Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-12-2014, 07:36 PM (This post was last modified: 07-12-2014 07:39 PM by TheInquisition.)
Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
Young Earth Creationism is like a dead horse, but I want to keep smacking it because of it's infinite stupidity. I used to have a life-long friend that was a YEC, he actually is intelligent, but his intelligence has back-fired and thrown him down the black hole of confirmation bias, and he's immune to evidence.

So I still muse over the impossibility of YEC and the obvious proof against it and I thought about this the last few days.

Here's a pic of the galaxy Malin 1, it has a diameter of 650,000 light years, it is 1.4 billion light years away.

[Image: Malin1.JPG]

I asked my former creationist friend about why there are objects so far away if the universe was 6,000 years old, he mumbled something about the speed of light changing, really stupid I know, and I couldn't really make any sense out of this. Does that mean the speed of light went to an infinite speed until it arrived at Earth and then it started going at it's regular speed?

Despite this incredibly stupid explanation with all of the problems it entails, he actually bought into that, like I said, immune to evidence. One problem would be that there would be a gap in transmission of light and gravity that would produce a very distinct dark band in distant galaxies where this occurred 6,000 years ago.

In the case of Malin 1, this would create a dark band 6,000 light years from it's center, we would see this around the center of every galaxy that would be easily visible. Obviously we only see a smooth uninterrupted spiral pattern that extends from the center. The galactic center of Malin 1 had to be there emanating light and gravity at least 325,000 years for it's spiral structure to exist as the gravity travels at the speed of light towards the edge. If god just plopped it into the cosmos, it wouldn't even have a gravitational influence reaching to it's perimeter, we would see an odd gap at the 6,000 light year range. Of course, no such gap exists in any galaxy that we have observed.

For a galaxy to have any structure at all, it had to exist at a minimum the distance of it's radius and obviously much longer to develop the complex nebulas and stellar structures in the galaxies we see today. A galaxy is simply too big to even exist in a young universe.
We see far larger structures such as filaments that extend out to ten billion light years. That means that the structure had to exist at least as many years as it is large because the gravitational force could not have traveled long enough to form it in the first place.

So that's what it comes down to, large equals old. You can't rationalize your away around this fact, the structures of the universe depend on a force that travels at light speed. Size is equivalent to a minimum age, just a starting point to something quite a bit older.





[Image: 23ba8faf54ec2de968172fd2ee21034f5051886d...2bb281.jpg]

BTW- The first biblical creation accounts say the Earth was created before the sun or stars, the second creation account at the same time, obviously not! If you want to fly in the face of obvious evidence like this, there's not much hope for you. The only tenable position is to consider the creation account as pure myth, a parable. A lesson in how ignorant and ill-informed ancient Jews were about cosmology.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 07:44 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
[Image: deadhorse.gif]

I sense your exasperation with your friend, keep plugging away.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
07-12-2014, 08:38 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
What is an imagine theory? because when I looked up the japanese wikipedia article on creationism it called it that.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Metazoa Zeke's post
07-12-2014, 09:39 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
I've heard four different explanations for the star problem. They are the omphalos hypothesis, white hole cosmology, C decay, and the Anisotropic synchrony convention. The Omphalos hypothesis claims the light from distant object was created in route. White hole cosmology claims the Earth was created in a white hole and time is moving much slower in the rest of the universe. C decay claims light traveled much faster in the past than it does now. According to the anisotropic synchrony convention the speed of light is asymmetric and travels towards an observer instantaneously and at C/2 away from an observer. Of the four I find the anisotropic synchrony vaguely interesting if unconvincing due to our inability to actually measure the one-way speed of light.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 10:40 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(07-12-2014 09:39 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  I've heard four different explanations for the star problem. They are the omphalos hypothesis, white hole cosmology, C decay, and the Anisotropic synchrony convention. The Omphalos hypothesis claims the light from distant object was created in route. White hole cosmology claims the Earth was created in a white hole and time is moving much slower in the rest of the universe. C decay claims light traveled much faster in the past than it does now. According to the anisotropic synchrony convention the speed of light is asymmetric and travels towards an observer instantaneously and at C/2 away from an observer. Of the four I find the anisotropic synchrony vaguely interesting if unconvincing due to our inability to actually measure the one-way speed of light.

I hadn't heard of that last one before. It's mind-numbingly stoopid.

Omphalos is unprovable, makes God into a liar and gets them into fights with the Last Thursdayists.

C decay makes everything go boom, as does messing with any universal constant. That pesky e=mc2 equation that powers stars. Guess what happens when you increase c by a factor of a few million.

