RE: How old is the Earth?
October 13, 2010 at 4:40 pm
(This post was last modified: October 13, 2010 at 5:22 pm by Anomalocaris.)
1. Isotropic propogation of star light is not a "old earth" supposition. Old earth doesn't not need any supposition about the propogation of star light at all to derive. "Isotropic propogation", if by that you meant light travels at the same speed in all directions across all times, is independently deduced as the most parsimonious explanation consistent with all evidence. Based on this lower limit on the age of the universe is independently derived using standard candle method of distance measurement.
2. The separate lower limit on the age of the universe produced by observation allows old earth supposition to stand. otherwise the age measurements of one or the other needs revision. We don't revise for the bible. But we do revise for evidence.
3. The observation of the decay of light curves of supernova does not depend on "isotropic propogation" of light to constrain the rate of decay of radio active elements produced in the explosion. We've seen the same decay behavior far and near, whether your light propogation theory places supernova at the beginning of the universe 13 billion years ago, or 6000 years ago, the decay behavior hasn't changed. And the non changing behavior of decay could THEN, be used to forbid the 6000 year interpretation, or indeed anything much shorter than 13 billion years.
4. But, pray quantify your theory of "non-isotropic propogation" of star light, it would be delightful to hear. Light travels so fast in direction that it covers 13 billion light years in 6000 years, perhaps? Or is it that light from supernove less than 6000 light years away is red shifted and dimmed exactly in our direction so as to be consistent with each other, with conservation of energy, and while looking like it was from 13 billion light years away?
5. Now about that education thing. Relevent science did in fact all happen in the last 6,000 years. Mostly in the last 150 years. So even your imaginary Calvinest tulip god probably has no strictures against your studying its history in detail, and understand how different aspects of the understandings of the universe was arrived at, unless you imagined a stricture against that also.
6. Exactly what position do you hold? Beside bible as you've come to read it is always right and whatever contradicts the bible as you read it is wrong?
2. The separate lower limit on the age of the universe produced by observation allows old earth supposition to stand. otherwise the age measurements of one or the other needs revision. We don't revise for the bible. But we do revise for evidence.
3. The observation of the decay of light curves of supernova does not depend on "isotropic propogation" of light to constrain the rate of decay of radio active elements produced in the explosion. We've seen the same decay behavior far and near, whether your light propogation theory places supernova at the beginning of the universe 13 billion years ago, or 6000 years ago, the decay behavior hasn't changed. And the non changing behavior of decay could THEN, be used to forbid the 6000 year interpretation, or indeed anything much shorter than 13 billion years.
4. But, pray quantify your theory of "non-isotropic propogation" of star light, it would be delightful to hear. Light travels so fast in direction that it covers 13 billion light years in 6000 years, perhaps? Or is it that light from supernove less than 6000 light years away is red shifted and dimmed exactly in our direction so as to be consistent with each other, with conservation of energy, and while looking like it was from 13 billion light years away?
5. Now about that education thing. Relevent science did in fact all happen in the last 6,000 years. Mostly in the last 150 years. So even your imaginary Calvinest tulip god probably has no strictures against your studying its history in detail, and understand how different aspects of the understandings of the universe was arrived at, unless you imagined a stricture against that also.
6. Exactly what position do you hold? Beside bible as you've come to read it is always right and whatever contradicts the bible as you read it is wrong?
