Every astronomer has to acknowledge physical reality, and reality tells us the universe is old.
LOL - then prove it. Prove how physical reality tells the universe is old.
This is getting funnier and funnier.
But that is not "What God told us". That is only your interpretation of the Bible. If you are going to be literal in your interpretation God also told us that the Earth is flat.The only reality that I subscribe to is what God has told us in scripture. If scripture happens to coincide with science then that is nice but it doesn't bother me if it doesn't.
I am not here to talk science, I really don't care about it. I posted to reply to the OP who said they wanted a YEC view, so that is what I gave. I am a YEC because this is what scripture teaches and I believe this is what God did.
I'm not responsible for your education.
yeah, it is; you guys have not been able to back your assumptions up with science.
Good thing! I'd be misled if I listened to you.
Not this garbage again.
I know what they say the speed of light is. Do we know that has remained consistent through time? Do we know that the things they observe are really as far away as they think they are? Again, those are just guesses too.
The speed of light is constant to within the measurement tolerance to a redshift of 3.
Measuring the speed of light with ultra-compact radio quasars
This is not guesses, it is measurement.
I dont know how you got your ideas about science, but you are in error about most of it.
Only thing I've pointed out to any of you is that the dating methods are stated by the very scientists you all believe; are inaccurate and inconsistent.
You told me "X, Y and Z" and I used the very science that you stated proved your point to prove you wrong.
What else could it be than but you hold the truth in unrighteousness?
The speed of light is constant to within the measurement tolerance to a redshift of 3.
Measuring the speed of light with ultra-compact radio quasars
This is not guesses, it is measurement.
Wasn't it Hubble who came up with the expanding universe theory?
Yes, we do know that it was constant. Changing the speed of light has massive implications.I know what they say the speed of light is. Do we know that has remained consistent through time? Do we know that the things they observe are really as far away as they think they are? Again, those are just guesses too.
There is no absolute science to dating the age of the cosmos; or how big the cosmos is. Or whether or not it's remained consistent. They say the cosmos is expanding. And the "bigger" it gets the "faster" it "expands". Entropy - things go from a state of order to a state of chaos.
Wasn't it Hubble who came up with the expanding universe theory?
No, you really havent. But you are too ignorant in science to understand this.
I posted the articles. Not my fault if you won't read them.
-snip-
You do not understand radiometric dating. You should be trying to learn, you should not be constantly telling us that you do not understand what you are talking about. We already know that.It's a current measurement; but just as with the amount of carbon or argon in the environment; has that measurement remained consistent through time?
And if it is consistent through time - what if they aren't accurately measuring how far away stars actually are (or aren't)?
Remember.... Hubbell's expanding universe theory. (Fits in with the 2nd law of thermodynamics. = order to chaos.)
It's a current measurement; but just as with the amount of carbon or argon in the environment; has that measurement remained consistent through time?
And if it is consistent through time - what if they aren't accurately measuring how far away stars actually are (or aren't)?