The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely

[LastPoet]

Hey, fundamentalists are allowed within the rules. But this forum is full of atheist sharks, just waiting to take a bite. He could've just did a little(?) more homework.

[Zen Badger]

Gracie, no answer as to why the observable universe is so big?

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

Gracie, no answer as to why the observable universe is so big?

That will not help you on the age question though.

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

[Captain Colostomy]

Gracie, no answer as to why the observable universe is so big?

That will not help you on the age question though.

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

He can use whatever the fuck he wants...you sure as shit do.

[Esquilax]

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

Ah, but as per the fact that I have proven this, there is only a no god fact. No assumptions are necessary. I proved it to be correct.

You, however, have a "god" misconception.

[Zen Badger]

Gracie, no answer as to why the observable universe is so big?

That will not help you on the age question though.

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

It actually does, but I'm still awaiting your response to the question

[max-greece]

Gracie, no answer as to why the observable universe is so big?

That will not help you on the age question though.

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

Except that if you accept the size of the universe you are accepting the age.

Andromeda, the nearest spiral galaxy to us and the only one we can see with the naked eye (ignoring dwarf galaxies - yes Stimbo - I know) is 2.5 million light years away from us.

That means it took light 2.5 million years to get here.

That we can see it (without a telescope no less) means, immediately, that the universe is at a minimum 2.5 million years old.

This leaves you in something of a quandary. You will now have to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity to get to your own age estimate to pass. Good luck with that.

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

That will not help you on the age question though.

Remember, you cannot use the "no God" assumption for dating the age of things.

Except that if you accept the size of the universe you are accepting the age.

Andromeda, the nearest spiral galaxy to us and the only one we can see with the naked eye (ignoring dwarf galaxies - yes Stimbo - I know) is 2.5 million light years away from us.

That means it took light 2.5 million years to get here.

That we can see it (without a telescope no less) means, immediately, that the universe is at a minimum 2.5 million years old.

This leaves you in something of a quandary. You will now have to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity to get to your own age estimate to pass. Good luck with that.

The theory of relativity holds, but there are different possibilities depending on initial conditions.

You are assuming the shape of space over large distances and the speed of light over large distances.

Those assumptions are based on the already proven false assumption of "no God"

[Zen Badger]

Except that if you accept the size of the universe you are accepting the age.

Andromeda, the nearest spiral galaxy to us and the only one we can see with the naked eye (ignoring dwarf galaxies - yes Stimbo - I know) is 2.5 million light years away from us.

That means it took light 2.5 million years to get here.

That we can see it (without a telescope no less) means, immediately, that the universe is at a minimum 2.5 million years old.

This leaves you in something of a quandary. You will now have to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity to get to your own age estimate to pass. Good luck with that.

The theory of relativity holds, but there are different possibilities depending on initial conditions.

You are assuming the shape of space over large distances and the speed of light over large distances.

Those assumptions are based on the already proven false assumption of "no God"

Good o, now get those conditions to produce a figure of 6000 years

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

The theory of relativity holds, but there are different possibilities depending on initial conditions.

You are assuming the shape of space over large distances and the speed of light over large distances.

Those assumptions are based on the already proven false assumption of "no God"

Good o, now get those conditions to produce a figure of 6000 years

I think that you do not understand that with God all things are possible.