the Universe Is Not "Billions of Years"Old (Imnotdutch)

[KnoXville]

This is the most misguided attempt to justify bibble fiction I have ever seen. Seriously, I don’t mind playing the magical floods game, operation evil red dude underground, or even the holy inbreeding duo of McMaster Adam and damsel eve. But this questioning the astrophysics and the universe shit would make the most retarded people on earth laugh at you.

There are so many errors in that original behemoth of bullshit you posted its disgusting. It was obviously written by some deluded armchair priest who happened to be cruising on some x with a scientific american during his daily alterboy blowjob. Go to NASA and present this paper and you will be lucky if Steven Hawkings doesn’t get his fellow cromies to pin you down with there pocket protectors and beat you into a coma with there flaccid scientist penis’s.

The universe is more than billions of years old, I can prove that with a hundred statements but because each will go over your head I will leave it to this one.

There are stars, specifically in this case ones called ‘quasars’ which are very bright and strong radio emitters with many emission lines in there spectra. They are distance wise beyond many other galaxies we know of and are still red shifting (a term regarding electromagnetic radiation to imply movement away from the source of observation). Those quasars are many billions of ly away, and since all electromagnetic radiation travels at a constant speed, refer to einstein, the images of the stars we are seeing are billions of years old, proving that they existed in that form 20 billions or more years ago because the images you see takes that long for the light they create to get here, and I’m not even going to mention the stellar evolution that took billions of years which was obviosuly required for the quasars to form in the first place. That is fact.

 

[Jimsbbc]

I don't believe that a "day" in creation = 24hrs. There is really no way to disprove evolution and say that it doesn't exist in macro-micro forms. Just look at Darwin's Finches and adaptive radiation that took place on these islands for example. Also, look at the speciation of the Phylum Chordata and the animals who all share a form of notochord including vertebrates. It is obvious animals evolved from a common ancestor. I do not think however, that God did not have a hand in this. I can't believe that this highly diverse and interdependent food web evolved from amino acids in the promordial soup. Then these gave rise to polymers which turned into simple celled algae. It is just impossible for me to think this all spawned out of nothing. I believe that God created the world and universe as it is and then introduced man, but not in a 7-day time period.

 

[anythingbutsane]

This is the most misguided attempt to justify bibble fiction I have ever seen. Seriously, I don’t mind playing the magical floods game, operation evil red dude underground, or even the holy inbreeding duo of McMaster Adam and damsel eve. But this questioning the astrophysics and the universe shit would make the most retarded people on earth laugh at you.

There are so many errors in that original behemoth of bullshit you posted its disgusting. It was obviously written by some deluded armchair priest who happened to be cruising on some x with a scientific american during his daily alterboy blowjob. Go to NASA and present this paper and you will be lucky if Steven Hawkings doesn’t get his fellow cromies to pin you down with there pocket protectors and beat you into a coma with there flaccid scientist penis’s.

The universe is more than billions of years old, I can prove that with a hundred statements but because each will go over your head I will leave it to this one.

There are stars, specifically in this case ones called ‘quasars’ which are very bright and strong radio emitters with many emission lines in there spectra. They are distance wise beyond many other galaxies we know of and are still red shifting (a term regarding electromagnetic radiation to imply movement away from the source of observation). Those quasars are many billions of ly away, and since all electromagnetic radiation travels at a constant speed, refer to einstein, the images of the stars we are seeing are billions of years old, proving that they existed in that form 20 billions or more years ago because the images you see takes that long for the light they create to get here, and I’m not even going to mention the stellar evolution that took billions of years which was obviosuly required for the quasars to form in the first place. That is fact.

I spent several years working at an observatory and giving astronomy presentations to the general public. I would regularly have bible beaters attend these shows and attempt to debase everything I was saying.

The typical creationist counter to this is:

God made the light and the quasars. He can make them resemble any phenomenon he wishes.

BUT... the counter to this is the following: Why would god deceive? Is your god deceptive?

 

[KAYNE]

DID GOD CREATE MIDGETS WHEN HE CREATED LIGHT? HE SURE AS HELL DIDNT CREATE A LIGHT MIDGET.....THOSE BASTARDS ARE HEAVY AS RHINO SHIT AND DONT FLY FAR EITHER.





