Why Science CANNOT Prove the Earth Is Billions of Years Old
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 02. 2024
- This eye-opening presentation from Bryan Osborne will show you why the earth isn’t billions of years old, as well as why science and the Bible clearly support an earth that’s only a few thousand years old.
========
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics (Christianity-defending) ministry dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ effectively.
On our CZcams channel, you’ll find answers to your most pressing questions about key issues like creation, evolution, science, the age of the earth, and social issues. We desire to train believers to develop a worldview based on the Bible and expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas and their implications.
You’ll hear from top teachers such as Ken Ham, Bryan Osborne, Dr. Georgia Purdom, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, Tim Chaffey, Bodie Hodge, Dr. Gabriela Haynes, Dr. Terry Mortenson, and more.
Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world: AnswersinGenesis.org/give
As a new believer in Jesus Christ coming from atheism, this is exactly what I needed to confirm! Praise God and thank you for this video ❤
Good for you! But please, do not throw away your critical thinking, e.g. when it comes to the age of the Earth 😉.
@@christopheespicthis video is the definition of critical thinking
It’s a critique of an ideology
@@off6848 oh please.... 🙄
Why were you an atheist before?
@@off6848 Errr....sorry, but this video is entirely based on uncritical acceptance of bronze age myths over verifable sceintific information.
100% Truth, which is why you never see a single example of a human who was the offspring of a nonhuman.
Why would you expect to see an entirely new species in one generation?
@@sciencerules2825 I don't, because I accept observable biology and documented history which demonstrate to us that creatures only reproduce after their own kind just like the Bible says God created them to. There is only one observable species of human. Here we are over 150 years after darwinism's inception, having observed billions of human births and we have zero transitions of nonhumans to humans and zero transitions of humans to something that is not human. Yet we see 100% accuracy of what scripture says: that humans only produce after their own kind. That's solid scientific evidence for the Bible. Pls accept observable science and documented history; declare Jesus as your Lord, believe in your heart that God raised him from death and you will be saved (Romans 10:9).
@@sciencerules2825 just tell us who in your family was an ape and put this whole debate to rest.
@@refuse2bdcvd324 So you're whining over something no one says or thinks happened anyway. 😂
@@refuse2bdcvd324 All human beings are apes, including you. Cope.
I have a question: why don't they use the principle of uniformitarianism when it comes to climate change/global warming? Because we can prove climate change is always changing from the beginning to the present, but they act like this is something new.
Because uniformitarianism has not been a scientific tenet for many decades. It is not "what science says." It is a straw man the creationists latch onto to help them mislead their audience about science.
Uniformitarianism is applied, when something seems constant. For example half times of radioactive material. Not constant is for example CO2 in our atmosphere or the change of distance between the earth and the moon.
Uniformitarianism has not been a scientific assumption for many decades. The climate has not only changed many times form the beginning, and has sometimes done so suddenly and most definitely not "uniformly". That should be enough to give us pause. The only thing that is new today is that WE are contributing to it.
@@jockyoung4491 The huge concern today is the rapid *rate of change* of the climate. Extreme climate changes are documented in the history of the planet but in the past they always happened so slowly life could evolve fast enough to keep up. That is not true with this latest change which is 100% man made. We're currently entering a 6th mass extinction event because most species just can't keep up with the environmental changes.
because climate change/global warming is a cult
@6:43 sums it up perfectly - “It’s not a head issue, it’s a heart issue.”
Yes, the Bible is faith, not science. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as we remember the difference.
@@jockyoung4491 DEFINE, for us----the definition of the word....
"SCIENCE."
@@jockyoung4491 Evidently, YOUR chosen word for "GOD," is
"SCIENCE!"
Hmmm.....Interesting!
Are you really that uneducated? Wow ! @@raygsbrelcik5578
I agree. I can see, hear, and taste science.
A missing-in-action god with a heavenly choir that vanished
2000 years ago becomes a DOA god. Forgettable. @@raygsbrelcik5578
And they'll fight tooth and nail to hold to those ideas, because of what it means if they're wrong. God bless this channel, and help them reach the younger generation.
_And they'll fight tooth and nail to hold to those ideas, because of what it means if they're wrong_
lol, my irony meter just exploded.
Amen 🙏
@@richardgregory3684
Crazy, isn't it? It's as if these young Earth people live on an entirely different planet, and are completely disconnected from reality when it comes to subjects like this.
@richardgregory3684 Sure you can say that same thing, but the irony shows even more when all the evidence shows creationism is true and people who subscribe to a naturalistic worldview will find anything excuse to hold onto their worldview.
@@richardgregory3684 you're reply makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, though I know you were aiming for the whit award. But if I'm wrong, when I die, I have nothing to worry about... and if you're wrong, well, that's a whole different story now isn't it?
That fact is that geological and biological processes are not consistent! They can vary widely. Example: In 2023, a big earthquake in Turkey opened up a canyon in the middle of an olive grove about a 1.5 miles long and 130ft. deep in a span of just a few days. It exposed many rock layers, and you know what? The slower process of erosion has now started working on it too, as local streams and rainfall begin to flow into it and carry away sediments. However, a flash flood or another big quake can make more abrupt changes to it in the near future. We just can't predict when those events will happen or how big of a change will occur.
Yep, we can't even predict the weather, yet some dude in 1700 stated that everything is consistent without abrupt change, and people unquestioningly believe it and sustain it.
Yeah, it's hubris to think that we've "arrived" and understand how it all works! We don't know Jack!
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
@@bryanjackson8917 well since God is a myth that would be a lie
Yes and you know what if you come back a thousand years from now they will be able to tell that the earth suddenly opened up and created that canyon and then subsequent erosion took place
Hmmm... I was taught in school that the Great Barrier Reef here in Australia was millions of years old despite the sea level being up to two hundred feet lower than today during the ice age. Most of the reef would have been high and dry during that period.
So it being plunged several miles underwater then still having to be above water after anyway (AiG agrees that the ice age happened) makes more sense to you?
Core drills have been done on coral atolls, for obvious reasons. The reefs grow one polip per year. It's a great way to get a history of events. Ocean Core drills in deep undisturbed Ocean locations, ice Core drills ect. Read my other posts. The book of Hebrews makes the case that God is in his 7th Sabbatical creation day of rest. Incidentally, these Core drills are among our best dating methods. Radioactive decay methods are always calibrated with these types of Earth chart recordings.
The ice age accounts for a small fraction of the last millions of years, so Im unsure why you would base your sea level predictions entirely on that alone. It is also much more likely that sea level would change significantly over millions of years than over 6000 due to the shear amount of time.
@@tone9358you seem to think it preexisted the flood. It did not.
@@cosmictreason2242 Not only is there no evidence of a global flood, it’s precluded by modern physics.
I have read the Bible's explanations and I have read various science books explanations. What others decide they want to accept is up to themselves but for myself,
I can't buy any guesses and speculations and mere fantasy created by human minds to ever be "science". I believe the old Bible is the only truth, and only truth that is satisfying.
I do not believe human made words being superior over the old bibles. I do not trust mankind to decide anything that is regarded to the past or the future. I trust the Lord!
Hahahahahaha....u trust bronze age desert goat herder myths that are largely demonstrably false. Every religion has their "word of god". Jesus is a myth and there is no god. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing some evidence
That is certainly your choice. Believe what you want to, but don't claim that science supports it when it does not.
@@jockyoung4491 not sure if he meant science or scientism.
"I believe the old Bible is the only truth"
Why do you believe "the bible" to be truth? Why not the Bagavad Gita, or the Urantia Book, or the Book of Mormon?
"I trust the Lord!"
As do I; but how did you obtain a knowledge of the Lord?
@jockyoung4491 right! If we could only find that one first miracle then all of science can be correct!
If you start off with the wrong assumptions you will reach the wrong conclusions. That much is true. However, if you start off with a conclusion that your narrow worldview will not allow you to deviate from then you don't have science at all, you have ideology.
Then tell us, atheist, why God doesnt exist with 100 percent backed proof and the real age of the earth not one of you imbecile eggheads can figure out?
How is it History proved Jesus exists, with all His miracles, yet you reject a hypothesis that may be right because not one of you fools can carbon date?
Exactly, and that's what the debate is about. It's not science vs religion, but man's word vs god's word. Even evolutionists have admitted that evolution is a religion, not science, and it should be treated as such when talking about it.
To quote Michael Ruse:
“Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint-and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it-the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.
“… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.”
@@ryans8081 I do not know who Michael Muse is, nor can I find any reason that he is a scientist.
