@@seanpol9863 not a strawman. Patterns don't have a mind, but they do point to intentionality, design, and a mind.. And btw, laws come from a law-giver.
@@seanpol9863 That wasn't a strawman. It's either because of a mind, or mindless randomness. To put blind faith into amazing chance is akin to betting on a game that you don't even know the rules of.
@@refuse2bdcvd324Patterns and laws in nature don't need a "law-giver"; they arise from the inherent properties of the universe. Gravity doesn't need a deity to function-it's just how mass interacts. The idea that it's either "a mind" or "mindless randomness" is a false choice. Natural processes like evolution and physics aren't random-they're guided by consistent, observable principles. Betting on a game without knowing the rules? That's faith in a god, not science.
@@CelticSpiritsCovenBelieving in scientific explanations isn't blind faith-it's based on evidence, mate. Patterns and natural laws emerge from consistent processes in nature, like gravity or evolution, not a "mind." For example, snowflakes form intricate designs purely through physical forces, not intentionality. And laws, in science, aren't rules handed down-they're descriptions of how the universe behaves, observed and tested over time. It's not randomness; it's cause and effect, mate.
저는 한국에서 방송을 만드는 PD입니다. 창조과학은 정말 정말 귀한 사역이며 성경이 사실이고 진실이라는 것을 증거하는 과학 학문입니다. 이 사명을 하는 모든 분들을 존경합니다. 감사드리며 항상 응원합니다. ★ I am a producer broadcasts in South Korea. Creation science is a truly precious ministry and a scientific discipline that proves that the Bible is factual and truthful. I respect everyone who carries out this mission. Thank you and always support you
정말 불행한 일입니다, 약 2,000년 전 바티칸의 권력 장악: 거짓과 기만이 여전히 당신을 사로잡고 통제하고 있는 것을 봅니다, 한국에서. "신세계 창조론"은 그저 거짓말과 사기일 뿐입니다. 언젠가 당신은 진실을 알게 될지도 모릅니다. 솔직히, 그때는 당신처럼 역사에 대해 완전히 무지할 때 훨씬 더 행복했어요. 어쩌면 "무지함은 행복"이라는 말이 맞을지도 몰라요. 이 경우, 진실은 정말로 아프다.
I've ways thought it odd that secular astronomers claim to know so much about the universe and yet we sit here, seeing things from only our perspective. Sure a satellite made it out past the edge of our solar system but in light of how big the universe is, it is still a very small lense we are seeing through.
We can see light from objects almost as old as the universe itself. The galaxy HD1 was spotted by the HST at an estimated distance of 13.5 billion light years. Just by using parallax alone as measured by the Hipparcos space telescope we can see stars at a distance of 10K parsecs or over 30,000 light years away.
Nobody knows very much about the universe. And if modern scientists are on shaky ground because of the limited ability to examine the cosmos, it also doesnt escape my notice that ancient ppl claiming revelations from invisble beings is even shakier ground by the same logic.
My question is, how are they able to even maintain contact with any probe that far away when my internet fails with a hardwired connection any random day of the week?
@@BmoreGrrrrl Because the expansion of the universe hasn't been consistent you can't say that just because stuff that is 13.5 billion light years away doesn't mean the universe is 13.5 billion years old. That's the equivalent of saying, he must be 60 years old beacuse he lives 60 miles away and it takes a human 1 year to travel 1 mile. (well how did you come up with him moving 1 mile?) Because I just assume its a constant 1:1. Do you see the failure in that model? Because the reality is that human is 30 years old and he used a car to move 60 miles away and he actually did 100% of the moving in the first week of that year and has just lived there since. You can't assume age of the universe based on distances of things.
We can put ourselves as the pinnacle of this universe, but the universe doesn't care whatever we are thinking... it will do whatever natural and physical laws governing it...
If our galaxy was the size of the USA, our sun would be the size of 1/2 a red blood cell. If each galaxy was the size of a grain of rice, and you started filling an Olympic swimming pool, fill it to the brim ( it will take a long time) then fill another 180 swimming pools, and you have the amount of galaxies in the observable universe, and the creator of all that cares what you eat and who you fall in love with? How ludicrous do you want to get?
Thanks to Creation Ministries for your great work in bringing the Truth to people. The knockers like to think that Creationists are idiots while they themselves cannot offer any plausible rebuttal. In these times The Lord told us that there would be scoffers…..
It’s delusion and pseudoscience. You can still be a Christian without ignoring basic well understood science. But you have to assume much of the Bible is not scientifically accurate
A rebuttal for what? Claims made with no evidence?. My claim is that Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall and then Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. There's quite literally no evidence whatsoever of a young earth a young solar system or anything like this. Participate in your delusions if you will I can't stop you.
@@avechristusrex31 not all creationists, but many creationists ignore and deny many, many fields of science, so that does kind of make them willfully ignorant.
@ in my opinion the new discoveries being made through scientific research brings us closer to realising how utterly impossible it is to explain the universe and everything in it by purely naturalistic processes. As a Catholic I am aware of numerous scientifically studied Eucharistic Miracles (not to mention artefacts such as the Shroud of Turin or the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, or the thousands of incorrupt saints etc.). All of these are supernatural phenomena that defy natural processes. In the case of Eucharistic miracles a piece of consecrated bread becomes (there are numerous examples worldwide such as the miracles in Lanciano, Buenos Aires, Santarem and so on) in many cases actual living heart tissue from the left ventricle with AB blood type in all cases (same as the blood type on the shroud). This did not happen by an evolutionary process but rather a supernatural process that science cannot explain. Many creationists are themselves scientists and are well aware of ‘The Science’. However, the supernatural is real and we do not need to limit ourselves to purely natural processes. For example, I believe that God (who operates in the supernatural apart from when He manifested as man in the form of Jesus) created a mature universe which means that we do not need to pour over the issue of distant starlight for example.
