Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Spock

The Distant Starlight Problem

339 posts in this topic

Ok, here is my first thread starter. I don't really see one on this topic and we do have about 6 going on age of earth. I've read Answersingenesis rebuttals, but I'm more interested in seeing what argument being made by YEC advocates on this topic is the one that you hold your hat on. What I like about this article is that he takes the ten arguments made by YEC people and refutes them one at a time.

Here is the article-

http://csharp.com/starlight.html

Let's have it.

Spock out

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are assuming the speed of light has always been the same.....    science has no idea what happened when God spoke, "let there be light".

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are assuming the speed of light has always been the same.....    science has no idea what happened when God spoke, "let there be light".

Did you read his rebuttal to that argument in the article? See Point # 3

Do you disagree with that rebuttal? If so, how so?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

you are assuming the speed of light has always been the same.....    science has no idea what happened when God spoke, "let there be light".

Did you read his rebuttal to that argument in the article? See Point # 3

Do you disagree with that rebuttal? If so, how so?

 

Like I said, science doesn't have a clue what happened when God said let their be light......     even with our own science none of our physics works at the point of the so called big bang......   we are assuming all these things have been constant from the start, but there is no way of really knowing that.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From your source:  http://csharp.com/starlight.html

 

"The claim that God created the universe with an appearance of age with light already in transit to the earth from distant stars cannot technically be proved or disproved, so it is not scientific."

 

  :24:  Neither is anything he postulates!  It's in the past...you can't do EXPERIMENTS on the past.  So Everything, from whatever camp on this issue, is not "scientific".  It's UNFALSIFIABLE; Hence, UNPROVABLE!!  Just stories, speculations, and Unfalsifiable/Unprovable Assumptions.

 

Setterfield @ least has measurements from the past.  Can he Prove the extrapolations......NOPE!!

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why is hard to accept that an all knowing all powerful God created all of the stars at the instantly at the same time, including the ones that are 10-14 billion light years from earth whose light we will never see with the naked eye?

 

The assumption by some creationists  is that the stars had to be visible on the fourth day, but that is not the case.  The simply had to be made on the fourth day. 

 

God did not create the universe with the appearance of age.  He created the universe functionally mature. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why is hard to accept that an all knowing all powerful God created all of the stars at the instantly at the same time, including the ones that are 10-14 billion light years from earth whose light we will never see with the naked eye?

 

The assumption by some creationists  is that the stars had to be visible on the fourth day, but that is not the case.  The simply had to be made on the fourth day. 

 

God did not create the universe with the appearance of age.  He created the universe functionally mature. 

 

how does that answer the question of how we can see light from stars billions of light years away?  6000 years is not enough time for their light to reach earth at known speed of light.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why is hard to accept that an all knowing all powerful God created all of the stars at the instantly at the same time, including the ones that are 10-14 billion light years from earth whose light we will never see with the naked eye?

 

The assumption by some creationists  is that the stars had to be visible on the fourth day, but that is not the case.  The simply had to be made on the fourth day. 

 

God did not create the universe with the appearance of age.  He created the universe functionally mature. 

 

:thumbsup:

 

Another Way, Even Peer Reviewed Yet Seldom Considered

 

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. Genesis 1:6-7

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why is hard to accept that an all knowing all powerful God created all of the stars at the instantly at the same time, including the ones that are 10-14 billion light years from earth whose light we will never see with the naked eye?

 

The assumption by some creationists  is that the stars had to be visible on the fourth day, but that is not the case.  The simply had to be made on the fourth day. 

 

God did not create the universe with the appearance of age.  He created the universe functionally mature.

This rebuttal makes no sense to me again Shiloh.

If we here on earth are viewing a supernova that happened 167,000 light years ago, doesn't that tell you something? It certainly tells me this universe is more than 10,000 years old, otherwise, how could the light from that explosion be 167,000 years away?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0