@@ryans8081 The key here is that the theory of evolution did not start by one man's word. It was a collective effort from scientists to discern what we now know as evolution.
@@Eunity286 You're right in that it's not one particular man, but it is "man's word" in the sense that it excludes the Bible as the starting authority and starts out with us humans, God's creation, being the authority, and not God himself. So it is an alternative religious worldview in that sense.
Michael Ruse has taught at Florida state university since 2000 and has written over 20 books about evolution, some dealing with creationism alongside it, so I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss him as being illegitimate among evolutionists, nor not being a scientist. He was speaking the truth about evolution being a religion, and that is how evolution has been treated in the American public school classrooms and universities since the supreme court took God out of public schools in the early 1960's. If you're a school teacher and you criticize millions of years as being illegitimate history and say that the universe was created only a few thousand years ago, according to the Bible, you'll get fired, lose your job, have your credentials revoked, and so on. If evolution was merely science, then people would be free to criticize and disprove it without fear of being reprimanded, but it's not.
Death before sin! Perfect. Well said spot on.
Animals were never granted eternal life.
Animal death. The Bible clearly states the death came to all men at fall(Romans 5 12)and doesn't mention animals. From scripture and creation, we see that there was animal death before the fall of man and that doesn't change the gospel in the slightest. The gospel is still exactly the same.
Sin is just an imaginry disease, with an imaginary cure.
I don’t think death is caused by sin
@@Silver77cynsin means to do something against goodness. Do you believe murder is immoral?
Hey AiG? If radiometric dating doesn't work, why does the oil and gas industry use it to find what they're looking for? If it wasn't accurate, it would be useless to them.
Don't confuse the creationists with facts. 🙂
Schrödingers accuracy. They’re only inaccurate when that “proves” Genesis. Duh.
@@dinfastyou’re failing to understand that you’re following exactly what he’s explaining 😂
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
Who said that is the method they use ? They mainly use seismic testing to find the pockets. They also poke tens of thousands of holes to capture the entirety of that reserve. Just visit the Permian basin or Bakersfield. They can test the depth of it from drilling core samples and then drill horizontally to maximize well output. To ensure unfettered flow of oil or gas in the zones they inject sand and/or other chemicals into the pocket or reserve. This is known as fracking.
Darwin and Lyell were friends. Lyell was a Mason, an occultist. Darwin's father and grandfather were Masons, and it's likely Darwin was too.
Who cares? Darwin is of historical interest only.
Who cares? Scientific theories do not belong to, and are not based on, one person. Evolutionary theory and evolutionary biology are not synonymous with 'Darwinism'. Darwin could have been a freaking serial killer and that would have no bearing on modern evolutionary theory whatsoever.
Isaac Newton was into Alchemy, for Christ's sake.
@@jockyoung4491 say that to the monkeys in secular academia. Somehow, they think being a bunch of monkeys wearing suits gives them more credibility than specially created children of God, made in His image, would give them. I just say, "Hey, y'all, listen to the monkey talk! Give it a banana." ;)
Freemasonry has played a part in the teaching from many false teachers including Joseph Smith the founder of The Mormons and Charles Taze Russell who started the Jehovah's Witnesses and Charles Darwin was also a Freemason. Freemasonry is evil and teaches false teachings and hidden Occult practices and wants to destroy the truth of God's word.
Watch the 7 days of Noah. They talk a lot about this.
They can't prove the multibillion years age for one of 2 reasons - a) What they are trying to prove is not true, or b) They lack the forensic tools and/or ability to prove the age "scientifically"
Well neither a or b are actually true, so....
option C: you are ignorant
To determine the age of the Earth scientifically, forensic tools are not typically used. Instead, scientists rely on a variety of methods from the fields of geology, astronomy, and physics. Here are some of the primary scientific tools and techniques used to estimate the age of the Earth:
Radiometric Dating: Radiometric dating is a technique based on the decay of radioactive isotopes. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes in rocks and minerals, scientists can estimate the time that has elapsed since the rock or mineral formed. The most commonly used radiometric dating methods for dating the Earth include uranium-lead dating, potassium-argon dating, and rubidium-strontium dating.
Fossil Dating: Fossils provide important clues about the Earth's history. By studying the distribution and age of fossils in sedimentary rock layers, scientists can develop relative age estimates. This is known as biostratigraphy. Additionally, the age of fossils can sometimes be directly determined using radiometric dating techniques.
Geochronology: Geochronology involves studying the age of rocks and geological events. By analyzing the sequence and relationships between different rock layers, as well as the ages of volcanic ash layers and impact craters, scientists can develop a timeline of Earth's history.
Isotopic Analysis: Isotopic analysis involves measuring the ratios of stable isotopes in geological samples. Isotopic ratios can provide information about the processes that have occurred over time, such as the age of rocks and the timing of geological events.
Astronomical Dating: Astronomical dating methods use astronomical observations to estimate the age of the Solar System and, by extension, the Earth. This includes techniques such as studying the cooling and contraction of the Sun, the dating of meteorites, and the analysis of lunar samples brought back by the Apollo missions.
It's important to note that these methods are complementary and often used in conjunction with one another to build a comprehensive understanding of the Earth's age. While estimates can vary slightly depending on the specific method used and the assumptions made, the current scientific consensus is that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old.
" They can't prove the multibillion years age for one of 2 reasons
You do not prove things in science
" - a) What they are trying to prove is not true,"
Demonstrate why the earth can not be millions of years
" or b) They lack the forensic tools and/or ability to prove the age "scientifically" ""
But they do have them and demonstrated the age
Radiometric dating is important tool used to determine the age of the Earth and its rocks. It relies on measuring the decay of radioactive isotopes within rocks and minerals. By comparing the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes, scientists can calculate the amount of time that has passed since the rock formed.
Radiometric dating is based on the principle that certain isotopes of elements are unstable and decay over time at a predictable rate. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes in a rock sample, scientists can calculate the amount of time that has elapsed since the rock formed or the event being studied occurred.
For example, one commonly used radiometric dating method is uranium-lead dating. Uranium naturally occurs in several isotopic forms, including uranium-238, which decays into lead-206 over time. By measuring the ratio of uranium-238 to lead-206 in a rock sample, scientists can determine the age of the rock.
Other isotopic systems, such as potassium-argon dating and rubidium-strontium dating, are also used for radiometric dating. Each isotopic system has its own decay rate and is applicable to different time ranges.
Radiometric dating is a powerful tool in geochronology, but it is important to note that it is not the only method used to determine the age of the Earth. It is often used in conjunction with other dating techniques, such as relative dating methods (e.g., studying the order and relationships of rock layers) and paleontological dating (e.g., dating fossils found in the rock layers). These different methods help build a comprehensive understanding of Earth's history and the passage of time.
A study of the Great Barrier Reef was done after WWII to see how fast the reef could recover from damage during the war. From their twenty years of observation...scientists came to the conclusion that the reef was about 4500 years old. Let's see, what global event happened about 4500 that reshaped the Earths surface. ...oh yeah....the Noahic flood.
We have formations that is older than 20000 years old
There was no Global event that happened about 4500 years ago that reshaped the Earth
The southern third of Isle La Motte contains remnants of the Chazy Reef, which, at 480 million years old, is considered the oldest reef in the world where corals first appeared.
Corals are animals that leave annual layers that can be counted like tree rings. Just saw a doc the other night about a reef that was (I think in Australia) dated at about 15,000 years based on those annual layers.
There are tree rings up to 9000/11500 years (of the tree type that only give 1 ring per year, correlated to layers on lake bottom, ice core, radiometric dating etc ....)
@@miscamisca6775Actually...trees have been found to reflect multiple rings in a year based on weather conditions...look it up. A tree ring is no guarantee of chronicle age. Just as soft dinosaur tissue...now found at dig site on five continents puts the lie to dinosaurs having lived 65+ million years ago.
10:26
"That was a very slow birth" Got me 😂
Regarding the seals radio carbon dating … I went and pulled the article that that was taken from as annotated at the bottom of his slide… It says that antarctic seawater has significantly less carbon 14 activity than is accepted as the world standard for carbon dating.
I wonder what other situations where fossils and rocks have been dated have been under similar limitations? I wish they would go into that.
Yes, so the scientific community knows about the reservoir effect, that is why you can not use C14 on sea living creatures.
C14 works best on plants
Carbon dating can, at best, only go back to say 50,000 or so years (100,000 with AMS, but that's really pushing it), and as you may be aware, thousands and billions of years are quite different numbers in terms of the respective spans of time we are talking about here.