"Very delicate ring structures ... which are not consistent with being billions of years old" is like saying those six month old tires are not consistent with that car being thirty years old. Likewise, "Oddball moons orbiting different planets" has nothing to do with the universe's age. That is like saying that because we have all these oddball cars, then cars could not be old. One would expect moon, planet, star and galaxy variations. That is exactly what we find. Short period comets come from the Oort cloud. There is nothing unusual about that. Edit: Short term comets were originally long term comets that got too close to a gas giant. Consequently, their orbits were reduced to short term orbits.
The age of any of this is irrelevant. You and I have a life that is a vapor in terms of time. The world view is one that is an attempt to make sense of things absent from God. The problem with this is that it means something came from nothing. Now, that is also a religion that many cults follow. We try to sound so logical when we defend this belief that there is no God but under the surface glows an imminence of deluded evil. So in that short vapor of your life their view provides the very thing they claim everything came from; nothing.
@@benevolentpercipience9195 its interesting to me how these people believe nothing created everything which is scientifically impossible and after they die they back to their creator which is nothing!
@onementality9781 It doesn't matter how life came to be. There is a deep, profound purpose in life. Life is to live a full life, go, do and explore many new and fascinating things. But above all, we are to do these things with others, to enjoy the simple things in life like a piece of art or music with others.
As you explained the creation of the world at the end I was outside looking at the sky with the beautiful sunshine and clouds and birds singing, and it shows God's love in what He does. It should be obvious to all that there is a creator that loves us, and He wants us all to live forever in a world without sin.
Meanwhile your cat is ripping one of those beautiful singing birds to shreds for dinner. Somewhere else in the world that beautiful sky is a hurricane tearing their lives apart. Also, I was just reading about worms that eat the eyeballs of human children. That same loving creator designed all this loveliness, what a guy.
@teks-kj1nj Note that your argument is actually a _religious_ argument, not a scientific one, since it is about what God supposedly would or would not do rather than about the scientific evidence. It's a common argument, though, and we've answered it here (and elsewhere): → The Attenborough eye-worm argument against God - creation.com/attenborough-eye-worm-argument-against-god
@@creationministriesintl Yes, it is a religious argument. And the answer is unsatisfactory. Who designed the condition of 'the fall' - God. It still comes back to him, at the end of the day, everything is his design. Can't use the fall as a scape goat for god's cruelty, coz that's also god's design and intent.
@@teks-kj1njThe penny has not drioped for you yet. There is evil, ugliness, cruelty, pain, disease, viral life, misery and death purely because of human (and angelic) free-will. God wants true communication with a flock of children of utter righteousness who reject evil... and the only way to win this return to Eden (Goodness, Beauty, kindness, peace, perfect health, perfect animal life, joy, and immortality) is to allow the evil ones who choose humanity (satan) to separate themselves and so be destroyed along with all evil in the day of judgement. This entire creation (since the fall) is merely the first universe and history necessary to find the flock who go to the REAL one - the Eternal Kingdom - the "New Earth" as it is described in the Book of Revelation.
Awesome work! Thanks for your humility and for not allowing yourself to be put to shame. When we know the truth we should not be afraid. Thank the Lord my eyes were opened. I can believe my Bible today without all those unanswered questions. They all stemmed from things the world taught me. The secular world that I knew was lying to me in a few ways. Some things do not make sense in the context of lies and sooner or latter it all falls apart. The truth is forever. It belongs to God. Naturally science would confirm biblical creation! I was so afraid to be let down or confused more. Ministries like yours are so needed today!
The science worldview is the data drives the conclusion. The creationist worldview is the pre-determined conclusion drives the 5% of data they cherry pick and the 95% of data they ignore.
One of my favorite rescue device's. Ort cloud. A imaginary place that's never been seen or detected where comet's come from. Because comet's exist there must be a ort cloud.
@Glop1177 yes icy objects have been observed they are called comet's. That can't last millions of years billions are out of the question. So the ort cloud was fantasized by people who believe in billions of years. Please list when the ort cloud was observed and where it is located because you obviously believe in a lie. Some people believe that the earth is flat. Now prove it.
@stevelever83 science can only be done on things that are seen anything else isn't science but faith. For knowledge you need a historical record. Every living person was given a gift by Jesus Christ. All anyone has to do is accept it.
Yeah, it generally does have to be. The entire complex depends on the stability that is provided by the gravity of all of them acting in concert all at once.
Even Isaac Newton understood that the arrangements of the planets and moons in our solar system could not have come there accidentally, nor could that have happened progressively. It had to be there with precision from the start like the parts of a working clock.
@@pigzcanfly444 Are you kidding us? A clock does not have black holes that will transform and rearrange itself. A clock does not have hydrogen atoms floating inside that will eventually group together and form new clock features. The universe is self-transforming, both in destructive and creative ways. Isaac Newton might have been the smartest guy ever but he lacked the knowledge we have gained since he died. Think about it.
Psalm 19 The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork. 2 Day unto day utters speech, And night unto night reveals knowledge. 3 There is no speech nor language Where their voice is not heard. 4 Their line has gone out through all the earth, And their words to the end of the world. In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoices like a strong man to run its race. 6 Its rising is from one end of heaven, And its circuit to the other end; And there is nothing hidden from its heat.
@@IAMhassentyou-w5m There are a few clues here. A firmament is a glass or crystal dome. The people who wrote this didn’t know anything about the world. The earth has no end because it is a sphere something the writer/s did not know. The sun does not rise from one end of the heaven, obviously. Just more BS claims.
