Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.

[SavedByTheLord]

Three issues with those who push your brand of creationism;
They are uneducated, gullible, and,
wax exceedingly vain and arrogant.

And of course absolutely correct.

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

 

[Subduction Zone]

And of course absolutely correct.

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

Please properly define your terms or drop your bogus challenge.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Please properly define your terms or drop your bogus challenge.

No assumptions means you cannot assume anything.
6000 years is self explanatory.

Scientists have looked everywhere. They have used amazing telescopes, even from space, and have peered into the far recesses of the universe. They have probed into matter and living things at the smallest of scales. They have built large particle colliders to smash particles together with enormous energies and analyzed the results. Mankind has been to the moon, landed probes on Mars, sent probes past all the planets, had close ups of comets, asteroids, and meteors. They have searched the very depths of the oceans, been to the mountaintops, drilled into the earth, been to Antarctica, searched deserts, rain forests, and drilled into glaciers. They have studied the sun, moon, earth, the planets, asteroids, comets, stars, galaxies, pulsars, quasars, star clusters, nova, supernova, neutron stars, dwarf stars, and black holes. They have analyzed proteins, enzymes, organs, and DNA from countless creatures. They have dug up many millions of fossils. They have searched for signs of aliens. They have analyzed tree rings, varves, ice cores, sediments, studied all the radioactive isotopes. They have very many equations, even used computers, and now will try AI.

And for all that, the only thing they have proved is that there is nothing older than 6000 years old without an assumption. On the contrary, they have proved that God Almighty exists, that God created all things about 6000 years ago in 6 days, and that the Bible is true. Here are some pertinent passages from the word of God.

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. – Psalm 19:1

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, - Romans 1:18-22

I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. – Psalm 139:14

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. – 2 Tim 3:7

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. – 2 Thess 2:8-12

But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. – 2 Tim 3:13

 

[Subduction Zone]

No assumptions means you cannot assume anything.
6000 years is self explanatory.

Then 4.55 billion years for the Earth is self explanatory. Two can play your silly games.

Scientists have looked everywhere. They have used amazing telescopes, even from space, and have peered into the far recesses of the universe. They have probed into matter and living things at the smallest of scales. They have built large particle colliders to smash particles together with enormous energies and analyzed the results. Mankind has been to the moon, landed probes on Mars, sent probes past all the planets, had close ups of comets, asteroids, and meteors. They have searched the very depths of the oceans, been to the mountaintops, drilled into the earth, been to Antarctica, searched deserts, rain forests, and drilled into glaciers. They have studied the sun, moon, earth, the planets, asteroids, comets, stars, galaxies, pulsars, quasars, star clusters, nova, supernova, neutron stars, dwarf stars, and black holes. They have analyzed proteins, enzymes, organs, and DNA from countless creatures. They have dug up many millions of fossils. They have searched for signs of aliens. They have analyzed tree rings, varves, ice cores, sediments, studied all the radioactive isotopes. They have very many equations, even used computers, and now will try AI.

And for all that, the only thing they have proved is that there is nothing older than 6000 years old without an assumption. On the contrary, they have proved that God Almighty exists, that God created all things about 6000 years ago in 6 days, and that the Bible is true. Here are some pertinent passages from the word of God.

And you have still failed to define what you mean by "assumption". Sorry, no one can answer your silly questions if you cannot properly define your terminology.

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. – Psalm 19:1

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, - Romans 1:18-22

I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. – Psalm 139:14

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. – 2 Tim 3:7

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. – 2 Thess 2:8-12

But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. – 2 Tim 3:13

Ooh! There is a massive error. Why quote the Bible? It appears to be only a book of myths. Your own rules "NO ASSUMPTIONS" Please prove that the Bible is reliable in any way at all.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Then 4.55 billion years for the Earth is self explanatory. Two can play your silly games.


And you have still failed to define what you mean by "assumption". Sorry, no one can answer your silly questions if you cannot properly define your terminology.

