Does the Young Earth theory dispute the speed of light and distance of stars?

Question

YECs believe that God created the Earth and the Universe at the same time, roughly 10000 years ago yes? But you only have to look into the sky to see the light of stars that has travelled well over 10000 years to reach our eyes. In some cases the distance would have taken over a million years.

Do YECs deny that the stars are as far away as astronomers have deduced or do they presume the speed of light is somehow faster than it is thought to be?

I'm trying to understand how it could be possible from a logical point of view, without just saying "Oh, God moved the light closer so that we could see it within our lifetime." Help me out here.

kentgru: How do you know that? According to most YEC science I hear that the Sun is shrinking (although the evidence is a bit lacking). Stars don't grow until they develop into Red Giants (which involves burning a different type of fuel). That takes millions of years according to studies of other stars.

Cris C: Ignorance won't get you anywhere. If you even picked up an astrology book you'd see that these theories aren't just the ramblings of some presumed knowledgable professor - they are studies done again and again. Have you never heard of telescopes? We can observe things in space like the size of the Sun, the distance of stars and calculate, from the knowledge we have accumilated, a theory.

You can't just make all that knowledge go away but putting your hands over your ears and going "Lalalalalalallala. I can't hear you!"

Here's some scientific facts on how the speed of light was determined - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#Measurement_of_the_speed_of_light It wasn't just made up because we assumed light was just really fast.

Wow kentgru, you added something. Can we say propaganda? While a majority of what you wrote (or copy+pasted as it seems)

Yes it's possible but everything you're saying is theoretical and besides, the Earth would need to be effected by such a large amount of gravity to slow it down by that magnatude that it would show effects by now. Remember gravity effects mass aswell as electromagnetic radiation.

Even taking into account everything you've said, that doesn't change that the Universe cannot be a mere 10000 years old.

Papa Bear: That's exactly the kind of explanation I said I was trying to avoid. If you're not going to keep to the rules, don't play the game.

Answer 1

If you want to think about things logically. The sun burns at a constant rate. If the earth were truly millions of years old, the sun would have been large enough to touch the earth.

Ok, let me tackle your origional question...

The equation of something traveling a given distance divided by the speed it is traveling:

Time=Distance/Speed

When you apply this to stars, it turns out to be millions of years. Since astronomers measure distances of stars in many different ways, the Distance is correct. The speed of light is easily observable and even though has been claimed to have changed speed over time, has never been proved to be different than what it is today. So the Speed is correct.

The only variable not touched is Time. Time is shown (with experimental support) to distort with gravity and speed. Einstein's theory of gravity indicates that gravity distorts time.

This has been measured many times. An example is clocks on the top of tall buildings run slightly faster than those at the bottom.

When matter is dense enough, the gravity is so intense, light bends back onto itself (the event horizon).

Theoretically, the universe has boundaries. (If the universe had no boundaries then all the net gravitational forces would cancel out.) It is also commonly accepted that the universe is bigger today than it was thousands of years ago.

If the universe is growing, then at one point it has expanded past the state that it was surrounded by an event horizon.

As matter passed out of the event horizon, the horizon itself had to shrink to nothing. This means that at one point, the earth was virtually frozen in time. While an observer on earth would not feel anything different, "billions of years" would have gone by allowing for light to reach earth and stars to age. etc.

I hope this makes sense for you.

I didnt copy+paste, but I did not come up with it myself. I can give the link if you want. If you really think about it, everything scientific is just a theory. There is no infallable theory out there.

Does the Young Earth theory dispute that God created the earth? No. God does not have to follow scientific rules. You can't explain God with scientific laws.

I guess in a nutshell, it all comes down to what you believe. We aren't the first to debate this, and will not be the last!

Answer 2

I find it very interesting that scientist like Hawkings prove out much of how the bible says the universe was created.
Including the time of darkness after the big bang when there was no light, how time its self was created in the big bang and the entire universe coming from a single point.

YEC how ever is trying to factualize a story in Genesis that doesn't even make logical sense (like where did Cane and Abels wives come from?) This story was not meant to explain how old the universe was or whether man is descended from apes.

Just for the record recent findings have changed the Hubble Constant and the distance has increased to the other solar systems due to the math change. Also
the speed of light is determined by the magnetic permeability of space and could be speeded up if the permeability was changed.
Time was created in the Big Bang and is relative to your position in space and your velocity in relationship to everything else. At the time of the Big Bang matter expanded faster than the speed of light (according to current models). You are basing you opinion on the false idea that the speed of light is a constant is unaffected by
what it is passing through or by the curvature of space and that our view of time in our position of space is the only measurement.

YEC in my view is flawed but there is plenty of wiggle room in current science to make something seem logical if that was your goal.

Answer 3

Isn't believing in Astronomy and the physical sciences of deep space (deduced reasoning) also a bit like a religion? I mean, don't you have to take a lot of that "knowledge" on faith? Who has actually observed a star form over millions of years? No one.

How do we even know our own sun is growing or shrinking? No one has been able to measure any differences in its size or mass since we have had instruments that can make those measurements. Its all based on some educated persons deductive reasoning and theories. Its another religion.

Please explain how we can simply look into the night sky, see distant star light, and by that observation know the light we see took thousands or millions of years to travel from deep space to our eye?(YOU SAID: you only have to look into the sky to see the light of stars that has travelled well over 10000 years to reach our eyes.)

I do not understand how you reach that conclusion based on those facts alone. You use the word "logic". Where is the pure scientific logic in that statement. What is the measuring device? Science is hard measurable facts and you gave none.

P.S. ADDITION: I see the usual Non-answer being tossed around again. Thank you for the explanation I was seeking to clarify your statement. As usual, when asking a "scientific" person to give a scientific explanation to their scientific statement you just get double talk and attacked. I guess thats some more of that "logic". Put your opponent on the defensive to shut them up.

Answer 4

i think of you each physique is all nuts is what I quite think of. The advent myths, and there are quite 3 in Genesis, have been created by a bunch of primitives who believed the earth to be flat, who had no thought what a fossil became and understood no longer something of ways the universe works. They concept the sky became a ceiling with holes in it that enable easy shine by. each time they have been given puzzled they only marked it right down to God attempting to confuse them. Are you quite telling me you are able to't understand actuality to any extent further suitable than a 4,000 year previous goat herder that had to apply stones to count selection by way of fact no one had found out the selection "0" or common algebra yet?

Answer 5

You don't think that since he's capable to create stars, that he couldn't also place light streams where they can be seen by far off galaxies? Do you think that when Adam first came alive, that he only just than began producing blood and all the nutrients necessary to sustain the human body?

Answer 6

The Young Earth "Theory" is not a theory at all. It is at best a vague musing. It cannot even be classified as a hypothesis.

Answer 7

I thought everybody knew the earth was only 6,000 yreas old and was created on tuesday at 3:00PM

Answer 8

You shouldn't really worry about this kind of unscientific brainless bullh*t nonsensical stupidity; Young Earth Theory my *ss! The "BRAINLESS ONES" will always walk among us; don't give them the time of the day!

Answer 9

This manifest the type of education America is getting. The youth are being taught of mythology. tsk, tsk

Answer 10

I agree with you...the world is much older. people have to know this. they are just afraid to admit it.