It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Best evidence you'll ever see that the earth is young

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: 2Faced

One can, indeed, believe in a Creator, I do, and still not believe that the Earth is young, nor that is was created in six days...

C'mon now, trying to herd people into small boxes isn't conducive to productive conversation.




posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Time dilation.

It can play tricks on tha mind.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: JameSimon

Really?, how about Einstein's special theory of relativity? Time dilation actually gives evidence for a young Earth for compressed time at the beginning of the expansion of the universe moving much more slowly and as the universe expands and stretches spaceTime time moves much more quickly.

This explains the reasoning behind finding evidence of geologic time being much longer than time as measured by the Ancients via the Earth traveling around the Sun and the Earth spinning on its axis.

The biggest problem with the scientific paradigms is every scientist at every current Paradigm believes they have all the answers when they know very little.

Jaden



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   


If there is a god, and he/she/it created us in his/her own image, I can only conclude he/she/it is far from perfect, and thus not really worthy of my worship.
a reply to: 2Faced
Come on now, how do you even know that God wants or needs worshipping?
Try looking at it like this, It would be like as if you gave a dollar to the richest person on the planet. It just wouldn't be needed, would it?



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Like you, I don’t know what god likes. Just as I don’t know what jolly saint nick and his old lady are up to tonight. I can speculate. But as long as you cant claim god personally told you he doesn’t like to be worshipped, I rather dwell in my own flavor delusion.

a reply to: ancientthunder



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: JameSimon
A guy talking is not evidence of everything. The earth is more than 4 billion years old, get over it.


Yes it is unfortunate that some are drawn in to young earth theology. I mean its just not needed to explain the human dispensation on the earth.

I know a guy that would teach that the Hebrew said "the earth was void again" or became void. That there were really several destructions of the earth before man. Differing coal layers (6 to 10) in the earth prove this idea not to mention God himself saying that he would not destroy the earth again with water, as He had apparently done several times in the past. Even the Maya tell of several earth destructions by water whatever thats worth here. That several attempts were made to create a creature humanoid that could recognize God. They were all destroyed. It apparently wasn't until God stepped in and "breathed" His spirit into man during the beginning of the last creation, this creation I should say, did man with the "God element" happen. Maybe they wanted to avoid that up unto that point, that is giving Adam the "God Breath". And when He fell they rushed to remove the "Tree of Life" so that Adam didn't become like the Gods totally.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



science nerds can make one indistinguishable from the natural in 3 months


So scientists made the earth??? Sounds ridiculous huh?

There are fossils of tropical plants in Washington, which was under snow for tens of thousands of years. Which means the earth must be really old because the US must have moved from a more southern location to it's present location over millions of years for it to have been tropical once.

And what about seashells found on mountaintops? Let me guess, they were put there by scientists??


Don't cross wires....scientists can now duplicate how rock made in a Lab in several months and it is indistinguishable from other rock and how oil and coal can also be made in a lab the same ways....now this is not only important in and of itself but it in many many ways validates the Vlar Global Continental Wave Model....these laboratory actions are duplicated on a GLOBAL SCALE as post-impacts of a Vlar Global Continental Displacement Wave.The missing link has always been the Vlar Global Continental Displacement Model as described here on ATS many times...use the search option.Note- the name Vlar is in no way connected to or referencing anyone who may have that name...it is derived from a public domain definition of the word Vlar.
edit on 4-8-2018 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 01:55 PM
link   


I can speculate
a reply to: 2Faced
Good for you, but just saying your conning yourself along. Yes, you are free to believe whatever you wish, if that is what makes your boat float.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: JameSimon

Really?, how about Einstein's special theory of relativity? Time dilation actually gives evidence for a young Earth for compressed time at the beginning of the expansion of the universe moving much more slowly and as the universe expands and stretches spaceTime time moves much more quickly.

This explains the reasoning behind finding evidence of geologic time being much longer than time as measured by the Ancients via the Earth traveling around the Sun and the Earth spinning on its axis.

The biggest problem with the scientific paradigms is every scientist at every current Paradigm believes they have all the answers when they know very little.



Jaden


Kind of odd to have a person use scientific conjecture as a means to call into question scientific conjecture. Anything which is not based upon solid "hands on evidence" is largely speculation, the validity of which rests upon the credibility of those who would propose it.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Evidence - The available body of Facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
edit on 4-8-2018 by blackrabbit1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 02:31 PM
link   


the atheists' claims, and you realize they've got nothing


Creationists have nothing but religious books, how is that better than science.



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArchangelOger
a reply to: 2Faced

“if there is a god, who created him? Did he spontanious appear out of nothing, kinda like a big bang?”

That's like a double question, what caused the big bang?

“if there is an allmighty god, why does he give an innocent 4 year old girl cancer?”

Who sinned?

“if there’s a god, why did he give us flaws?"

You asked for it.

Oh and the whole image thing, that is ALL human beings,
not this one here or there so what one does effects ALL. The so called game changed with the Messiah's death.


Lol. Pure fantasy. And if god is giving a 4 year old girl cancer for 'sinning,' then that guy is a malicious fu cking psychopath and Im glad he kicked rocks. Now if only he'd scoot on outta here and refrain from punishing innocence here in the real world, thatd be great.



ETA: I am not even an atheist, in fact I do kind of subscribe to there being a creator, but if said creator is actually actively punishing people, children, for 'sin', then i also stand by my statement that said creator is a sadist and I dont much care for them.

