Featured Old earth or young earth?

So you're saying that the earth doesn't really look old. It's just that the processes observed today at present rates are assumed to have been the processes and rates always in operation, so old age is assumed, not observed.

So apparent age is a fallacy.

 

There was a song when I was a kid - Ol' Man River...

Paul Robeson - Old Man River Lyrics | MetroLyrics

HankD

 

Well it works in the short term but over long periods of time you have to "assume" nothing changed as far as rates go AND you have to "assume" the starting conditions. Lot of "assuming" gets stuck in place of the actual Word of God "as if" the assumptions of man (that any atheist might make) are every bit as valid as the Word of God when it comes to re-inventing God's Word to fit what man "imagines and then assumes".

 

So the question would be, can one assume the Grand Canyon was formed almost instantly by a catastrophic event and would the evidence fit?

 

True. If you are not looking for a divine act of creation (just as we could ask - were humans formed instantly by a catastrophic event or did monkeys make them, or did God make them). And in the case of the Grand Canyon a single catastrophic event could do this when the ice dam broke after the flood and ice-age. Or it could have formed when the land was raised up and the waters receded) - several catastrophic events to choose from.

 

What about ice core samples from the polar ice caps?

 

yes, was created by the Great Fllod!

 

So, what is the evidence? That is a rhetorical question. I've heard lectures and read literature pro and con. One's presuppositions determines his interpretation of the data, and frankly, the YEC geologists have better explanations. In the debates, the Naturalists almost always retreat the "purpose of science," which, they say, is to find Naturalistic explanations for observable phenomena. But that is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one.

 

What about ice core samples from the polar ice caps?

 

Polar Shaved Ice!

HankD

 

Both sides use the same evidence, its just the creationist side actually supports the facts!

 

As far as I am aware just Adam and a flood

 

Jesus saw Adam and eve as real historical beings!

 

How about the FACT that light from parts of our very own galaxy takes some 30K years to reach us? (Not to mention the light from other galaxies!)

I believe God allowed us to discover the speeda light for the purpose of clarifying some creation questions.

Now, lemme ask those proficient in ancient hebrew here - Do the first verses of genesis not show that God re-formed the surface of al already-existing earth in "the beginning"?

And God caused Noah to take at least one pair of EVERY animal, bird, insect, etc.on board the ark. thus, if dinosaurs had then existed, they woulda been released with the other animals when the flood receded, and woulda been known to man.

 

And to open a host of others.

Saying "the speed of light is such and such, so the universe is old" isn't telling the whole story.

Adam's Telescope

 

We can prove that speed of light can slow down/speed up, so how sure are we that the speed has always been same in all Universe?

 

Scientists have been able to slow light down to some 38 MPH in certain transparent gels, but not able to speed it up past its "standard" velocity.

 

But now, doesn't the Hebrew say the Spirit of God moved over the face of the waters? Therefore, SOMETHING must've been there.

 

Anyone live near Denver?

About Ice Cores :: Video Gallery

The Ice Core Lab would be pretty cool to check out. It might take a bit of time to manually count the layers on the cores but if you have the time and the credentials, you can check the data out yourself.

NICL Use & Sample Access - U.S. National Ice Core Laboratory