The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: New Major Breakthrough For Creationists  (Read 4631 times)

Offline jesusmania

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« on: 18/05/2008 04:41:35 »
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists-April, 16 2008 :o

Many scientists say that the age of the earth is 4.54 billion years old.  How can this be when the Holy Bible says it’s 6,000 to 12,000 years old?  Who is right?  Scientists date the earth from a meteor. This meteor was supposedly one of the original rocks from the formation of our solar system.  Our solar system was created from the Big Bang.  The Big Bang theory says that an original core matter exploded and expanded from an extremely dense and hot state and continues to expand today.  My theory states that this original core matter was placed in space by God.  This original core matter exploded, creating the universe, planets, moons, stars and  galaxies (including our Milky Way) about 13.73 billion years ago.  A supernova that had existed for 4.54 billion years in our Milky Way galaxy exploded and created our solar system about 12,000 years ago.  Since our earth was a part of this supernova, it will also date at 4.54 billion years old.  Here is the major breakthrough:  After this 4.54 billion years, God created the heavens and earth, around 12,000 years ago.  It is very possible that God is talking about our solar system creation in Genesis and not the universe creation.  Many scientists think that fossils are very old because they are in strata or sediment layers that appears to be created millions of years ago.  It has been proven that strata can be laid down, layer upon layer, very quickly.  For example when Mt. St. Helens erupted in 1980 it laid down as much as 600 feet of sediment, layer upon layer, on the north face of the slope which would appear as hundreds of thousands to millions of years old.  Carbon 14 dating that is used to date dead animals and plants, can only go back to around 60,000 years.  It can be off  by 10,000 to 23,000 years. 
Here is my timeline for the history of the earth.
2 Peter 3:8 says:
With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
Using this we can conclude that the first day of creation was around 12,000 years ago.
Day 1 (12,000 yrs ago)-A massive supernova that existed for 4.54 billion years in our Milky Way galaxy exploded creating light and also our solar system.  God also created the concept of a 24 hour day and night period.  Heaven and earth (our solar system) was created. 
Day 2 (11,000 yrs ago)-God separated the waters between the earth and sky.
Day 3 (10,000 yrs ago)- God separated the waters from the dry land.  He created plants (9,001 yrs ago). The world's oldest tree has been found in Sweden, a tenacious spruce that first took root just after the end of the last ice age, more than 9,500 years ago.
Day 4 (9,000 yrs ago)-God created the sun, moon and stars.
Day 5 (8,000 yrs ago)-God created the fish and birds.
Day 6 (7,000 yrs ago God created animals and humanoids) (6,001 yrs ago-God created Adam and Eve).  What is the difference between Adam and Eve and Neanderthals and other humanoids?  Adam and Eve were able to conceive of the fact that God exist, whereas Neanderthals and other humanoids were animals and had no concept of God.  This is the difference between humans and animals, animals have no concept of God.  Adam and Eve were the first real humans in the image of God.  Humanoids were animals that migrated out of Africa.
Day 7 (6,000 yrs ago)-God rested.
Noah’s Flood-4,348 years ago.[/b][/color]


 

Offline science_guy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
  • I'm right there... inside neilep's head!
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #1 on: 18/05/2008 06:01:45 »
Quote
This original core matter exploded, creating the universe, planets, moons, stars and  galaxies (including our Milky Way) about 13.73 billion years ago.
that is not quite true, the Big Bang started out with almost all hydrogen, which then formed stars. eventually, the original stars went supernova, creating the heavier elements and the solar nebulas.

Quote
For example when Mt. St. Helens erupted in 1980 it laid down as much as 600 feet of sediment, layer upon layer, on the north face of the slope which would appear as hundreds of thousands to millions of years old.
this is true about sediment, but not all sediment is alike.  Scientists know that sediment is all different in the layers, helping discover the differing eras of Earth's History.

Quote
With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
Using this we can conclude that the first day of creation was around 12,000 years ago.
how long ago was that written? you dont have to tell me, it was rhetorical.  The thing is, that was an example of how time is to God, not an ultimatum of a translation between "our time" and "God time".  God transcends timelines, and is not bound to a specific limit in the passing.

