To everyone in this forum, please, explain to me the Speed Of Light being C=299,792,458 metres per second. And the fact that, if we are in such a young Universe, we can see stars that are located at millions of light years away. Shouldn't we be unable to see them, because their light couldn't have possibly reached us, yet? From what I recall we should only be able to see starts only a thousand light years away. And, that is not the case. On a side note, why is the Universe degrading so fast, if it was created perfect? And, last of all, how in th heck did humans coexist with Dinosaurs and no human remains have been found on any Dinosaur remains? Don't tell me Dinosaurs were docile, that's like saying no wolf, tiger or lion has ever eaten a man, or child.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Explain the Speed Of Light.
- Thread starter Valiarius
- Start date
- Status
As far as I know, you are not allowed to post those sorts of questions here because they may offend some of us. But I'll answer nevertheless.
The universe was created 6000 years ago by an act of God. This creation, as you can expect, was a supernatural event and thus did of course not follow the usual laws of nature.
The speed of light is derived from laws of electromagnetism that were created by God to make our universe work. We do not know how God made the stars and galaxies, but it is likely that He created them within a special time frame, isolated from the normal time passing on earth. In this time frame then the stars could go through their life cycle within the blink of an eye. When God released the time frame of the stars and adapted it to earth time, the star light was already there, just as if if had traveled billions of light years.
For us on earth, this phenomenon would look as if God had created not only the stars, but also the past of the stars, together with light rays from stars gone long ago, and even together with the cosmic background radiation. This gives the impression as if the universe existed since many billions of years.
The universe is not degrading fast, its degrading very slow. And it comes as close to a perfect creation as probably possible.
Humans did not coexist with Dinosaurs. This is a rumor planted by some who want to ridicule Creationism, and meanwhile sadly even believed by many Creationists and Creationist websites.
Of course a lot more can be said to that, but I hope this answers your questions at first.
The universe was created 6000 years ago by an act of God. This creation, as you can expect, was a supernatural event and thus did of course not follow the usual laws of nature.
The speed of light is derived from laws of electromagnetism that were created by God to make our universe work. We do not know how God made the stars and galaxies, but it is likely that He created them within a special time frame, isolated from the normal time passing on earth. In this time frame then the stars could go through their life cycle within the blink of an eye. When God released the time frame of the stars and adapted it to earth time, the star light was already there, just as if if had traveled billions of light years.
For us on earth, this phenomenon would look as if God had created not only the stars, but also the past of the stars, together with light rays from stars gone long ago, and even together with the cosmic background radiation. This gives the impression as if the universe existed since many billions of years.
The universe is not degrading fast, its degrading very slow. And it comes as close to a perfect creation as probably possible.
Humans did not coexist with Dinosaurs. This is a rumor planted by some who want to ridicule Creationism, and meanwhile sadly even believed by many Creationists and Creationist websites.
Of course a lot more can be said to that, but I hope this answers your questions at first.
Upvote
0
MatthewDiscipleofGod
Senior Veteran
- Feb 6, 2002
- 2,993
- 268
- 48
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
So far White Hole cosmology has been my favorite theory when it comes to how we explain a young earth yet still see planets from millions of light years away. Watch this video to get an idea of what this is all about.
Upvote
0
Here's a comment by the Reasons to Believe apologetics website about the White Hole theory:
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/unravelling.shtml?main
It's of 10 years ago and I haven't heard anything of such theories anymore recently, but I'd be interested if someone knows some news about similar theories to explain the distant starlight problem.
Upvote
0
There have been human bones found with dinosaurs, but when the report is made, the scientists in power suppress the information and/or call it an anomaly. "Those bones don't belong there !" they say.
Upvote
0
busterdog
Senior Veteran
Tucked away in the speed of light problem are a number of enormous assumptions about how things are. What is there between us and that star? Mostly lots of stuff we don't understand.
If distance is the primary issue and the time to cross it, does it mean anything that across these enormous distances we have perhaps 90% of everything that is, but which we can't see. Now, I am not taking that assumption as gospel, but consider the 99% of all the energy in your car. It can burn fairly quietly for about 350 miles or it can blow you house to pieces under the right conditions.