I dont believe that to be the case however, proof lies with how the worst people are currently sitting at the top in this world. Basically, it seems like 'sin' is rewarded more than anything else.
edit on 4-8-2018 by Lightdhype because: Harshness

edit on 4-8-2018 by Lightdhype because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   
A 'MSc. in 'science'???? Never heard someone having one in science we have them in things like Geography.. Geology... chemistry..or Masters in stuff like starwars... one legged lesbian rights for martians... Point I am making is what is his field of MSc. (If it is a MSc. at all) and more important where did he study.. A MSc. in particle physics from MIT I'd be impressed.. a £300 one of ebay.. not so much...

Remember also, lotss of 'scientists' have outlandish ideas, that's actually the point of science.. Peer reviewed and tested papers now that's the real test. Until then their opinion pretty much means diddly squat.



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Some of these arguments are terrible. For example his moon recession argument is completely bunk. Pretty much all astrophysicists know that the rate of moon recession has changed over time.

Here is the list of points and time signatures, if you wanted to look at specific arguments. Don't waste your time watching this whole thing. Most of this has already been debunked.

01. Diamonds (4:47)
02. Stalactites & Stalagmites (9:56)
03. Polar Ice Caps (11:54)
04. Rock Layers (16:38)
05. Radiometric Dating (21:00)
06. Coal (28:25)
07. Fossils (33:21)
08. Helium in Earth’s Atmosphere (37:18)
09. Salt in Dead Sea (38:18)
10. Moon (39:45)
11. Star Light (43:18)
12. Galaxy Rotation (45:45)
13. Salt in Oceans (47:28)
14. Continent Erosion (47:57)
15. Ocean Sediment (50:40)
16. Star Deaths (51:17)
17. Sun Surface Rotation (53:59)
18. Dust in Space (55:31)
19. Earth Magnetic Field (56:15)
20. Comets (59:14)
21. Uranium in Oceans (1:00:18)
22. Gas & Oil Wells (1:00:38)
23. Stone Age Skeletons (1:02:05)
24. Dinosaurs (1:04:33)
25. Index Fossils (1:07:36)



edit on 8 5 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 02:15 AM
link   
It's like someone arguing that the sky is not blue and his argument actually seems plausible to a point that people start to see he is right, the guy full of common sense, logic and factual examples why the sky is not blue.


Then they all step outside and say oh Sh!T the sky is blue...


edit on 5-8-2018 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 03:13 AM
link   
a reply to: JameSimon


A guy talking is not evidence of everything. The earth is more than 4 billion years old, get over it.

True, a guy talking and showing pictures and graphs and video, is proof of absolutely nothing. But hey, the earth could just be 4 billion years young.

I only watched 16 minutes in, and I got to get some sleep. But, I got to say its funny how information can be interpreted, the whole video so far is kind of like a Monty python sketch, some of it is funnier then the stuff you see in the science textbooks. Which off course are wrong, but hey at least the revise them every 30 or so years.

But I left off at the whole planes buried 250 feet in ice in the polar ice caps after 46 year from ww2 to the 1980s. Hey if they waited a bit longer maybe 80 years there would only be 10 feet of ice on top of those planes.

Right now those ice caps are much lower in 2018. Climate change is real, in fact its always been changing.

And that part on the stalactite caves. Is he not aware that in nature it takes longer to dig out a cave with wind and natural means, then it would to have stalactites grow if the environment is right due to man made means in digging a cave.

But you know how people argue there points, they start with a point they like, then they work toward those ends to reach that end. I like this science vs creationist thing, its hilarious, and it keeps both groups on there toes to a degree.



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 04:44 AM
link   
a reply to: JameSimon

What you said, a guy talking is not evidence of everything. So far you 4 billion years claim.



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

When the religious books will be gone, all there will be are science books. Something you'll never figure out.



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChristianParr
A 'MSc. in 'science'???? Never heard someone having one in science we have them in things like Geography.. Geology... chemistry..or Masters in stuff like starwars... one legged lesbian rights for martians... Point I am making is what is his field of MSc. (If it is a MSc. at all) and more important where did he study.. A MSc. in particle physics from MIT I'd be impressed.. a £300 one of ebay.. not so much...


Well, laugh at his 'scientific' qualifications. This from his own website, he has:

-Undergraduate degree in Agriculture, University of Tennesse.

-Masters in Forestry from the College of Environmental Science, State University of New York. This college focuses on forestry and their masters are taught, not research based. His thesis was titled "The Redwood National Park : a case study of legislative compromise".

-Doctorate of Divinity at the Christian Life School Of Theology in Ohio, which is a private college whose founder was accused of running a sham university with fake degrees.

So here you go, this gentleman does not have a science background hence he is twisting information to fit his biblical beliefs.



posted on Aug, 5 2018 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Masterjaden

No it doesn't seems you don't understand relativity. But thats ok many do not either. Relativity has 1 main point and that is observers can see different things depending on their positions.

Ill give you an example lets say we have a photon that travels from a galaxy 10 million light years away. Our photon has traveled 10 million years to get here from our perspectives . Now lets say we could actually shrink down and ride on a photon. From the photons perspective it travelling at the speed of light no time has passed since it left the other galaxy and reached us. This doesn't mean the universe is 1 second old the key to determining how much time has passed is to figure out how much stuff happened between to intervals.

Now about the video i didnt get very far because i quickly realized this guy is a fool. His major excuse was mankind can simulate processes in a lab quicker than nature can and somehow that proves the earth is young. All this proves is we have figured out how nature makes them and because of this we can speed up the processes involved.

Oh and one more thing manufactured opals are easy to spot where natural ones are entirely different because the process takes millions of years. When we make them they are not random but uniform. Meaning we can make it better than nature but we lose something because its not unique.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join