Interesting...

[tdrehfal]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/olde...t_030710-1.html

The age of the universe is said to be 12-15 billion years old. What would happen if we discovered a 15 billion year old rock on earth? Dates seem

to become irrelevant at that point and you're left with the entire universe coming into existance at once. Guess people would have to revise the

age of the universe again and that does appear to be a function of time so far.

[systemstrike_7]

That is freakin cool!!! I always get so excited when we find new stuff in space. The universe has always boggled my mind, and always will.

As to your question, what point are you trying to make? I know it is probably simple, but my brain is on a vacation at the moment....

[tdrehfal]

He's trying to disprove all of modern cosmology with the date of a rock.

It's pretty cool though.

I am not

It's more like trying to suggest that the things cosmology observed could've had a designer.

Edited February 8, 2007 by tdrehfal

[cjrose]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/olde...t_030710-1.html

The age of the universe is said to be 12-15 billion years old. What would happen if we discovered a 15 billion year old rock on earth? Dates seem

to become irrelevant at that point and you're left with the entire universe coming into existance at once. Guess people would have to revise the

age of the universe again and that does appear to be a function of time so far.

Cool site. Mysteries to be revealed.

[tdrehfal]

OK good, because that would be a foolish endeavor.

But how do you think it could imply a designer? (Especially when Creation is only supposed to be a few thousand years old according to the Bible.)

If the universe sort of just 'came into being' fully formed very quickly it would imply a designer, regardless of what dates you believe in.

[tdrehfal]

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/olde...t_030710-1.html

The age of the universe is said to be 12-15 billion years old. What would happen if we discovered a 15 billion year old rock on earth? Dates seem

to become irrelevant at that point and you're left with the entire universe coming into existance at once. Guess people would have to revise the

age of the universe again and that does appear to be a function of time so far.

You need to learn to grasp what 1,000,000,000 years is like. It's easy to those that understand....

Maybe you'll see that rocks cool much, much, much, much, much faster than you have in your head, that maybe you could be wrong about something, that a certain percentage of the population has a better understanding of ANYTHING compared to you. That is humble. That is the apex of humility......

That's why THEY ARE 4.6 Billion years old.

Things tend to fall into place after that.....

If you should harp on us about anything it should be that the Anthropological Argument is more sound than "God-did-it" in that it allows FOR OUR UNDERSTANDING. How defeatist can you be? You seem determined to keep us in ignorance. I wish I had something better to say, I truly do, but if I feel convicted of anything, it's this.....

For instance:

Christians seem to think that it's "God's will, WILL be done" and say "God's will be done" for short, when the two have two very distinct definitions......

It could be summed up using the Example Christians portray of Hitler, as a metaphor really, of what the words convey and what is really dispensed as, for truth: Actual Meaning, taking a look at Adolf Hitler "Mein Kampf." Keep in mind I have little respect for this book, it caves to intuition to such an extreme, I find there is nothing to be proud of:

To quote:

"The folkish-minded man, in particular, has the sacred duty, each in his own denomination, of making people stop just talking superficially of God's will, and actually fulfil God's will, and not let God's word be desecrated."

"For God's will gave men their form, their essence, and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will. Therefore, let every man be active, each in his own denomination if you please, and let every man take it as his first and most sacred duty to oppose anyone who in his activity by word or deed steps outside the confines of his religious community and tries to butt into the other."

[...]

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

Why don't you see this?!

It's because it's self-deteating. Please stop pretending, and do something....

I love you people.

Uhh.. I don't know where the anger and adolph hitler references came from what was supposed to be a science discussion. What am I supposed to do

here? Oh yes, I see it, Adolph Hitler was the true model Christian and every christian is just like hitler and christanity is evil, evil evil... I can see the "light"

now... Keep your emotional anger or whatever out of it and keep science in the discussion and stay on topic here then. This is rediculous. Don't talk about

the apex of humility while exploding into some kind of emotional rage, please.

Edited February 9, 2007 by tdrehfal

[apothanein kerdos]

OK good, because that would be a foolish endeavor.

But how do you think it could imply a designer? (Especially when Creation is only supposed to be a few thousand years old according to the Bible.)

This a myth. Though I do not believe in a young earth (as I will get to), people teach the earth is only a few thousand years old based on bad interpretation. They take the geneologies of the Bible, add them up, and viola, 6,000 years ago man came into being. Unfortunately for them, in Hebraic thought, genealogies are not chronologically ordered. A good example is that the Genealogy in Matthew leaves out many generations, all in order to prove a point. Thus, there are many 6 day creationists that teach the world was created 100,000 years ago, billions of years ago, etc.