Ooh! There is a massive error. Why quote the Bible? It appears to be only a book of myths. Your own rules "NO ASSUMPTIONS" Please prove that the Bible is reliable in any way at all.

4.555 billion years looks suspicious. Too exact.

There are red shift studies that are doubling the age of the universe. The error is very great,
Is the earth twice as old.

 

[Subduction Zone]

4.555 billion years looks suspicious. Too exact.

There are red shift studies that are doubling the age of the universe. The error is very great,
Is the earth twice as old.

Why? You cannot just make empty claims. You need to be ready to prove them. And very old science had different ages for the universe. Guess what science does a we get more and more and better data? We get closer and closer to what looks like the right answer. That is not refutation. That is confirmation.

How do you get everything backwards?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Why? You cannot just make empty claims. You need to be ready to prove them. And very old science had different ages for the universe. Guess what science does a we get more and more and better data? We get closer and closer to what looks like the right answer. That is not refutation. That is confirmation.

How do you get everything backwards?

Doubling the age of the universe is not closing in.

New Evidence Suggests the Universe Is Twice as Old as We Thought

Most astronomers believe the universe is 13.7 billion years old. A new study says that figure could be closer to 26.7 billion.

www.popularmechanics.com

 

[Audie]

And of course absolutely correct.

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

Your assumptions are OK tho.

Its what a creationist would call integrity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Doubling the age of the universe is not closing in.

New Evidence Suggests the Universe Is Twice as Old as We Thought

Most astronomers believe the universe is 13.7 billion years old. A new study says that figure could be closer to 26.7 billion.

www.popularmechanics.com

Oh my!!! Popular mechanics.

No, just no.

 

[We Never Know]

Doubling the age of the universe is not closing in.

New Evidence Suggests the Universe Is Twice as Old as We Thought

Most astronomers believe the universe is 13.7 billion years old. A new study says that figure could be closer to 26.7 billion.

www.popularmechanics.com

Don't be put back by critiques of your source.

Popular Mechanics

Detailed Report​

Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: United States
MBFC’s Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Magazine
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

Popular Mechanics - Bias and Credibility

PRO-SCIENCE These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence based through the use of credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Don't be put back by critiques of your source.

Popular Mechanics

Detailed Report​

Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: United States
MBFC’s Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Magazine
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

Popular Mechanics - Bias and Credibility

PRO-SCIENCE These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence based through the use of credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Popular Mechanics is "High Credibility" when it has articles that involve engineering. Here they are so far out of their wheelhouse that it is not even funny. It is just sad. "Tired light" is an old concept that never was well accepted. If one wants to say "Scientists believe . . . " and no qualifications are given that means that one is claiming that a strong majority at least of scientists have that belief. Tired light is a fringe belief.

The concept has been tested and refuted, a long time ago. You might want to check out this article:

Tired light - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And yes, Wiki is a very valid source for this sort of argument. Experts in their spare time will edit Wiki and at this level they have to be able to justify their editing. You can also check out some of the links if you wish.

If you want the TLDR the two different models were tested by comparing the predictions that they made about the light that we observe from distant sources. The Tired Light model's predictions did not match what was observed. The standard expanding universe model does match observations.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Popular Mechanics is "High Credibility" when it has articles that involve engineering. Here they are so far out of their wheelhouse that it is not even funny. It is just sad. "Tired light" is an old concept that never was well accepted. If one wants to say "Scientists believe . . . " and no qualifications are given that means that one is claiming that a strong majority at least of scientists have that belief. Tired light is a fringe belief.

The concept has been tested and refuted, a long time ago. You might want to check out this article:

Tired light - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And yes, Wiki is a very valid source for this sort of argument. Experts in their spare time will edit Wiki and at this level they have to be able to justify their editing. You can also check out some of the links if you wish.

If you want the TLDR the two different models were tested by comparing the predictions that they made about the light that we observe from distant sources. The Tired Light model's predictions did not match what was observed. The standard expanding universe model does match observations.