THus, it is quite unfair to assume that the distance between us and the star and its present appearance really is static or worth all the confidence reposed in it by evolutionists.
I don't agree with the white hole cosmology of Russ Humphries, but it certainly points to the theoretical possibilities in a universe where science admits not knowing much at about 90% of the matter and energy.
This all exists at one end of the scale -- ie, across the large expanses of time and space.
At the other end of the scale is the very small and the question of what happens in all those very small spaces, smaller than partices, that are the components of what separates us from those stars.
Quote:
Now for one final length scale - still smaller. This is the length scale at which quantum gravity should become important - the Planck length l. On the scale of the Planck length, it's possible that the structure of spacetime becomes quite different from the four-dimensional manifold we know and love. Spacetime itself becomes a foam (according to Wheeler) or a bucket of dust (according to Wheeler) or a bubbling sea of virtual black holes (according to Hawking) or a weave of knots or tangles (according to Ashtekar, Rovelli, and Smolin). In short, it's weird, but beyond that nobody really knows. To be more precise, the Planck length is the length scale at which quantum mechanics, gravity and relativity all interact very strongly. Thus it depends on hbar, c, and Newton's gravitational constant G.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/length...#planck_length
Add to this the demonstated inherent energy in a "vacuum" (see Casimir effect), for which Richard Feynman said there is practically no limit to the energy therein. According to some theories, on these particles represent the effects of events beyond our reality in other dimensions. So, how exactly do we define that conclusively? Today there is no lightning in New Jersey. But, it is still possible. And you better believe that enormous violence by lightning was possible in the past and future of our atmosphere.
So, while the process of light getting here is demonstrably unlike the process of car covering a certain length of highway. Light is "probagated" in some senses along this field of virtual particles, according to some theories. Assuming a uniformitarian behavior is pretty bold.
There are several people in the past several years who have demonstrated variations in the speed of light and provided a number of theories for the same. The first and best in recent history is at setterfield.org. A good Christian and a lovely man. http://www.setterfield.org
(So good that evolutionists will break the rules to diss him here.)
.[/quote]
If you believe that satan is real, many possibilities can be offered.
If you believe that man can indeed choose to live apart from God, then the world from which man chooses to exclude God can be expected to have some trouble.
If you believe that our planet and those on it have never been attacked by malevolent forces but has only been affected by the benign hand of the Lord, then I am not sure how to address your question or what to do about your parenting skills.
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I tried to track this down and what I found was a little puzzling. Malachite man was found in rock that was supposed to be 140 million years old. Since I have no confidence in radiometric dating I'll just link the site for whatever it's worth:
Official World Site Malachite Man
One of the very interesting things about this is they have a perfectly modern human jaw that has been turned to turquoise.
Then there is this guy, I have no idea how credible this excavation is but they claim it's a dinosaur eating a hominid (human). One of these days I'm moving out west and check some of this stuff out for myself.
The talk origins crowd have basically responded to this sort of thing by saying dinosaur bones have never been found with human bones and if they were it wouldn't matter. That's TOE for you, no matter what the evidence is or possibly could be it can't be a problem for TOE.
That's all I got.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
Thanks for those links. I'm going to read them.I tried to track this down and what I found was a little puzzling. Malachite man was found in rock that was supposed to be 140 million years old. Since I have no confidence in radiometric dating I'll just link the site for whatever it's worth:
Official World Site Malachite Man
One of the very interesting things about this is they have a perfectly modern human jaw that has been turned to turquoise.
Then there is this guy, I have no idea how credible this excavation is but they claim it's a dinosaur eating a hominid (human). One of these days I'm moving out west and check some of this stuff out for myself.
The talk origins crowd have basically responded to this sort of thing by saying dinosaur bones have never been found with human bones and if they were it wouldn't matter. That's TOE for you, no matter what the evidence is or possibly could be it can't be a problem for TOE.
That's all I got.
Grace and peace,
Mark
It's nice to see that they hold as tenaciously to their faith as I do to mine.