@@FrugalRoo Well you are an odd man to garner the meanings from this sublime scriptute that you mistakenly ascribe to it... to me I see no "flat Earth" - nothing about the word "firmament" strikes me as anything other than beautiful accuracy - and "to the ends of the earth" is a poetic description that I find perfectly clear and understandable without any question... The fact that we call "day" and "night" from our Earthbound perspective makes absolute sense and accuracy - even though, from the perspective of the sun we are still in the first day - the "night" as we see it - being non existent. Our Creator made an exquisite miracle of this existence and made sure that mankind will never understand the secret to the mysteries of His work but to divide us between those who will be thrown into eternal darkness by dint of their own chronic desire to know better than Him (foolishness) and undermine Him - and those whom He built it all for - those who put faith and trust in the sheer najesty of His amazing gift of grace, and thereby are Chosen for His Eternal paradise to come.
@@FrugalRoo Pangaea before the flood. If you know how to put puzzle pieces together, then you can tell that all land mass on earth was once connected. Just more evidence that the people in the bible weren't as stupid as you ignorantly claim they were. We can't even build the pyramids. People outside of your atheist cult religion aren't ignorant people.
Theres an excellent debate between Jimmy Akin and Gideon Lazar on the subject. Both are catholics, both apply scripture, and tradition. One uses scientific evidence and the modern magisterium and the other questions the science and views things from the early church fathers. It’s very good!
Mark Bless you for insights Im wondering when God had cursed earth and man did it include the universe?and do you think God created in the second heavens other species?
Glad you enjoyed the video. Regarding your questions: 1) Yes, the "whole of creation" was affected by the Fall. E.g., see Romans 8:18-25 (especially verse 22) 2) If you're wondering about sentient alien life, then we believe that the answer is a very clear "no". There is simply no space in the Bible, or the Gospel, for sentient alien life. For more explanation, see creation.com/did-god-create-life-on-other-planets
Good observations and reasoning. I especially agree with one particular observation with regards to a young universe, is that evolutionists don't allow for the possibility of the supernatural and rule that completely out, and then draw questionable conclusions around it. Even if the physics don't add up in their expectations. If an old universe of billions of years is a fixed assumption, then the observations can't speak for itself because certain presupositions were taken for granted, and must fit the mold of interpretation.
@@BmoreGrrrrl All I'm basically saying is, science and the supernatural don't need to be mutually exclusive as some suppose, but what if they were compatible instead? To start with the premise and demand that there can't possibly be any supernatural (presupposition), is to come to the scientific table of observations with pre-conditions, which affects the deducted conclusions. And then if the outcomes don't match the expected outcomes based on physics, then speculations to some other unknown cause is not helpful. Especially if a crucial possibility is dismissed because it doesn't fit the popular framework of perception.
@@Heinstein69 Scietific process 101 The null hypothesis (H₀) is a foundational concept in statistics and the scientific method. It is a statement that assumes no effect, relationship, or difference between variables. For example: • In a clinical trial: “The new drug has no effect compared to a placebo.” • In an astrophysical study: “There is no correlation between star formation rates and galaxy size.” It serves as a baseline that researchers aim to test. The goal of experimentation is either to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis, based on evidence. Why Objectivity is Essential Objectivity ensures that the scientific process remains impartial and focused on evidence rather than personal beliefs, biases, or assumptions. The null hypothesis plays a critical role in this by: 1. Establishing a Testable Claim: It defines a clear, falsifiable statement that can be objectively tested. 2. Guiding Methodology: Researchers design experiments to gather unbiased data that either supports or refutes the null hypothesis. 3. Avoiding Bias: It prevents researchers from jumping to conclusions based on subjective beliefs or desired outcomes. For science to remain robust, the null hypothesis must reflect natural, measurable phenomena, free of preconceived notions about the outcome. The Role of Supernatural Confounders Including supernatural explanations (e.g., divine intervention or magic) in scientific experimentation contradicts the core principles of the scientific method for several reasons: 1. Non-Falsifiability: Supernatural claims cannot be tested or disproven using objective evidence. For example, how would one measure or repeatably test the influence of an omnipotent force? 2. Lack of Predictive Power: Scientific hypotheses must generate predictions. Supernatural claims are inherently unpredictable and non-replicable. 3. Undermines Empirical Testing: If the outcome of an experiment can always be attributed to an unobservable, supernatural force, no hypothesis can ever be truly rejected or supported. This halts progress. Why the Scientific Process Would Collapse Science relies on the ability to explore natural phenomena through repeatable experiments and objective measurements. Introducing supernatural confounders would: • Make results subjective, as supernatural forces cannot be independently verified or measured. • Eliminate falsifiability, a core criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience. • Lead to confirmation bias, as researchers could attribute any unexplained result to supernatural causes without seeking natural explanations. For example, if every anomaly in physics were attributed to “supernatural intervention,” advancements like quantum mechanics or relativity would never have emerged. The pursuit of natural explanations is what drives scientific progress. Conclusion The null hypothesis and the scientific method thrive on objectivity, falsifiability, and empirical evidence. Introducing supernatural confounders would replace rigorous inquiry with untestable assumptions, effectively halting the progress of science. Science is designed to study the natural world; once supernatural claims are included, it loses its foundation and becomes indistinguishable from belief or ideology.
@@Heinstein69 he saying out solar system is not that old but the universe is different. That started with big bang or God spoke depending on what side you on
I trust God's word over the word of man. The 6 day creation would have been a miracle of infinite proportion and if he is omnipotent and omnipresent I don't see why this is a problem for some believers. They're listening too much to the world. Better to heed the voice of our Creator.
It's a problem because it contradicts observed reality so most believers either need to confront the fact that the Bible isn't literal or God is a liar.
