Challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

[Astrophile]

It is a cosmic mess out there.
Venus rotating the wrong way.
Uranus rotating on its side.
Galaxy 4266 with its arms leading the galaxies rotation not trailing it.
Titan retrograde.

The retrograde rotations of Venus and Uranus are probably the results of collisions with other planetary embryos. Such collisions were common during the formation of the planets (about 4500±50 million years ago); we owe the existence of the Moon to the Earth's collision with a Mars-sized planetesimal, and the oblique rotations of other planets (for example Saturn, Mars and Neptune) are probably the results of similar but smaller collisions.

The galaxy in question is NGC 4622, not NGC 4266. It is in Centaurus, and about 34 megaparsecs away. The inner spiral arms trail the galaxy's rotation, but the outer arms lead it. This could be the result of an encounter with another galaxy, but that is only a guess. (By the way, NGC stands for New General Catalogue.)

It is Triton (the largest satellite of Neptune) that is in a retrograde orbit, not Titan (the largest satellite of Saturn). Triton is probably a captured Kuiper-belt object.

These anomalous rotations, etc., do not support creationism. They are merely unexplained facts of astronomy, and are as inexplicable on a creationist or supernaturalist theory as on a physical or naturalist theory. Why should God have given Venus and Uranus retrograde rotations, Triton a retrograde orbit, and NGC 4622 leading spiral arms? (I know, it seemed a good idea at the time.)

 

[Esteban X]

These anomalous rotations, etc., do not support creationism. They are merely unexplained facts of astronomy, and are as inexplicable on a creationist or supernaturalist theory as on a physical or naturalist theory. Why should God have given Venus and Uranus retrograde rotations, Triton and retrograde orbit, and NGC 4622 leading spiral arms? (I know, it seemed a good idea at the time.)

An example of the God of the Gaps, what seems inexplicable can after research and study can be attributed tp perfectly natural causes. God as an explanation (which explains nothing) becomes unnecessary.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible does not say that.
Wrong yet again.
That does happen a lot with atheists, and those that believe in evolution or billions of years, or in false gods.

The Bible does say that you can buy sex slaves. It does say that you can sell your daughter as a sex slave. You keep demonstrating that you either have not read or did not understand your book of myths.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just use the terms from the King James Bible which is bondservant, bondman, or bondwoman.
Obviously you do not because the terms are different.

They are not. This is why you cannot demand that people use the KJV. You do not understand it yourself. Tell me, what is the difference between a bondservant and a slave? You seem to think that servant and slave do not mean the same thing. Even in the KJV it is clear that it approves of chattel slavery f you read enough of it.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Here is simple challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.

I will soon post a thread that will refute billions of years and evolution.

Here is an evidence based ancient rock:

"
The oldest in-place Earth rock is thought to be from the Acasta Gneiss in the Canadian Shield. Scientists use dating techniques on the zircon crystals in the rock, determining the age of this rock to be about 4.0 billion years.

Happy Old Rock Day! | U.S. Geological Survey

January 7th is Old Rock Day, so let’s take a look at old rocks from near and far!

www.usgs.gov

 

[McBell]

I will soon post a thread that will refute billions of years and evolution.

And we are all still waiting for that thread....

 

[SavedByTheLord]

And we are all still waiting for that thread....

I already have.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Here is an evidence based ancient rock:

"
The oldest in-place Earth rock is thought to be from the Acasta Gneiss in the Canadian Shield. Scientists use dating techniques on the zircon crystals in the rock, determining the age of this rock to be about 4.0 billion years.

Happy Old Rock Day! | U.S. Geological Survey

January 7th is Old Rock Day, so let’s take a look at old rocks from near and far!

www.usgs.gov

Yet there are many that have used zircon crystals to show that the rock layers cannot be 100s of millions of years old.
And there are things that are supposed to be C-14 dead and are not.
And there are many other clocks that show the earth is only thousands of years old.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I already have.

Nope.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yet there are many that have used zircon crystals to show that the rock layers cannot be 100s of millions of years old.
And there are things that are supposed to be C-14 dead and are not.
And there are many other clocks that show the earth is only thousands of years old.

Only fools. Only incredibly ignorant and dishonest people. No experts in the field did so.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Only fools. Only incredibly ignorant and dishonest people. No experts in the field did so.

There is an abundance of evidence which dates the earth and the universe to far less than billions of years.
Just because someone disagrees with you is no reason to call them dis honest.
Your post is just circular reasoning.

 

[ratiocinator]

Yet there are many that have used zircon crystals to show that the rock layers cannot be 100s of millions of years old.

[citation missing]*

There is an abundance of evidence which dates the earth and the universe to far less than billions of years.

[citation missing]*

*Note: dishonest creationist sites are not good enough.

Just because someone disagrees with you is no reason to call them dis honest.

The reason to call them dishonest is when they tell us lies, misrepresent the evidence and theories they are trying to challenge, and/or show no understanding of the subjects they address.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

[citation missing]*


[citation missing]*

*Note: dishonest creationist sites are not good enough.


The reason to call them dishonest is when they tell us lies, misrepresent the evidence and theories they are trying to challenge, and/or show no understanding of the subjects they address.

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral...

www.icr.org

Note, deceived scientists using the circular reasoning of the no God assumption are not good enough.

 

[McBell]

I already have.

I must have missed it.
Would you be so kind as to link to it?

 

[McBell]

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral...

www.icr.org

Note, deceived scientists using the circular reasoning of the no God assumption are not good enough.

A Liars For Jesus site?
Well, since that is all you got...

 

[ratiocinator]

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral...

www.icr.org

*Note: dishonest creationist sites are not good enough.

Note, deceived scientists using the circular reasoning of the no God assumption are not good enough.

Real science makes no assumptions about god(s). Like I already pointed out to you before, those which start with an unquestionable faith based conclusion, are doing the opposite of science. ICR is just another example. They too have 'core principles' that they just assume and try to make everything fit to it. That is not science.

The article uses the RATE project, which is just bad science.

Helium Diffusion and Retention in Zircons (re: RATE)

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yet there are many that have used zircon crystals to show that the rock layers cannot be 100s of millions of years old.
And there are things that are supposed to be C-14 dead and are not.
And there are many other clocks that show the earth is only thousands of years old.

All of that nonsense has been refuted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is an abundance of evidence which dates the earth and the universe to far less than billions of years.
Just because someone disagrees with you is no reason to call them dis honest.
Your post is just circular reasoning.

Then why can't you post any?. Why can't you find one reliable source that agrees with you?

 

[Sargonski]

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral...

www.icr.org

Note, deceived scientists using the circular reasoning of the no God assumption are not good enough.

Huh ? .. the circular reasoning and deception is in the OP "prove without assumptions" assertion.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Then why can't you post any?. Why can't you find one reliable source that agrees with you?

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral...

www.icr.org

also see Robert Gentry’s book Creation’s Tiny Mystery .

also see Thousands Not Billions by Don DeYoung

Also see The Young Earth … by John Morris.

Gold sites include
AnswersInGenesis.org
icr.org
creation.com
creationtoday.org

There are many other young earth creation books and sites.