Old solar system unlikely - "Oort comet cloud"

[kendemyer]

I recently read some information which I believe makes a old solar system unlikely and has to do with the "Oort comet cloud". I would like to read more about it and would welcome some reader feedback. If you could limit your discussion to the "Oort comet cloud" it would be much appreciated.

Here is what I read:

More problems for the

Edited October 5, 2006 by kendemyer

[kendemyer]

Ask An Atheist,

I made a polite request. I said if you could limit your discussion to the "Oort comet cloud" it would be appreciated. Please abide by my reasonable request.

Secondly, if you don't like AnswersinGenesis I suggest you read the following journal article and get back to me:

Stern, S.A. and Weissman, P.R., Rapid collisional evolution of comets during the formation of the Oort cloud, Nature 409(6820):589

Edited October 5, 2006 by kendemyer

[Pizzaguy]

If you could limit your discussion to the "Oort comet cloud" it would be much appreciated.

AAA says... Doesn't seem to be much information out there- scientists have no clue what it is truly made up of, only that there is a body of stuff out there that supplies matter for comets.

Well, doesn't look like there's much to talk about, does it?

While AIG does seem to make a good point about comets, the evidence for a young earth seems kinda weak to me, and I'm very MUCH a creationist.

[Pizzaguy]

One of the things I like to think about is the age of the earth/universe/creation, etc.

Now, forgive me, but to a Christian (IMO) it DOESN'T MATTER how old creation is, as this has nothing to do with salvation and (again, IMO) doesn't change things one bit: We are here, Jesus came to save us, God is love ... etc.

But I STILL like to think about it....

I read the links given in the opening post - interesting. But I am not convinced that they debunk an old earth simply with their comet argument.

Now...

Apart from the first few paragraphs of Genesis and the descriptions of the generations between Adam/Jesus/etc., there is nothing I see to support a 6,000 year old earth. But as I look around me, I see plenty of support for a "billions of years old" creation.

Why don't you just believe the Bible, like any GOOD Christian would?

Anytime the Bible TELLS me something, I believe it. Some examples:

"Jesus wept."

"And he arose on the third day."

"He said: 'It is finished'. "

"God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son."

"Go, and teach all nations."

But the Bible doesn't say, "God created the earth on October 23rd, 4004 B.C." We only come to such a conclusion based on INTERPRETATIONS. IMO, "God said it, and I believe it" is a resonable way to think - but I don't see where God has "said it" in relation to the date of creation.

As I read the first two chapters of Genesis, I only see words that make it VERY CLEAR that God did it all. Gen 1:1 is not hard to read!

As for this, "six days, then He rested" stuff ... first, He's God! He needs no rest! I think that what we are being told is not for HIM to explain things to US, but for Him to INSTRUCT us on how to live/work/rest/worship, etc. God doesn't owe me an explanation of how or when He created - and it is my belief that He ISN'T telling us ANYTHING in Genesis other than that HE DID IT!

I have droned on long enough - but I really think that the 6,000 year old creation is ONLY an attempt to 'boil down' God's creative work to something that human minds can comprehend. But we can't comprehend this.

Go back to the midevil church - they taught that the earth WAS ROUND, but that the sun, moon, planets and stars were fixed on crystal spheres, and pushed thru the sky by angels. All of creation was small and within the grasp of a human mind, and man was at the center of creation. Now, the Bible NEVER has said ANY of this - but human minds INSISTED on grasping creation. And so it goes...

We are still doing it today: Look, I can't wrap my mind around 4 or 6 BILLION years, I MIGHT be able to grasp 6,000 years - but BILLIONS of years are the same thing to me as INFINITY. God is infinite in every way - and I believe his creation is as well. I see the billions of years old creation as nothing more than one more milestone pointing to an infinite creator. A creator who, like His creation, is simply beyond my mental grasp. He is beyond the mental grasp of ALL OF US - so how 'bout we stop trying? How 'bout we stop trying to explain things we cannot understand or grasp? How many of us can explain the conversion of matter to energy or energy to matter? (Which obviously happened in Genesis.)

God certainly lives outside space, and I think He also lives outside of time. I don't think I could understand the act of creation any more than my dog can understand how I KNOW that it's gonna rain two days from now. Genesis wasn't written to explain creation to me - He's the one who asked Job, "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?

Tell me, if you understand." (Job 38:4)

I still say Genesis was never written to explain the act of creation - it was written to make it clear that GOD did it.

And God owes me no explanation.

[Pizzaguy]

Interesting link about the "October 23rd, 4004 BC" date.

[Pizzaguy]

this is contrary to scripture. God is not a God of lack of wisdom, or lack of understanding. Nor is he a God who tells lies.

Agree - He tells no lies. But I think you bent over backwards to not understand my statement.