Because it is seawater - Hydrogen and Oxygen. There is no carbon in it.
I felt like I was having trouble understanding and believing it but I understand it now. This video helped clear it up. We were taught things wrong in school I suppose
At school... Or on this channel 🙄
@@christopheespicsure, what would a system gain if you were to live solely for money and view yourself as a useless piece of flesh with now bigger meaning then working to the bone. Other then a mindless workslave, I mean.
Yeah, I’ve never believed that this earth is billions of years old. I was that guy in science class that just looked at the teacher like really….. sure.
@@kevinhank17because he’s open minded and doesn’t just accept what’s told to him? Good to see you admit you can’t think for yourself.
@@unknown____9695 you know if you pay attention in science class you can learn how to test all the things you don't believe are real and see for yourself, or just be an open minded free thinker and blindly believe an old book with nothing to back it up except for itself, cause that's good critical thinking right? I'm sure you searched long and hard for answers and tested all kinds of physical properties, thinking for yourself the whole time and determined the bible, which contradicts reality in so many ways is somehow more correct than reality, right? Which of the literal hundreds of versions of the bible is the right one again?
the scientific method was not used in this video lol.
@@the.littlest.toaster its a video, not a science experiment in and of itself, genius. You likely would not say the same for a video of Dawkins talking about evolution even though he also does not use the scientific method while doing so. 😂 and guess what - evolution also doesn’t use the scientific method. No one has observed it in all of history.
People can be made to believe many things. This is the "art" of lying and the "art " of deceit. Firts thing to do is see what is the source of the information and if this source is credible amon th experts in the field. Not a small fringe club of non-scientists who do not know squat. Then you should fact check. Like Adam and Eve, fact or fiction. Noah's Ark, fact or fiction......are there any witnesses. Any experiments any encompassing theory. A miracle is the absence of an explanation. Of you kake such extrordinary claims it requires extraordinary evidence. No matter how strongly you believe or how many strongly belief, it can be a virus that infected many brains, because it was meant to do so.
The Bible is that virus. The younger you are and the more naive you are, the more this non-sense gets imprinted in the brain, and unless you are extraorinarily smart and educated, most of the time people that fell victims to this hoax, simply cannot disconnect from it. It essentially has become a chronic addiction. The only antidote is science.
Hi, something I've been struggling with lately is the Septuagint genealogies of Shem. The Septuagint adds between 50 and 100 years of life to the dates that the patriarchs had the next patriarch. This adds between 600 and 700 years of timeline between the flood and Abraham when compared to the much younger maseratic texts. I would love to see you guys cover this topic in detail. This doesn't change my view on a young earth, but it would explain a lot of weird archaeological mysteries that we see in many ancient cultures.
God is always several steps ahead.
He made sure the Qumran/Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in the 20th century.
They date back to between the 3rd century BC and 1st century AD.
Most of the texts have more in common with the earlier Septuagint translations (indeed the Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC) than the newer Masoretic (which was composed between the 6th and 10th century AD). The Masoretic has quite a few changes here and there.
About that genealogy, it only adds one person to the line of Shem, a person named Cainan is listed as the father of Shelah. This would add 130 years (the amount given in the Septuagint as when he fathered Shelah) to the time from the Flood (Shem) to Abraham.
130 years of wiggle room is not too bad, Archaeology tends to stick to close estimates unless they have a specific event they discovered...for example the Siege of Lachish is documented in the Bible as happening in 701 B.C., This is confirmed by the discovery of the Wall from Sennacherib's palace commemorating the event (currently in a british museum), as well as the dig site of Tel Lachish discovered in the 1930s.
As a Christian, my question is this. If all forms of radio/carbon dating are inconsistent, then by what process are the Creationist scientists and physicists dating everything? I don't doubt what I know to be true, but I also want to make sure we aren't using the same pre-suppositions.
These folks want to use science when it serves their ideas and disregard the same science that disproves what they're saying.
They will invoke DNA (literally deoxyribonucleic acid something from the periodic table and chemistry) then forget that SAME science.
I'm a Christian and I know the earth isn't 6,000 years old.
Don't like using Carbon-14 dating? No problem there are OTHER methods that can validate things scientifically. Go ahead and use Potassium Argon dating (K-Ar) if you have a problem with C-14
Yep, same dating techniques are used to date archeological sites that are propped up as confirmation of the Bible's historical accuracy. Convenient, eh?
And it isn't creation scientists doing the dating. They don't actually do research. They pull the data from secular scientific published papers.
@@amaizenblue44 Well archeology does consistently confirm the events, people and places of the Bible whether they get the dating right or not. They're still there. Plus they've found many artifacts and coins confirming people in the Bible such as King David, Pontius Pilot and Nebechanezzar.
@@2EdgedSword77 some of the events, no doubt. Kinda beside the point, though.
@@amaizenblue44 I just didn't want to imply we should throw out archeology is all.
If this teaches me anything, it's that average people like me take either side of this controversy on faith. I have not the grounding in the many specialties that make up physics, chemistry, biology, geology, nor of philosophy, the history of science, etc, that would enable me to hold my own in an argument defending either side against holders of the other.
I also think that there are very few professions or trades in which competence is affected by whether the practicioner believes in Deep Time evolution or Young Earth creationism. This is because most fields deal with things as they are now and not as they were in time immemorial. This includes medical doctor, astronaut, lawyer, ship captain, and many more.
Not true. One cannot be a geologist without understanding the age of the earth and geologic processes. One cannot find oil without understanding both long-term geology and radiometric dating. Medicine is grounded in biology, and biology makes no sense outside of evolution. Our ability to make vaccines and many other successful medical treatments relies on genetics - which relies on evolution. Linguistics requires understanding origins of language, and one can't make sense of that if one is restricted to Genesis mythology. History falls apart if one is restricted to Genesis mythology. Engineering relies on physics, and physics is very clear about the age of the universe and of the earth...deny the science behind those things and you make a hash of engineering.
The simple truth is that even the folks at AiG live in a world that would not exist, and broadcast their ideas over means that would not exist, if everyone actually held to their genesis-only views. We'd still be in the iron age (at best).
One does not have to be an expert in the sciences to see the basic reality of the world around us, nor to recognize the dishonesty and cherry-picking that AiG relies on to keep the money flowing.
@@njhoepner Well spoken. But again, I personally take most of these matters 'on faith' because of my lack of grounding in these disciplines. I deliberately did not include geology, astronomy, or physics and certainly not paleontology because the current state of those fields leans on deep time, and there has been no compelling evidence to make the materialists question the assumption. By the way, that's interesting about petroleum exploration. If I meet someone in that field I'll have to pose him a question about how someone would fare in that endeavor without a belief in evolution. Given either belief an engineer would know from training and experience where to look for oil. And oil is, ultimately, where you find it. (I read somewhere that some Russian oil people are investigating a possible mineral origin for crude oil. But the Russians will try anything, like sputniks, communism, etc.)
As a Catholic growing up in these times I've always been a deep time creationist. Deep time may clash with scripture, but it's in keeping with His apparent style, what with our being buried in deep space. My fascination with Young Earthism after all these years is fueled by the thought of the jolting derailment of everyone's expectations if it were somehow proven true. The effect would be like the moment in _The Truman Show_ when his boat rams into the fake horizon of his artificial habitat.
In the meantime, yes, there are many things the young-earthers cannot explain away. Fossils of species alive today should be as numerous as those of extinct ones. We should be unable to observe stars more than about 6,000 light years away. (Adam and Eve should have seen no stars until Alpha Centauri popped into view four years on!)
@@360decrees2 I'm not an expert on these field either (I have an MA in History), but one of the differences between the sciences and religion is I can do some investigating and study for myself and at least get a decent idea what's really happening.
As you noted, I think deep time speaks for itself...the only way to get around it is layers upon layers of miracles/magic, and deception at that. I just don't see it. It is possible to be a deep-time creationist and still be rational...but it does require relegating parts of the bible to allegory. Once one starts doing that, it seems to me the whole thing eventually comes apart at the seems.
It's possible there is a god behind it all...but if so, it appears to be a god so embedded in natural processes, and hidden by them, that he/she/it/they can be discounted. I can't close off the idea, and I won't fall on my sword trying, but I don't see enough evidence to get me to accept it.
If we are all on some version of The Truman Show, we've got other issues. 😄
@@njhoepner Genetics and evolution are not contradictory to the bible of young earth whatsoever, it's a real process and it works because dna contains information (like a programming language), in fact it proves the intelligent design behind it all. It's what made us be able to breed dogs we like, crops that are productive etc, adapt to various environments, which is all a blessing and intentional.
