The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old

[orogenicman]

The alternative (which you apparently refuse to do) is to do something about your functional illiteracy.

…says the guy who has had an embarrassing amount of difficulty understanding the basic concepts contained within everyone’s responses to him.

If by "embarrassing amount of difficulty understanding basic concepts" you mean that I don't understand how anyone can pretend to get a 10,000 year old universe from unambiguous evidence of a 13.7 billion year old universe, then your are right. I do have difficultly accepting such a delusion. The only thing I find embarrassing is the fact that there are still people in the world who believe in 10,000 year old universes, expanding Earths, hollow Earths, and flat Earths.

Since that isn't going to happen, you should see a shrink to deal with your delusions.

This is what people always say when they just got destroyed in a debate.

Nope. This is what people always say when encountering someone as willfully ignorant as you.

In the mean time, have you ever wondered why the only people who believe the book of genesis is anything but a work of mythology are evangelical Christians? Ever wonder why the people who wrote it (The Jews) don't see it like you do?

You can’t even get this right I see. According to Freundel of Contemporary Orthodox Judaism's response to modernity many Orthodox Jewish thinkers still accept a literal six day creation (also supported by Wikipedia’s article on Young-Earth Creationism). Secondly, many Muslims and Reformed Christians and nearly all Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses also accept a literal interpretation of Genesis. How many people believe something to be true is ultimately irrelevant but I just wanted to ensure that you had your facts straight since you usually do not.

Well, you see. unlike you, I don't have to refer to "Freundel of Contemporary Orthodox Judaism's response to modernity" since, having been married to a Jew, I know first hand that most modern Jews are not orthodox. Orthodox Jews are a minority sect within the Jewish faith just as fundamental Christians like you are a minority in the Christian faith. For instance, according to a 1990 nationwide survey, 7 percent of American Jews are Orthodox. And like you and your fundy brothers and sister, they got Genesis wrong as well.

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm

[Statler Waldorf]

If by "embarrassing amount of difficulty understanding basic concepts" you mean that I don't understand how anyone can pretend to get a 10,000 year old universe from unambiguous evidence of a 13.7 billion year old universe, then your [sic] are right. I do have difficultly [sic] accepting such a delusion. The only thing I find embarrassing is the fact that there are still people in the world who believe in 10,000 year old universes, expanding Earths, hollow Earths, and flat Earths.

Nope, what I was referring to was your ignorance of special relativity’s conventionality thesis.

Nope. This is what people always say when encountering someone as willfully ignorant as you.

I do not blame you for playing the personal attack card, it’s obviously the only one you have in your deck.

Well, you see. unlike you, I don't have to refer to "Freundel of Contemporary Orthodox Judaism's response to modernity" since, having been married to a Jew, I know first hand that most modern Jews are not orthodox.

That’s a fallacious appeal to authority. I am sorry-but unlike Freundel-your wife is not an appropriate authority to speak upon the beliefs of all modern Jews. I appeal to the experts on the matter, you appeal to your wife’s opinion. That’s funny.

Orthodox Jews are a minority sect within the Jewish faith just as fundamental Christians like you are a minority in the Christian faith.

That’s irrelevant, you claimed that only evangelical Christians believe in a young Earth (ironically enough you made this claim to someone who is not an evangelical Christian and who believes in a young Earth) and Orthodox Jews are not evangelical Christians. Secondly, I am not a fundamentalist Christian I am a Reformed Christian-there’s a difference. If you are going to toss these terms around I’d prefer that you at least learned what they meant first.

For instance, according to a 1990 nationwide survey, 7 percent of American Jews are Orthodox. And like you and your fundy brothers and sister, they got Genesis wrong as well.

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm

Wait, I thought that only evangelical Christians believed in a young Earth? It’s funny when you refute yourself like this.

[orogenicman]

If by "embarrassing amount of difficulty understanding basic concepts" you mean that I don't understand how anyone can pretend to get a 10,000 year old universe from unambiguous evidence of a 13.7 billion year old universe, then your [sic] are right. I do have difficultly [sic] accepting such a delusion. The only thing I find embarrassing is the fact that there are still people in the world who believe in 10,000 year old universes, expanding Earths, hollow Earths, and flat Earths.

Nope, what I was referring to was your ignorance of special relativity’s conventionality thesis.

Perhaps you could elaborate on what you consider to be my ignorance regarding "relativity’s conventionality thesis".

Nope. This is what people always say when encountering someone as willfully ignorant as you.

I do not blame you for playing the personal attack card, it’s obviously the only one you have in your deck.

Hehehe. Pot-kettle-black.

Well, you see. unlike you, I don't have to refer to "Freundel of Contemporary Orthodox Judaism's response to modernity" since, having been married to a Jew, I know first hand that most modern Jews are not orthodox.

That’s a fallacious appeal to authority.

