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.
Actually, it's Billions of Billions of years ago, at least that's what the Earth itSelf shows us.
It shows me that He is not a liar and that it was all created. Science shows me they are muddled and confused as expected when people forget to include God. When they try to piece together a picture of creation without the creator using only physical processes and evidence obviously they could never have gotten anywhere.
This question is a quote but not from me so I assume it is for someone else. I do not see the stars as old at all. How long light takes to move really has nothing to do with it. That is about like saying, it would take me three hundred million years to walk to the nearest star so it must be 400 million years old. How fast you can walk actually has nothing to do with the age or distance to that star. Likewise how fast light moves as far as man can measure has nothing to do with the distance or age of stars. If God wanted light to be somewhere instantly, it would be. If He wanted starlight to be seen by Adam, as He did, the light would be here to see then, days after the stars were created. Only for those limited to thinking in the box and limiting themselves to the speed of light and natural world would associate these things. Creation is not limited to natural or physical laws or realities, sorry. Not when God fills the universe.
Funny that date is roughly the time Jesus was here
I will say this much, that natural processes derived dating may be good for as long as we know God did not come to earth, or will things to happen on earth that might have involved atomic realities having changed! Good luck telling us how long that might be!OK, but since it is impossible to get ages from radioactive dating or any other natural process (because we do not know when the supernatural may have affected the natural) you need to have another way to show us something was after creation for sure. Also, if you admit that creation means that no normal rules and the natural do not apply at all, you might be beginning to suspect that that principle can easily be extended as needed to any other time God was working and changing things
Right, so if the ratios are there now, I assume they were also there at creation day one (for the long lived isotopes) So, what about it? They did not get there by decay. So how do you date it?? You have no way of knowing the precise ratios. All you could possibly know, (if God did not again affect things since then) is how much new daughter material got here in 6000 little years!
It is not I who see anything as embedded age! That would be science, who stubbornly sees various ratios and natural processes as the defacto creator. They imagine old ages, and no creation, so that to them it looks old. The isotopes in the rocks and etc are not really old, so it does not look old to me. Only to the deceived. It was not really age in the rocks. It was stuff that they used a godless philosophy to call old.
Nope it's actually the date when the stories about Jesus were written (79 CE, the eruption of Vesuvius).Funny that date is roughly the time Jesus was here
From astronomical measurements of distant galaxies we know that the "atomic realities" have been unchanged for at least 1 billion years.I will say this much, that natural processes derived dating may be good for as long as we know God did not come to earth, or will things to happen on earth that might have involved atomic realities having changed!
I (like everyone else in science) do not deal with supernatural causation.
Given that we have measured the decay rates, we know exactly how much daughter material would accumulate in 6000 years.
Right, so if the ratios are there now, I assume they were also there at creation day one (for the long lived isotopes) So, what about it? They did not get there by decay. So how do you date it?? You have no way of knowing the precise ratios. All you could possibly know, (if God did not again affect things since then) is how much new daughter material got here in 6000 little years!
So this was after the eruption of Jesus from the grave, OK. So, decades after God returned to heaven, is that the best you got?
No, I do not know that. I do know that godless principles have been projected out into the universe. Remember, though that light moves at the speed at which God wills it to move. That is the actual and precise speed of light. Not only that, but light exists because God said let there be light! That was something like 6000 years ago and no light in this universe predates that, because no light even existed! Looking at light move now at whatever speed God ordered at this time for it to move cannot tell us anything about great ages. Nothing. Cosmology is a complete fraud that is based on false premises. In pretending they can see so far they prove how shortsighted they actually are! They see nothing but some lights and they add godless assumptions piled to the clouds to arrive at so called ages and distances. Everything they base distances and and ages on in the universe is a lie.
No, you are too busy used false premises like the 'naturalonlydunnit' to attribute creation to the creator. That is very supernatral and no accident whether you know it or not. Basically science is demon possessed! (much of it). It is demonic to look only at the physical and natural processes and world to determine where man and creation came from.
How much would accurate in 6000 years would be the outside maximum limit for your dating techniques. And almost certainly it is far far less than that. If God affected things when Jesus was here, or at Babel, or other times, we would not know.
How do you know they are wrong? You haven't even presented a specific fossil you want to talk about, you're just talking about fossils in general and yet somehow you can claim that these hypothetical dates for the hypothetical fossils are wrong?
You can't even present any such rocks, so don't suddenly act like it's my fault because the rocks you can't produce can't be tested.
You are assuming that your point of view is correct and asking me to accept it as the default position.
This isn't even a rational response. It's just rambling without any understand of what you claim is wrong, and rejection without justification.
So God personally spoke to you?
And what about when these other people say things that contradict each other?
Why should it when you've said nothing scientific? All you've done is spout a bunch of claims that anyone can make. Lots of people have believed that they were spoken to by God, and they were wrong. Why should I have a different opinion when you say God has spoken to you?
Because they can't be independently verified.
So you start with the conclusion you want and then try to fit your experiences into your predetermined conclusion.
You can consider them whatever you want.
So are you saying that you are not a Human?