Nothing in evolution implies that the world is old or young, it's just a process.
Abiogenesis on the other hand has never been proven with the scientific method and people who believe it say it would take impossible odds to happen. So unless they can prove life on other planets exists or recreate life from non life in a lab, there is nothing but faith in either naturalism or creationism that dictates your belief.
@@360decrees2 There are plenty of fossils from species that would have existed during the flood and after, of course animals evolved after the flood and are quite different now. Also we have not found every fossil in existence and not all species have the same likelihood of being fossilised (in a flood).
In genesis, God made the stars on the same day as the sun and the moon. You made the assumption that the universe must be old in order to be able to see the stars far away, but that's your belief in naturalism, that everything happens from natural causes and that the processes from today have always been the same. Nothing prevents it from being made 6000 years ago with the appearance of age.
Lot of bias in mainstream science, the people who don't believe in naturalism are not taken seriously. So if you are a christian, take what they say with a grain of salt.
Jesus open thier eyes and heart of all the people to the Truth of God's Holy Word the Bible in Jesus name I pray Amen 🙏
Jesus, please tell them once and for all that you're not real and that there's no reason to believe in you. Then we can stop the insanity. For the sake of common sense.
@@nofairytales5604 so sad so blind to Truth one day you will.meet Jesus and you will regret that day if you don't believe I pray you will open your heart to the Truth of who Jesus is our Savior and our God Hallelujah Amen 🙏
@nofairytales5604 I was an atheist for 7 yrs and started to read the Bible got to the book of numbers and I said if you want me to believe your going to have to show me because I wasn't going to read this book anymore that is when God opened my eyes and heart to the Truth of who Jesus is our Savior and our God I could go on a tell you what happened to know this but it would take forever to write it all.out but if you want to know Truth if Jesus is real you going to have to ask and open you heart and if you are sincere you will find the God you reject because if you ask with an open heart God will draw you to Him believe me it will be Amazing when you meet God I pray you will Amen 🙏
@nofairytales5604 you are so blind to Truth so sad you don't know who Jesus is our Savior and our God Hallelujah Amen 🙏
I don't think I'd be telling anybody else they're "blind to truth" when you believe in non-rational and unprovable fantastic claims. And I do know who Jesus is, or more appropriately, was: Jesus was someone who may or may not have lived. I believe he probably did exist, but the gospel presentations are all conjured-up myth (based totally on earlier myths). Most probable is the view that he was one of many Jewish preachers trying to help his people establish a metaphoric "kingdom of god," I imagine largely an effort to get the Hebrews out from under the thumb of the autocratic Romans. Jesus's early followers most likely saw him as a god figure (not uncommon for the time), but there is no evidence to suggest that he was claiming to be a god or trying to start a new religion. Lastly, the four gospels are not original sources and are not reliable historical documents, regardless of what people want to believe. Sorry that reality gets in your way.@@johnnemeth825
Good video. Based on the title i was expecting the debunking of radioactive dating and such, but still had some good apologetics.
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
"Based on the title i was expecting the debunking of radioactive dating and such"
Well, do not look any more, YEC fails with that every time.
@@miscamisca6775 I’ve read some good pieces (especially when blind tests are done on items with known less than hundreds of years and they come back millions/billions) on that exact thing, I was just expecting a concise video presenting that evidence here.
@@michaelahofer1004
" I’ve read some good pieces (especially when blind tests are done on items with known less than hundreds of years and they come back millions/billions) on that exact thing,"
Yes, with a large spread of the years, that is a strong indication that the specific method can not be used to reading errors.
One famous example is when a YEC'er went up on mount saint Helen and used a dating method which lower range is around 2 million years, and sure enough,
he got a wide spread of the dates. Everyone knows that this is an indication that there is to little isotopes in the material to be used with that specific method.
Everyone knows then the rocks are to young to date with that specific method, a different method is needed.
But the YEC'er fully aware of this fault went on and made youtube videos of it, >
These short videos are great. Especially for children and teenagers who’s attention span is hard to listen to a 1 1/2 , 2 1/2 hour or more presentation . Please keep doing these shorter and information packed style of videos as they are very good . God bless for all the work you guys put into making these great truth videos 🙏
And Americans
Regarding the attention span of children, perhaps it would help if the video was cut up into short sections of no more than 30 seconds or so in length and then posted on Tik Tok.
Literally all the science does point to God
Science, by definition, CAN'T point to God. It can't say anything about God either way.
All of it.@@nathancook2852
@@nathancook2852 he said what he said and he's correct
@@nathancook2852 Charles Darwin's theory of evolution says that there must be an intelligent creator in order for life to exist the way it does.
@@maliquesmith2311 I can see that Nathan will have a long wait before you or anyone provides any evidence for the empty claim.
Thank you for the video. God bless your Ministry.
This video is absolute bull-crap, not a single point makes any sense whatsoever. And you believe him? Ask a scientist and they will be able to annihilate his entire argument easily. Don't trust people so easily, especially when they agree with what you already think. This leads down a dangerous cycle and is usually how cults start and spread.
He doesn’t and can’t. If he exists he has no power here on this earth
@@Oskyosky2009 If he doesn't exist, or have power on the earth, why are you here on a Christian channel? You wouldn't give us a second thought if what you said was true
@@owens7647 I come here for the unhinged comments. Also sometimes a good conversation happens.
I will trust God's Word over science 100 fold!
So if your appendix burst, would you go to a science based hospital, or a church?
What a stupid comment 😂@@richardgregory3684
" I will trust God's Word over science 100 fold! "
Says the guy who expressed his opinion via computer
That's your own faulty reasoning.
If you get sick don't go to the doctor, medicine is science. Go find a witch doctor.
I love your "test" comment. It reminded me of my high school biology teacher - and I went to public school. He started the unit on evolution with the statement "you don't have to believe it but this is what's on the test."
He also played the Paul Harvey bird story the last school day before Christmas break!
@@nathancook2852 don't feel sorry for me. He was a great science teacher. I feel lucky to have had him as a teacher. There's plenty to disagree with about evolution - I know that I didn't come from pond scum or a shrew or even an ape. Why do you want to watch creation science videos if you're so against it? ... 🤔 Maybe your trolling will eventually lead to critical thinking about evolution .....
@@anny3046Sorry my friend, but we are all primates. Also known as apes.
Reminds me of a science teacher I once had who told us "you don't have to believe vaccines work but they just may save your life!"
Excellent video! One point to consider is that the Bible teaches (Psalms & Job) that God stretched out the heavens. When you stretch space, you also stretch time. Imagine a rubber band marked into 6 equal segments (Days) that is stretched. Since the creation story requires Divine revelation as man was not created until the 6th day, his (man's) view of time and history (relativity) would appear to be longer.
A second and considerably more speculative consideration is concurring that sin must have entered into the world before death (Rom 6:23). However, could the fall of Satan somehow have been the instigator of corruption into this physical universe?
Imagine a rubber band marked into 6 equal segments (Days) that is stretched out.
Now imagine that rubber band is so old and cracked that it suddenly snaps when you try to stretch it out to suit your rather narrow needs.
Now you have a very good Bible lesson to teach and demonstrate in Sunday school.
You can also add language and agriculture, tools, etc to that timeline. Even secular dating shows there is almost no language and culture recorded/found before about 7000 BC. Somewhere between 7000-5000BC, we suddenly see the rise of language, culture, nations, cities, etc. Seems like awfully similar timing to many other things. Now they are trying to tie all that to the post-Dryas period, after an ice age around 12000bc, they say. Funny that even then, that fits within the timeframe.
There are no historical records, aka written language. But we do have smaller civilization's remains and cave paintings dated way before that. Creationists cannot make their point without ignoring 99% of the facts 😅
Unseen evidence is not reliable, and there's no evidence of parthenogenesis fpr humans. People cling to religion for comfort, and suspend their disbelief to enable faith. Bigfoot and even a flat earth is still very real in many minds. You get it.
Correct. They make attempts at stretching out ages best they can for various reasons, but that is correct and in fact, they get more COMPLICATED as they go back in time and become dumb down as we come closer to modern age.
@ptsd888Or societies. Doesn't really matter. Smaller gathering of humans where they built stuff that still stands.
@@katamas832Dated to when, exactly? Stonehenge is only 5,000 years old.
WHEN DO WE GET TO THE PART WHERE HE EXPLAINS HOW DINOSAURS WERE ON NOAH’S ARK?
