Challenge Issued: Arguments for YEC

[Shermana]

Well then I'm not sure how we're going to carry on with any discussion for the YEC point of view if we can't even agree on how to examine the points behind each issue such as how Comets are able to survive myriads of rotations around the sun. Even if each orbit takes thousands of years, that still leaves you with less than a few hundred thousand years of Universe, and you'll have to say the ones that dissolve in 200 years are all recently made.

Perhaps I will try with another issue that doesn't involve so much theory on EACH side (not just the Creationist) to get around the issues, but I'd like to see more about how Jupiter can radically alter the Comet's orbit.

I will look into another of the YEC arguments to post in the next few days that won't require nearly as much technical data and theoretical conceptualization. We'll have to call Stale mate I guess for now but I think the evidence clearly points to an early age of the Universe with these no matter how you slice it here.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

I think the evidence clearly points to an early age of the Universe with these no matter how you slice it here.

Um... What?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Well then I'm not sure how we're going to carry on with any discussion for the YEC point of view if we can't even agree on how to examine the points behind each issue such as how Comets are able to survive myriads of rotations around the sun. Even if each orbit takes thousands of years, that still leaves you with less than a few hundred thousand years of Universe, and you'll have to say the ones that dissolve in 200 years are all recently made.

No one has stated that any comet lasts 200 years. To my knowledge they ALL last longer than that. The > and < 200 year point was to calculate how many years it takes for a single trip round the sun.

I also need to see the evidence that comets are primordial. It was stated not presented with evidence. I can bring evidence as to how comets are created by the traditional understanding. This is what we are doing here. Its examination of the evidence. If you would like I also present the challenge for you to scrutinize certian key portions of evidence in existing science.

Perhaps I will try with another issue that doesn't involve so much theory on EACH side (not just the Creationist) to get around the issues, but I'd like to see more about how Jupiter can radically alter the Comet's orbit.

Well its part of the most fundamental aspects of these types of calculations. Its gravity. Just as the comet goes round the sun because of its gravity it likewise is affected by large bodies of mass in the solar system such as jupiter. Though the only things large enough to truely make any significant or measurable impact would be the gass giants with Jupiter being the most likely to affect any given comet.

Actually its thanks to Jupiter and some of the other Gas giants that they have changed the trajectory of several different objects that Earth has lived for so long.
Here is an article on that specifically. If you want more I can find them for you.

I will look into another of the YEC arguments to post in the next few days that won't require nearly as much technical data and theoretical conceptualization. We'll have to call Stale mate I guess for now but I think the evidence clearly points to an early age of the Universe with these no matter how you slice it here.

Well I wouldn't call it a stalemate. I hopefully have adequately explained why those calculations as you presented were "wrong" to arrive at the conclusion that you stated. If there is more to it then it might have a stronger case.

 

[Shermana]

I hopefully have adequately explained why those calculations as you presented were "wrong" to arrive at the conclusion that you stated.

I must have missed where you pointed out anything that proved what I posted wrong.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I must have missed where you pointed out anything that proved what I posted wrong.

The majority of my post was substance of this nature. To re-cap the problems I had and was waiting for you to clarify was

1) why do you assume comets are primordial (perhaps a definition of primordial as well)

2) If the whole of the argument is that the earth couldn't have been more than 10k years old then why do we have comets that do last far longer than that? Only a specific type of comet lasts less than that.

3) What do you make of the explination that Jupiter and other gas giant's gravity works to slingshot and elongate comet lifespans? Its a well known phenomenon and we use it ourselves in our man made objects. The hubble telescope used Jupiter's gravity in a similar slingshot action to sling its trajectory outwards.

These are very fundamental flaws to the original premis that come lifespans disprove old earth theories. You haven't really answered those yet.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

These are very fundamental flaws to the original premis that come lifespans disprove old earth theories. You haven't really answered those yet.

Not to mention that- even if such an argument was successful- the fact remains that we evidence from several different fields which converges on an older earth- so if there was a conflict between the two, it'd be far more likely that we're simply mistaken about comets somehow, and that the various fields (geology, paleontology and evolutionary biology, cosmology, etc.) which all point to a much older earth (and universe) for various reasons are accurate.