KAYNE

 

[the nature boy]

I don't believe that a "day" in creation = 24hrs. There is really no way to disprove evolution and say that it doesn't exist in macro-micro forms. Just look at Darwin's Finches and adaptive radiation that took place on these islands for example. Also, look at the speciation of the Phylum Chordata and the animals who all share a form of notochord including vertebrates. It is obvious animals evolved from a common ancestor. I do not think however, that God did not have a hand in this. I can't believe that this highly diverse and interdependent food web evolved from amino acids in the promordial soup. Then these gave rise to polymers which turned into simple celled algae. It is just impossible for me to think this all spawned out of nothing. I believe that God created the world and universe as it is and then introduced man, but not in a 7-day time period.

so then only certain things are to be taken literally and certain things not so?

 

[big_bad_buff]

If you quote biased sources then you are bound to get biased answers........the links I checked were all from creationist sources.

I'm sure that there are plenty of scientists that are sceptical aobut lucy.......why not quote them?

According to Richard Leakey, who along with Johanson is probably the best-known fossil-anthropologist in the world, Lucy's skull is so incomplete that most of it is “imagination made of plaster of paris”. Leakey even said in 1983 that no firm conclusion could be drawn about what species Lucy belonged to.

I simply ran a search as i stated in google, and posted the first few threads that looked like it had to do with "lucy" but of course you just stating they are all wrong of course proves it to me.

I thought it was a known fact that lucy was a joke. I actually heard it first on the discovery channel, and then on several other shows.

 

[Norman Bates]

(what does this mean? )Assuming that no comets were created after. A stupid assumption, as everyone can see.

why is Niagara Falls were it is today? and not already eroded itself into the ocean? (erosion rate is 2.5 feet i believe, but not sure)

were are the rest?

It means that not every comet existed in the beginning of the universe. Therefore younger comets are no proof of the age of the universe.

SAme goes for rivers. Look a bit around and you will probably find a dried river bed where once a river was. Not every river existed when the world came up.

i´m not going to dig on every one of these "arguments". What i posted was just what i know from school.

 

[Jimsbbc]

Where does it say in Genesis that the 7 creation "days" were any specific length of time? What was a day during the first 3 "days"? The stars and the universe were the 4th day. The first few "days" could be any length of time. Much of the Bible is figurative, not literal. The Bible doesn't tell us everything, otherwise there would be no need for faith.

 

[big_bad_buff]

There are stars, specifically in this case ones called ‘quasars’ which are very bright and strong radio emitters with many emission lines in there spectra. They are distance wise beyond many other galaxies we know of and are still red shifting (a term regarding electromagnetic radiation to imply movement away from the source of observation). Those quasars are many billions of ly away, and since all electromagnetic radiation travels at a constant speed, refer to einstein, the images of the stars we are seeing are billions of years old, proving that they existed in that form 20 billions or more years ago because the images you see takes that long for the light they create to get here, and I’m not even going to mention the stellar evolution that took billions of years which was obviosuly required for the quasars to form in the first place. That is fact. [/B]

first i want to state that this is not a creation vs evolution debate. i just want to point out that there are different views that make just as much since as what you just stated.

http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-121.htm
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm#Evidence

 

[KnoXville]

http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-121.htm
[/url]

Nice work finding that.

Unfortunately their four possibilities are not right at all, and im not just saying this to disagree. Distances in space can be accurately measured and we have proven so in the past. The other two are actually funny as hell, implying that because the speed of light Light and proven astrophysics do not agree with the theory than they must be wrong in a 'magical way'. Proving that light takes a "shortcut" using archaic astrological methods or that the speed of light changing over time.

That is absurd, im not really suprised that these interpretations are only reviewed by other creationist members, as they hold no footing if presented to actual astro related scientists. We know how light works and based on the images we see gravity, EM radiation, and we have laws for these things. Why do you suppose that no creationists are working in the big elite space organizations? ands that the smartest people in the community won't even awknowledge it.

Also if the universe was created by a god, that wouldn’t explain the cosmic background radiation that we can still detect presumably from the heat and power of the 'big bang' theory that has since Doppler shifted from the visible light and IR spectrum. Some of the stuff you posted in the past at least had a little scientific merit, but in this article they are essentially making stuff up.