Could they have been brought on as eggs or hatchlings?
❤❤this is a great video!!!
Unfortunately it comes to the wrong conclusion in the end..
Thank you, this is excellent !
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
I love this so much! So well explained! Thank you.
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
They are lying to you… Please take a actual science course in an actual college
@@keithziegler8881bump
Everything we observe is the past. You observe the light that traveled from something to you. Light from the moon takes seconds, light from the sun takes minutes, and stars that are light years away take years.
You only assume it's the past because science tells you it is, but can you prove it is not light from the future. (didn't think so!)
You can prove canyons can be made in hours or days (Mt.St.Helen). From that you know the Grand Canyon could have been quickly made say from the runoff of a great flood.
MSH "canyon" was 50' deep and rapidly straight cut through soft unconsolidated volcanic ash. The Grand Canyon is 2 miles deep and cut with sinuous incised meanders slowly eroded through extremely hard rock like sandstone, limestone. The geology of the two couldn't be more different.
@@annieoaktree6774 Yes a small lake draining vs huge flood, I would expect the damage to be on a greater scale.
@@agentl0key891 It's not the size of the flood. It's the underlying hardness of the substrate. Volcanic ash is sediment; unconsolidated piece that are easily moved. The rock that makes up the Grand Canyon is considerably harder. In addition, a rapid flood would end up with mostly straight walls. The meandering mentioned by annieoaktree would not exist. Those only occur if the water flow is considerably slower.
@@mrastin821 Simple dam water releases have chewed through concrete with ease. It not the substrate but what particles are in the water and speed of it.
@@agentl0key891 You're talking about steel reinforced concrete. Over time, the steel (if exposed to water) can rust and weaken the structure, which can result in faster damage than would occur with natural rock formations. The steel reinforcement is still useful for tension in the concrete, and allowing some flexibility where needed.
And that still doesn't explain why the Grand Canyon follows the meanders of the Colorodo River, instead of a much more linear path if it was caused by a massive rush of water.
Rightly divide the Bible. Only God can tell you the age of the world.
***why you do not ask God ? he can tell you all details! but mind you, first you must have an appointment and make sure you will be there on time, God is very busy, he has no time to loose with those childish kind of business.***
Nah god can't do anything because he isn't real
@@RitmosMC Maybe in your opinion of 10:10
@@leebrown8029 Nah no opinion, it's simply fact
"At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow in heaven on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory if God the Father". Phillipians 2:10-11
EVERYONE needs to hear/watching this video. Great job brother
Perfect.....Love this study...
There must be some advantage here a believer can see, like making better prediction from a more accurate time line. But thinking about weather predictions a man of faith can change it anyway or move mountains
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
In fact over 80-90% of independent dating methods prove the earth is much younger than 25k years
LOL!!!
i have the feeling that is from aigs «scientists«!!
where are those studies?
Where "independent dating methods" means "stuff I pulled from my nether regions"
Next to scientology and ken ham STATING the EARTH is only six thousand years old, this might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard !
Whoever told you that was simply lying.
How old is the Grand Canyon? Think of it as a giant tree-trunk & count the rings. You will struggle to get a figure below 250,000 years. You can lie to us all you want - just be sure you can repeat those lies to Him when he asks. He is unlikely to take kindly to those who feel the need to lie on his behalf.
Great work! God's truth is shining through!
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old
Because God made it look that way when He created it!
I believe we've not found the original source of the quote that's attributed to Keppler. Have you found it?
Radiometric dating is a method used to determine the age of rocks and minerals by measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to their decay products. It relies on the fact that certain isotopes of elements are unstable and decay over time at a predictable rate.
Here's a simplified explanation of how radiometric dating works:
Isotopes: Atoms of the same element can have different numbers of neutrons, resulting in different forms called isotopes. Some isotopes are stable, meaning they do not undergo radioactive decay, while others are unstable and decay into different isotopes or elements.
Radioactive decay: Unstable isotopes, known as parent isotopes, spontaneously decay into more stable isotopes or daughter products. This decay occurs at a constant rate known as the half-life, which is the time it takes for half of the parent isotopes to decay.
Measuring the ratio: By analyzing the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter products in a rock or mineral sample, scientists can determine how much time has passed since the rock formed. This is done through laboratory techniques such as mass spectrometry or counting the number of radioactive decays.
Half-life: Each radioactive isotope has a unique half-life, which is the time it takes for half of the parent isotopes to decay. For example, the half-life of uranium-238 is about 4.5 billion years, while the half-life of potassium-40 is about 1.3 billion years. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter products and knowing the half-life, scientists can calculate the age of a rock.
Assumptions and limitations: Radiometric dating relies on certain assumptions, such as the initial abundance of parent isotopes, a closed system (no addition or removal of isotopes), and constant decay rates over time. While these assumptions are generally valid, they can introduce some uncertainties in dating. Additionally, radiometric dating is most accurate for rocks that formed in the last few million to billion years, as older rocks may have experienced significant geological processes that can disturb the isotopic ratios.
By applying radiometric dating to different isotopic systems, such as uranium-lead, potassium-argon, and rubidium-strontium, scientists can determine the ages of rocks and minerals with varying degrees of precision and accuracy. These dating methods have been extensively tested and refined over many years, and their results have been cross-checked with other dating techniques and geological evidence, providing a reliable means of determining the age of rocks on Earth.
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
Excellent, thank you! What a pity that most Christians don't work out the inconsistencies between the Biblical account of creation and the theory of evolution, made only to nullify Ps 19.1 and Romans 1:19-20
"THEORY," is not FACT, Penny!
Did you even BOTHER to Study the Entire video??
So then we are wrong about evolution. Science changes as we have more information and knowledge. Macroevolution has never been observed.
@@lauramann8275 Pure, dumb Chance cannot even come UP
with the Human CELL, much less, an entire human being, my
Friend!
Not only would chance have to Create ALL the necessary
Components that make up a Cell, it would have to ARRANGE
them all in the Right Order!
Sorry but-----The Mathematical probability of just ONE CELL,
Not only CREATING itself, but WRITING ITS OWN DNA, is a
Number FAR TOO LARGE to Compute, by human standards.
You've GOT to be Kidding!!
Not to mention;
This CELL would be Obligated to BUILD a Cell Wall around it
self.....ALL BY ITSELF!
Mathematic Perfection, without INTELLIGENT DESIGN??
Preposterous!!
Or for that matter, the inconsistencies between the biblical account and the obvious reality before our eyes in almost any field of science.
@@njhoepner Such as? How do you explain the precambrian explosion and the great unconformity or the universal forces? Science can't explain everything.
Consider Charles Spurgeon’s view on this. I don’t think we should view this a first-rank issue, so that we would exclude him and many others over the centuries from the faith based on this. It can’t be said that all who hold a different view or just say they don’t know with certainty are doing so to accommodate the culture of their time.
Charles Spurgeon was a Freemason, a Luciferian mongrel who precahed a false and distorted version of Christinaity called Calvinism, so he excluded himself from the Chrstian faith.
Charles Spurgeon was a Freemason, a Luciderian who preached a false and distorted version of Christinay called Calvinism, so he excluded himself from the faith.
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
Excellent! The problem with apologetics can be arguing from different places. But seeing science align with biblical truth is awesome! Christians need to trust the bible and true science!
Charles Lyell was a lawyer. Yeah, not in any way a scientist, but he was a friend of Darwin. an example of the geologic table, which he drew up, has been found in it's in entirety in the real world exactly ZERO times so far...
The geologic column is a tool. Naturally, given the size and variety of climates and other factors, you won't have every layer that ever existed found in one spot. But we do have layers, and rules for how we can order them. With the right data, we can connect columns in one place to columns elsewhere (we do this all the time), so we can piece huge chunks of time together.
Excellent 💯
Whether you utilize the resources that God has placed within one's own grasp, or build upon the labors of others, a person discovers a world beyond one's grasp and sets out upon a course of life's persuits, be it self fulfillment or selfless service to those around one. Corruption being what it is will seek to profit from the labors of those who have labored for the benefit of others. Here is where wisdom counts for more than knowledge for it alone determines the value of one's faith in God's truth and not mankind's collective knowledge.
Is there any way to get the powerpoints from this presentation?
I came heree to Rumble to watch because on youtube, various words were being blocked but I find it happening here also. This is happening in other videos too.
Is anyone able to confirm for me that the objections with origin science also apply to future science, such as modelling? Thanks
Probably...both objections are equally ridiculous.