Lol but in the same verse, gods words claims the (flat) earth has a metal firmament which prevents the waters of heaven from flooding earth ... and also has all the stars, planets and moon stuck in it. You don't believe this, and must be very intellectually dishonest to ignore this.
Things to ponder! Our physical, deteriorating, dying, temporary universe was created by a spiritual God that lives forever. Which domain is actually real? And which, therefore, demands our attention?
If your god lives forever, he would have to start at negative infinity and get to 0 before starting the universe. The problem with negative infinity is that you can't even get to the starting line because you don't can't name its location. Baked into your statement is its own undoing.
@@alexdrake8079 does that mean your position is that the world's astrophysicists, cosmologists, and astronomers have been lying for the past several decades?
@@vashmatrix5769 The current rate of lunar recession has not been constant over time but has varied quite a bit due to plate tectonic movements affecting tidal drag. Even if the 3.8cm/yr was constant that would indicate a distance of the moon 4.5 billions years ago at roughly 40% of the current distance. So what's the problem?
That's incorrect I've done the math the moon would have only been about 40% closer if you use today's rate of recession for all 4.5 billion years of the scientific age of the Earth. That's not a problem.
The main reason for removing Pluto was to avoid having to include dozens and dozens of dwarf planets in our list of solar system planets. Today you would be listing @50 planets to describe our system.
If this man were a genuine scientist, he would publish these claims in peer-reviewed journals and likely become one of the most famous and influential scientists in history. The fact that he is not a renowned scientist and instead makes unfounded claims to audiences who accept them without evidence demonstrates that he is not a serious scientist.
Ah yes… because his peers who are locked into believing an unfounded theory as more factual than physics would be quick to review his findings favorably. Convenient chip to play, but as you have been taught, logically inconsistent.
@@AiDreamscape2364 ohh and what makes you such an expert? Who are you to say that he is not a serious scientist, especially in a scientific society who are already swelled headed egotists and already made up in their minds about science and do not search for the truth about our existence.
It's interesting to note......The Hebrew word for "Day" is "Yom" this can apply to any time period. so if we examined Genesis 1:1 "In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth" This states that they were here before the creative days that allowed life on earth to begin.......The translation of Yom could also mean that the period referred to a "day" in English could also be epochs. Proof of this is found in the next chapter Genesis 2:4 "The is the history of the heavens and the Earth in the time they were created, in the DAY God made the earth and heaven." That lumps all the creative "days" into 1 "day" So we are talking about a literal day. I really enjoyed this video lots of great information I just wanted to present another way to look at it. Does this mean an all powerful creator couldn't create everything in 7 days? No of course not, but examining translation brings a different view that many in the scientific community might not have ever thought about.
I question comets like Hayley’s Comet. The tail is mass torn off from the comet itself. The comet is consuming itself at a fast rate, but there it is every few hundred years…… in millions of years it would have eaten itself
The comet only loses mass when it gets close to the sun, which it only does for a few months once every 4,000 years, and the actual amount of material lost is surprisingly tiny.
@drdarren666 No I'm not just theorising, although I did screw up the periodicity it's about 80 years. Hale Bopp is the one that's on a 4000 year cycle. Nonetheless the point stands the actual amount of mass they lose per aphelion is surprisingly tiny the matter in the tail is incredibly diffuse.
@drdarren666 Well it probably hasn't. Comets don't originate from the inner solar system they come from the kuiper belt it's a region out beyond Neptune. It's like a second asteroid belt, except it's mostly ice not rock. Pluto is a kuiper belt object, and there are a few others big enough to have names. Most don't there's probably millions, billions of them floating out there. Comets that come into the inner solar system are probably the result of collisions out in the kuiper belt something gets knocked off course and starts falling towards the sun. Even the ones that do come close to the sun will last a long time. Hundreds of thousands of years anyway, and the really long period ones like Hale Bopp will probably last millions.
@ Not trolling. More flabbergasted (never thought I would need to use that word) because apparently people are having an unironic discussion about this topic like it’s a real thing. This is Flat Earth level absurdity. But it’s 2024 now, not 1024, so it’s way worse.
@ nope. ( Edit: @7ebr830 ) If what you said was true, then literally anybody, who means to offend us by criticizing what we say, is by your definition a troll. A troll provokes for the purpose of disruption and argument. I pulled that off urban dictionary, which took like three seconds. I’m not interested in trolling. I’m conveying that I’m genuinely baffled that we, with the power of modern science and the massive databases of the internet, are STILL arguing about the old Earth/universe vs a young one like we are still cave men.
"You must start with belief in God or you will most likely come to wrong conclusions." I'm an atheist. Was I wrong to point this out? Someone stated on here: _Dinosaurs fossils are not millions of years old by that time they would have turned into dust._ So I answered with the following: _That's not how fossilisation works._ _Dinosaur fossils aren't just old bones lying around-they've turned to stone over millions of years through a process called permineralisation. Minerals gradually replace the organic material, preserving the shape and structure._ _We also know they're millions of years old because of radiometric dating, which measures the decay of radioactive elements in the rocks surrounding the fossils. Techniques like uranium-lead dating are highly reliable and repeatedly confirm these timeframes. It's solid science, mate, not just guesswork._ How is this the wrong conclusion?
@Faust2Dr everyone velueves something. That belief influences how they see the natural world. If one starts with the wrong belief it will negatively impact how they see the evidence and come to a false conclusion.
@@kevinhenry5749 - you can't really start with the 'wrong' beliefs. You try to understand the world, have theories, test them, and see if they stand up to challenge. If your theories are not open to change as the evidence emerges, then they are prejudices, not beliefs.
@@Ronaldoluiznazario Come on! At least insert the object of the sentence so we know WHO exactly you're calling ignorant. If your calling the people in this video ignorant then shouldn't you point out what sort of information they are missing to show how they don't have a proper argument?? Your comment as is is utterly useless and I'm inclined to think that the author of such a comment is on the contrary ignorant themselves and simply projecting that ignorance onto others.
@Ronaldoluiznazario You can call it asinine, but that doesn't make it actually asinine. You still haven't said anything of substance. And called my comment asinine with zero rationale.
We live in a Holographic Universe. Which gives a 6-day creation viability, but God laid-out a 7-day week. All versions of String Theory dictate that the smallest part of matter is compared to SOUND, and God SPOKE to create, God said, God called, God commanded. And humans made in the image of GOD, also create by speaking; therefore, we must guard our words. Our DNA is a superLANGUAGE. We are made in the image of God. ARMS & LEGS like Jesus Christ, but we are mostly made of water, and the atoms of the H2O molecule are mostly space. Gold is 99.999% SPACE, therefore, humans are 99.999% SPACE with consciousness...like the invisible part of GOD the Holy Spirit is omnipresent consciousness.
@@BmoreGrrrrl to the avatars of a computer game (if we attribute sentience to them for the sake of the illustration), the mechanism by which the programmer "created" their world must seem miraculous, since it is inexplicable in terms of the set of rules that define their digital existence.
Is your translated Bible as accurate as the original? Because, in any case, God said whatever He said in Hebrew. Once you translate any language to another one, it becomes an interpretation, or "adaptation".
The James Webb Space Telescope demonstrates a Mature Creation. Hubble looked into deep space for a prolonged time, but saw nothing, just darkness. But the JWST saw thousands and thousands and thousands of mature galaxies (Scientific journal: NATURE). The discovered galaxies are too large, and as mature as the galaxies closest to earth. Mature disk-shaped large galaxies with smooth arms. This discovery is of a MATURE CREATION!
Even if we say every single factoid was completely true and correct, that would not mean that solar system "Can't Be Old". He even admits this himself at 21:50 so that's not great for the veracity of the title. But bizarrely none of this even really challenges an old universe. The universe has many features that appear old, and some that appear young. Well, the most harmonious explanation for that is that younger features formed more recently or if they are old, there may be certain factors prolonging those phenomena. That is not atheistic, that's just common sense rationality. If my younger cousin is 12, we don't say my whole family can't be more than 12 years old. Saturn's rings might be "only" 400 million years old. So what? That's about 1/10 the time they could have existed in the solar system. We have 4 gas giants. Maybe Jupiter had bigger rings from 2 billion years ago to 1.5 billion years ago (It has small ones now), who knows? It doesn't really point to a younger solar system. Comets have long orbits, and we see new ones all the time. So scientists think there's a big cloud of them far away. Again, that's not exactly shocking, it seems very likely, actually. There's several features in our solar system with unusual spin or atmospheres, sure. How do we know they are unusual? Because usually other planets and features looks old. Now how about a single counter example? No matter what "dark spot" we point Hubble or JW at, we see distant stars and galaxies. Everything we know about physics says these images are of objects that existed billions of years ago and so far away that their light is just now reaching us. If the universe is thousands of years old and God created it, He would have had to create streams of light that look like stars and galaxies that never existed that are only visible to high tech telescopes. Or maybe he created all of it, let it sit for billions of years and the created the solar system young but with a bunch of old looking features. I would think doing something like that would be counter to God's nature, but far be it from me to assume I know that. All I know is this is extremely strong evidence that the universe is old. And that many, many other features of the universe point to it being old. Unless you are dogmatically committed to the young view that's where the preponderance of the evidence clearly leads. Trying to say that it's because the people he's arguing against are committed to naturalism is just a way of dodging the fact that most of the available data suggests the opposite conclusion. This whole video he's appealing to naturalism when it suits his position and then ignoring it when it doesn't. Total Hypocrisy.
@@keepthechange2811 This is sort of a misunderstanding of entropy. Or maybe an oversimplification. In a closed system, high energy states tend toward lower energy states until equilibrium is reached, and no work can be done at equilibrium. However, this isn't "chaos" in the traditional sense. For example. If you have some salt water in a closed system with enough air, eventually the water will evaporate and the salt crystals will coalesce. From a traditional definition, salt water is more chaotic than salt crystals (which tend to be regular cubic crystals), but water vapor is more chaotic. However, the salt crystals will never dissolve again and the water will stay in the air as humidity. There will be sustained "order" in the salt crystals even as entropy goes up from an initially more "chaotic" state. So this isn't "decay" in some deep order-chaos sense, it's just physics at work. In reality, there is often order from chaos as a byproduct of entropy because that is how work gets done.
Got plenty of ways that creation speaks to us, though I won’t comment on a specific timelines But I can tell you the rings of Saturn are constantly replenished via its moons I can’t remember if it’s Gandymeade (spelling?) or maybe Europa but one is constantly spewing geysers of ice Into Saturns gravitational field, add centrifugal force and you have Saturns rings This is also why they’re bright and ‘new’ which is a completely accurate observation
@@censortube3778 No one says the heavenly bodies don't move. It's just that you can't get to them. God created a firmament to sperate the waters from above, no one can get through it, not even satan.
@@poliincredible770 you should look up what evidence means. This is nonsense claims completely devoid of evidence. Even the speaker tells us that it “might” be but never ever provides any evidence.
