"Embedded Age" Requires Fake Fossils

[AV1611VET]

Present? not as many as you would like to think.

Can you name me one Christian in the present that does not believe it?

Islam will be the next cause for concern for people in the future.

Even if that happens, Islams believe: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Bear in mind I'm not denying expansion due to the Doppler effect (the motion of objects through space relative to us), but the expansion of the space itself is in the realm of magic.

All you need to show now is the cause/effect relationship between the results from those tests and the expansion of empty space.

Good luck.

Oh, the expansion of space is no more magic than the existence of space. Space isn't a real thing. What is real are events, and the relations between the events. You can interpret the observations as expanding space OR you can interpret the observations as relativity slowing of time for the distant moving objects. EITHER WAY WORKS EQUALLY AS WELL and they can be used interchangeably. If you don't like the idea of expanding space, simply enjoy the idea of distant galaxies having time slowed because of their faster motion as the recession speeds approach the speed of light.

Of course, if you want to think of the universe as finite though very very great, then expanding space is easier to hang onto that concept. A great hypersphere that grows with time seems a logical thing to suppose. If you want to think of the universe as infinite, then contemplating the moment the universe began as a "singularity" gets to be a difficult idea.

But then, we have to admit that part hasn't been figured out yet anyway.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

[VERSE=Romans 10:17,KJV]So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.[/VERSE][VERSE=1 Thessalonians 2:13,KJV]For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.[/VERSE]

So are you saying you believe the Bible because you believe the Bible? That's not true. That's not how you started to believe the Bible. You might continue to believe the bible because you believe the Bible, but that's not why you started to believe the Bible. Why did you start to believe the Bible?

 

[Subduction Zone]

We don't need an explanation. We already know the explanation -- it's all over the internet. If I wanted to place my faith in an explanation I would read the Bible.

What we need is the observation that confirms the explanation without the need for circular reasoning (like we see space expansion because we see redshift, and we see redshift because we see space expansion).

If the empty space between two objects is observed to expand, then show us that observation and the cause/effect relationship between that observation and redshift, and enough with the make-belief stories.

But that would be foolishness on your part. The Bible is not a book of science. It was never meant to be. It has no explanation for how life got to its present state, much less of the universe itself.

And you sadly are the one that is using circular reasoning. Once again you show that you have no idea how science is done.

 

[Subduction Zone]

More hogwash.

It’s referred to as plasma redshift here:

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401420

Yes, plasma can redshift light. The problem is that this redshifting is frequency dependent and does not match the observed redshifting of the universe. And that is not exactly a peer reviewed paper. That is an open source outlet. So you failed twice using that claim.

 

[Astrophile]

Bear in mind I'm not denying expansion due to the Doppler effect (the motion of objects through space relative to us), but the expansion of the space itself is in the realm of magic.

All you need to show now is the cause/effect relationship between the results from those tests and the expansion of empty space.

Good luck.

The fact that the redshift increases linearly with the distance of the object, with a ratio of 67.80±0.77 km/s/Mpc, is evidence that the redshift is due to the expansion of space rather than to the individual motion of galaxies relative to the Milky Way. How could the radial velocities of galaxies increase with distance in this way; are they all running away from us?

 

[dad]

Oh please, if anyone is making "godless chirping" it is you. Your beliefs are not supported by either the Bible or by science. Your beliefs have been show to be wrong using Scripture. You were defeated by me long ago. You probably have not made one valid post in years here.

My belief is simply that the models of science are firmly based on the belief and assumption that current nature reflects the past. You cannot dispute that. It screams out like a wounded barnyard owl. As for the past in future in the bible, it is obvious they are different than now. That is a no brainer. All one needs is honesty. Cut the godless chirps.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My belief is simply that the models of science are firmly based on the belief and assumption that current nature reflects the past. You cannot dispute that. It screams out like a wounded barnyard owl. As for the past in future in the bible, it is obvious they are different than now. That is a no brainer. All one needs is honesty. Cut the godless chirps.