Future science is called predictive
Which just means divination
Did you also know that the ancient witchcraft of divination was based on numbers? Using numbers to predict the future
Divination comes from the word divine which is a variation of the word divide
The word science means to cut or divide knowledge the Sci prefix is like as in the word Scissors ✂️
To cut and divide knowledge
Now you know science = witchcraft literally
@@njhoepner notice how you arent able to actually address the topic, theres obviously huge difference between historical science and observational science
@@user-rb3tk5th2i No, there isn't. Science is based on observations, followed by inferences from those observations, which lead to hypotheses, which are then tested either by experiment or further observation. Science about the past is based on observations about the past...the age of the earth, for example is based on observations of geology, of radioactive decay, of physical processes. Lies in Genesis attempts to create a false dichotomy by saying "we can't go back into the past, therefore we can't possibly know anything about it." Which is pure nonsense. Never mind that that would make their bible a fantasy as well.
Models are not permitted in the scientific method.
No accurate way to calibrate the measurement scale! It’s a guess! Not good science! 😊
It's a guess to you and me. To a scientist, who knows much more than us, it's pretty certain. The bible on the other hand, utterly unreliable set if much changed old books from when humans knew very little, containing lots of proven nonsense.
@@sids5002 too bad for your pain. I realize on this point and this time your not capable of understanding. You have much to study and learn. As you grow your knowledge will increase. If you allow yourself to grow. You can always ask God for help in that area. Unfortunately for you with a closed mind and hard heart a person can’t even help you find the truth. All up to you! Your choice!
@@sids5002 archaeologists around the world use the Bible to find lost cities and the Bible has literally never been proven wrong.
No, it's excellent Science. You just haven't studied this.
@@BucketOfAndrew agreed 👍
If this wasnt satire I would think that these people don’t know what they’re talking about
Love the breakdown! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I’ve read the Bible and I’ve read science books. I have to say that I believe the Bible, I do not believe man’s word. I do not trust man. I trust the Lord.
That's unfortunate, considering that Science has done so much more for humanity.
Men wrote the Bible too though...🤔
Christian faith uses unseen evidence to prove truth while science uses observable evidence to prove theory. I think the Bible is often preferred because the rewards of an afterlife and seeing loved ones again is more comforting than indifferent science. Religion enables tribalism, unfortunately.
Okay use your magic spells to prevent illness like the Bible says instead of antibiotics
The bible is written by men ! It's contradictions prove it !
Exactly right. As someone who has done research and technical applications in industry for 15 years I can tell you the word "science" gets thrown around and abused way too much. Most modern "science" is not a controlled design experiment, rather its observational - essentially stuff happens and you grab "data" and heavily rely on your "expertise" (your biased prenotions) to try to weave an ad hoc explanation together to explain it. It ends up being who can convince enough people of what you said, and most of the time that doesn't even happen, it just becomes political.
Years ago I met a renowned geologist whose career boasts include achieving significant state zoning policies. We eventually became on good terms through unlikely circumstances (kudos to his openness as he knew I was a Christian and had a different worldview). After these kind of conversations, he fully conceded to the fact that evolution and millions of years is not provable science, it's just a theory driven by people who already decide what they believe in terms of worldview (not any differen than Christians who read the Bible). Compare that to the fact that the Bible is the most validated book archeologically speaking compared to any text by orders of magnitude, along with the great work this channel is doing, and you have a strong working theory that distinguishes itself. Thank you guys for all the great work, love the content!
That is hilarious. You clearly do not understand evolution, nor how radiometric dating works. Both of them are factual, and they prove that the Earth is ancient. Your beliefs in ancient myths will not deter scientific progress. Who is this geologist whom you spoke to? Any actual geologist would know that the Earth is ancient, and geological processes gradually gave rise to the structures that we see on the planet today.
What is a scientific theory?
@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440I believe the earth is ancient but that man and animals are only from thousands of years ago.
@@Eunity286 A scientific theory is a collection of facts and substantiated ideas that explain how a natural phenomenon occurs.
@@truthbebold4009 That is incorrect, my friend. The first animals were aquatic organisms from about 600 million years ago.
Thanks for posting
I have a question. If we knownthe rate of decay of a radioactive isotope, then we.can calculate the age of that radioactive rock. And some are older than 6000 years
.
But the Bible does not say any where how old the earth is. How can we be sure of the age of 6000 years? Evidence?
***plus 6 more zeros***
It comes from Usher, he made calculations based on the family description in the old testimony, that is, who gave birth to whom and what age.
I contend the solar system, and earth are 4.5 billion years old.
11:13 Andrew Snelling? Institute for Creation Research? That is so funny!
In Gen. 3:2-3. Before man sinned the idea of death was present already. Adam and Eve already have an idea what death is about and it must been a terrifying idea. Perhaps the reason why God used it as a warning, so that they will not eat of the tree. The question is what basis did God use as an idea of death to warned them? They must have had some idea already, even before they sinned. Considering the reading of verse 3.
The Bible is nothing more than a collection of fairy tales.
I wanted to ask if it is ok to have a cross or crucifix on my wall. I have a crucifix but was told a cross would be a better choice. Please help. Thank you.
A cross shows that Jesus is no longer on it. He was buried and then raised from the dead. A crucifix shows Jesus still on the cross which means that He died for us and that was it. Cross is better then
Thank you@@benjaminlunsford7157
@@benjaminlunsford7157The Crucifix is a visual reminder of Christ's humility and love for us and the extreme lengths He was willing to go to in order to heal and redeems us. Demons hate the Crucifix because they are proud and rebellious creatures, and the obedience and humility that Christ demonstrated on the Cross is what ultimately defeated them, and they can't stand that because it reminds them of who and what they are and how pointless and futile their rebellion was. It was all for nothing. Now the Devils children, the Protestants, also hate the Crucifix because many of them have demons and become extremely agitated and angry when they see one becuase of the demonic energy at work stirring up the passions within them. Other Protestants are just extremly fleshy and worldy people that are obsessed with status and power, human respect and their reputation so the idea of a suffering Messiah is repulsive to them just like it is to the Jews. They think a scourged and bloody Christ is a weak and pathetic Christ, when it's actually the complete opposite. Another reason they hate the Crucifix is because it demonstrates obedience, something that proud souls cannot endure. Protestants are notoriously rebellious and disobedient, just like their fathe the Devil, which is why they are constantly fighting one another and trying to tear Christianity to shreds by separating into thousands of different sects that all contradict and compete with eachother while claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit, the spirit of truth. Pride, rebellion and division - those are Satan's hallmarks, and those of his children as well.
The Crucifix is a visual reminder of Christ's humility and love for us and the extreme lengths He was willing to go to in order to heal and redeems us. Demons hate the Crucifix because they are proud and rebellious creatures, and the obedience and humility that Christ demonstrated on the Cross is what ultimately defeated them, and they can't stand that because it reminds them of who and what they are and how pointless and futile their rebellion was. It was all for nothing. Now the Devils children, the Protestants, also hate the Crucifix because many of them have demons and become extremely agitated and angry when they see one becuase of the demonic energy at work stirring up the passions within them. Other Protestants are just extremly fleshy and worldy people that are obsessed with status and power, human respect and their reputation so the idea of a suffering Messiah is repulsive to them just like it is to the Jews. They think a scourged and bloody Christ is a weak and pathetic Christ, when it's actually the complete opposite. Another reason they hate the Crucifix is because it demonstrates obedience, something that proud souls cannot endure. Protestants are notoriously rebellious and disobedient, just like their fathe the Devil, which is why they are constantly fighting one another and trying to tear Christianity to shreds by separating into thousands of different sects that all contradict and compete with eachother while claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit, the spirit of truth. Pride, rebellion and division - those are Satan's hallmarks, and those of his children as well.
Doesn’t matter either way. It’s not sinful to have either, doesn’t even matter if you have an upsidedown cross
I think you guys are great and love so much of what you say and do, and I believe in a young earth. But as far as no death before sin, you have a big problem you need to address. If there was no death, there was no need or use for the Tree of Life. If there was no death, why did it exist? What was its intended use? Did plants die when you ate them? Did micro organisms die? What was the line between what could die and could not?
Plants are part of the tree of life like limbs belonging to the whole eating individual plants did not kill the tree of life
You have to realize that the separation of life forms is artificial or illusory there’s only one living thing the whole
It can and will die though
The bible is specific. There was no death until sin entered the garden. The Tree of Life was there as a test, and a testament. It was not the Tree of Life and Death, it was just the Tree of Life.
