RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
October 9, 2013 at 8:53 am
(October 9, 2013 at 8:11 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:(October 9, 2013 at 8:09 am)max-greece Wrote: Now Gracie - one subject at a time dear.
"Relativity does not prove the age of the universe at all."
When you accept distance - which you did - then relativity does indeed prove time.
Lets try again - I know you can get this, I just know you can.
Andromeda is nearby - its in our neighbourhood (its on a collision course with our own Milky Way) its that close- just 2.5 million light years away.
Now Relativity - you do understand relativity don't you. The whole idea that the speed of light is constant but time itself varies with speed. You accepted it - remember?
So the speed of light across space is fixed, and we chose a nearby object so we know that there's nothing distorted or funny going on in a distant region of space we know nothing about. No super-massive objects in the way to bend space - just a nice straight line of clean space between us and Andromeda.
So we know how fast light travels - and we know how far (2.5 million light years) so we know how long it took.
So we know the universe is at least as old as it took light to get here (actually plus another thousand odd years as the Persians first saw Andromeda in about 975).
But we (you and me Gracie), we have established without a single reason for doubt that the universe is at least 2,500,000 years old. The flood can't change that, all those pesky fossils can't change that even God can't - because we did it - you and me.
David Russell Humphreys already has a cosmology model that uses relativity, solves the light problem and the universe is created 6000 years ago.
But the no God assumption is false.
It cannot be used in the age question.
David Russell Humphreys has a cosmology model that uses relativity that solves the light problem for DISTANT objects.
I didn't choose a distant object. Even if time were running slowly on Earth it would be running slowly on Andromeda too - its our neighbour - remember.
So Andromeda would be in Humphreys' great gravitational depression along with our solar system.
Still needs 2.5 million years. (Are you feeling a bit setup now?) Did ya think I didn't know of Humpreys' (actually flawed) theory?
Nice, but predicable try.