I once read in a book - about 15 years ago - that a teenager out west, let's say in one of the Dakotas just for kicks, found human and dino remains together. He was told a bunch of mumbo jumbo by the establishment and they discredited his find. I'm afraid I don't remember details as well as I remember the big picture.
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I'm reading a book about the Leakeys a famous family of paleontologists. It's a hoot, apparently he made hominids (human ancestors) with ape size skulls into our ancestors based on tool use. They were dubbed Homo habilis which means 'handy man' because of the supposed use of tools.
He tried to use his philosophy of ancient tool artifacts on the Calico Early Man Site located about 15 miles northeast of Barstow, California. It was devastatingly bad move, all they ever found were some tool like looking rocks and no human fossils. He tried to give the dates of over 100,000 years (something he got by with in Africa) and it was rejected.
It doesn't take a lot of faith to realize that the Darwinian world is full of baloney. I could rearrange my theology if the Darwinians were not so disingenuous about the evidence. I would also give it some consideration if the postmodernists were not so antagonistic to a literal reading of the Scriptures.
This comes down to human history and they simply are not convincing. Saying that is called an argument from incredulity, I say it's just a lack of credibility on their part.
Anyway, I hope you like the links.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
busterdog
Senior Veteran
Then there is this guy, I have no idea how credible this excavation is but they claim it's a dinosaur eating a hominid (human). One of these days I'm moving out west and check some of this stuff out for myself.
Credible? Just look at the expression on his face.
That sure looks like it hurts.
You will note the name of the prof. Heinschvagel. I think that means its a joke.
Upvote
0
Valkhorn
the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist
- Jun 15, 2004
- 3,009
- 198
- 44
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Mark, both of those are hoaxes:
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/moab-man.htm
http://www.nmsr.org/april_fool.html
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/moab-man.htm
http://www.nmsr.org/april_fool.html
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Hoaxes huh? I was not all that impressed with what I found but calling the first one a hoax is an exaggeration:
After studying all available evidence Coulam and Schroedl write, "After visiting the mine in 1995, we "We believe the human remains from the Keystone Azurite Mine are the remains of ancestral Puebloan miners who were either deliberately or were accidentally buried while mining for Azurite in the 6th or 7th century A.D.
One very interesting thing about it, I didn't know the Puebloan indians mined Azurite.
http://paleo.cc/paluxy/moab-man.htm
Yea, this one looks like a hoax. I would like to know how they pulled off the picture though.
http://www.nmsr.org/april_fool.html
Upvote
0
Valkhorn
the Antifloccinaucinihilipili ficationist
- Jun 15, 2004
- 3,009
- 198
- 44
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Malachite man is clearly a hoax:
http://members.aol.com/gkuban/moab.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC111.html
I also might add that it was Evolutionists who quickly pointed it out as a hoax first, not Creationists.
http://members.aol.com/gkuban/moab.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC111.html
I also might add that it was Evolutionists who quickly pointed it out as a hoax first, not Creationists.
Upvote
0
Back to the original question. There are basically 3 ways to explain the distant starlight problem away. Either you assume that the light speed was a million times faster in the past, or you assume that time out in the universe runs a million times faster than on earth, or you assume that most stars and galaxies far away never existed and God just created their images and light rays in order to deceive us.
The first two ways both have the obvious problem that we would then see all events in space, such as supernovae or cepheide cycles, happening in extreme slow motion. As that is not the case, light speed and time in the past universe must have followed the same laws of physics as today on earth.
Thus a believing YEC must assume that God intentionally created our observations, like the background radiation and images of supernovae and other phenomena for deceiving us, letting us believe that the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
The question is - why would He do that? I don't buy the "for giving us free choice to believe or not" explanation.
The first two ways both have the obvious problem that we would then see all events in space, such as supernovae or cepheide cycles, happening in extreme slow motion. As that is not the case, light speed and time in the past universe must have followed the same laws of physics as today on earth.
Thus a believing YEC must assume that God intentionally created our observations, like the background radiation and images of supernovae and other phenomena for deceiving us, letting us believe that the universe is 13.7 billion years old.
The question is - why would He do that? I don't buy the "for giving us free choice to believe or not" explanation.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
