Can science prove the world is over 4 billion yrs. old?

[Dan_Daly]

YEC has not yet learned the lesson that the Catholic Church learned with Galileo. When dealing with material things science is unbeatable, because science specialises in just the material. Dating a rock is something material. Science is always going to win when dating rocks, just as it won when deciding that the Earth went round the Sun.

It’s interesting but “science” doesn’t “win” at all regarding this matter. Whether or not the earth revolves around the sun or everything revolves around the earth is simply a matter of defining a frame of reference. According the modern science geocentrism is just as valid as heliocentrism.

Pax

 

[rossum]

It’s interesting but “science” doesn’t “win” at all regarding this matter. Whether or not the earth revolves around the sun or everything revolves around the earth is simply a matter of defining a frame of reference. According the modern science geocentrism is just as valid as heliocentrism.

Not precisely. In terms of kinematics you are correct, a frame of reference can be defined as you wish. In terms of dynamics you cannot define arbitrary frames of reference because you need to take into account accelerations, and hence forces. If you wish to have the Sun go round the Earth then you need a force to keep it in its orbit and not go flying off at a tangent. Since gravity is not strong enough to do that you need a new force. There is no evidence of such a force.

rossum

 

[inocente]

Continuing on you come across a guy writing down what he witnessed regarding the footprints. Should you ask him how they were made? Would you necessarily believe what he told you even if it went against the consensus of the researchers?

Whoa buffalo, this is getting weird. Based on this thread YEC never even looks at evidence, never asks any questions, punches reason in the face, is flat out incoherent.

To accept YEC we are prohibited from believing our own eyes and must throw out a sizable chunk of the physical law, while simultaneously ignoring that this paints God as a great deceiver. It’s not even true that YEC reads Genesis literally, from the discussion on the vault of the sky YEC never even bothered to read Genesis.

It appears to be a totally unexamined belief, not even noticing that its very reaction against science admits to the power of science. (On the other hand ID is pure scientism, refusing to let us see creation except through its pseudoscience lens, even rebranding God as the scientistic sounding “intelligent agent”. Incidentally, on post #214 remember the ban and your Back Fence thread for evolution/ID.)

I and others have already said the age of the world makes no difference to our faith, and from what I can see YEC is a secular fairytale, a doublethink having no possible bearing on Christ.

 

[inocente]

One cannot be a Christian and a scientist.

Did you really mean that? No doubt you accept scientifically developed antibiotics from your scientifically trained doctor, just as you use your scientifically developed computer. Is it OK for you to use scientists to get what you want while not letting them into your church?

 

[Dan_Daly]

Not precisely. In terms of kinematics you are correct, a frame of reference can be defined as you wish. In terms of dynamics you cannot define arbitrary frames of reference because you need to take into account accelerations, and hence forces. If you wish to have the Sun go round the Earth then you need a force to keep it in its orbit and not go flying off at a tangent. Since gravity is not strong enough to do that you need a new force. There is no evidence of such a force.

rossum

I think the evidence is that we haven’t gone flying off into space nor has the sun. For any action there is an equal and opposite reaction. How you define your positive and negative axis is again a decision up to whoever is modeling the system in question.

In terms of picking a point of origin for your system that has significance, the sun is very significant to us, but it is only one of many, many stars. The earth on the other hand, is the only home of life in the Universe that we know of, and the place with the 2nd Person of the Holy Trinity chose to become the Word made Flesh. That’s pretty significant.

 

[rossum]

I think the evidence is that we haven’t gone flying off into space nor has the sun.

We haven’t gone flying off into space because the force of gravity between Earth and Sun is enough to keep the much smaller Earth in orbit round the Sun. That same force is grossly insufficient to keep the much larger Sun in orbit round the Earth. Given that the Sun has not flown off into space and that there is no evidence of any fifth physical force sufficient to do so we can reasonably conclude that the Sun does not go round the Earth.

rossum

 

[HOLY_POOH_FAN]

There is absolutely nothing “Catholic” about the Science of Genesis except to say the account is so riddled with physical science errors it obviously was never written to be a textbook of Science. IT is a God-guided story of His Lordship of the Universe, the earth is GOOD, humans are made in God’s likeness and marriage between a man and woman and human sexuality and having children are excellent and holy and blessed by God. SCIENCE can discuss, advance theories and search all it needs to for physical answers but forget finding them in Genesis 1-3. .

 

[inocente]

In terms of picking a point of origin for your system that has significance, the sun is very significant to us, but it is only one of many, many stars.

In passing, the reason you believe the Sun is a star is from science. Genesis doesn’t call it a star, it says God created two great lights and the stars. Their collective purpose is to bring light to the Earth, separate day from night, as signs to mark sacred times, and to mark off the days and years. GJ 412 A and Alpha Centauri A don’t provide much light so the whole reason they exist must be to act as a calendar for us. Genesis doesn’t say any of them are spheres, and fails to mention the planets, nor of course the age of the Earth.

