alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-01-2014, 01:27 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(05-01-2014 06:53 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Are these different views and arguments contingent on believing the Bible?
No.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2014, 01:44 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:25 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-01-2014 09:41 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  Alpha,

Do you believe there are stars we can see that are 50,000 light years away?
Yes. Unless you're going somewhere new with this, this is about the dumbest argument going.

Um moron that wasn't an argument, it was a question.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2014, 01:56 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:24 AM)alpha male Wrote:  I don't trust radiometric dating. There are too many unprovable assumptions involved. The primary assumption of unchanging decay rates is now in doubt.

Delusion. You *CAN* recover.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2014, 03:01 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:24 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-01-2014 09:21 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  OK, how do you reconcile that with:
BTW, the list function is cute, but annoying to respond to.
Quote:[*]A universe that's 13.7 billion light-years across
What's to reconcile?
Quote:[*]Multiple radiometric ages for the Earth and the Solar System of 4.5 Ga
I don't trust radiometric dating. There are too many unprovable assumptions involved. The primary assumption of unchanging decay rates is now in doubt.
Quote:[*]Continental Drift
What's to reconcile?

Seems like enough to start with.



[Image: Spokeskid-tap-dancer.jpg]

Let the tap dancing begin...


Drinking Beverage

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
06-01-2014, 05:13 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:25 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-01-2014 09:41 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  Alpha,

Do you believe there are stars we can see that are 50,000 light years away?
Yes. Unless you're going somewhere new with this, this is about the dumbest argument going.

Lol, you're an idiot, aren't you?

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
06-01-2014, 06:09 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:24 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-01-2014 09:21 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  OK, how do you reconcile that with:
BTW, the list function is cute, but annoying to respond to.
Quote:[*]A universe that's 13.7 billion light-years across
What's to reconcile?
Quote:[*]Multiple radiometric ages for the Earth and the Solar System of 4.5 Ga
I don't trust radiometric dating. There are too many unprovable assumptions involved. The primary assumption of unchanging decay rates is now in doubt.

Please explain the 'unproven assumptions' involved , it sounds fascinating.
And you will need to provide citations. Drinking Beverage

Quote:
Quote:[*]Continental Drift
What's to reconcile?

Seems like enough to start with.

What's to reconcile? The evidence of the time frames involved versus your beliefs sounds like enough to start with.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
06-01-2014, 07:44 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 01:24 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(05-01-2014 09:21 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  OK, how do you reconcile that with:
BTW, the list function is cute, but annoying to respond to.
  • It's handy for organization
  • You can remove it with minimal editing in your reply
  • Here, I'll show you how

Quote:
Quote:A universe that's 13.7 billion light-years across
What's to reconcile?
Being disingenuous isn't cute and is annoying to respond to.

Light travels at 1 ly/yr, hence the name. If the observable universe is 13.7 Gly across then it must be 13.7 Ga old. This is in direct contradiction to your young Earth. Kindly reconcile.

Quote:
Quote:Multiple radiometric ages for the Earth and the Solar System of 4.5 Ga
I don't trust radiometric dating. There are too many unprovable assumptions involved.
Care to list a few? I know them all and how to check them.

Quote:The primary assumption of unchanging decay rates is now in doubt.
News to me and bad news to us all. Would you care to cite a source?

Quote:
Quote:Continental Drift
What's to reconcile?
Your young Earth seems to have a few hundred million years of it accumulated. Another tiny contradiction that you need to reconcile.

Care to try the other five on my list? The massive impacts are a cool one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Paleophyte's post
06-01-2014, 08:05 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 07:44 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  Light travels at 1 ly/yr, hence the name. If the observable universe is 13.7 Gly across then it must be 13.7 Ga old. This is in direct contradiction to your young Earth. Kindly reconcile.

It's not. 94 with some calculations, or so I heard; but duh! Recent modifications give a value of 13.82, making "observable universe" at least 27.64. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like houseofcantor's post
06-01-2014, 08:35 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
(06-01-2014 08:05 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(06-01-2014 07:44 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  Light travels at 1 ly/yr, hence the name. If the observable universe is 13.7 Gly across then it must be 13.7 Ga old. This is in direct contradiction to your young Earth. Kindly reconcile.

It's not. 94 with some calculations, or so I heard; but duh! Recent modifications give a value of 13.82, making "observable universe" at least 27.64. Tongue

OK, the edge of the observable universe was 13.7 Gly +/- change in the seat cushions when the light that we are now observing left. That edge has now expanded to ~47 Gly distant (~94 Gly is the diameter which is less useful for this discussion) but we can't see that yet. So the oldest light that we see is 13.7 Ga old. To be accurate, the oldest objects that we can observe are just a bit over 13 Gly because beyond that the redshift gets foolish and early atomic hydrogen "fog" absorbs most of the light.

But lets not confuse matters. You just can't fit a 13 Gly universe into a 20,000 ly bottle.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Paleophyte's post
06-01-2014, 08:41 AM
RE: alpha male's beliefs concerning the age of the Earth
Mine was a troll argument,

(06-01-2014 08:35 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  But lets not confuse matters. You just can't fit a 13 Gly universe into a 20,000 ly bottle.

...is a good rebuttal. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: