To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: Young Earth Arguments
PhysOrgForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > General Sci-Tech Discussions > Creation / Evolution

Bringer-of-Light

QUOTE
1. The Sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 ft/hr. The Earth is 93 million miles away from the Sun. In less than 20 million years, the Sun would have been so large that it would touch the surface of the Earth. Further, if the Sun had more mass, the gravity pull would be much larger and the Earth would have been sucked into the Sun long before 20 million years.

2. Short-period comets, like the Haley Comet in our solar system, whose life expectancy is only 10,000 years old, would have been blown apart by the solar winds years ago if they were older.
 
3. Absence of fossilized meteorites in different layers of strata on Earth proves that Evolution is a farse. According to evolution, different layers of strata were exposed for billions and billions of years, but only the top layers of the Earth have fossilized meteorites, and that in abundance.
 
4. The Moon is receding from the Earth every year. If the Earth were billions of years old, then the Moon would have been too close to the Earth. According to the inverse square law, the tides would have been so strong that everything would have died twice a day!
 
5. The Moon has short lived isotopes, like the Uranium 236.
 
6. The Space Dust is being vacuumed by the Robertson Effect. The smaller particles are blown out, the bigger particles are sucked in together. If the Universe were so old, it would be clean, dust free by now.
 
7. The Universe could not be more than 10,000 years old, because the rate of the star cluster is expanding. The Orion Starts are traveling rapidly.
 
8. Saturn's rings are still unstable, showing they are possibly less than 6,000 years old. If they were billions of years old, they would have stabilized by the binding of the denser particles and the smaller particles together.
 
9. Jupiter, Saturn, and its little moon "I-O" are cooling off very rapidly, but they are still very hot. If billions of years had passed, they should have been cold already.
 
10. The Earth's magnetic field is decreasing half a life every 830 years. This magnetic field can't be more than 10,000 years; there is no way to reverse it.
 
11.Look at the amount of lava and volcanoes on Earth. The Volume of lava ÷ Rate of lava coming out of the volcanoes = Amount of years. If the Earth was billions of years old, there would be much more lava on the surface of the planet.
 
12. Look at the amount of minerals in the sea. The amount of minerals in the sea ÷ Influx of minerals into the sea = Amount of years. This shows only a few thousand years.
 
13. Look at the formation rate of Helium in the Atmosphere. This shows the Earth could be at the most 0.2 million years -- God created the Earth with some Helium already.
 
14. The Erosion Rate of the continents is so large that the Earth would have eroded to sea level in 14 million years.
 
15. The top soil formation on Earth is formed at a steady rate which shows only a few thousand years.
 
16. Erosion rate of Niagara Falls
 
17. Oil Pressure would have leaked out if the earth were billions of years old. Scientists can get garbage and turn into oil in a lab in 20 minutes.
 
18. The size of the Mississippi river delta ÷ The amount of mud being deposited = The time the delta has been in existence. This shows less than 30,000 years old. Noah's flood deposited 80% of the delta in a few days.
 
19. The Earth slows down as it spins at a rate of a thousandth of a second. In a million years, the earth would have been spinning too fast for life on earth.
 
20. There is only a small amount of settlement on the ocean floor.
 
21. The largest stalactites and stone formation in caves around the earth only show a few thousand years, like in the Sequoia Cave in Tennessee. Stalactites grow rapidly, at a rate of 1 inch every year; the largest stalactite shows to be about 4,400 years old. In Florida, there are stalactites of 16 inches growing from an electrical wire.
 
22. The Sahara desert is expanding. Once the soil is depleted, it is irreversible. The expansion rate is 4 miles per year at the present moment. At a rate of ¼ mile per year, the age of the Earth would come to about 4,400 years old.
 
23. The seas are getting saltier every year. If the Earth was billions of years old, the oceans would be too salty for any form of life by now.
 
24. The current world population is 5½ billion. If we started with 8 people 4,000 years ago, this would give us a population of 5 or 6 billion.
 
25. The oldest coral reef is 4,200 years old in Australia. Remember that Noah's Flood was about 4,400 years ago.
 
26. The oldest living tree is 4,300 years old.
 
27. The oldest known historical date is 6,000 years ago. The oldest written form is very complex; humans were not stupid.

- gospeljohn.com
buttershug
First you are using backwards logic.
You have your conclusioin then cherry pick arguements to fit it.
The would be priest Darwin did the opposite. He believed in Creation then found evidence and changed his conclusions not changed what evidence he considered.
He stayed a devout Christian.

Most of those assume that a particluar situation is steady state.
For example use that logic on the world's heaviest man, I recently read he has lost lots of weight. What if you extrapolate that backwards. do you conclude he once weighed as much as the Earth does?
Bringer-of-Light
The weight of a man has nothing to do with the age of the earth. Neither does Darwin's theory. I guess you said these things because you can't refute the information I posted on a point by point basis?
buttershug
First can you confirm every point.
Second I could come up more points that you would have to resort to the Flying Spaghetti Monster Arguement to refute. Namely God did it.

but even if sosmeone did refute them all one by one? So what?
You can come up with more points, and the other side can come up with ten for each one you do.

And you would be better off proving the Bible without simutaneously proving the Koran or other Divine books.
Bringer-of-Light
I'm supposed to take your word that you can refute my points and just forget them? I'd like to see these refutations.
buttershug
I'm supposed to take your word that you can validate your points and just forget them? I'd like to see these validations.
Bringer-of-Light
Do you believe in a young earth?
buttershug
No, do you believe the world was created last thursday? AKA Last Thursdayism.
Delia
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 02:19 PM)
Do you believe in a young earth?

Do you believe that one day you'll possess more intelligence than algae?
Bringer-of-Light
delia - You are attempting to call my integrity into question which is uncalled for.

Butter - What is last thursdayism? Stop trying to derail discussion with foolishness. Why can't you be serious? Can you refute the young earth hypothesis or not?
buttershug
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 03:07 PM)
delia - You are attempting to call my integrity into question which is uncalled for.

Butter - What is last thursdayism? Stop trying to derail discussion with foolishness. Why can't you be serious? Can you refute the young earth hypothesis or not?

Last Thursdayism is a refutation of YEC.
It is no more foolish than YEC.
How do you epxlain carbon dated items over 7,000 years old?

You have to go with preponderance of evidence or some variation of Last Thursdayism, the Flysing Spaghetti Monster, or YEC. None of those survive preponderance of evidence.

edit Delia was calling into question your intelligence, not your integraty.
How do you manage to be so close but so far away so often?
Bringer-of-Light
Last thursdayism is baseless. I am basing my belief in a young earth on EVIDENCE. Why is that hard for you to see. Read my opening post again.

I thought carbon dating was only viable to 4000 years back.
buttershug
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 03:22 PM)
Last thursdayism is baseless. I am basing my belief in a young earth on EVIDENCE. Why is that hard for you to see. Read my opening post again.

I thought carbon dating was only viable to 4000 years back.

But not PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE!

And carbon dating isn't the only dating method there is.
barakn
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 06:28 AM)
1. The Sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 ft/hr. The Earth is 93 million miles away from the Sun. In less than 20 million years, the Sun would have been so large that it would touch the surface of the Earth. Further, if the Sun had more mass, the gravity pull would be much larger and the Earth would have been sucked into the Sun long before 20 million years.

2. Short-period comets, like the Haley Comet in our solar system, whose life expectancy is only 10,000 years old, would have been blown apart by the solar winds years ago if they were older.

3. Absence of fossilized meteorites in different layers of strata on Earth proves that Evolution is a farse. According to evolution, different layers of strata were exposed for billions and billions of years, but only the top layers of the Earth have fossilized meteorites, and that in abundance.

4. The Moon is receding from the Earth every year. If the Earth were billions of years old, then the Moon would have been too close to the Earth. According to the inverse square law, the tides would have been so strong that everything would have died twice a day!

5. The Moon has short lived isotopes, like the Uranium 236.

6. The Space Dust is being vacuumed by the Robertson Effect. The smaller particles are blown out, the bigger particles are sucked in together. If the Universe were so old, it would be clean, dust free by now.

7. The Universe could not be more than 10,000 years old, because the rate of the star cluster is expanding. The Orion Starts are traveling rapidly.

8. Saturn's rings are still unstable, showing they are possibly less than 6,000 years old. If they were billions of years old, they would have stabilized by the binding of the denser particles and the smaller particles together.

9. Jupiter, Saturn, and its little moon "I-O" are cooling off very rapidly, but they are still very hot. If billions of years had passed, they should have been cold already.

10. The Earth's magnetic field is decreasing half a life every 830 years. This magnetic field can't be more than 10,000 years; there is no way to reverse it.

11.Look at the amount of lava and volcanoes on Earth. The Volume of lava ÷ Rate of lava coming out of the volcanoes = Amount of years. If the Earth was billions of years old, there would be much more lava on the surface of the planet.

12. Look at the amount of minerals in the sea. The amount of minerals in the sea ÷ Influx of minerals into the sea = Amount of years. This shows only a few thousand years.

13. Look at the formation rate of Helium in the Atmosphere. This shows the Earth could be at the most 0.2 million years -- God created the Earth with some Helium already.

14. The Erosion Rate of the continents is so large that the Earth would have eroded to sea level in 14 million years.

15. The top soil formation on Earth is formed at a steady rate which shows only a few thousand years.

16. Erosion rate of Niagara Falls

17. Oil Pressure would have leaked out if the earth were billions of years old. Scientists can get garbage and turn into oil in a lab in 20 minutes.

18. The size of the Mississippi river delta ÷ The amount of mud being deposited = The time the delta has been in existence. This shows less than 30,000 years old. Noah's flood deposited 80% of the delta in a few days.

19. The Earth slows down as it spins at a rate of a thousandth of a second. In a million years, the earth would have been spinning too fast for life on earth.

20. There is only a small amount of settlement on the ocean floor.

21. The largest stalactites and stone formation in caves around the earth only show a few thousand years, like in the Sequoia Cave in Tennessee. Stalactites grow rapidly, at a rate of 1 inch every year; the largest stalactite shows to be about 4,400 years old. In Florida, there are stalactites of 16 inches growing from an electrical wire.

22. The Sahara desert is expanding. Once the soil is depleted, it is irreversible. The expansion rate is 4 miles per year at the present moment. At a rate of ¼ mile per year, the age of the Earth would come to about 4,400 years old.

23. The seas are getting saltier every year. If the Earth was billions of years old, the oceans would be too salty for any form of life by now.

24. The current world population is 5½ billion. If we started with 8 people 4,000 years ago, this would give us a population of 5 or 6 billion.

25. The oldest coral reef is 4,200 years old in Australia. Remember that Noah's Flood was about 4,400 years ago.

26. The oldest living tree is 4,300 years old.

27. The oldest known historical date is 6,000 years ago. The oldest written form is very complex; humans were not stupid.

1. I'm not sure where this 5 ft/hr factoid came from, but even if it were true the argument relies on one fallacious assumption: that this rate of shrinkage has been constant throughout time.

2. Solar winds don't blow apart comets. Solar radiation warms them up enough to volatilize certain compounds. Solar radiation decreases with distance from the sun. Another fallacious argument hiding here: that Halley's comet has always had the same orbit.

3. Blatant lie. There is far less old material because it has been destroyed by plate tectonics and erosion, so most of what is found should be young. Nonetheless there are fossil meteorites, like this 145 million year old one from half a mile down a borehole: link.

4. Another argument with a fallacious assumption: that the Moon has been receding at the same rate for all time. Also tidal forces don't follow an inverse square law, they follow an inverse cube law.

5. The Moon is constantly exposed to hard radiation from the sun and other sources. Its not surprising that a few elements have been transmuted.

6. Stupid assumption that new dust isn't being made. Asteroids never collide?

7. I can't even tell what argument is being made here. What star cluster? Why does the speed of Orion matter?

8. Stupid assumption that results from not considering destructive collisions.

9. Io is heated by tidal friction. Jupiter and Saturn are quite fluffy and still collapsing, turning gravitational potential energy into heat.

10. Alternating stripes of magnetic polarity in rocks at seafloor spreading centers are a record of numerous field reversals. Saying that field reversals are impossible also ignores the fact that the sun does it every 11 years.

11. Ignores plate tectonic theory and subduction of crustal material.

12. Ignores plate tectonic theory and subduction of ocean water, also ignores evidence of the accumulation of salts in vast evaporation basins.

13. Helium is one of the lightest elements around and also one of the least reactive with other compounds, thus is quickly lost from the top of the atmosphere.

14. Erosion rates vary from place to place and time to time. Specifically, erosion rates are highest were the elevation drop is steepest, so a flat plain will not erode nearly so quickly. Also, new continental material is constantly created.

15. Top soil is not formed at a steady rate. Maybe the person that wrote number 15 should compare notes with the person that wrote 14.

16. Huh?

17. New oil made in a lab doesn't imply there can't be old oil in the ground. The statement about oil pressure is just plain weird. Most oil wasn't made billions of years ago, merely millions. If the structures that trap oil are cohesive enough that we have to drill into them to get the oil, then obviously they're strong enough to withstand the "oil pressure" and there's no reason to suspect they weren't capable of doing so for a long time.

18. References? The delta is huge. My guess is that this 30,000 year figure was invented out of clear blue sky.

19. Another fallacious assumption similar to previous ones, that the rate of spindown has been constant throughout time.

20. The ocean floor is subducted and destroyed at a fast rate.

21. I've visited the same caverns repeatedly throughout several decades and can assure you their formations aren't growing at a rate of an inch a year. That number is way too large for most caverns.

22. Another fallacious assumption: that the Sahara started forming at the instant the Earth was formed. The possibility that desert formation started afterwords does not seem to have occurred to the idiot that wrote this.

23. See #12.

24. So what? Evolution doesn't suggest it's impossible for the human population to grow exponentially.

25. Blatant lie. See
this

26. Blatant lie. The oldest single tree was a 4900 year-old bristlecone pine, but there are clonal trees like the Quaking Aspen in Colorado whose lower age estimate is 10,000 years.

27. So what? Language obviously started before writing, and thus the oldest writing would be as complex as the language it represented.
buttershug
Lucifer; your turn to back up the points.

And hopefully someone will bring up points that show the Earth is older than you think. A Geologist should be able to bring up 10 times as many as you did but valid ones.
Trippy
QUOTE (buttershug+Jun 29 2008, 03:12 PM)
Lucifer; your turn to back up the points.

And hopefully someone will bring up points that show the Earth is older than you think. A Geologist should be able to bring up 10 times as many as you did but valid ones.

How about the list of elements with halflives less then 80 million years that are missing from the earths crust?

That's a fairly good indicator that the earth is a few billion years old.
NeoDevin
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 05:28 AM)
26. The oldest living tree is 4,300 years old.
Dabeer
Ok, so one poster took a stab at these, but I'm going to try to fill in some of the holes he left. If I skip a question, it's because he nailed it.
QUOTE
1. The Sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 ft/hr. The Earth is 93 million miles away from the Sun. In less than 20 million years, the Sun would have been so large that it would touch the surface of the Earth. Further, if the Sun had more mass, the gravity pull would be much larger and the Earth would have been sucked into the Sun long before 20 million years.

Assumes a constant rate of "shrinkage", but more importantly, assumes that the sun shrinking is a fact! The idea that the sun is shrinking was included in a abstract of a paper by John Eddy and Aram Boornazian in 1979. Their methodology was proved to be flawed, and the paper was never published.

Also, size is not the same as mass, maybe the sun is just getting more dense, possibly as the lighter hydrogen gets fused into helium?
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
1. The Sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 ft/hr. The Earth is 93 million miles away from the Sun. In less than 20 million years, the Sun would have been so large that it would touch the surface of the Earth. Further, if the Sun had more mass, the gravity pull would be much larger and the Earth would have been sucked into the Sun long before 20 million years.

Assumes a constant rate of "shrinkage", but more importantly, assumes that the sun shrinking is a fact! The idea that the sun is shrinking was included in a abstract of a paper by John Eddy and Aram Boornazian in 1979. Their methodology was proved to be flawed, and the paper was never published.

Also, size is not the same as mass, maybe the sun is just getting more dense, possibly as the lighter hydrogen gets fused into helium?
5. The Moon has short lived isotopes, like the Uranium 236.

Additionally, those isotopes are intermediary decay products from longer-lived isotopes.
QUOTE
6. The Space Dust is being vacuumed by the Robertson Effect. The smaller particles are blown out, the bigger particles are sucked in together. If the Universe were so old, it would be clean, dust free by now.

Uh, no, there's still plenty of small particles that have been "blown out" to make it a dusty place. Also, Poynting-Robinson effect only happens within a solar system, not in deep space. And as the other poster said, there's plenty of sources of new "dust" - collisions, stars going nova, etc.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
6. The Space Dust is being vacuumed by the Robertson Effect. The smaller particles are blown out, the bigger particles are sucked in together. If the Universe were so old, it would be clean, dust free by now.

Uh, no, there's still plenty of small particles that have been "blown out" to make it a dusty place. Also, Poynting-Robinson effect only happens within a solar system, not in deep space. And as the other poster said, there's plenty of sources of new "dust" - collisions, stars going nova, etc.
7. The Universe could not be more than 10,000 years old, because the rate of the star cluster is expanding. The Orion Starts are traveling rapidly.

Star clusters expand due to the explosive forces of an older star that went nova. The Orion stars are moving, so what? This proves nothing.
QUOTE
8. Saturn's rings are still unstable, showing they are possibly less than 6,000 years old. If they were billions of years old, they would have stabilized by the binding of the denser particles and the smaller particles together.

Irrelevant. So what if the rings are only 6,000 years old, that doesn't mean the Universe isn't 13.5 billion years old, it just means the rings formed 6,000 years ago.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
8. Saturn's rings are still unstable, showing they are possibly less than 6,000 years old. If they were billions of years old, they would have stabilized by the binding of the denser particles and the smaller particles together.

Irrelevant. So what if the rings are only 6,000 years old, that doesn't mean the Universe isn't 13.5 billion years old, it just means the rings formed 6,000 years ago.
10. The Earth's magnetic field is decreasing half a life every 830 years. This magnetic field can't be more than 10,000 years; there is no way to reverse it.

Wrong. The Earth's magnetic field has reversed multiple times, as documented by the polarization of ferro-magnetic minerals. The strength of the Earth's magnetic field is driven by the fluid motion of the Earth's core, and is not steadily decreasing - ferro-magnetic minerals record periods of increased magnetic field.
QUOTE
11.Look at the amount of lava and volcanoes on Earth. The Volume of lava ÷ Rate of lava coming out of the volcanoes = Amount of years. If the Earth was billions of years old, there would be much more lava on the surface of the planet.

And the core would be hollow? Subduction destroys surface crust, including lava, and recycles it. You're also assuming the rate of lava flow is constant, and probably are ignoring lava that you just don't see, that you don't know is there.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
11.Look at the amount of lava and volcanoes on Earth. The Volume of lava ÷ Rate of lava coming out of the volcanoes = Amount of years. If the Earth was billions of years old, there would be much more lava on the surface of the planet.

And the core would be hollow? Subduction destroys surface crust, including lava, and recycles it. You're also assuming the rate of lava flow is constant, and probably are ignoring lava that you just don't see, that you don't know is there.
12. Look at the amount of minerals in the sea. The amount of minerals in the sea ÷ Influx of minerals into the sea = Amount of years. This shows only a few thousand years.

You're assuming deposition rates are constant, and that there are no processes by which minerals are removed from the ocean. Using this method of dating using aluminum gives an age of 100 years - obviously incorrect, and using sodium gives 260 million years.
QUOTE
13. Look at the formation rate of Helium in the Atmosphere. This shows the Earth could be at the most 0.2 million years -- God created the Earth with some Helium already.

Are you saying there's not enough or that there's too much? Helium produced by radioactive decay can be trapped in the rocks in which it was formed. Helium in the atmosphere is stripped by ionization.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
13. Look at the formation rate of Helium in the Atmosphere. This shows the Earth could be at the most 0.2 million years -- God created the Earth with some Helium already.

