• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nothing made everything....

LOL!!!

Bone valley, so named due to all the bones which have presumably been found by fossil hunters....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_Valley_Formation

Says nothing about shark's teeth. But given it is Florida and very low lying I would expect that the occaisional sea level change would put such things in there.

You will have to do a lot better than quote some place that has scientists all over it.

The University of Florida offered an imaginative explanation for why so many fossils in Bone Valley were out of geological order. The university scientists claim hurricanes disturbed old fossil beds over millions of years, mixing old fossils with new, leaving the whole jumbled mess out of order today.

I'm not buying speculations like those which may calm the secularists down but do nothing to add to scientific truth.
 
The University of Florida offered an imaginative explanation for why so many fossils in Bone Valley were out of geological order. The university scientists claim hurricanes disturbed old fossil beds over millions of years, mixing old fossils with new, leaving the whole jumbled mess out of order today.

I'm not buying speculations like those which may calm the secularists down but do nothing to add to scientific truth.

Today you get dead sharks and other marine life inthe Florida swamps.

These will. if conditions are good enough, leave fossils.

Sharks do not live in fresh water swamps.

The world is complex. Deal with it.
 
Someone asked me to do the math, using their numbers, so I did.

Well, no scientist is claiming that so.... you lied.

You have, I presume used the number of how fast the moon is moving away from the earth.

The reasons why you can't do that is that the energy required to move from a low orbit to a slightly higher orbit is far hiegher than moving from a high orbit to a slightly higher one.

The second reason is that the amount of force and energy doing the tidal acceleration differes due to the arrangement of the coninents. Today's earth has 2 large land masses arranged North South with large oceans between. This is the most effective way to allow big tides and then grip them. Wing nut earth if you like.

You have to generally start with simple maths but be open to additional complexity coming along.
 
Originally Posted by zyzygy View Post
Distance from Earth to Moon 384,400 km
Speed of the Moon's recession from Earth 4 cm per year.

You do the math.

961 million years ago, if secularist assumptions are to be believed, the earth and the moon were in physical contact with each other.

96.1 billion years. By too simple maths. Wrong number.
 
Given that you are uttely unwilling to look at the utterly overwhelming evidence that shows utterly clearly that the universe is billions of years old you fully know that you have just committed yourself to lying to yourself.

I would find that deeply personally mind unhinging.

You don't need to do this.

He has convinced himself as long as someone will argue something, it's not a fact.
 
He has convinced himself as long as someone will argue something, it's not a fact.

I think it is far deeper than that.

I think the whole thing is a committment to none-truth. To avoidance of mental challenge and permissiveness of double standards.
 
The University of Florida offered an imaginative explanation for why so many fossils in Bone Valley were out of geological order. The university scientists claim hurricanes disturbed old fossil beds over millions of years, mixing old fossils with new, leaving the whole jumbled mess out of order today.

I'm not buying speculations like those which may calm the secularists down but do nothing to add to scientific truth.

How old are the Earth and Moon? Break the habit of a lifetime and actually answer a question.
 

I think it is far deeper than that.

I think the whole thing is a committment to none-truth. To avoidance of mental challenge and permissiveness of double standards.

These YEC are so risible. Totally blind to facts and science.
 
How old are the Earth and Moon? Break the habit of a lifetime and actually answer a question.

Everyone knows it's 6000 years. The good book says so.
 
Huh? Earth is only 4.6 Billion years old. Moon was formed shortly thereafter, probably due to an impact.

Yes, but if you divide the numbers, orbital distance and rate of increase you get that number.

The point is that it is far more complex than that.
 
Yes, but if you divide the numbers, orbital distance and rate of increase you get that number.

The point is that it is far more complex than that.

Rate of increase is certainly not constant. And, the moon was never orbiting the earth at 1 foot. Best guess I read was that the original orbit of our moon was about 25% closer than it is today, which actually does match the math of a steady drift of roughly 4mm per year.
 
How dare you fabricate nonsense like that? God waved his magic wand! Marke will prove that. We await on him with bated breath.

I know. 6000 year old earth means that the moon is pulling back at about 8 miles per year. Which suggest that it will be crashing into Venus or Mars before long.
 
Rate of increase is certainly not constant. And, the moon was never orbiting the earth at 1 foot. Best guess I read was that the original orbit of our moon was about 25% closer than it is today, which actually does match the math of a steady drift of roughly 4mm per year.

Originally Posted by zyzygy View Post
Distance from Earth to Moon 384,400 km
Speed of the Moon's recession from Earth 4 cm per year.

You do the math.

The energy that Earth loses is picked up by the moon, increasing its distance from the Earth, which means the moon gets farther away by 1.5 inches (3.8 centimeters) annually.8 Sep 2017

That's 38mm. SI is easy but you do have to make sure you have the right units.

I have explained why the rate is not steady over long time periods.
 
Given that you are uttely unwilling to look at the utterly overwhelming evidence that shows utterly clearly that the universe is billions of years old
I've looked at the same evidence that you have looked at. I'm not ignoring anything. You haven't addressed my counterargument that evidence is not proof. It doesn't matter how much support this evidence may or may not have; it is still not proof of anything... it is merely evidence. Evidence can lead to numerous different conclusions because they are based on observations, and observations are subject to phenomenological issues. We all (as individuals) experience the world in our own unique way.

Now, you happen to find this particular evidence to be very convincing, and you have strong faith in your "old Earth-er" religion. Personally, this particular evidence doesn't convince me of anything. I happen to be an agnostic when it comes to the age of the uni(multi)verse while you happen to be a fundamentalist "old Earth-er". That's where we are butting heads.

...deleted 'you're lying' mantra... deleted 'lack of intelligence' mantra...
 
Everyone knows it's 6000 years. The good book says so.

I know that some Christians believe this, but I am a Christian who doesn't. I don't see anywhere where The Bible makes this claim. That has led me to be an agnostic concerning the age of the uni(multi)verse. There's good evidence for multiple theories, but I've never been swayed enough by any of them to put my faith in them, so I remain an agnostic concerning those religions. There's just no way of knowing...
 
If you see a photo of a child, the photo is of you, would you claim that it is false with the same justification as above?

Strawman Argument. I am not questioning identity; I am questioning age.
 
That's 38mm. SI is easy but you do have to make sure you have the right units.

I have explained why the rate is not steady over long time periods.

I was simplifying it for obvious reasons.
 
I've looked at the same evidence that you have looked at. I'm not ignoring anything. You haven't addressed my counterargument that evidence is not proof. It doesn't matter how much support this evidence may or may not have; it is still not proof of anything... it is merely evidence. Evidence can lead to numerous different conclusions because they are based on observations, and observations are subject to phenomenological issues. We all (as individuals) experience the world in our own unique way.

Now, you happen to find this particular evidence to be very convincing, and you have strong faith in your "old Earth-er" religion. Personally, this particular evidence doesn't convince me of anything. I happen to be an agnostic when it comes to the age of the uni(multi)verse while you happen to be a fundamentalist "old Earth-er". That's where we are butting heads.

If you walk along a beach and follow a set of foot prints do you need more evidence that it was somebody walking there before you or is that enough?

The evidence we have all around us of an old earth is vastly more overwhelming than that.

My door step is sandstone that was laid down many millions of years ago. The rest of the house is also made of the same stuff. I cannot see it and not know that it was formed a very long time ago.

Neither can you you just lie to yourself.
 
Back
Top Bottom