Question to those that subscribe to the young Earth "theory"

Actually the light we see may be coming from stars that no longer exist .

I dont understand your point though.Even if the earth is 6000 years old we would still be receiving light which is millions of light years away from the cosmos .

 

since the bible doesn't (i don't think it does at least) say how old the universe is, i don't think the 2 theories really contradict each other.

 

A light year is just like a regular year but it has half the calories.

 

An excellent observation. With the intent of not offending anyone...it goes a lot deeper then just that.

But, analyzing your comment, in Genesis the earth and universe were supposedly created simultaneously. In order for this to be true we should not see stars certain light year distances away because they didn't exist if the bible is correct. Either that or mathematics is all screwed up!!!!

great observation and a topic that could get very deep and very offensive to some......wouldn't offend me if your up to it?????

 

well not to nitpick but heavens could also mean sky...........

 

How do you get that the earth and universe were created simultaneously? Bible never says t
hat. Just that they were created at the beginning...before the story starts. No reason not to read that to mean he created the universe and then he created Earth at the beginning. You're simply projecting simultaneously was what they meant

 

... or how the Colorado river ate all that land in the Grand Canyon in 6000 years

 

You are technically correct but the account in Genesis does strongly imply that the two events were simultaneous.

Even accounting for the "But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day." If earth was made on day 2 and if you believe a literal account in Genesis, the earth is only 1,000 years older than the universe.

The facts severely outweigh the tale IMO.

Signed

-- A Christian who believes that God wouldn't mislead his children so, the creation story in Genesis must be a parable or was not divinely inspired.

 

Ahh but there is no mention of God creating time so logically a day can mean any amount of time and one day during creation doesn't have to be the same length as another. This is obviously not a detailed account of creation,more like a cliff notes version. A detailed account would cause the bible to be a billion pages long. This is more like a father telling his three year old child where he came from. Tell him a nice story but avoid the boring details

 

No. I believe there are many valid ways to interpret the bible. Trying to figure out the timeline of existence seems to be missing the purpose of the book

 

I'm in the who knows category. I'm confident that the 17 billion year time frame will be constantly revised

 

Well if you're an atheist then no lol. If you're into numerical breakdowns I guess its possible but I would suspect that wasn't the reason why the book was written

 

Because science is at the beginning of its journey. It doesn't know anything yet

 

Not if you believe in synergy lol. 1+1 could equal 3. Especially if the condom breaks

 

Fair enough. So how old is the earth supposed to be in the young earth theory? 6000 years old? well i'm not in that camp

 

Do you believe that the speed of light is constant in every part of the universe? Do you believe that the speed of light was constant throughout the history of the universe?

 

Lol

 

i guess it is if it is possible to bend space and time. if you believe God created the universe then it is possible to also believe that he can manipulate time and space. On the otherhand if you believe the speed of light could be variable and thus expanding the time scholars traced the creation to 6000 years ago what does it say about the longevity of Adam who lived until age 930?

 

speed of light is constant for all frames of reference <--- theory of general relativity, I believe......

 

well there are theories out there that the velocity of light is declining which would make the earth much younger than currently believed though not 6000 years old. also i believe that there are theories that dont have light being a constant

 

I had not heard that but I am not a physicist. Can you a brother to some reference material so that I can read up on that hypothesis?

 

Yes it is a scientific theory. A paper I believe was published in the 80s from what I read. It seems though that it has more to do with them analyzing the measurements of the speed of light. However, it does not seem from what I have read that the paper takes into account things such as more accurate measuring instruments, better experimentation, etc. However, keep in mind I have not read the actual paper, so I can't say for sure if its bogus or not.
One experiment people may want to read about is michelson morley experiment. This supposedly is one of the experiments einstein based relativity on.......

 

I'm sorry but those theories are wrong. There are theories that aliens helped the egyptians build pyramids, that doesn't make them GOOD theories.

Light is a constant to all observers. The best analogy I've heard is that of a car. Just pretend light moves at 101 MPH okay?

You get in your car and decide to race a beam of light. Your car only goes 100 MPH but you're going to give it a shot anyway. You speed off and reach 100 MPH. If light weren't a constant, you would see the light moving at 1 MPH ahead of you, but that isnt what you see. The light (to your surprise) is still moving 101 MPH faster than you are, even though its speed hasn't changed.

Confusing? You bet. But it's been proven experimentally over and over and over again.

EDIT: To add on, if someone was watching this race they would in fact see you 1 MPH behind the beam of light. Which is why light is constant to all obervers. They are standing still, and move differently though space time than you (a moving object).

 

A quick search turned up this from 2002
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml

I did a quick search of the university's website, I found the astrobiologist / theoretical physicist, but nothing on this topic. I'll see what I can find later when I have more time, seems interesting.

 

yeah thats basically relativity. The thing the speed of light as a constant did was basically lead to thigns mathmatically such as time dilation and length contraction.

 

As Adam pointed out earlier, science is in its infancy, there is still alot that we don't know. At one point in time the Earth was flat and the center of the solar system, those were long held beliefs and anyone who challenged them was laughed at, or worse. There is still alot that we don't know and maybe never will know, but does that mean that we should stop asking questions because we seem to have already found the answer?

Science is at its best when people look for new ways to understand old ideas, the work of Michio Kaku immediately comes to mind. To think that we already have all the answers is silly.

 

BTW ... I'm not a young Earther, but I do believe the "heavens" referred to in the scripture cited are the skies, not the universe. See verses 7 and 8.

 

As fair an interpretation as many others...