@@jesusknight1Chapter and verse please. If death did not exist, then how could God's threat of death for eating from the Tree of Knowledge have any meaning to them? Would kind of make the whole test unfair.
To expand on that, if God really wanted to stop Adam and Eve, he could have given them a Revelation type 1/2 hour, showing them the death of millions of babies, women, people. The diseases, the wars, the addictions, the corruption. He could have shown them what death really meant for the future. It's almost as if he wanted them to fail so he could provide a Saviour. He'll probably give me a Job moment for that one.
@@markav1212 Romans 5:12 for one. It mentions sin entering by one man. Adam. Genesis 3:19 mentions returning to the ground (death) because of his sin. And his work (tending the garden) became a chore because the ground was cursed. There are other verses, but you can start with these and find more if you wish to continue your research. Blessings!
Thank you. God bless you
Very informative, thank you 👍
Just one question. There was man's original sin, and then there was the first and deadliest sin of pride committed by satan himself. Do we know when he committed this sin of pride? Wasn't it sometime long before Adam and Eve were even created? If so, then sin did exist, just not in man.
Yeah but Satan is a spiritual being, hell was originally made for the devil and his angels. Adam was made in our physical realm and placed as the head of all the physical creation, when he fell, death entered our physical world. It was a sinner that tempted Eve, so yes Satan had already fallen but he's not originally from our physical dimension, he's a spiritual being. The spiritual angels were there watching and singing as God created our Earth (job 38:1-7), the 3rd heaven where God dwells, the spiritual realm which God is the Head of pre-dates our temporal physical realm which started in Genesis 1:1.
When he said...i will assemble my self over the stars of heaven and i will be like the Most high.
Thank you so much for these clear and comprehensive explanations.
Amen!
I used to be a true believer in science and I can only hope I have sufficiently atoned for my blasphemy to ensure grace for my eternal soul.
Awesome! ❤
The fact that you have been dissuaded from your former atheistic beliefs ___that has you on the right track. Persist! 😊 May I ask whether there was any one thing that caused you to change your stance? Or were there several things?
You front-runner lead us in our struggle with them 😮
Amen. God 🙏 Bless ✝️💛.
We've been here around 6000 years
6000 years ago the first civilisations came to be.
LOL. And your source is a book of fiction.
Ask an astronomer, biologists, physicist, ....
and they will laugh in your face.
A paleo-anthropolist will show you footprint, artefacts and fossils. Even archeology
found stone structures over 10000 yo.
There are stone artifacts that date back a million years. Cave paintings 40000 ya.
@@jacuzzihot How do you know it's that old, were you there ? How do you know their dating methods are reliable ?
People defending the Bible, incorrectly state that dating methods are unrealiable.
Unfortunately, that would throw non-experts and those who regard the Bible teachings as absolute truth off. But there are a number of fields of science that have independent dating methods which mutually all agree, e.g. being able to give an upper and a lower estimate that almost coincide as e.g. the age of the Chicxulub impact. Fossils, artifacts, radiocative and luminescence dating all agree with independent estimates from completely independent estimates from cosmology, meteorites,
***pardon me, a lot more please***
This is so great and reassuring (:
Thank you for posting this video. You must show the world about this and spread it around. More people will become Christian, and christianity might make lots of people quit other religions (:
A huge apocalyptic reset occurred in the “1700s”. The entire world changed, I believe some sort of mud flood is what did it. Up until then we had a different (Christian) society which would be unrecognizable to us today.
Guys, this is how science works. You hypothesize the process from observations. Then you attempt to prove your hypothesis through experiments.
Not According to YEC
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
" Guys, this is how science works. You hypothesize the process from observations. Then you attempt to prove your hypothesis through experiments. "
Not exactly but close, what you do is
Observing something
Create a hypotes to explain it and that predict something yet to be observed
Testing the hypotes with new observation, that is, demonstrate it (you never prove things in science) and check if the predictions can be observed
Then it start to move from hypotes to a scientific theory.
If predictions fails or new observations occur that do not match, you either forget the hypotes or modify it and start over again.
@@miscamisca6775 Thank you doctor details.
Gods word is true
God is a fiction.
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
@@bryanjackson8917 "Because God made it look that way when He created it!" Thanks for the laughter! 😀
Absolutely, unfortunately this guy is doing something he is accusing the scientific community of doing, taking something and extrapolating it out so far that it no longer makes sense. He seems to be a master of this.
How do we even know the Bible or any other book is the true word or god?
What is one meaning of the Hebrew word for “day” that indicates longer periods can be understood?
5 The Hebrew word yohm, translated “day,” can mean different lengths of time. Among the meanings possible, William Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies includes the following: “A day; it is frequently put for time in general, or for a long time; a whole period under consideration . . . Day is also put for a particular season or time when any extraordinary event happens.”1 This last sentence appears to fit the creative “days,” for certainly they were periods when extraordinary events were described as happening. It also allows for periods much longer than 24 hours.
The relationship between gravity, time, and light throws all cosmological dating out the window. We need more polymaths.
Genesis in a way mentions in it's own way that the earth rotates.
In order for day and night to occur the earth rotates.
The earth completes a rotation in 24 hours.
It does not complete a rotation over a long period of time.
If it was long periods of time?
Our days, weeks, months and years would also be long periods of time.
Except that in the creation account it says:
"And evening came and morning went" etc
Further more, you would also have to ignore Exodus 20:9-11
"9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."
@@notsureyou No, at times, he calls just the evening or just the day as being a day, the Hebrew word for day could mean extended periods of time such as the day of Noah. Also the Hebrew word referring to God resting does not refer to a single day but refers to him as actually continuing to rest because each creative day is believed to be at least 7,000 years long. In fact 6,000 years from Adam is about 1976, but we don't know when Eve was created which was decades after Adam. Add in the 1,000 year millennial reign of Christ after Armageddon And that will equal 7,000. So God has been continuing to rest. But for the Israelites, their day of rest was the seventh day of the literal week. It could not possibly have been six 24-hour periods of time. Otherwise that would mean Eve was created on the very same day that Adam was created and that didn't happen. Adam was around for many many years, even decades before Eve was created which is why he became lonely. He also had many years to name things.
@@michaelk3582 "And there was evening and there was morning, the first day"
"And there was evening and there was morning, the second day."
"And there was evening and there was morning, the third day."
"And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day."
"And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day."
"And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day."
Such a good video
Isn't entropy a good point of consideration, much like any creatures lifecycle it begins and over time decays, the universe is most likely the same. It began and is not building up but devolving, the clock is running backwards toward zero not forward to infinity.
Yes, but there are many billions of years before we have to worry about it.
The universe is not breaking down, merely changing
Life is fully compatible with the laws of thermodynamics. Entropy is offset by the harvesting of energy. Tress use sunlght, animal feed.
@jacuzzihot The laws of thermodynamics only applies to closed systems and not biological organisms. This is a poor arguement that tries to deal with the order disorder mantra
@@jacuzzihothow can you input (harvest) energy at a lossless output or at parity with energy generated?
I believe I know why but according to regular thermodynamics in a finate system or more accurately plenum, that should be impossible
Ummm… no. The moon making contact to the earth math you did is wrong. Distance to moon: 238,855 miles (average) Convert to inches: 15,133,852,800 inches. Now divide by 2 inches a year: 15billion / 2 = 7.5 billion. Simple math and you didn’t put that correctly in the video. What else are you misleading us with in the video?
Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old!
Because God made it look that way when He created it.
He is not talking about the moon touching and grinding the earth surface by 0 distance. He is talking about the distance of the moon 2 million years ago will cause destructive ocean waves by that theory.
How does the earths magnetism argument square up with the fact that the magnetism of the earth fluctuates? We aren't using James Hutton's approach here are we?
Title could also have been... "Why Science Cannot prove that we are all living in a computer simulation that has been running for only 5 years" 🤔
Or only been running since you last woke up , ~16 hours old .
@@marklmansfield Exactly!
So you believe in a creator aswell. A step in the right direction
Thank you AIG !!!
Great video!
Learnt alot.🙂
How you have to lie to believe?
Time Is the guesswork of Mankind and his scientists .. who said what the length of an hour is, ? A day , a year , a million years Etc.. ?
A Million years might be a split second in the eyes of the creator .. Mankind ‘Alone’ has interpreted the length of time using his own calculations !
Just as mankind alone has interpreted the meaning of the bible...
Ok I just looked this guy up. Now I know why his word salads are so good. Yea can talk fast and well, presents facts out of context and moves on. Talks about rocks from volcanoes. Doesn’t mention once the relationship of mother daughter materials in that little rant.
