I didn't deny the validity of it, I just said I wasn't familiar with it. Also, just because one piece of information I said has a chance of being false doesn't mean everything I said was false. There was plenty of evidence to prove that we live on a young earth created by God.
I’ll do a few of them and leave the rest for someone else: The sun is losing both mass and diameter. Changing the mass would upset the fine gravitational balance that keeps the earth at just the right distance for life to survive. I see you haven’t done the math. In the past 4.5 billion years the sun has lost a total amount of mass that has resulted in an increased orbit of the Earth by only 7000 miles, well within the habitable zone. Billions of years ago the moon would have been so close that the tides would have been much higher, eroding away the continents. There were no oceans on the Earth billions of years ago because an object striking the Earth formed the moon; hence the Earth and moon were molten rock in that time and for quite a time afterwards. The moon contains considerable quantities of U-236 and Th-230, both short-lived isotopes that would have been long gone if the moon were billions of years old. Both the U-236 and Th-230 on the moon are of recent origin and were generated from the radioactive decay of U-238, which has a half-life of almost 4.5 billion years. Saturn’s rings are still unstable, indicating they are not billions of years old. The rings may have formed less than 100 million years ago but this has nothing to do with the age of the planet.
Old thread, I noticed, but since it's active I decided to read it. Anyhow.. I think most of the gods and goddesses throughout history aren't really gods in the sense of the almighty-creator-of-all god, but are rather demi-gods. If we create a newborn through cloning, we are technically their gods as we created them. Back when we were still exploring the world with our advanced technology and native tribes saw us in flying machines, we seemed to be gods to them. So the same applies to us thousands of years ago. If we saw a more advanced species, we would look to them as gods as well. And if we were created by another species, they would be our god. However, they wouldn't be the almighty-creator-of-all god, whoever it may be, they would just be demi-gods like us. And that's why they died off through the years... in my opinion. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! That's all in regards to worshipped humanoid beings like us, not gods that are symbolic in nature such as the sun or something like a bird. - N
No there isn't. It is just in your head. The tree lines alone show that earth is at least 9000 years old. Radiometric dating shows it is even much older. Do you have a problem with radiometric dating? Are you questioning our basic understanding of radioactive decay?
Sir Charles Darwin was, and remains, the chief observer of animate chemical(biochemical) intereactives(or's) of Earth, as well as all foward looking pro-idealistical alter-terraformer's as well as non equisitentials of plain Earth practicing naturalists. Simply stated, "That which can continue, will, while the rest will fail"....The greatest math, Algebra, ect.....backs up that statement to A "TTTTTTT".
So u are saying that god created the earth and the stars and the galaxies. oK explain why he created the galaxies just for us then! Also, why did he make the interior of the earth molten? Why didn't he just create a solid earth then? No, there's plenty of evidence for one animal changing into another! Its not direct evidence but neither is saying that the earth is 6500 years old!
Sorry to be so blunt, people! I'm not GOD............but maybe ...a few address ###'s......... :m: :m: Think Darwin............ Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
BEEN PSYCHIC BEFORE!!!111 aSK BANSHEEE ABOUT 09/10/01 Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Just thought I'd throw that in.......John Conners
The Sun may lose mass in its stellar wind and by mass-energy conversion, but - like the Earth - it is also accreting diffuse matter from the space it travels through. Earth grows a net few thousand tons heavier each day; the Sun probably also gains more than it sheds. But, as you said, not enough to make much difference, even over billions of years. Even so, Earth would have cooled off and formed oceans while the Moon was still pretty close in. Massive tides would indeed have caused rapid erosion - Earth's volcanic and tectonic processes were also much more violent back then, however. New land was probably forming quite fast enough.
Jupiter & Saturn radiate more heat than they receive because they still generate it internally. Some very plausible mechanisms of chemical differentiation have been put forward, allowing heavier elements within the giant planets to sink towards the centres and produce heat by gravitational potential energy. It may also be that the compressed metal core of a gas giant acts as a natural fission reactor. The same has even been suggested for the Earth: anything Earth can do with internal pressure, Jupiter can surely do better. Sirius B is a white dwarf; Sirius A, the one we see, is a thriving main-sequence star, still to enter its red giant phase. Since Sirius B's red giant days are clearly millions of years behind it (and it wouldn't have been a neighbour to Sol back then), I don't see how the Sirius system can have looked red a few thousand years ago. I certainly never heard of this! Just possibly, there was a small, dense dust cloud between it and us back then; more likely, the translation of some antiquated record was in error and Betelgeuse was mistaken for Sirius. Topsoil in the northern temperate regions has only been accumulating since the end of the last ice age - indeed, just a matter on millennia. Laterite soils in the tropics are often far deeper and older. What do you mean? The original rotation rate of the Earth may have been only a few hours. Tidal effects bleed away the Earth's rotational angular momentum, but this will not lead to a LINEAR increase in the length of a day: when the rotaion was faster, the loss of a given quantity of mechanical energy would make less difference to the rotation period than it would now. In many places, deep ocean sediment is dredged up again by currents. It returns to the surface waters and fertilizes phytoplankton. Sediments are also disturbed by earthquakes, buried under new lava flows, etc. Some parts of the Indian Ocean basin do have sedimentary deposits many kilometers thick, deeper than the water standing above them. Still, continental drift does keep the oceanic crust relatively young.
"The current population of earth (5.5 billion souls) could easily be generated from eight people (survivors of the Flood) in less than 4000 years." Just shear numbers wise, maybe. Without some divine intervention at some point, a major revolution in the science of genetics, or some period of abnormally high mutation rates, I don't see how that scenario could result in the genetic diversity currently found in the human race, granted relative to other species we're not terribly diverse anyway.
What are u talking bout Howard?! I never understand wat ur saying Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Thats the internet discussion equivalent of singing "I know the most annoying song in the world and it goes something like this. I know the most annoying song in the world and it goes something like this..." and so forth.
The simple answer is that they didn't. We share a common ancestor with chimps, and didn't split away from them that long ago, as far as evolutionary time is concerned.
I'm not sure why I should be banned... I haven't insulted anyone, I'm, just being argumentative. Anyway, heres a story about radiometric dating for you. Two aliens come from planet nepschron to do some "scientific dating" on high school students. They first fly to Illinois and begin measuring the height of highschoolers. They find that the average height is about 65in. They continue to watch these students for a couple more years and find that they grow about 1in each year. So, by their "scientific dating", they have come to the conclusion that these highschoolers are 65 years old. Of course this isn't enough evidence to convince everybody else, so they decide to do more "scientific" work. They fly to California, and begin measuring the weight of the average highschooler. After a year of restless work they conclude that the average weight is 130 pounds and that the average high school student gains 2 pounds per year, indicating they are 65 years old. Confidently, now with two separate measurements, in two separate locations, they conclude that the average weight and height, as well as the inflation rate shows "scientifically" that highschoolers are 65 years old. Now, the parents came to see what was going on with the aliens and their studies. The aliens stated that the students were - after "Scientific Scrutiny" - found to be 65 years old. Shockingly the parents dispute these claims and assure the aliens that the students are not the proposed ages. "We've got first hand experience, we know their history!" said the parents. "Listen ma'am, we have done scientific work here, and all we want is the scientific data." Ask yourself, what went wrong? I'm sure you can get the point here. click here for a very interesting article on our supposed ape ancestors.