As for the article, then the universe is older. Dating the age of the universe isn't an exact science, as you have to measure the rate at which the universe is supposedly expanding (through observation of stars, galaxies, etc). What this would show, however, is that soon after the Big Bang, we have a planet (possibly with life). This is consistent with our own fossil record which also shows massive explosions in evolution - rapid evolution. This is something materialists have yet to explain.

[hatsoff]

I'm no astro-physicist, but it seems to me that one conclusion which appears to contradict an earlier conclusion based on a comparatively larger and more well-understood body of data would suggest that the new evidence may have been misunderstood in some way. In other words, if this new study really did conflict with accepted scientific theories and models, the latter would not necessarily be disproven. Also, while the age of the earth is fairly certain (4.3 billion years, give or take a few hundred million), I don't think scientists claim the age of the universe is anywhere near as well-established.

In any case, though, a 12.7 billion-year-old planet by no means undercuts the possibility of a 13.7 billion-year-old universe.

Edited February 9, 2007 by hatsoff

[tdrehfal]

OK good, because that would be a foolish endeavor.

But how do you think it could imply a designer? (Especially when Creation is only supposed to be a few thousand years old according to the Bible.)

This a myth. Though I do not believe in a young earth (as I will get to), people teach the earth is only a few thousand years old based on bad interpretation. They take the geneologies of the Bible, add them up, and viola, 6,000 years ago man came into being. Unfortunately for them, in Hebraic thought, genealogies are not chronologically ordered. A good example is that the Genealogy in Matthew leaves out many generations, all in order to prove a point. Thus, there are many 6 day creationists that teach the world was created 100,000 years ago, billions of years ago, etc.

As for the article, then the universe is older. Dating the age of the universe isn't an exact science, as you have to measure the rate at which the universe is supposedly expanding (through observation of stars, galaxies, etc). What this would show, however, is that soon after the Big Bang, we have a planet (possibly with life). This is consistent with our own fossil record which also shows massive explosions in evolution - rapid evolution. This is something materialists have yet to explain.

Thank you for this non-emotional sceientific reply.

[cjrose]

OK good, because that would be a foolish endeavor.

But how do you think it could imply a designer? (Especially when Creation is only supposed to be a few thousand years old according to the Bible.)

If the universe sort of just 'came into being' fully formed very quickly it would imply a designer, regardless of what dates you believe in.

Further proof.

YOU see it. Give it up.....

What proof? If you shed whatever is causing such a combative attitude and quick to "disprove" Creation, you will eventually find your proof, your evidence with an open mind and willing desire for truth along with investigating facts. There are facts in the Bible that scientists have supported. Many think science and the Bible are at odds. This notion causes some to reject the Bible without truly investigating.

Skeptics and atheists who are aware of the latest breakthroughs in science are now being forced to reconsider doubts about the Bible. And many of today's most prominent scientists are for the first time considering, literally, the probability of the God of the Bible. For the first time ever, the explosion of knowledge provides enough information to understand scientific ideas written over 2000 years ago. Insights that only the Creator of the universe could have known.

Of course news affecting beliefs about God travel slow. Even with importance stressed on new findings. Evolutionists are determined to provide proof by using Scripture as a contradiction that causes doubt and closed perspective. So, where is the proof that we are creatures who share the same emotions, physical attributes, many commonalities, that we are here because of physics and the explosion of atoms and particles that could remotely just suddenly design how our bodies have organs that all need each other, how cells reproduce more human beings in this thing called life?

So, the world is billions of years old and there are archeologists still discovering fossils and the bones of creatures that at one time walked the earth. How does that disprove Creation and an Intelligent Designer called God?

The Bible stands alone -confirmed over centuries by millions of scholars. Scientific insights show: Accuracy, Inspiration from God - recorded accurately long before known by Man. There is proof in the Scriptures...i.e. God's delivery of his people by dramatic, miraculous events using ordinary people (Exodus).

God's law defined (Leviticus, Deuteronomy) God's judgement exemplified. (Exodus, Numbers). God's prophecy of the Savior to come. ( ALL BOOKS).

Most of what I have written is from a resource by Ralph O. Muncaster "The Bible - Scientific Insights" There is so much more I've just traversed over some of the facts. But, as you feel it necessary to see the world scientifically, others are open to the evidence of miracles and healings and that there truly is a supernatural higher power. That power is God.

Peace