This comment tells us nothing.
@@toddduchesne1749it tells you the bloke is not a scientist. Just someone reading another AIG script.
@@toddduchesne1749
Then go find out for yourself.
Other traces are more subtle - the composition of ice in cores drilled in Greenland and Antarctica, or the geochemistry of the shells of single-celled organisms in ocean sediment that can date back hundreds of millions of years. e last few million years and the hothouse climates of 50 or 100 million years ago.
I would like to point out something that about Uniformitarianism, also known as the Doctrine of Uniformity or the Uniformitarian Principle... It is a working THEORY not a scientific LAW. As mentioned in the video, it cannot be proven.
This was a very well presented video, and I thank you for your efforts.
Right on Brother!
I have yet to have anyone give any answers or explanation regarding 2 Peter 3:8.
3 views. One is that He gave us this example for prophetic reasons. Meaning a day is 1000 years and just like God created the Earth in six days he is giving 6000 years of time on this earth before he returns for the 1000 year millennial reign which is also considered a day.
Some take this to mean that each day was 1000 years which would make the earth still only Around 13 thousand years old.
Another view is that “Thousand years is like a day’ is the same thought that is also expressed in Psalm 90:4. “For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.” Thousand years are not long, for God has existed from eternity and will exist until eternity.
@@YoungEarthCreation ... Follow that up with there is no mention of how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden prior to them being cast out. We can presume that it was at least a minimum of 1,000 years due to God resting on His day 7. There is no mention of them having children or if they did what happened to them prior to being cast out. For all we know they could have been in our earth years in the Garden of Eden for 1 million years prior to being cast out. We also need to keep in mind that the calendar we use today is completely different than the ones that were used during the time of Adam and Eve after being cast out. So there could be a huge difference in the time frame of everything as we know it today.
Where does the true earth calendar begin and how was it meant to be read and utilized to determine the seasons, days, weeks, months and years? We do not have that answer and may never have that answer.
It's poetic. It just means that God outlasts man that time has little meaning for God ... That one day is like a thousand years for him because He is timeless.
@@amel2784 ... Put that in terms of Genesis Chapter 1.
@@rispatha Didn't I say I consider it to be poetry? ..... so therefore it falls under poetic license? There is no reason why the poetic language of one book in the Bible has to be drawn into a discussion of historical books in the Bible. When I say it's poetic then I mean that it employs poetic speech or employs poetic license.
Are you aware that many Biblical books and passages (as well as many non-biblical books) are poetic in nature and are neither historical nor to be taken as a strict teaching? In other words, it's not meant to be a mathematical equation.
This is a problem in English. English is not a poetic language. In fact, English is a specialty language that forever strives to describe things with strict veracity. Most every word must have a correspondence in physical reality, described by its size , volume, color or other measurable characteristic.
Have you read poetry in which the language is not to be taken literally, scientifically or historically? If you understand poetry, you understand poetic license. I see no reason to try to force this poetic description of God (that He is not confined by time) into Genesis or any other historical account or document.
In fact, the Hebrew culture and the Hebrew language are far more poetic than most people understand. For example, Hebrew poetry does not rhyme, like English speakers think of. Hebrew poetry relies upon repetition and some other unusual traits that are very foreign to English speakers; therefore, there are several passages in the Bible that cause a stumbling block for English readers. This misunderstanding arises due to unfamiliarity with Hebrew poetry.
It's not a cop out. Some people think that is trying to be shady when we explain things like this. Some people don't like to take into account that the Bible was written by people living in dramatically different cultures, world views, and mores. Yet, it remains pertinent across the centuries and across cultural lines.
14:03 Our magnetic field is not at its least strong now.
The centuries after the Flood, the carbon 14 production was c. 10 times faster.
It's influenced by three magnitudes:
* directly, number of incoming particles (forget which ones, but can look it up)
* directly, energy level of each particle
* inversely, strength of magnetic field.
The same higher income of radioactivity back then also contributed to both lowering of human life spans (that nice curve studied by Dr. Robert Carter), and the ice age.
giggle
@@jockyoung4491 Enjoy the laugh.
You may chuckle, smile etc as well.
When you are done, you tell me what you find strange?
@@hglundahl
Well, there really isn't any evidence demonstrating a global flood occurred, and there's much evidence demonstrating one most definitely did not, so there is that to consider. A global flood would have left geological evidence, biological/ genetic evidence, etc., but there simply isn't any.
@@travisbicklepopsicle NEWSFLASH!! You've been listening to
Secular propaganda, my friend! The very NATURE of the "Fossil
Record," itself, demonstrates a MASSIVE Catastrophic Event once
Took place!
@@travisbicklepopsicle You've been fed a humanist Lie, my
Friend! The very NATURE of the Fossil Record, demonstrates
a once Catastrophic Event, that HURLED Millions of animals
to their death-----Crushing, and preserving them for future generations to Observe.
To be fair, it never says how long Adam and Eve existed in Eden. Adam had enough time to name every living thing before Eve was even formed, that seems like a long time, idk.
The long period orbit comet question is answered by the Oort cloud, a hypothetical structure of objects 1/2 to 1 light year orbiting the sun. It has never been directly observed. A more likely origin is the Kuiper belt, which has been observed and cataloged. There are dozens or icy objects in the Kuiper belt.
The reason for a oort cloud is that the long term comets have their round trip there
And every year the world gets older. The more they find, The more time is needed. It's just like being able to change the answer In the back of the book to fit yours.😅
Typical in human history, honestly, humans want to change everything to fit in their subjective tastes. Like how the Pharaohs in the past constantly tried to erase evidence of other Pharaohs they disagreed with or every record of events that could paint them in any negative light and lived in a constant state of façade.
Humans have always been doing that; it's why so many denominations of Christianity exist because of people twisting something to fit their narrative. Or literally to create lies to spread their worldview and so on.
Heck, there is even an effort to try to discredit the Holocaust... It makes one wonder why men keep trusting men for the truth; we have clearly shown to be unreliable in multiple ways across history.😂
Therein lies the humility of scientific knowledge to grow and improve. Contrast with 'it says so in a 2000 year-old book'...
@@thedubwhisperer2157 I had no idea that people were getting smarter. Looking around I see people having more knowledge but less wisdom. This is why the bible says accurately that the fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom.
A hypothesis is not synonymous with a guess. Major mistake right there.
@@jjw000dw you don’t think I checked to confirm my comment first?
@@jjw000dw "educated guess" doesn't mean the same thing as a guess. Educated means that, when observing something novel or interesting, the first thing you do is go into the body of scientific knowledge and see if anyone else has observed this and explained it. You also get very familiar with all the information around a particular phenomenon, so that you have a solid background of information. You use THAT to produce a hypothesis, and the key to a scientific hypothesis is that it must give you the ability to make testable predictions. It is those predictions that help us design the experiments and sets of observations we need to test our hypothesis.
Very well explained!
Great!
Oh my god this guy actually brought up the 'moon argument'.
Isn't that on AIG's list of 'arguments we think you should not use'??
It may not be on their list anymore, but I'm sure it used to be
Hello again. Discovered that the theory of evolution is not fact yet?
What is wrong with the moon argument?
@@billlebrave8539 It makes calculation based on today's rate of lunar recession being constant when the rate is known to have varied greatly over time. The average rate of recession over the last 4.5 billion years is around half today's rate.
As long as someone doesn't call it out as straw man, then the other examples makes enough sense.
@@ninkstheultimate3376 the *scientific theory* of evolution explains the facts of evolution.
'Biological evolution is the change in inherited traits over successive generations in populations of organisms. Evolutionary modification of traits occurs when variation is introduced into a population by gene mutation or genetic recombination or is removed by natural selection or genetic drift'
-- Science Direct
Evolution is the foundation of biology and genetics. If for some strange reason you don't think evolution is fact, that simply means you don't understand evolution.
'Evolution is the core principle in biology'
-- National Institutes of Health
'Evolutionary Medicine (EM) is a rapidly growing field that uses the principles of evolutionary biology to better understand, prevent and treat disease, and that uses studies of disease to advance basic knowledge in evolutionary biology'
-- National Center for Biotechnology Information
Evolutionary biology is *applied* science, in areas such as agriculture, medicine and more.
Obviously, it's simply comes down to your lack of understanding, that's all. No big deal, you can learn about it if you want to. Plenty of free online resources. PubMed is a good place to check out. There have been millions of scientific papers published on the subject. Evolution is just as much a fact as gravity.