Referring to my ex-wife's Jewry is an appeal to authority? Perhaps you should reconsider that bullshite argument.

I am sorry-but unlike Freundel-your wife is not an appropriate authority to speak upon the beliefs of all modern Jews. I appeal to the experts on the matter, you appeal to your wife’s opinion. That’s funny.

So what you are saying is that you know my ex-wife better than I do. I suspect she would be surprised to learn of this.

Orthodox Jews are a minority sect within the Jewish faith just as fundamental Christians like you are a minority in the Christian faith.

That’s irrelevant, you claimed that only evangelical Christians believe in a young Earth

That is not what I claimed. Do I need to give you a lesson in reading comprehension?

(ironically enough you made this claim to someone who is not an evangelical Christian and who believes in a young Earth) and Orthodox Jews are not evangelical Christians. Secondly, I am not a fundamentalist Christian I am a Reformed Christian-there’s a difference. If you are going to toss these terms around I’d prefer that you at least learned what they meant first.

The fact remains that those who believe in a young Earth are far outnumbered by those who don't, many of whom are religious. So you are basically a Calvanist. You have my sympathies.

For instance, according to a 1990 nationwide survey, 7 percent of American Jews are Orthodox. And like you and your fundy brothers and sister, they got Genesis wrong as well.

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm

Wait, I thought that only evangelical Christians believed in a young Earth? It’s funny when you refute yourself like this.

Learn to read.

Getting back to our original discussion, there are plenty of equations that imply or else provide mathematical proofs of the finite speed of light. Can you show us a valid equation that implies that light can travel instantaneously, as you and your mentor claims?

[Statler Waldorf]

Perhaps you could elaborate on what you consider to be my ignorance regarding "relativity’s conventionality thesis".

The fact that you think the one-way speed of light is an inherent property of Nature and not a mere stipulation; that completely contradicts the conventionality thesis.

Hehehe. Pot-kettle-black.

I do not personally attack you, believe me I could.

Referring to my ex-wife's Jewry is an appeal to authority? Perhaps you should reconsider that bullshite argument.

Yes, anytime you make an appeal to someone fallible and who does not possess the proper credentials you’re making a fallacious appeal to authority. I do not make the rules, I merely enforce them sir.

So what you are saying is that you know my ex-wife better than I do. I suspect she would be surprised to learn of this.

No, I am saying that I know that Freundel is more qualified to comment upon such matters since he is the World’s leading expert.

That is not what I claimed. Do I need to give you a lesson in reading comprehension?

Oops! Pherhaps it is you who needs to learn how to comprehend what you wrote! I quote you directly from Post#293…

In the mean time, have you ever wondered why the only people who believe the book of genesis is anything but a work of mythology are evangelical Christians?

[Emphasis added by SW]
Sure sounds to me like you’re saying the only people who believe in a young Earth are evangelical Christians considering that’s exactly what you said.

The fact remains that those who believe in a young Earth are far outnumbered by those who don't, many of whom are religious. So you are basically a Calvanist. You have my sympathies.

Changing your tune now I see. The number of people who believe something is irrelevant to whether it is true or not. The overwhelming majority of people reject naturalism, are you going to now relinquish it?
Not “basically” a Calvinist, I am one.

Learn to read.

Learn to not refute yourself!

Getting back to our original discussion, there are plenty of equations that imply or else provide mathematical proofs of the finite speed of light.

Two-way yes.

Can you show us a valid equation that implies that light can travel instantaneously, as you and your mentor claims?

Absolutely!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_spe...way_speeds

[orogenicman]

[quote='orogenicman' pid='573309' dateline='1388457870']
Perhaps you could elaborate on what you consider to be my ignorance regarding "relativity’s conventionality thesis".

The fact that you think the one-way speed of light is an inherent property of Nature and not a mere stipulation; that completely contradicts the conventionality thesis.

Are you suggesting that the speed of light is not natural?

You're the one who considers the one-way speed of light to be instantaneous (and thus magically affects the age of the universe) sans any supporting evidence whatsoever. Congratulations.

Hehehe. Pot-kettle-black.

I do not personally attack you, believe me I could.

I'm all a tremble.

Referring to my ex-wife's Jewry is an appeal to authority? Perhaps you should reconsider that bullshite argument.

Yes, anytime you make an appeal to someone fallible and who does not possess the proper credentials you’re making a fallacious appeal to authority. I do not make the rules, I merely enforce them sir.

And of course, you know someone who is infallible, right? (This should be entertaining)

So what you are saying is that you know my ex-wife better than I do. I suspect she would be surprised to learn of this.

No, I am saying that I know that Freundel is more qualified to comment upon such matters since he is the World’s leading expert.

And yet he seems (or rather, judging from your claim) rather ignorant of the facts, as pointed out already:

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm For instance, according to a 1990 nationwide survey, 7 percent of American Jews are Orthodox. And like you and your fundy brothers and sister, they got Genesis wrong as well.

