OK creationist Christians again, if the universe is "young" how do you rectify the problem of light distance?

Question

Is there any , you know, "scientific" way you can explain light from stars traveling millions/billions of years just to reach our eye sight?
The amount of time it takes for revolutions of stars and the calculated ages galaxies, and supernovas? Why does God make nebulas?

Answer 1

I believe it is impossible to define God or measure Him in the confines of Man's understanding. It is comparable to the feat of fitting all of the waters of the world into a single thimble. It just can't be done.

Answer 2

OK, the philosophical answer is this...if God is truly God and all powerful, what is to say that he wouldn't create the light from the stars already moving across the universe. That would show his awesome power in creation.
As for the scientific answer, I am not sure that the story of Creation in Genesis is not prophetic writing, which would mean that the "days" may not actually be days as we know it. After all, we are talking about time here, which is a man-made idea. So by that reasoning, the earth may be older than 10,000 years

Answer 3

"a million. The regulations of the universe " thoroughly inappropriate. "2. introduction of existence from spontaneous non-residing inorganic chemical substances " technically also inappropriate. evolution concerns itself with how residing issues replace, and by no skill how existence began. even with the undeniable fact that, clinical suggestions about abiogenesis do have so a lot more desirable data than you would note. "4. Fossil record (If evolution were authentic, there should be thousands and thousands of intermediate fossils to prepare it.)" there are. species are literally not fastened issues. each fossil ever got here upon will be seen. the 'problem' right it really is the creationsist definition of species, and intermediate species "most of the earliest fossils, trilobites, had eyes more desirable complicated than the human eye, yet trilobites are claimed to be most of the earliest sorts of existence in accordance to evolutionists." so what. basically those who dont comprehend evolution, inclusive of creationists, imagine that that is meant to be a hierachy, with 'more desirable helpful, more desirable complicated' issues on the right. i.e, inappropriate consider accordance with lack of understanding. "7. Mount St. Helens eruption " i dont comprehend something about that "9. the straightforward cellular" definite the cellular is complicated. all biologists are conscious of this. and evolution is the basically aspect that may account for this. evolution CAN produce complexity, thats sort of the comprehensive factor. "10. round common sense " Scientists (in the field noted as geochronology) have *many* self sufficient strategies of relationship rocks, and they dont count number on fossils. "eleven. relationship strategies" i dont study them. the physicists say they're very precise, and independantly verifiable. the creationists say they suck. "15." The body None of our body organs exist on their lonesome ...." in different words, this argument is termed irreducible complexity. it really is been debunked countless situations. that is a blind fact that evolution can not account for as an party, the circulatory equipment, and counter to the quite data.

Answer 4

well, light just travels ... it has a dual structure: particle/wave ... and it travels ... i would say light is very very traveloholic :)


nebula, i think, are the universe's swamps, in which stars are being brought to life... so he creates the initial spark (the big bang) and nebula's come along the way, after god created the mechanism - they are instances of his principles ...


The Bible says that God created world in 7 days :) but keep this in mind, during the first day, God didn't have a sun and a moon to keep track of this time .. so, who knows, maybe the first day took a couple of thousand billion million trillion years :)

Answer 5

We have no way of knowing for sure that the speed of light today is the same as prior times. Photons emitted for sources may be losing energy with time. Also, God being all powerful could have created the universe with photons en route.
Now...how do YOU account for the thin layer (2-3 inches) on the Lunar surface when scientists prior to the first Moon Landing estimated a layer 20-30 feet thick into which the Lunar Module would sink and not be able to take off? Everybody remembers "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" but they forget a few seconds later, "I can see the soles of my shoes".

Answer 6

Ok youn is relative term and a theory based just on the mathematical calculations you speak of, as we can tell it is expanding at aincrasing rate, the theory runs if the speed slows gravity wll bring it back together, but when they say yung they mean several hundred billion years old and then there the space time diferential as gravity of large masses speeds up and slows down time so distance and time calcs are irelavent!

Answer 7

Jane,
There is no way most creationists could even begin to comprehend your question. They can not comprehend that it takes time for light to reach one point to the next, they do not understand the basics of physics or Biology. That is why it is so easy for them to call it Mambo Jumbo. It is kind of like when people thought the earth was flat, they were way to simple minded to visualize anything different.

Answer 8

the fossil record is shown to match the general sequence of the appearance of living forms described in the book of Genesis. Furthermore, a creative day as understood by the ancients can mean an epoch of extended duration, in much the same way as the terms “period” and “era” are used by science in describing earth history. Thus, the Bible is not at odds with scientific findings. It indicates that the creative days lasted aeons. It does not support the conclusion of creationists who believe that those days were each 24 hours in length.

Answer 9

Nobody necessarily said the universe is young. Youre confused with "Young Earth Creation" which believes that the earth is only a matter of thousands of years old.

Also the chick above stole my thunder about the universe expanding. It is known as "red shift." You can read more about it on the link provided. There is scientific evidence for Gods creation. But are atheistic scientists interested in scientific evidence which doesnt support their assertion that there is no God?

Answer 10

Dont you hate people who are that ignorant. Oooh, Dinosaurs are'nt in the bible, there for they never existed, the universe and our planet was actually created in 7 days, blah blah blah....

Of course I think that its a matter of the 1%ers. Basically, 1% of Christians are that retarded to think or say those sorta things, kinda like 1% of muslims wanna be suicide bombers and so on.