The white hole is still my favorite. Not only would it destroy the world in truly amazing and horrific ways but it actually does the opposite of what creationists need. As you approach a white hole the rate at which time passes, as viewed by an external observer, speeds up. The seven days of Genesis would only have taken seven seconds in the external universe. Light from the sun wouldn't even arrive until 12:15 AM on day 8. They were thinking black holes but leave it to the creationists to get their holes mixed up.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
07-12-2014, 10:42 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(07-12-2014 09:39 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  According to the anisotropic synchrony convention the speed of light is asymmetric and travels towards an observer instantaneously and at C/2 away from an observer. Of the four I find the anisotropic synchrony vaguely interesting if unconvincing due to our inability to actually measure the one-way speed of light.

Not that i have a great education.. but the whole 'One way/Two ay' things doesn't make any sense to me.

Surely experiments like the Michelson/Morley interferometer is measuring light correctly? Also... we can see and can physically 'red shift' etc light beams.

We can interact with and manipulate photons.

Sorry... am quite lost on the whole anisotropic synchrony thingy.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 08:18 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(07-12-2014 10:40 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(07-12-2014 09:39 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  I've heard four different explanations for the star problem. They are the omphalos hypothesis, white hole cosmology, C decay, and the Anisotropic synchrony convention. The Omphalos hypothesis claims the light from distant object was created in route. White hole cosmology claims the Earth was created in a white hole and time is moving much slower in the rest of the universe. C decay claims light traveled much faster in the past than it does now. According to the anisotropic synchrony convention the speed of light is asymmetric and travels towards an observer instantaneously and at C/2 away from an observer. Of the four I find the anisotropic synchrony vaguely interesting if unconvincing due to our inability to actually measure the one-way speed of light.

I hadn't heard of that last one before. It's mind-numbingly stoopid.

Omphalos is unprovable, makes God into a liar and gets them into fights with the Last Thursdayists.

C decay makes everything go boom, as does messing with any universal constant. That pesky e=mc2 equation that powers stars. Guess what happens when you increase c by a factor of a few million.

The white hole is still my favorite. Not only would it destroy the world in truly amazing and horrific ways but it actually does the opposite of what creationists need. As you approach a white hole the rate at which time passes, as viewed by an external observer, speeds up. The seven days of Genesis would only have taken seven seconds in the external universe. Light from the sun wouldn't even arrive until 12:15 AM on day 8. They were thinking black holes but leave it to the creationists to get their holes mixed up.

Yeah the white hole fabrication was made up by Dr. Russel Humphreys

A hired Ph.D for the Institute of Creation Research, just pure Lysenkoism for Jesus.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 03:04 PM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(07-12-2014 07:36 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Despite this incredibly stupid explanation with all of the problems it entails, he actually bought into that, like I said, immune to evidence. One problem would be that there would be a gap in transmission of light and gravity that would produce a very distinct dark band in distant galaxies where this occurred 6,000 years ago.

Your argument is too sophisticated. Stick to the basics. How the fuck do they figure you can cram 100 billion (give or take change) galaxies into a bubble 6000 or so LY in radius? That leaves a few cubic LY per galaxy!

Remind him that
  • Creating the light already en route makes god a liar.
  • Messing with c makes everything go boom as per their very own "fine tuning" argument.
  • Perching the Earth on the cusp of a white hole turns us all into some exotic form of plasma and fails even then because they got the sense of the time dialation reversed.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
10-12-2014, 11:14 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(07-12-2014 07:36 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I asked my former creationist friend about why there are objects so far away if the universe was 6,000 years old,

The Bible says that the earth was created only a few thousand years ago; it doesn't say anything about when the rest of the universe was created.

One the fourth day God placed lights in the sky but the Bible doesn't say he created the bodies that were the source of those lights at that time. Since there was light the sun must have already existed. All of us have experienced cloudy days when there was light but the sun couldn't be seen. Obviously this condition prevailed over the whole earth before the fourth day. God changed atmospheric conditions so that the sun, moon, and stars became visible.

There is a post in my blog where I explain this in more detail:

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2014/0...-universe/

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2014, 11:30 AM
RE: Galaxies- large and old, creationism fails
(10-12-2014 11:14 AM)theophilus Wrote:  
(07-12-2014 07:36 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I asked my former creationist friend about why there are objects so far away if the universe was 6,000 years old,

The Bible says that the earth was created only a few thousand years ago; it doesn't say anything about when the rest of the universe was created.
Genesis 1:1 seems to give a pretty good concept that there were created at the same time.

[Image: fdyq20.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: