Audie
Veteran Member
Embedded age
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Young earth
- Thread starter Soandso
- Start date
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
That's about as ad hoc as you can get.
I don't think you read what I said...
"I think you have prompted me to look into how those scientists came to their conclusions."
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
9 billion years off.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It began with geology. Early Christian geologists took a serious look at different types of sedimentary strata and came to the obvious conclusion that they could not have been deposited quickly. Some creationists get it backwards (don't they always?) and claim that the old Earth concept was invented for evolution, but the old Earth concept was already well accepted long before Darwin formed his theory.
I always ask why certain religious people need to prove God's existence. Whom are they trying to convince, themselves or others? They are also ignorant of the fact that there are scriptures far older than their Bible.
Sure, the Hindu calculations are a bit off, but it's not bad for 3,000 BCE.
Soandso
ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
The reason why modern YEC scientists went with "thousands of years" is because they put their beliefs first ahead of their scientific endeavors. Their presuppositions start with their particular interpretation of their religious beliefs, then they try to use science to prove those beliefs true. When that fails, they try something else. Then, they try something else when that fails
While they continue to hit their head against a brick wall over and over and fulfill the true definition of insanity, the rest of the scientific body just keeps chugging along
That's not to say that religious people are bad at science - on the contrary. As far as I'm aware many if not most scientists happen to be very religious too. What separates them is that they do not try to prove their assumptions right in spite of the evidence. Instead, they simply follow where the evidence leads and go from there
If you are literally asking why young earth creationists chose thousands of years, I know from the Christian perspective it has a lot to do with things mentioned in the bible. Jesus' geneological line traced back to Adam, for one
exchemist
Veteran Member
Actually I don't think there is much evidence that Einstein was attacked or thought ridiculous. I suspect this is largely a romantic myth, perpetuated by people who want their own alternative ideas to be given credit - a variant on the "They laughed at Galileo" gambit.
In fact, Einstein's annus mirabilis papers were published in 1905, when he was 26, and already by 1908 he was recognised as a leading physicist and appointed lecturer at Bern, being promoted to associate professor a year later and becoming a full professor* at Prague in 1911. That is a pretty rapid acceptance by the science community, by any standards.
*In Europe a professor is not just any old academic teacher but the head of a faculty or a prestigious guest academic.
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
I actually wrote that first, out of habit. But then I remembered YECs don't think the world is 4-5 billion years old, they think it's 6 to 10 THOUSAND years old. That puts them close to 13 billion years off.
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
Actually, the Hindu calculations are fairly impressive.
No it was not. Einstein's ideas were very rapidly accepted.
Young earth is currently as irrational as flat earth theory given the evidence. So no, it does not have the status something that is controversial but possible.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That belief can become real tricky when we have strata of continuous deposition. One example that I can think of has roughly six million annual layers. Another one, and to make it worse it would be a "Flood deposit" according to YEC's, has only a few hundreds of thousands of layers of annual drying out. That leads to the question of how many times the flood dried up.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
It changes all the time.
New study suggests the universe is billions of years younger than we thought
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, it does not. How well accepted is that study?
Don't get your science from sources that rely on click bait
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
The scientific consensus ain't gonna change to date the universe to 10,000 years old. Period.
There is some uncertainty and conflicting data about the age of the universe, sure. But nothing approaching YEC numbers.
There is some uncertainty and conflicting data about the age of the universe, sure. But nothing approaching YEC numbers.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
You know that some YEC believe that the universe is old, right?
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
I know that there are OLD Earth Creationists, but they are not YEC. What does the "Y" stand for?
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
And besides, in Genesis, it says that God created the Earth before the moon and stars.
I think they meant that the universe is old, but the earth is young.
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
That conflicts with the accounts given in Genesis though.
Day 1: Light
Day 2: The "dome" over the Earth.
Day 3: Plants
Day 4: The sun, moon, and stars