Are you saying there's not enough or that there's too much? Helium produced by radioactive decay can be trapped in the rocks in which it was formed. Helium in the atmosphere is stripped by ionization.
14. The Erosion Rate of the continents is so large that the Earth would have eroded to sea level in 14 million years.

See below.
QUOTE
15. The top soil formation on Earth is formed at a steady rate which shows only a few thousand years.

See above.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
15. The top soil formation on Earth is formed at a steady rate which shows only a few thousand years.

See above.
16. Erosion rate of Niagara Falls

Shows that Niagrara Falls is not as old as the Earth. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper.
QUOTE
17. Oil Pressure would have leaked out if the earth were billions of years old. Scientists can get garbage and turn into oil in a lab in 20 minutes.

Assumes that the oil was there from the beginning, instead of being formed in the last few millions of years. Scientists producing oil is irrelevant.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
17. Oil Pressure would have leaked out if the earth were billions of years old. Scientists can get garbage and turn into oil in a lab in 20 minutes.

Assumes that the oil was there from the beginning, instead of being formed in the last few millions of years. Scientists producing oil is irrelevant.
18. The size of the Mississippi river delta ÷ The amount of mud being deposited = The time the delta has been in existence. This shows less than 30,000 years old. Noah's flood deposited 80% of the delta in a few days.

So the Mississippi formed less than 30,000 years ago. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper.
QUOTE
19. The Earth slows down as it spins at a rate of a thousandth of a second. In a million years, the earth would have been spinning too fast for life on earth.

Overestimates the rate of slowing. 450 million years ago, the day would have been 22 hours long.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
19. The Earth slows down as it spins at a rate of a thousandth of a second. In a million years, the earth would have been spinning too fast for life on earth.

Overestimates the rate of slowing. 450 million years ago, the day would have been 22 hours long.
20. There is only a small amount of settlement on the ocean floor.

Subduction, currents, etc. Additionally, while these rates are incompatible with "old earth" geology, they are also incompatible with "young earth" geology. Logically, these rates are meaningless for determining age.
QUOTE
21. The largest stalactites and stone formation in caves around the earth only show a few thousand years, like in the Sequoia Cave in Tennessee. Stalactites grow rapidly, at a rate of 1 inch every year; the largest stalactite shows to be about 4,400 years old. In Florida, there are stalactites of 16 inches growing from an electrical wire.

The caves formed 4000 years ago. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound. Stalactites on wires are formed from a different mineral source, at different dissolution rates than cave stalactites. Proves nothing.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
21. The largest stalactites and stone formation in caves around the earth only show a few thousand years, like in the Sequoia Cave in Tennessee. Stalactites grow rapidly, at a rate of 1 inch every year; the largest stalactite shows to be about 4,400 years old. In Florida, there are stalactites of 16 inches growing from an electrical wire.

The caves formed 4000 years ago. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound. Stalactites on wires are formed from a different mineral source, at different dissolution rates than cave stalactites. Proves nothing.
22. The Sahara desert is expanding. Once the soil is depleted, it is irreversible. The expansion rate is 4 miles per year at the present moment. At a rate of ¼ mile per year, the age of the Earth would come to about 4,400 years old.

The Sahara desert is not as old as the earth. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound.
QUOTE
23. The seas are getting saltier every year. If the Earth was billions of years old, the oceans would be too salty for any form of life by now.

The mineral content of the ocean is balanced by fresh water intake, and minerals being removed through natural processes. Additionally, there are bacteria that prefer salty environments. While our type of life might not survive, some life undoubtedly will.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
23. The seas are getting saltier every year. If the Earth was billions of years old, the oceans would be too salty for any form of life by now.

The mineral content of the ocean is balanced by fresh water intake, and minerals being removed through natural processes. Additionally, there are bacteria that prefer salty environments. While our type of life might not survive, some life undoubtedly will.
24. The current world population is 5½ billion. If we started with 8 people 4,000 years ago, this would give us a population of 5 or 6 billion.

Assumes exponential growth, which is demonstrably false. Most population growth has occurred recently with technology and increased resources.
QUOTE
25. The oldest coral reef is 4,200 years old in Australia. Remember that Noah's Flood was about 4,400 years ago.

The coral reef is not as old as the earth. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound.
QUOTE (->
QUOTE
25. The oldest coral reef is 4,200 years old in Australia. Remember that Noah's Flood was about 4,400 years ago.

The coral reef is not as old as the earth. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound.
26. The oldest living tree is 4,300 years old.

Wrong. The oldest living plant is a spruce tree in Norway, the root system being 9,550 years old. The oldest standing tree is a Bristlecone Pine, at about 5000 years. Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound.
QUOTE
27. The oldest known historical date is 6,000 years ago. The oldest written form is very complex; humans were not stupid.

Written language arose 5000-6000 years ago. So what? Provides a lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper bound.

I refer you to an excellent reference for these types of claims in the future.

http://wiki.cotch.net
Masked Marauder
As always, Bringer-of-Lite (beer), you asked and received. Now, the question is, will you debate these arguments or do the standard christian response...

GODDIDIT

We wait with abated breath.

MM
NeoDevin
QUOTE (Bringer-of-Light+Jun 28 2008, 05:28 AM)
25. The oldest coral reef is 4,200 years old in Australia. Remember that Noah's Flood was about 4,400 years ago.

QUOTE
The CRC Reef Research Centre estimates the age of the present, living reef structure at 6,000 to 8,000 years old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef

What's more, the reef has a history going back at least 24-25 million years.

Therefore the earth is at least 24 million years old.
El_Machinae
To the OP: the problem with this list is a rather massive societal issue. Most of those points are rather easily refuted by someone with a decent science education: granted, a single person would not be able to refute each point, just the points in areas they know about. However, this means that whoever compiled (and forwarded!) the list is stunningly ignorant of most of our Earth's natural history. The writer thought that each of those points were good ones!

In order to 'believe' this list, one would need to remain quite unknowledgable. And that's a sad thing.
Beer w/Straw
Where is my master phillip147 huh.gif

I'd like to get his position on this.
My feeble brain cannot comprehend such things.
theory_of_nj
How some people put so much faith and energy into nonsense is something i'll never understand. Gentlemen, excellent job in responding to him.
barakn
Dabeer, good work. smile.gif I especially appreciate how consistent you were when pointing out "lower bound for the age of the earth, not an upper." I have a few more points now that I've seen yours and have had more time to let things sink in.

1. The Sun is losing mass. 9.13*10^-14 Solar masses per year is being converted directly into light energy or lost as solar wind. Assuming constant loss, the sun will shrink to nothing in a mere 11 trillion years. Measuring a 5 ft/hr shrinkage should be easy by integrating (after correcting for relative motion between Soho and Sun) the center of a SOHO dopplergram over a sufficiently long period of time, perhaps 3 orders of magnitude longer than the solar 5-minute oscillations. No one has reported a shrinkage of this magnitude, so it must not exist.

5. U-236 is not a intermediary decay product. It is specifically created by neutron bombardment of U-235, but U-235 is part of a radioactive decay chain, so in a way it took both of our answers together to explain it properly.

6. For some reason I saw "solar system" instead of "Universe," mostly because only the world's biggest idiot could assume that the dust would disappear from the Universe entirely. Where did it go - under a giant carpet? The argument is even more stupid now that I'm reading it properly.

7. Basically the remaining gas in the cluster gets blown out, whether by supernovae or hot young stars. The reduced mass of the cluster means that faster moving stars can leak out, reducing the cluster mass further and allowing even more to escape.

8. Granted, the age of Saturn's rings is irrelevant. However, evidence recently gathered by Cassini suggests the rings are as old as Saturn itself, i.e. 4.5 billion years old.

13. Good point. I didn't notice that they didn't state whether they thought there was too much or too little. However, on other fundie sites they specifically state they think there is too little helium for 4.5 billion years of radioactive decay, although the scientific paper they use to support this claim states there's enough helium for 2 million years of decay, which is why our fundie included the claim that God made the helium (and misquoted by saying .2 instead of 2). Later papers showed how helium is stripped from the upper atmosphere.

23. I can't agree with you there. What you consider "fresh water," even rain water, has dissolved minerals in it (rain acquires it from dust in the atmosphere). The fresh water input to the ocean is what is increasing the salt, paradoxically, because the water then evaporates and leaves the salt behind.

24. Indeed. I said that human growth could be exponential, but I was referring to fitting an exponential curve to human population within the last few centuries. Obviously it can't continue to be exponential indefinitely or the entire mass of the Earth would be converted into humans, and its hard to tell what prehistoric population levels were.
El_Machinae
Excellent work.

My beef with the OP's cited site is that most of the answers to those questions are well-known in their respective fields. I'm sure that the owner of the website has had the answers pointed out to him a few times (though we could always try again). And yet, he's willing to keep them up there. Either the website owner is remarkably ignorant, or he's willing to foster ignorance in defense of his religion.

Imagine the damage being done to young (potential) physicists where they believe that the U-236 on the moon is there due to some type of magic. We need a more informed populace, not a willfully ignorant one.
rpenner
1. The orignal poster doesn't seem to desire conversation.
2. The original post was copied from http://www.gospeljohn.com/youngearth.htm
3. The original material is without attribution to sources, despite being largely a rehash of old arguments, some of which were popularized in the 1970s.
4. The original poster seems ignorant of the reasons why some of us refer to the original poster as Lucifer.
excaza
I like the saber-toothed duck. If I could make that in Spore I totally would.
Dabeer
QUOTE (barakn+Jul 4 2008, 03:09 AM)
Dabeer, good work. smile.gif

Thanks, just building on what you started smile.gif

QUOTE (barakn+)
23.  I can't agree with you there.  What you consider "fresh water," even rain water, has dissolved minerals in it (rain acquires it from dust in the atmosphere).  The fresh water input to the ocean is what is increasing the salt, paradoxically, because the water then evaporates and leaves the salt behind.

I'll agree with you that fresh water input might not provide the balancing effect I originally thought it would, but the fact remains that there are mechanisms by which the mineral content is removed, rendering mineral content an invalid dating method.
rpenner
I discovered something while making a point-by-point rebuttal. This has already been done (in 1994) and in the exact same order.

QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
1. The Sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 ft/hr.
This is not based on any observation or published scientific fact.

QUOTE (David Wise+ 2003)
Russell Akridge published his claim in the April 1980 ICR Impact No. 82, "The Sun is Shrinking", which the ICR has posted on their site. He based it on an editorial column in a physics magazine that mentioned an abstract presented by two scientists (Lubkin, Gloria B., Physics Today, V. 32, No. 9, 1979.) -- basically rumor mill type stuff. Those two scientists, Eddy and Boornizian, had examined the records of 117 years of naked-eye measurements taken of the sun and from those records they found a decrease of 2.25 seconds of arc per century or 0.1 percent per century, equivalent to the diameter decreasing by 5 feet per hour. However, they did also state that this only affected the outer layers of the sun, that it was only a temporary contraction phase, and that the sun is oscillating. However, that abstract never became an article, because after presenting the abstract at a conference it was found that those NAKED-EYE observations contained systematic errors that invalidated the entire study. Other studies of total eclipse records and of transits of Mercury over the past three centuries (performed with optical instruments instead of by naked eye, as I recall) showed much lower rates of diameter change and showed that the sun's diameter does oscillate with a period of 80 years and an amplitude of about 0.025 percent. Indeed, a few years later in another study one of the two scientists found that the sun's diameter had increased.
http://www.geocities.com/chastity403/quest...system.html#A12

QUOTE (Dave E. Matson+)
Thomas Barnes, Walter Brown, and Henry Morris used the argument for several years after the original report by Eddy and Boornazian was discredited (Van Till, 1986). I guess a lot of creationists still haven't gotten the word. In his debate with Dr. Paul Hilpman, on June 15, 1992 at the Royal Hall of the University of Missouri, Dr. Hovind applied the obsolete, shrinking-sun argument.
QUOTE (Van Till+1986)
Isolated from the corrective of continuing professional investigation and evaluation, the 'creation-science' community continues to employ this unwarranted extrapolation of a discredited report as 'scientific evidence' for a young Earth.
http://www.asa3.org/aSA/PSCF/1986/PSCF9-86VanTill.html
That was true in 1986 and is true today; it will be true for years to come. "Scientific" creationism lives like the proverbial ostrich with its head buried in the sand; it has no effective mechanism to weed out error.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof1
and
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE310.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-solar.html

QUOTE (Kent Hovind after Harold Slusher+June 1971)
1.5. Given the rate at which cosmic dust accumulates, 4.5 billion years would have produced a layer on the moon much deeper than observed. By implication, the earth is also young

(Added for completeness).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof2

QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
2. Short-period comets...

Copied from federal prisoner Kent E. Hovind. We know it was copied because it even copies Kent Hovind's mistakes.

QUOTE (Dave E. Matson+)
In passing, let me point out that the projected life span of one short-period comet, that of Halley's comet, is 40,000 years (Chaisson, Eric and Steve McMillan. 1993. Astronomy Today Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632,, p.339). Thus, we can forget about Dr. Hovind's 10,000-year figure! A comet's actual life span depends on its size.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof3

The continuing source of short term comets is well-known, and reasonably well-observed. http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/~jewitt/kb.html

QUOTE (Dave E. Matson+)
Another simple observation applies to the short-period comets, which means that we didn't even need the visual confirmation of the Kuiper Belt to win the argument! If there were no means for replenishing comets, then all of them would have the same age. In creationist eyes, they would all be 6000 years old. Yet, observations show that short-period comets with equivalent orbits and sizes have a variety of ages. They range from gaseous "babies," which could hardly have gone around the sun more than a few times, to burnt-out gravel heaps, which have been around the sun once too often. This simple observation proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the short-period comets are being replaced.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof3
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE261.html


QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
3. Absence of fossilized meteorites ...

Lies, lies, lies.
QUOTE
The Oldest Meteorites
When we are talking about the oldest meteorites we are not referring to the absolute age of those meteorites - most of them crystallized during the formation of our solar system and have absolute ages of 4.5 billion years! Instead, we are talking about their terrestrial ages, the time between their initial fall until the present day. Most meteorites weather away quite quickly in the oxidizing environment of the Earth, while some meteorites may literally be observed as they rust away. However, other meteorites fell at more fortuitous locations and were preserved until this day, e.g. in the ice fields of Antarctica and in the hot deserts of Africa. Some of them have been preserved for as long as 40,000 years or more. Indeed, there are some meteorites found to be much older still - those that have been preserved in sediments or in other geologic strata conducive to preservation, often referred to as "fossil meteorites".

The oldest of these fossils is the meteorite of Osterplana, Sweden, that was found in 1987 imbedded in some limestone. This limestone, which dated from Ordovician times, revealed to the scientists that the imbedded meteorite had fallen 480 million years ago! The meteorite of Osterplana is even older than the Brunflo meteorite which previously held the record for the "oldest". Brunflo, which was also found in Swedish limestone in 1980, has a terrestrial age of 450 million years. As with true fossils, most of the original meteoritic minerals in fossil meteorites has been replaced by terrestrial minerals leaving only the outer structure of the meteorite preserved. Although both meteorites have been classified as chondrites, only their chondritic structure remains as evidence of their extraterrestrial origins.