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm

That is not what I claimed. Do I need to give you a lesson in reading comprehension?

In the mean time, have you ever wondered why the only people who believe the book of genesis is anything but a work of mythology are evangelical Christians?

Sure sounds to me like you’re saying the only people who believe in a young Earth are evangelical Christians considering that’s exactly what you said.

If there are (and there may well be), they aren't trying to cause permanent damage to our education system by demanding that it be taught in our science classrooms?

The fact remains that those who believe in a young Earth are far outnumbered by those who don't, many of whom are religious. So you are basically a Calvanist. You have my sympathies.

Changing your tune now I see. The number of people who believe something is irrelevant to whether it is true or not. The overwhelming majority of people reject naturalism, are you going to now relinquish it?

Extraordinary claims, O' warped one.

Not “basically” a Calvinist, I am one.

You have my sympathies. Truly.

Getting back to our original discussion, there are plenty of equations that imply or else provide mathematical proofs of the finite speed of light.

Two-way yes.

Can you show us a valid equation that implies that light can travel instantaneously, as you and your mentor claims?

Absolutely!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_spe...way_speeds

Excuse me? Where in that article does it make the claim that light travels instantaneously? Moreover, where in that article is there an equation that provides a proof that light can travel instantaneously? What it does say is this:

To date, all experimental results agree with special relativity within the experimental uncertainty.

I might add that the problem with your claim that light can travel instantaneously has to do with the nature of light itself.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...eed-of-lig

Light, by definition, is an electromagnetic wave, a propagating disturbance in space and time that carries information about the acceleration of charges.

Were there an infinite value for the speed of light, light itself would not exist at all. Mathematically, the wave equation that describes light as an electromagnetic wave would lose its time-dependence.

an electromagnetic wave arises due to the finite time it takes for news of the change of location of an accelerated charge to arrive at a distant point. Think of an electric charge as being like a hedgehog with flexible rubber spikes going out to infinity in all directions. These spikes represent the electric field lines, the lines along which a test charge would move.

If the charge is jerked, the segments of the spikes close to the charge will move, but those farther out will still point in their original directions. The result is that each spike will get a kink that moves out to infinity. This kink relays the news that the charge has moved to the distant parts of the spikes and corresponds to an electromagnetic wave. If the wave moves infinitely fast, it is as if it were not there at all; the spikes are infinitely stiff and the news gets out to everywhere without any seeming kinks. In other words, there would be no electromagnetic wave, and thus no light.

The previous two arguments are two slightly different ways to say that if you think light is a wave, then it has to be something that propagates and takes time to go from one point to another. In other words, it has to travel at a finite speed. Infinite speed of propagation is an instantaneous magical change in things everywhere all at once, and not a wave at all!

[Chas]

Can you show us a valid equation that implies that light can travel instantaneously, as you and your mentor claims?

Absolutely!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_spe...way_speeds

The concept of 'one-way' speed of light fails utterly since regardless of what direction is chosen for a two-way measurement, the result is always the same.

[downbeatplumb]

The concept of 'one-way' speed of light fails utterly since regardless of what direction is chosen for a two-way measurement, the result is always the same.

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

---

The concept of 'one-way' speed of light fails utterly since regardless of what direction is chosen for a two-way measurement, the result is always the same.

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

[Chas]

The concept of 'one-way' speed of light fails utterly since regardless of what direction is chosen for a two-way measurement, the result is always the same.

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

---

The concept of 'one-way' speed of light fails utterly since regardless of what direction is chosen for a two-way measurement, the result is always the same.

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

You can say that again.

[orogenicman]

Moreover, even if we ignore the physics and concede an instantaneous one-way speed of light, you'd still have the issue of the two-way speed giving you no less than half the distance that is actually calculated, which still gives you a universe that is 6.85 billion years old, far older than warped one's biblical claims. Of course, we aren't supposed to notice that little problem with his claim.

For instance, we know that it takes about 2 seconds for laser light from the Earth to bounce off of reflectors on the Moon and travel back to its source, which gives us the distance of the Moon from the Earth with very high precision. If this measurement was wrong, we'd have no chance of sending probes there because our calculations would always send them to the wrong location.

[downbeatplumb]

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

---

"I'm light, I'm gonna go quite fast in this direction but on the way back it will take no time at all, just coz."

This one way speed of light idea is just a desperate trick to try and shoehorn in a young universe against all the evidence.

It is nothing but creationists looking at the evidence and saying "ah but what if (insert bullshit here)" which is what they do to everything.

No evidence is ever presented, just an attempt to shit on the facts to justify their mad position which they will always maintain no mater what the facts are.

They are a lost cause and not really worth bothering with.

You can say that again.

I blame the computer.