Just an update to the ping message.
Posted on 08/20/2004 9:10:09 AM PDT by blam
Yes.
Scripture says 16 or 17 times that God "stretched the heavens". What exactly that means I don't know, but I know when scripture tends to repeat something, it's usually very important. My understanding is that only the distance to the nearest stars have actually been calculated using trigonometry. The rest of the distances are inferred from the red shift. But might there be other reasons for red shifts???
And it is also possible that God created the stars complete with light in transit. While the standard evo claim is that such an act is inherently deceptive, that is not so. Scripture records that God created the stars to provide light for the earth. If creating light in transit is within God's power, why should He wait billions of years before enjoying that benefit? Why should He wait just because some men will assume that He couldn't have created it thus and thus come to a false conclusion about the age of the universe? Should God anticipate every act of arrogance of man and proactive take steps to keep him from reaching false conclusions?
New Theory on Red Shift
Continuing Saga of Speed of Light and Quantized Red Shifts
More on Red Shifts
Red Shift assumptions proven wrong
"2) Early geological estimates for the age of the geologic column based entirely upon rates of sedimentation were still far, far over 6,000 years. Well over 100,000, IIRC."
Using a "uniformitarian" approach and completely discounting the global flood. That's a long earth age approach assuming a long earth age.
"3) Lines of evidence from molecular biology tend to produce age estimates for things like the emergence of reptiles from amphibians, etc., in line with (but usually even older than) evidence from paleontology."
Again, a "uniformitarian" and "evolutionistic" approach assuming evolution.
The conclusions of 2 and 3 are based on the world view you've already adopted.
The light explanation is a little harder, but there are many possibilities. 2) Early geological estimates for the age of the geologic column based entirely upon rates of sedimentation were still far, far over 6,000 years. Well over 100,000, IIRC. 3) Lines of evidence from molecular biology tend to produce age estimates for things like the emergence of reptiles from amphibians, etc., in line with (but usually even older than) evidence from paleontology.
"The Earth is obviously old, period"
The Earth is obviously young, period"
Well, I'm Scott-Irish. Does that make me a Mulatto?
The disparate techniques were bridged and calibrated by cepheid variable stars. A number of other techniques have since been developed to measure astronomical distance. This site mentions water masers and analysis of star clusters. The more measures we have giving agreeable answers, the more confidence we have.
You keep your understanding too simple so that what you understand can stay wrong. In short, wilfull ignorance.
No. You're Celt on both sides and pure Negroid. I'm an Irish-German mulatto.
Willful. Must ewes spell checker!
"Exorcize your Morton's Demon!"
My understanding may be simple in some cases. It's been over 20 years since I had college astronomy, and I only had the one course in that field. I don't remember Cepheid stars being discussed. But I will admit it sounds logical. It's still based on assumptions that we know how light acts over long distances and thus difference in magnitude is an adequate surogate for distance.
The problem here is not the long distances. It's the assumption that long distances prove that God didn't make the heavens and the earth, in a 7 day period like He claimed.
The very first lesson on deception in scripture was that of Eve in the Garden. Satan flat out contradicted God and told her that she wouldn't die, followed by a lot of things that were true. Instead of focusing on the contradiction, Eve focused on the things that Satan had told her that were true and it made the lie palatable.
The long distances evolutionists point out are probably reasonably accurate, the constancy of the speed of light may be true too. However, they do not negate what God said about His making the universe when He said He did. There is an explanation for why things appear as they do. I'll look for the flaws in your observations and logic where I can find them. But at the end of the day, I'm going to believe God.
That's different than Morton's demon. I don't filter the evidence. But the evidence and man's understanding of what he sees is not strong enough to negate what God said.
Morton's problem wasn't the filter. It was that he had no absolute truth to measure by. Thus when Morton finally bypassed the filter and saw observations that at first glance contradicted his world view, he changed his world view. Convenient, yes, but he has no firm foundation. He'll be blown about by every change in the wind. He doesn't know who he is or where he came from. Is he Neanderthal's child?, or Cro Magmon's? or Lucy's? or trunkmoney's? He's got no clue. He's counted his Creator a liar based on things he doesn't fully understand.
I, on the otherhand, know the Creator of the Universe. If He says His written word is true, and His written word appears to say the earth is young, then my money is on a young earth. There's always the possibility I misunderstood something. But just because light as we understand it would take millions of years to get from where we understand the stars to be, using the physical laws as we understand them, does not in any way convince me that we fully understand the how and why and timing of God's creation.
The very first lesson on deception in scripture was that of Eve in the Garden. Satan flat out contradicted God and told her that she wouldn't die, followed by a lot of things that were true. Instead of focusing on the contradiction, Eve focused on the things that Satan had told her that were true and it made the lie palatable.
I grew up in Louisiana, home of America's illterate in two languages. I have a lifetime excuse for both grammar and spelling.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
Gods, Graves, Glyphs PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Oldest Jewelry? “Beads” Discovered in African Cave
National Geographic News | April 15, 2004 | Hillary Mayell
Posted on 04/16/2004 8:58:13 AM PDT by balrog666
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1118872/posts
Egypt’s Oldest Known Art Identified, Is 15,000 Years Old
National Geographic | 7-11-2007 | Dan Morrison
Posted on 07/13/2007 8:12:36 AM PDT by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1865401/posts
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Hell life was iffy just 150 years ago. It was nothing to lose a family to cholera or smallpox or bubonic not to mention stillborn or short lived infants. Then there was war, starvation, and outright genocide on top of that.
Just an update to the ping message.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