@@FrugalRoo factual: living organisms are composed of highly encoded genetic information. Comporting with reality: code is always the product of a mind. Testable: the Law of Biogenesis states that life always arises from preexisting life; never from non-living material. That means the origin of life has to be an eternal living source. Verifiable: What do we know from documented history that fits the qualification of an eternal living source? Only God. Falsifiable: reference the famous experiment conducted by Louis Pasteur demonstrating that life cannot arise from non-living material. All your criteria have been met. Please accept Christ.
The earth is not 6000 years old, thats not anti bible. Christian saying 6000 is stopping new people from learning about christ. Stop with flat earth and young earth
"Atmospheres that shouldn't be there"... Based on what empirical evidence? "Delicate ring structure that are not consistent with billions of years old"... Who said the ring structured are "old"? Why should they have to be? You seem so locked, mentally, on an instant creation process that you leave no room for dynamic processes that evolve over time. (Sorry for bringing up the dirty word "evolve". I now it's taboo with you lot...). -But that's a mistake. Everything in the universe evolves all the time. Stars are born, stars burn out. Stars explode. Neutron stars collide. Black holes are formed. And we measure this, practically all the time. And from distances that are far too great to have been formed 6000 years ago.
@@jacob.tudragens No one person has ever seen a mature redwood tree grow from a seed either but we can see redwood trees in all stages of growth. In exactly the same way we can see all stages of star formation with HST images.
Yup all he says is ' I wouldn't expect that ' and ' That shouldn't happen' The universe doesn't care what he 'expects' and what he thinks 'should' happen. Sheese, what ignorance.
You're not listening he explains it in the next scentence. The rings are dimming at a known rate. If they had been around for billions of years it would have been vastly darker, even in millions of years.
Maybe you missed the bit about short lived comets? The lack of theories for how they evolve? Or maybe they are one offs? Makes me think you are starting from an assumption. God as the watchmaker setting off the Big Bang and in God like timescales it all falls into place. That was his point. That’s a God outside of the universe, not the god of Christmas. Happy Christmas!
According to the Bible, in 2 Peter 3:8, it states that "with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day," meaning that in God's perspective, one day can be seen as equivalent to a thousand years; this is interpreted as a way to convey that God is outside of human time constraints and perceives time differently.
I’m certainly willing to acknowledge the possibility of a short term creation, but the thing I notice is that he seems to presume that the way things are is the way they have always been. Rings may form for several reasons. Maybe it is lucky that we exist at the same time they do, but that presumes that they exist so that we can view them. A satellite may become trapped in the orbit of a large body long after the planet itself is formed. They might even go the wrong way. In fact, I would argue that it’s more likely that such a satellite would not move as normal accretion would dictate.
Can you state whats the nonsense instead of saying “this” ? I mean he touched a number of topics it seems you dont want to accept as true. Which shows you probably dont have much schooling yourself. Be honest
Except archaeology and historians have uncovered immense evidence that the bible was factually telling history. Just because you don't like God doesn't mean he doesn't exist.
As concerning the video, which, for the most part, I agree with... there are some points which need clearing up. First, the scriptures do not say that the Earth is 6000 years old. That was interpreted into the narrative. " In a beginning, YEHOVAH created the heavens and the Earth. " Accurate translation from the Hebrew. Does not say how long it took. Then the narrative goes into preparation of the Earth which was previously made. Days are used as time references, yet the scriptures say that a day to YEHOVAH, the creator... is as a thousand years to man. So, it is not a stretch at all to say ok, so he is saying that he spent 6000 years preparing the Earth which he had previously made, and we don't know how long he spent creating the universe. During the sixth day, we had the fall of man, in the middle of the day. 1.5 days later finished out the week. Then the new week begins. This is the pattern of the biblical calendar. Reference book of Jubilees, and Enoch for some of this information. Then, in the book of Adam and Eve, " the word" ( the messiah, YESHUAH, aka Jesus ) said to Adam, after the great five and a half days, I will save you. Later , the word said to Adam, in explanation that "the great five and a half days are five and a half thousand years ". Book of Exodus says regarding the Passover lamb, that " you will select a lamb of the first year, and separate it from the flock for four days prior to the sacrifice. 1.5 plus four equals the five and a half days mentioned previously. It can not make sense any other way. Shalom.
If God created the stars for us (which He did) it would be no problem for Him to make the light from distant stars to reach earth at the same moment He made the star. Simple as that!
Is this guy serious? He must be joking right? He must be trolling everyone who watches him. What's really amazing is that there are actually grown adults who have more than a 3rd grade education who seriously believe this man's BS. Just look at the comments for this video.
@@freedominion7369are you being sarcastic? The concept of God is an unfalsifiable. I implore you not to fall into the trap of "well there you have it, God is unfalsifiable and therefore must exist" I'll give an example The God you know is not the real one, he got fired for drowning a bunch of kids in a flood and was replaced. God 2.0 took over the job immediately and since the new God was also all-powerful, he made sure that Christianity and the Bible still came out identical because he's aware that it's a really good way to brainwash people. So how do you know that your God is the original in this case?
From what I understand the age of the solar system here is being judged by the deterioration that happens. What if the deterioration only started at the fall of man? That is how we understand through scripture what happened on earth. Looking with that perspective the solar system could actually be older than what we think with deterioration only starting 6000 or so years ago.
But no-one says Saturn's rings are billions of years old - what a strawman And why does he thinks the rings are there just for us to observe?,, nutty His whole argument is the typical 'I don't expect that and don't understand' therefore 'god done it'. Jeese, just go look it up, the answers are all readily available. So lazy, or actually more like dishonest, because he knows you won't go look it it up yourself and will just believe what he tells you.
Why do you think the beautiful sky is. NOT there for us to observe. We’re not ants. We’re made in the image of God. As John said, “now are we the sons of God.”
