided some deep field images, certain quasars in those images appeared to be older than the universe itself. Soon afterward, the age of the universe and the big bang theory had changed almost miraculously by new scientific data. That was when I started to doubt scientific theories ofthe universe. Even today, there are some models that suggest that there was no big bang,and that the universe has always existed.

I bring this to your attention, because your reliability in "education" and wikipedia, leads me to believe that you therefore have determined that the universe is 13.8 billion years old. Something even more educational will be occuring soon. A new space telescope, the JWST is scheduled to be launched in October of 2018. The Hubble telescope was restricted by how far in the past it could view images. This is because of the red shift in the light sources moving away from the earth. The JWST will be using infrared image viewing so that light sources in the infrared range will become viewable. Why is this important? Should the data from the infrared images similarly show that star systems exist in which stars were created more than 13.8 billion years ago, then "education" will be proven false. However, no scientists will consider the big bang theory false. No, it will be changed to conform to an adjusted theory that continues to disprove the existance of God. I hope at that time, you will consider looking into the possibility that the Bible has been true all along. I did. All you have to do is promise to yourself that if that JWST proves wikipedia wrong, I will come back to this forum and start asking for evidence that the Bible is true.

See ya in 2018!

You don't seem to understand how science is done.

Yes, dates have changed, but they tend to get more and more accurate. I would love to see that source of your date. Creationists often pick dates on the fringe and falsely claim "this was the date"...
But we have learned more since the time when you first saw your date. Scientists used t think that the expansion of the Big Bang was a one shot deal, but in the last 20 years they found, again with better and more accurate telescopes, that it is still expanding today and that changed the date a bit. It may change a bit more in the future.

I don't know why you asked your question. Surely you know that the dates of YEC's are totally wrong.

Or at the very least I hope that you do.

 

[pitabread]

No, it will be changed to conform to an adjusted theory that continues to disprove the existance of God.

How do you figure god is disproved by the big bang theory?

 

[AV1611VET]

When I was in college 35 years ago, "education" stated that the age of the universe was about 9 billion years old using the Harwit model and a Hubble constant of 75.

Scientists will move the decimal point as needed to make their theories fit.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientists will move the decimal point as needed to make their theories fit.

When we learn new things in the sciences, yes, theories are adjusted.

That is much better than clinging to beliefs that were shown to be wrong over 200 years ago.

 

[AV1611VET]

When we learn new things in the sciences, yes, theories are adjusted.

Theories ≠ .

 

[pitabread]

When we learn new things in the sciences, yes, theories are adjusted.

That is much better than clinging to beliefs that were shown to be wrong over 200 years ago.

I've never understood how creationists can think that new scientific discovery expanding our knowledge of the universe is somehow a criticism of science.

I wonder sometimes if creationists even know why science is a thing we do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Theories ≠ .

Your post makes no sense.

Theories outrank your refuted beliefs. Something that you should never forget.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've never understood how creationists can think that new scientific discovery expanding our knowledge of the universe is somehow a criticism of science.

I wonder sometimes if creationists even know why science is a thing we do.

They have no answer to the question:

"How does the Bible correct its errors?"

They seem to think that any error in the Bible refutes their version of "God".

 

[AV1611VET]

Your post makes no sense.

AV: Scientists will move the decimal point as needed to make their theories fit.

SZ: ... yes, theories are adjusted.

AV: Theories are not decimal points.

SZ: Your post makes no sense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

AV: Scientists will move the decimal point as needed to make their theories fit.

SZ: ... yes, theories are adjusted.

AV: Theories are not decimal points.

SZ: Your post makes no sense.

Thank you for clarifying your error.

My response was still correct.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thank you for clarifying your error.

Let me get this straight.

Someone posts that it was taught that the universe was 9 billion years old.

Today it is considered 13.8 billion years old.

And the decimal place hasn't moved?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me get this straight.

Someone posts that it was taught that the universe was 9 billion years old.

Today it is considered 13.8 billion years old.

And the decimal place hasn't moved?

Nope. That is a change of a factor of only 1.5. "Moving the decimal point" indicates an error of a factor of ten. Just think how many decimal points you are off by.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nope. That is a change of a factor of only 1.5. "Moving the decimal point" indicates an error of a factor of ten. Just think how many decimal points you are off by.

LOL -- new math?

 

[pitabread]

LOL -- new math?

Regular math. Same as it's always been.

 

[AV1611VET]

Regular math. Same as it's always been.

It's no wonder science has littered the historical landscape with tombstones.

 

[pitabread]

It's no wonder science has littered the historical landscape with tombstones.

Because you don't understand math?

You might be giving yourself too much credit there.