Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

shunyadragon · Feb 1, 2004, 09:11 pm

[quote=jpapadpapa,]
Good point and I'm sorry I haven't addressed this. Since I don't have time, here is a link, which I'm sure you will have fun picking apart. (:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/405.asp

This is core of the explanation that was offered. It is basically an explanation that explains nothing.

In one sense, if observers on earth at that particular time could have looked out and ‘seen’ the speed with which light was moving toward them out in space, it would have appeared as if it were traveling many times faster than c. (Galaxies would also appear to be rotating faster.) However, if an observer in deep space was out there measuring the speed of light, to him it would still only be traveling at c.

It is fortunate that creationists did not invent such concepts such as gravitational time dilation, black and white holes, event horizons and so on, or we would likely be accused of manipulating the data to solve the problem. The interesting thing about this cosmology is that it is based upon mathematics and physics totally accepted by all cosmologists (general relativity), and it accepts (along with virtually all physicists) that there has been expansion in the past (though not from some imaginary tiny point). It is not based on math and physics totally accepted by cosmologists. None would accept the change in the time from billions to a few thousand for light to travel accross the universe It requires no ‘massaging’—the results ‘fall out’ so long as one abandons the arbitrary starting point which the big bangers use (the unbounded cosmos idea, which could be called ‘what the experts don’t tell you about the “big bang”’) This is actually what was done. Having or not having a boundary or an arbitrary starting point has nothing to do with the speed of light and the distance between objects. The magnitude of change proposed here is beyond any comprehension of science and the speed of light. .

This gets back to an earlier statement. The 'Creation Science' arguement rejects not only evolution but all modern science.

Feb 1, 2004, 09:11 pm	#184 (permalink) (top)
shunyadragon Hot Lava Location: Hillsborough, NC Posts: 940	[quote=jpapadpapa,] Good point and I'm sorry I haven't addressed this. Since I don't have time, here is a link, which I'm sure you will have fun picking apart. (: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/405.asp This is core of the explanation that was offered. It is basically an explanation that explains nothing. In one sense, if observers on earth at that particular time could have looked out and ‘seen’ the speed with which light was moving toward them out in space, it would have appeared as if it were traveling many times faster than c. (Galaxies would also appear to be rotating faster.) However, if an observer in deep space was out there measuring the speed of light, to him it would still only be traveling at c. It is fortunate that creationists did not invent such concepts such as gravitational time dilation, black and white holes, event horizons and so on, or we would likely be accused of manipulating the data to solve the problem. The interesting thing about this cosmology is that it is based upon mathematics and physics totally accepted by all cosmologists (general relativity), and it accepts (along with virtually all physicists) that there has been expansion in the past (though not from some imaginary tiny point). It is not based on math and physics totally accepted by cosmologists. None would accept the change in the time from billions to a few thousand for light to travel accross the universe It requires no ‘massaging’—the results ‘fall out’ so long as one abandons the arbitrary starting point which the big bangers use (the unbounded cosmos idea, which could be called ‘what the experts don’t tell you about the “big bang”’) This is actually what was done. Having or not having a boundary or an arbitrary starting point has nothing to do with the speed of light and the distance between objects. The magnitude of change proposed here is beyond any comprehension of science and the speed of light. . This gets back to an earlier statement. The 'Creation Science' arguement rejects not only evolution but all modern science. The empty cup contains the most Frank A Doonan Turn weapons into peace and friendship with gifts of jade-silk www.shunyadragon.com I do not know, therefore I think . . .