@@margomoore4527 I didn't say the sky, I said Saturn's rings and for millions of years no-one could observe Saturn's rings at all, only till some genius invented the telescope. If it was put there for our viewing pleasure, why can't we see it with the naked eye? Derp.
@@teks-kj1njuse your head a little more... you are exhibiting an astounding lack of imagination! You have been sold a false bill of goods... Your telescopes were/are not unseen surprises by an all-seeing, all powerful God... What you are seeing revealed to you now is precisely what He wants you to see. This universe is not the real one that is His New Creation. All of this is a test. Some of us will be taken to the New Earth which is eternal. Read your Bible and learn.
I have a very simple question for anyone who does not believe in Creation and intelligent design. Why are flowers and even tree leaves so geometrically perfect and beautiful? Don’t tell me it is to attract insects!!!! As someone who bought into Evolution I am now a total Creationist (after 12 years of research). Evolution never even got started because chemical evolution aka abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE!!!! Do your research. Evolution depends on the existence of self replicating life already being there. Adaptation within Kinds is all we see, because of the regulatory networks built into the genome of each kind. Re astronomy maybe someone can explain how we live on a life sustaining planet where the odds of such a planet existing defy mathematical probability. I won’t ask how nothing created everything. That’s too difficult!
@@avechristusrex31 Virtually all multi-celled species exhibit bilateral symmetry or radial symmetry. That's a feature formed by their growth from a single fertilized egg.
Just as there is no salvation in believing in a false doctrine in a secular sense there can be no enlightenment in believing in anything that is false.
That is why Jesus sent us to declare the Gospel, not creation as the saving message of God. There is enough ambiguity in creation that presents itself for interpretation. However the Gospel is short and sweet - the death, burial and resurrection. That's the Gospel.
We know Genesis is not accurate by reading it, it present two different accounts of creation which are mutually exclusive. Genesis appears to be the amalgamation of 3 earlier scripts/stories that are incompatible.. Of course some of those anomalies have been written out of modern versions.
@criticalthinker8007 nothing has been "written out of modern versions" (certainly nothing that the all powerful Holy Spirit hasn't Directed in order to veil what He so desires)- and, no, there are not two contradictory accounts of creation - there are only words (of unequalled precision and power) which paint the factual history of how God created life into consciousness and thereby being - written by the Creator Himself. Perhaps if we all (as clueless fools) could learn to show some respect - consider what all this actually means and stop talking about the absolute miracle of rLife - which none of us know better than Him- we may learn something staggeringly profound... Like that the entire universe - the existence of all we have ever seen or been or ever imagine - remains completely mysterious to ALL mankind except for the ones who have eyes that shine with joy in thr knowledge that they are destined for a place in the "real", far greater creation, still yet to be revealed to the few who pass this test. God Bless.
@@matthewstokes1608 Is that a tad covenant to say what has been written out is only what God decides. How do you account for the different versions of the modern bible. Considering the bible never say it was written or inspired by god, why do you believe it was. Why are you referencing God as a him, Genesis and the bible before the KJV never stated God was male, never assigned the male pronouns to God. Genesis says that in the beginning everything was water and then god created space in the water and land but it also says in the beginning there was nothing but air and god out of nothing created land and water. Those statement contradict each other.
@@criticalthinker8007 "Considering the bible never say it was written or inspired by god, why do you believe it was." You are wrong: 2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
He has studied all of this yet he knows just as much as I do about the solar system. I am no one in this field. And man has no idea when , what , who , where or why... Those are the facts
Do you know every single person who has ever existed and can confirm with scientific evidence that no person has actually known? Or are you just talking about your feelings? You didn't state fact, you stated your feelings.
Imagine trying to describe the entirety of the ocean whilst sitting atop a cliff side and not once ever swimming in the ocean. Imagination tries to compensate for what you don't know and to give you an idea of what is. It's not always accurate but it's fun.
There is literally nothing you could not "explain" by the bible "model". Just say "because god made it so" and we're good. Quite elegant, you don't even need to know any math or physics. Brilliant...
It is brilliant! And observable. Just like the evolution made it so belief. What’s the statistics of that? A lot of maths and physics doesn’t get you very far in non observable science, which is why huge money is put into JWST, Hubble etc.
I understand that there are way to many things that have to happen for this place and us to exist...temperature, fruits and vegetables, wood, water, air, consciousness, animals, Love, salt, sugar, color, smell, pain, soap, taste, etc...million more...And you think believing this was designed is stupid? I say Designer...you say nothingness...lol
@fergusonhr it's called natural processes, natural selection. There's pretty good evidence for how everything on your list works. No God needed to explain any of it. You're asserting an argument from personal incredulity. And I never said nothingness.
Interesting no scientific evidence at all is provided for the remarkable claims in this video, just the narrator's personal incredulity. That and $5.50 will get you a grande latte at Starbucks.
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n No. My scientific evidence can be found in the published peer-reviewed professional scientific literature. This place references no such scientific evidence.
@@jacob.tudragens You can read any of the evidence any time by going to the primary scientific literature. But first you have to want to educate yourself.
The big problem I have when comparing naturalistic explanations with creationist explanations is that the naturalistic explanations are just so much simpler and make so much sense, once one takes the time to understand them. They make God unnecessary.
Naturalist explanations are not just simple, they have been simplified for mass consumption and you are told "the experts say...". But as this video shows, the devil is in the details of what you are not told. You are not told of the evidence for a young earth, young solar system, or young universe. You are not told of all of the fudge factors required to make the Big Bang theory work. You are not told of the difference between experimental science (truth found by repeatable experiments) and historical science (speculations about the past which exclude the eyewitness testimony found in the Bible). Let me give you one example. The Big Bang Theory requires one God sized miracle to be true: cosmic inflation. Cosmologists could not explain why the background radiation, which they believe is leftover from the big bang, is so uniform in every direction because even with 14B years, that is not enough time to achieve that uniformity. So one cosmologist came up with the idea that a very very very short time after the big band, the universe suddely expanded at a rate faster than the speed of light (cosmic inflation), but only for a very very very short period of time, and then its expansion rate was reduced. No one observed this and there is no evidence to confirm this speculation, yet it is a miracle that is required by the big bang theory.