 

[Lui]

If you caught her point though - they are kind of annoyed that only a small percentage believe in evolution as the NCSE sees it.

Only of small percentage believe in evolution? I didn’t get that from those videos. I would say that most people in the WORLD believe in evolution and rightly so because in my opinion evolution is 100% sure while YEC is based on ignorance.

Did you really mean that?

I think it’s useless to argue with YECs.

 

[buffalo]

Did you really mean that? No doubt you accept scientifically developed antibiotics from your scientifically trained doctor, just as you use your scientifically developed computer. Is it OK for you to use scientists to get what you want while not letting them into your church?

Duh - I was commenting on what Eugenie was saying in the video. She was playing the same old angle. If one is a creationists and offers evidence it is batted away because the person is a creationist. (Did you even watch your own link?)

 

[buffalo]

Only of small percentage believe in evolution? I didn’t get that from those videos. I would say that most people in the WORLD believe in evolution and rightly so because in my opinion evolution is 100% sure while YEC is based on ignorance.

I think it’s useless to argue with YECs.

Do you not pay attention to the news polls regarding beliefs?

 

[buffalo]

Not precisely. In terms of kinematics you are correct, a frame of reference can be defined as you wish. In terms of dynamics you cannot define arbitrary frames of reference because you need to take into account accelerations, and hence forces. If you wish to have the Sun go round the Earth then you need a force to keep it in its orbit and not go flying off at a tangent. Since gravity is not strong enough to do that you need a new force. There is no evidence of such a force.

rossum

I believe the geocentrists claim is that the universe’s mass is the balancing force.

 

[Lui]

Do you not pay attention to the news polls regarding beliefs?

Polls in the US? In Germany I haven’t seen any polls that there are people who believe in YEC and I seriously doubt that most Americans believe in it. Show me the polls.

 

[buffalo]

Polls in the US? In Germany I haven’t seen any polls that there are people who believe in YEC and I seriously doubt that most Americans believe in it. Show me the polls.

Geez - I gotta do all the work for you guys…

Source
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com...roduction/Cms/POLL/cbe6kxp2j0mq0heqbqtwva.gif

 

[vz71]

I would say that most people in the WORLD believe in evolution and rightly so because in my opinion evolution is 100% sure while YEC is based on ignorance.

False dichotomy fallacy.

 

[Lui]

I’m not convinced by that poll. I’m pretty sure that most educated people in the world(not only US) believe in evolution and that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. I exclude people who have no or little education. Unfortunately many people of the population are quite uneducated.
If you ask them how many continents there are, they don’t even know what a continent is.
If you ask them where France is they would think it’s somewhere near Alaska

 

[vz71]

I’m not convinced by that poll. I’m pretty sure that most educated people in the world(not only US) believe in evolution and that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. I exclude people who have no or little education. Unfortunately many people of the population are quite uneducated.
If you ask them how many continents there are, they don’t even know what a continent is.
If you ask them where France is they would think it’s somewhere near Alaska

Another false dichotomy fallacy.

This time it is hidden, but you are setting up an argument between educated and uneducated where no such correlation has been established.

 

[Lui]

Another false dichotomy fallacy.

This time it is hidden, but you are setting up an argument between educated and uneducated where no such correlation has been established.

Show me the proof that I am wrong.

 

[buffalo]

I’m not convinced by that poll. I’m pretty sure that most educated people in the world(not only US) believe in evolution and that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. I exclude people who have no or little education. Unfortunately many people of the population are quite uneducated.
If you ask them how many continents there are, they don’t even know what a continent is.
If you ask them where France is they would think it’s somewhere near Alaska

You are not? Perhaps your a priori beliefs are stronger than the facts.

In any case Eugenie is lamenting the fact that so few see evolution her way, the atheistic way, and that court rulings, enforcement, making it more friendly to theists, keeping ANY mention of God out of the school will resolve it. They are creating their own “anti-wedge” strategy. :sad_yes:

The main problem I see is that good science will suffer the consequences and human reasoning will further fall victim to worldviews.

 

[Lui]

You are not? Perhaps your a priori beliefs are stronger than the facts.

In any case Eugenie is lamenting the fact that so few see evolution her way, the atheistic way, and that court rulings, enforcement, making it more friendly to theists, keeping ANY mention of God out of the school will resolve it. They are creating their own “anti-wedge” strategy. :sad_yes:

The main problem I see is that good science will suffer the consequences and human reasoning will further fall victim to worldviews.

For me believing in YEC is as ignorant as believing in the Easter bunny. YEC is NOT a fact, sorry. It’s a fact that YEC is nonsense.