In Exodus, and elsewhere in scripture, God plainly says, "I made heaven, earth, and the sea, and EVERYTHING that is in them in SIX DAYS."...

Similarly, if God took anything other than 6 days of work and one day of rest to make creation, then he would be a liar, because he says over and over in scripture that it took 6 days work...

Exodus 20:11

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Jesus also told us that, "if your eye offends thee, pluck it out..." What do you suggest I do with THAT verse?

I ask, If you can't read Genesis 1 literally, then what CAN you read literally in the Bible? The way people pick and choose what THEY want the words to say is just plain ridiculous, and there are things in the Bible that are a LOT harder to believe taken literally than the creation account. If you can't believe Genesis 1, I question whether you can really believe a man can rise from the dead or walk on water either. Surely THOSE accounts would have to be taken figuratively as well. You certainly wouldn't be able to read anything in Exodus chapters 20 and 31 literally either, since they are referring back to the genesis account, and then since you can't read those chapters literally, you wouldn't be able to read almost anything in the Bible literally. Clearly that is just plain ridiculous

He died, and arose again. It is NOT harder to accept that at all.

But the fact is, the evidence is against a 6,000 year old earth. Let me ask you something, you keep bringing up this "God must have lied if Pizzaguy is right" stuff. Ok, so if the earth DOES turn out to be 5 billion years old - what do YOU do with those verses?

Gotta head to lunch ...

Edited October 11, 2006 by Pizzaguy

[Pizzaguy]

Your purported evidences will say:

1) Earth is about 4.6 billion years old. that number seems to change from day to day, etc.

2) Life started from some microscopic organism that somehow evolved out of a cosmic soup tha tsomehow evolved into everything we see today.

3) man evolved from a lower life-form into what we are today over tens of thousands, or millions of years, etc.

Whoa, STOP!!!!! I believe GOD created everything!!!!

All I am saying is that I don't believe he did it on October 23rd, 4004 BC.

What part of your evidences support an old solar system? The Bible does not support the old solar system myth. In fact, the Bible directly opposes it on several levels.

Geologic evidence. Star light from 300,000 light years away. etc.

Either you believe the Biblical account, or you don't believe it.

Let me define what I belive and I'll do you the same favor. You are more offensive than some atheists here.

Several people have tried, but they have never been able to show scriptural justification for believing the OSS theory.

I am not using scripture. I am using my own intellect. Based on what I have observed, and the answers to questions I have obtained, the earth is old. And even if the earth is 6,000 years old, the UNIVERSE is much older than 6,000 years.

And God owes me no explanation.

Go back to Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo - before Copernicus the midevil church was SURE that the earth was round (they got that right!) and that the sun, moon and stars were fixed on crystal spheres - pushed thru the sky by angels. Science (in the form of a guy peering thru a simple optical instrument) destroyed that universe.

We now now that man is NOT at the "center" of creation (as they saw it, that is.) The universe that we (even you) know of is completely different from the one they 'lived' in - yet faith survived! Even tho the church was SURE of it's position - it eventually had to concede science to science.

I think a similar reformation is now due - it's time for part 2: where we admit that we are mis-reading the creation account in the OT.

Look, GOD made everything. How He did it is beyond me. But I REALLY don't think he did it 6,000 years ago. My mind is still open, and this is one of my 3 or 4 favorite topics - mostly 'cause science is wonderful to me. And ALL of creation testifies to His handiwork - it is all truly beautiful. (Ever seen a sunrise on Mars?)

Perhaps you can change my mind (if you can take a break from the insults and condescending remarks).

For now, one question: How do you explain the fact that I can look up at stars that are 300,000 light years away? How did the light get here if it's only been traveling for 6,000 years?

Edited October 11, 2006 by Pizzaguy

[StewartP]

I ask, If you can't read Genesis 1 literally, then what CAN you read literally in the Bible? The way people pick and choose what THEY want the words to say is just plain ridiculous, and there are things in the Bible that are a LOT harder to believe taken literally than the creation account. If you can't believe Genesis 1, I question whether you can really believe a man can rise from the dead or walk on water either. Surely THOSE accounts would have to be taken figuratively as well. You certainly wouldn't be able to read anything in Exodus chapters 20 and 31 literally either, since they are referring back to the genesis account, and then since you can't read those chapters literally, you wouldn't be able to read almost anything in the Bible literally. Clearly that is just plain ridiculous

Also, From the Bible, I have traced the exact age of the earth to within margin of error of the julian calendar on this forum before, its listed somewhere. I found that the 4004 years B.C. is actually off by quite a bit, but is still within the "ball park" so to speak. The earth is just over 6000 years old.

The bible also says that a bat is a bird, the earth is flat, it has four corners, the earth does not move and that Pi is equal to 3.

Now, do you take those literally too?

[billie]

Where does the Bible say the Earth is flat?

[Pizzaguy]

Since you wont answer my questions, I won't answer yours.