The oldest intact meteorite is the Lake Murray iron. A single mass with a thick iron-shale was found in a gully in Oklahoma, USA, in 1933. The meteorite was imbedded in some Antler Sandstone dating from the Lower Cretaceous, suggesting that Lake Murray landed in a near-shore, shallow sea, while these beds were being deposited about 110 million years ago! In addition, although the exterior of this meteorite has been heavily corroded, the inner nickel-iron core has remained unaltered, establishing Lake Murray as the oldest meteorite on earth. It literally fell in times when dinosaurs still ruled the Earth!

http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/charts.htm#oldest
http://www.meteorlab.com/METEORLAB2001dev/.../LakeMurray.htm
http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Mar04/fossilMeteorites.html
http://www.haberer-meteorite.de/english/St...0meteorites.htm
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/278/5335/88
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc97/pdf/5057.pdf

Oh, and to demonstrate that this site is shilling for Kent Hovind again:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof4

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
The Oldest Meteorites
When we are talking about the oldest meteorites we are not referring to the absolute age of those meteorites - most of them crystallized during the formation of our solar system and have absolute ages of 4.5 billion years! Instead, we are talking about their terrestrial ages, the time between their initial fall until the present day. Most meteorites weather away quite quickly in the oxidizing environment of the Earth, while some meteorites may literally be observed as they rust away. However, other meteorites fell at more fortuitous locations and were preserved until this day, e.g. in the ice fields of Antarctica and in the hot deserts of Africa. Some of them have been preserved for as long as 40,000 years or more. Indeed, there are some meteorites found to be much older still - those that have been preserved in sediments or in other geologic strata conducive to preservation, often referred to as "fossil meteorites".

The oldest of these fossils is the meteorite of Osterplana, Sweden, that was found in 1987 imbedded in some limestone. This limestone, which dated from Ordovician times, revealed to the scientists that the imbedded meteorite had fallen 480 million years ago! The meteorite of Osterplana is even older than the Brunflo meteorite which previously held the record for the "oldest". Brunflo, which was also found in Swedish limestone in 1980, has a terrestrial age of 450 million years. As with true fossils, most of the original meteoritic minerals in fossil meteorites has been replaced by terrestrial minerals leaving only the outer structure of the meteorite preserved. Although both meteorites have been classified as chondrites, only their chondritic structure remains as evidence of their extraterrestrial origins.

The oldest intact meteorite is the Lake Murray iron. A single mass with a thick iron-shale was found in a gully in Oklahoma, USA, in 1933. The meteorite was imbedded in some Antler Sandstone dating from the Lower Cretaceous, suggesting that Lake Murray landed in a near-shore, shallow sea, while these beds were being deposited about 110 million years ago! In addition, although the exterior of this meteorite has been heavily corroded, the inner nickel-iron core has remained unaltered, establishing Lake Murray as the oldest meteorite on earth. It literally fell in times when dinosaurs still ruled the Earth!

http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/charts.htm#oldest
http://www.meteorlab.com/METEORLAB2001dev/.../LakeMurray.htm
http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Mar04/fossilMeteorites.html
http://www.haberer-meteorite.de/english/St...0meteorites.htm
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/278/5335/88
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/metsoc97/pdf/5057.pdf

Oh, and to demonstrate that this site is shilling for Kent Hovind again:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof4

4. The Moon ...
Wrong again. But at least not as wrong as orginal Kent Hovind.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof5
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CE/CE110.html

QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
5. The Moon has short lived isotopes
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof6

QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
6. The Space Dust ...
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof7

QUOTE (Lucifer and Company+)
7. ... the rate of the star cluster is expanding. The Orion Starts are traveling rapidly.
Gibberish, also stolen fron KH. I dare "Light-Bringer" to restate this claim as a logical argument.

QUOTE (Dave E. Matson+)
Among the oldest star clusters are the globular clusters, some of which may be older than 10 billion years! (Chaisson and McMillan, 1993, p.411). Far from being an argument for a young universe, star clusters (especially globular clusters) are a showcase for an old universe.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/how...yea.html#proof8

If you've not noticed this by now, I would like to point out that the order of the bullet points is identical to the order in which they appear in the TalkOrigins article. This pattern continues for the rest of the 27 numbered points. (The title of the web page indicates 28, which probably is left over from the deletion of the moon dust claim.)

So all of these claims are stolen without attribution from Kent Hovind's magnum opus Creation Seminar Notebook in the section entitled "Facts from Science that Demonstrate the Universe is Not 'Billions of Years Old'",

The order is identical to the order found in the section. And all of the (27!) claims are found in that work of Kent Hovind's.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood.html
barakn
Rpenner,

Dabeer, I, and others responded without doing much research because the claims were so patently false and so easy to disprove. Your research, however, turned up something very interesting: just how ancient the claims are and how controversial they are even in the Creationist community. Bringer-of-Light should be ashamed of having dredged up these already-refuted claims made by a convicted felon with a doctorate earned at a degree mill.
Ron
Nice answers all,
I just saw Lewis Black and one of his jokes was 'If someone claims the Earth is only 10K yrs old, I show him a fossil. If he continues to insist, I throw it at him!
Peace,
Ron
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.