Quote
Day 1 (12,000 yrs ago)-A massive supernova that existed for 4.54 billion years in our Milky Way galaxy exploded creating light and also our solar system.  God also created the concept of a 24 hour day and night period.  Heaven and earth (our solar system) was created.
please tell me... How does a supernova go about existing for that long?

Dont misunderstand my post, I am, in fact, a Devout Christian.

However, please at least specify which kind of Creationist this view is (your's is a Young-Earth creationist view) while I myself am an Old-Earth Creationist.  But the thing is, is this really a breakthrough, or is it merely another hypothesis?


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8665
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #2 on: 18/05/2008 13:49:08 »
Radiocartbon dating has shown that some things are a lot older than the 12000 years (as you say). Do you not see that as proof that there's a problem with your idea? Estimates of the upper limit vary but something like 50000 to 100000 years is reasonable.
Other radio-dating techniques can pus the timescale back even further.
Ice core samples can provide over 100000 years of history.

Any idea that the earth is younger that that simply isn't science. There is no evidence that it's true and there's plenty of evidence that it's false. It can't even be called a hypothesis with any legitimacy.
If, on the other hand, someone wishes to claim that the bible is inconsistent with the data perhaps they might wish to consider that it's the bible, rather than reallity, that's wrong.
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #3 on: 18/05/2008 15:32:24 »
That's not a breakthrough, merely a claim
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #4 on: 18/05/2008 15:38:30 »
Yes, just a claim - a false one at that.

Literalism is a heresy in the eyes of the Church. It was considered a heresy by the early Fathers of the Church, and still is by some of the more traditional churches, including the only surviving Apostolic church from the time of Paul, the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch - the original Church of Antioch, the second Christian church, second only to the Church of Jerusalem. They deny the Bible as being literate as do all of the early Fathers of the Church.

The Catholic Church agrees with the fathers of the church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_fathers) who explicitly deny any literal interpretation of the bible.

If the teachings of Jesus are parables, then it doe not logically - or by faith - follow that the rest of the Bible is to be taken literally. That is why the Church, both Syriac, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Anglican, considers taking every word of the Bible literally - or literalism - a heresy, or minimally, and very grave error in theology.

In order to make pronouncements and statements of faith as are made in the original post, one must lack knowledge of what the early Christian Community though and what the Jewish community of that time thought of the Old Testament. BOTH believed it to contain stories that taught by giving examples. The Creation Myth, which is what they considerer it, is no different. It is a parable of the creation, not a story to be taken without thought, at face value.

After educating myself as to what Christianity was really all about in its historical, original form and reading the works of the earliest Christians that I could find, I rejected the hard-shell Baptist church teachings I grew up with and came to realize that they were the result of ignorance of the history and origins of Christianity. Literalism was NOT a common part of the Christian tradition until after about 1500 AD. Those who held such beliefs before this time were either corrected or driven away from the Christian community

I still am a Christian - a Christian who believes as the early Christians believed, not the watered-down, crusading religion held by many today. I am a follower of the man who said "turn the other cheek" - the man of peace whose main teaching was being in harmony with all creation and mankind. 
« Last Edit: 18/05/2008 15:40:19 by JimBob »
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #5 on: 18/05/2008 15:44:15 »
"Adam and Eve were the first real humans in the image of God.  Humanoids were animals that migrated out of Africa."

That is a rather racist statement, suggesting those who remained in Africa are not real humans. Would you like to correct it or would you like you topic deleted for this racist remark?
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #6 on: 23/05/2008 21:14:05 »
I must admit to deriving a certain amount of amusement from Creationists. I like their view that everything which contradicts their beliefs must be flawed - carbon dating being a case in point. They can't say how it is flawed, but the fact that it contradicts their beliefs means it must be flawed.

Another little gem is "Fossils were placed in the ground by Satan to make us disbelieve the True Word". So Satan put oil & coal in the ground too, did he? He was a busy little bunny, wasn't he! Wherever did he find the time to tempt Christ in the desert?
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8665
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #7 on: 24/05/2008 00:51:45 »
"Fossils were placed in the ground by Satan to make us disbelieve the True Word"
Why did God let him?
Did God feel that I would be better off for being mislead?
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #8 on: 24/05/2008 22:35:42 »
"Fossils were placed in the ground by Satan to make us disbelieve the True Word"
Why did God let him?
Did God feel that I would be better off for being mislead?