Doubling the age shows that they do not know the age of the earth.

Could the age of the universe be twice as old as current estimates suggest? | Penn Today

Penn Professors Vijay Balasubramanian and Mark Devlin offer a broader understanding of a recent paper’s claim that the universe could be 26.7 billion years old.

penntoday.upenn.edu

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Only because maybe you will learn something.

Popular mechanics is simply just republishing an article.

All one has to do is google the 'title' and see who else carries the story..

New research puts age of universe at 26.7 billion years, nearly twice as old as previously believed

Is the universe twice as old as we thought? | Astronomy.com

A recent paper suggests our understanding of the cosmos is wrong and proposes a different model. Could this new idea be right? In a word: No.

www.astronomy.com

The universe may be twice as old as we thought: a venerable 26.7 billion years

A new study challenges the age of our universe and offers insight into early galaxies)

www.zmescience.com

So they were off by 13 billion years.
so the error range is 13 billion years
13.7 billion years +- 13.7 billion years.

 

[We Never Know]

Doubling the age of the universe is not closing in.

New Evidence Suggests the Universe Is Twice as Old as We Thought

Most astronomers believe the universe is 13.7 billion years old. A new study says that figure could be closer to 26.7 billion.

www.popularmechanics.com

Try this link from phys org

New research puts age of universe at 26.7 billion years, nearly twice as old as previously believed

Our universe could be twice as old as current estimates, according to a new study that challenges the dominant cosmological model and sheds new light on the so-called "impossible early galaxy problem."

phys-org.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[McBell]

And of course absolutely correct.

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

Give real evidence the Earth is only 6000 years old.
NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Give real evidence the Earth is only 6000 years old.
NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED

Here is a link to an article.
there are over 30,000 figurines depicting dinosaurs. These were made by people, who should not have known what they looked like.
That means all the rock layers and their fossils and all their dating is bogus.
The surface of the earth is only thousands of years old.

www.Discovery.Global

Enter the exciting world of Discoveries! You will discover articles and videos of Bible Prophecy, Dinosaurs, Biblical Discoveries, Geology, Evolution and much more!

www.discovery.global

God describes a plant eating dinosaur in Job.

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. - Job 40:15-17

 

[McBell]

Here is a link to an article.
there are over 30,000 figurines depicting dinosaurs. These were made by people, who should not have known what they looked like.
That means all the rock layers and their fossils and all their dating is bogus.
The surface of the earth is only thousands of years old.

www.Discovery.Global

Enter the exciting world of Discoveries! You will discover articles and videos of Bible Prophecy, Dinosaurs, Biblical Discoveries, Geology, Evolution and much more!

www.discovery.global

God describes a plant eating dinosaur in Job.

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. - Job 40:15-17

Funny, your linked article does not make any mention at all about rock layers, or fossils, or a dating process.
Nor does your linked article make any claim as to the age of the Earth.

Which means that your claims above are all assumptions on your part as to what the article says.

Perhaps you would like to try again?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Funny, your linked article does not make any mention at all about rock layers, or fossils, or a dating process.
Nor does your linked article make any claim as to the age of the Earth.

Which means that your claims above are all assumptions on your part as to what the article says.

Perhaps you would like to try again?

It dates dinosaurs as only thousands of years old.
The evolutionists have tied the dinosaurs to the fossils in their rock layers.
And they dated these as 100 million years.
So the rock layers and those above and the the fossils and thos in those layers are now only thousands of years old.

 

[McBell]

It dates dinosaurs as only thousands of years old.

Your linked article never makes any such claim.

The evolutionists have tied the dinosaurs to the fossils in their rock layers.
And they dated these as 100 million years.
So the rock layers and those above and the the fossils and thos in those layers are now only thousands of years old.

Your linked article does not make any of these claims either.

care to try again?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Your linked article never makes any such claim.


Your linked article does not make any of these claims either.

care to try again?

It is fact and the rest is a logical conclusions from that fact.
Have you met the simple challenge that I gave?