And yet you cannot support your "alternate past" with either the Bible or science. You still have less than nothing.

 

[dad]

And yet you cannot support your "alternate past" with either the Bible or science. You still have less than nothing.

Science cannot support ANY past state. Cut the chirping on and on, and deal with that reality. The bible does indicate major differences, so I am not sure why you pretend to have some bible case against it, you sure don't. On all fronts, you lose.

 

[JasonClark]

Can you name me one Christian in the present that does not believe it?Even if that happens, Islams believe: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

How would I know a real Christian from a not so real Christian, can you tell them apart?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Science cannot support ANY past state. Cut the chirping on and on, and deal with that reality. The bible does indicate major differences, so I am not sure why you pretend to have some bible case against it, you sure don't. On all fronts, you lose.

Sure it can. You have almost no understanding of science so you are naturally wrong. And no, the Bible says nothing about "altered states".

 

[dad]

Sure it can. You have almost no understanding of science so you are naturally wrong. And no, the Bible says nothing about "altered states".

Altered states?? I would think that heaven and Eden were normal, we are in an altered state.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Altered states?? I would think that heaven and Eden were normal, we are in an altered state.

You are the one that keeps claiming a mythical altered state. We know that there was no Eden. Who knows about whether there is an actual heaven or not. I don't think anyone would trust your interpretation of the Bible.

 

[dad]

You are the one that keeps claiming a mythical altered state.

I don't call the created nature that, sorry.

We know that there was no Eden.

Sure you do. Even making such a stupid claim shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Who knows about whether there is an actual heaven or not.

Jesus. Paul. John' Ezekiel. Isaiah. Daniel...etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

How would I know a real Christian from a not so real Christian, can you tell them apart?

Then I'll take this:

Present? not as many as you would like to think.

... with a grain of salt.

 

[Doveaman]

plasma redshift here:http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401420

Oh, the expansion of space is no more magic than the existence of space. Space isn't a real thing.

But yet I'm suppose to believe that something that isn't a real thing can expand.

 

[Doveaman]

Yes, plasma can redshift light.

Therefore your space expansion trick is unnecessary.

The problem is that this redshifting is frequency dependent and does not match the observed redshifting of the universe.

Yeah right.

When it doesn't fit, just ignore it or discard it:

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401420

"The plasma redshift explains the observed magnitude-redshift relation for supernovae SNe Ia without the big bang, dark matter, or dark energy. There is no cosmic time dilation. The universe is not expanding...This means that there is no need for Einstein's Lambda term. The universe is quasi-static, infinite, and everlasting."

And that is not exactly a peer reviewed paper. That is an open source outlet. So you failed twice using that claim.

It's an acceptable scientific source that even you accept.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Therefore your space expansion trick is unnecessary.

Wrong. I explained why your paper was wrong.

Yeah right.

When it doesn't fit, just ignore it or discard it:

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401420

"The plasma redshift explains the observed magnitude-redshift relation for supernovae SNe Ia without the big bang, dark matter, or dark energy. There is no cosmic time dilation. The universe is not expanding...This means that there is no need for Einstein's Lambda term. The universe is quasi-static, infinite, and everlasting."
It's an acceptable scientific source that even you accept.

Nope,I never have. Once again I requested a peer reviewed paper. That paper was no peer reviewed. When they try to slip that past peer review it is pointed out that the redshift observed in plasma is frequency dependent. Do you realize why that means that you failed?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't call the created nature that, sorry.

I could have sworn that you did.

Sure you do. Even making such a stupid claim shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Now dad you know that is not true.

Jesus. Paul. John' Ezekiel. Isaiah. Daniel...etc.

So you are admitting that you have nothing again. Thanks dad.

 

[Kylie]

Can you name me one Christian in the present that does not believe it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/one.in.50.clergy.dont.believe.in.god/42082.htm