God was having a tea break. Well, he'd been working hard creating everything and needed a rest.
 

Offline caboose17

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #9 on: 26/05/2008 04:13:32 »
no it was the super devil not the devil. He is very powerful.
 

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #10 on: 26/05/2008 09:31:25 »
In science there are ways of describing events so that non-scientifically minded / interested people have a clear picture that could shed light on the way the bible or indeed any ancient writing has been written and re-written.

For example, it has been written though I can’t remember where but I can remember hearing it. If the age of the universe represents x amount of time. The age of the sun represents x amount of time, the Earth before the arrival of water represents x amount of time, the existence and extinction of the dinosaurs =time, then the existence of mankind represents something like a mere second in comparison.

If a scientist wrote this formula down so that it could be read again in a few thousand years it could be taken quite literally by many people interpreting the age of the planet and the arrival of mankind in days rather than billions of years.

Another example is the feeding of the 5000. Show a man how to catch a few fish with a net and he can feed the five thousand. Teach a man how to grow wheat from seed and cultivate it and he can literally feed the five thousand, by baking bread and splitting loaves. Could the timesclaes have become obscured over time? Given the fact that many documents over time are interpreted differently by many people for reproduction it is not hard to se how a fairly accurate account of events can end up becoming interpreted differently and this does not include deliberate attempts to obscure text for the sake of say laying claim to land and water by showing the people it was written so it must have been so.

Predicting an eclypse by having a sound knowledge of astral events could make the ancient predictor appear godly.

Spittle rubbed in someone else’s eyes for example may well have provided an anti-microbial affect and lubrication.

The following stories are factual, the skipper that told this to me did not elaborate it and I found his account of events as being told in an unremarkable way:
A friend told me of an event onboard a fishing boat miles from the shore. One of the crew collapsed after complaining of chest pains and died right in front of the skipper and the rest of the crew. His body was placed in the ice hold so that it would remain well preserved for many hours, and as there was no point rushing back to harbour the crew carried on fishing as this is an industry that has become hardened to death and injury.

After some 24 hours had passed the crew heard a banging noise on the ice hold and quickly opened the doors. There to everyone’s amazement stood the man who had previously been found to have died. Very cold, shivering but definitely not dead.

Now imagine this incredible story being written down as part of an account of history and being carried on for several thousand years in many different tongues and interpretations of what was an accurate account of events.

My own work on circulation in the body could shed light on what happened as the lifeless body was placed in the hold. The cold air would be very dry as any moisture would be frozen. A body can gasp as air is released. I have seen this at first hand. Being placed on ice would almost certainly result in the man being on an incline as the floor of the hold would be covered in ice. Cold air preserved the lives and retained the neurological function of soldiers who would normally have been fatally injured in the Falklands, this has now led on to some remarkable improvements in surgery, aiding the survival rates of some pretty impressive surgical procedures by cooling the body prior to surgery and warming the blood following surgery. So a combination of the dry air, cooling of the body, the angle of the body and the continuation of circulation after death according to my own research may have been enough to kick start the body! Evidence......? Well as it happens I do have first hand experience of tilting a dog with a serious heart condition by raising his upper body in my arms. I have personally witnessed a complete recovery on many occasions as the dog took a deep breath and jolted back to life. The last time I took him for a walk and he collapsed, I let him go by leaving him flat. Knowing full well that he would not survive. This was a very hard day for me and my wife, but Buster died in our arms on a walk where he loved to play.

Another account from the same skipper is that of a man who got his lower leg caught up in a nylon cord that was attached to a net overboard. The rope stripped off his lower limb and took his foot complete with his rubber boot leaving just the bones below the knee. But there was no blood as one would expect and for some time the limb did not bleed until morphine was administered. Then the blood gushed out and he nearly literally bled to death. Fortunately he survived. This could have been written down as a miracle event, and indeed shamans put hooks through their body and skewers through their mouths but this is no miracle when these wounds do not bleed. But how many people over the hundreds and possibly thousands of years have witnessed these events believing them to be mystical and godly?

And then there are those that deliberately trick people into believing something that is not true like this video on Youtube:
feature=related
« Last Edit: 26/05/2008 10:21:58 by Andrew K Fletcher »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

New Major Breakthrough For Creationists
« Reply #10 on: 26/05/2008 09:31:25 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length