QUESTION: so I keep hearing that the atmosphere of Mars was pretty much blown away by the solar wind because Mars has NO magnetic field to shield Mars from the solar wind and hence is why Mars has such thin atmosphere; then why does Venus that has NO magnetic field to shield it from the solar wind and is so much closer to the sun than Mars and Earth still have such a THICK atmosphere??????? I have NEVER heard anyone ask that question.....
there are 2 hypothesis for the age of Saturns rings: 1. They are relatively new. Or 2. They are as old as Saturn is. The first hypothesis is the more favored hypothesis and the 2nd option is not promoted by 99% of scientists. I believe in a creator also. And I believe his greatest work was creating something from nothing. After that feat, I dont hold him responsible for my failings.
This stuff is laughable. The guy doesn't understand how anything works so he thinks god must have done it. I tell you what... why don't you invite a scientist/astronomer to sit alongside this guy and discuss his "points".
This guy has zero expertise in the topics he is invited to speak on. Zero expertise and zero credibility. Yes someone with a PhD in planetary sciences would be a definite step up. I would listen to this guy (maybe) if he spoke on electromagnetics.
@@HuFlungDung2 , like your fundy hero here I don't know enough about the rings of Saturn to be able to make conclusions about the age of the universe thereupon. My advantage is that I'm honest about it and rely upon people who have actually studied the matter.
As a born again Christian, I respectfully ask, what possible difference does the age of the earth have to do with God's grace and our salvation through Christ Jesus? I would propose nothing at all.
Whats funny is, the yec movement is young, only became popular again in the 1970's after Morris's book ( not a Geologist, and could not get one Christian scientist to back him up) now its a thing again. 😂 but is entertaining to watch how gullible people are.
Make a science point to refute his evidence instead of insulting. Science should be about objective reality and not your snarky attitude which was what caused the leading ASTRONOMERS at the time of Galileo to deny his beliefs.
Jupiters retrograde moons were likely captured not formed when Jupiter formed. Same goes for the other gas giants and Pluto. Creation is not a simpler answer than natural processes it is infinitely more complex. I’m sorry but this is like listening to my 6 year old autistic nephew try to explain astronomy. You are wrong about everything you said.
Which dating method was used to date the tablets and what assumptions did they start with? Look into that please before taking their word for it! Apart from the igneous base rock of Creation , the rest of the rocks formed as a result of catastrophism in a short period of time. Hence we get fossils (including polystrate fossils and rock layers with little to zero signs of erosion on their surfaces (other than between mega sequences). These layers were created during a worldwide flood for which there is endless evidence.
As things degrade in one form or another; the thought of moons colliding and reforming over and over is silly. They are more likely to form one large or be a ring strewn about and growing mire and more spacious pun intended. 😊 The more they disprove our Gods handiwork the more they prove it to be his .
🎬 Get FREE access to the award-winning documentary _Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels_ here: creation.com/49Beah
how about the universe ?
Gemini, the AI, found 13 unique criticisms of the rescuing devices that attempt to answer Maxwell's criticism of the solar nebular theory.
"...how great are your works O Lord! In wisdom you have wrought them all...." Psalm 103
"and He made the stars also"
That is one of my favorite verses.
@@TickedOffPriest same!!
Like every other apologist, he never addresses why there's a universe at all, which is a FAR more important question.
@helpmaboabb I think that God created the universe to be in a relationship.
@@TickedOffPriest Tjis is s pretty desperate answer... as if an omnipotent God needs a finite number of people for a relationship.
@@helpmaboabb God wants Heaven to be filled to the brim, but people reject Him.
The universe declares the glory of God, not mindless randomness.
Saying it's "mindless randomness" is a strawman-science is about uncovering patterns and laws, not chaos.
@@seanpol9863 not a strawman. Patterns don't have a mind, but they do point to intentionality, design, and a mind.. And btw, laws come from a law-giver.
@@seanpol9863 That wasn't a strawman. It's either because of a mind, or mindless randomness. To put blind faith into amazing chance is akin to betting on a game that you don't even know the rules of.
@@refuse2bdcvd324Patterns and laws in nature don't need a "law-giver"; they arise from the inherent properties of the universe. Gravity doesn't need a deity to function-it's just how mass interacts. The idea that it's either "a mind" or "mindless randomness" is a false choice. Natural processes like evolution and physics aren't random-they're guided by consistent, observable principles. Betting on a game without knowing the rules? That's faith in a god, not science.
@@CelticSpiritsCovenBelieving in scientific explanations isn't blind faith-it's based on evidence, mate. Patterns and natural laws emerge from consistent processes in nature, like gravity or evolution, not a "mind." For example, snowflakes form intricate designs purely through physical forces, not intentionality. And laws, in science, aren't rules handed down-they're descriptions of how the universe behaves, observed and tested over time. It's not randomness; it's cause and effect, mate.
저는 한국에서 방송을 만드는 PD입니다.
창조과학은 정말 정말 귀한 사역이며 성경이 사실이고 진실이라는 것을 증거하는 과학 학문입니다.
이 사명을 하는 모든 분들을 존경합니다. 감사드리며 항상 응원합니다. ★
I am a producer broadcasts in South Korea.
Creation science is a truly precious ministry and a scientific discipline that proves that the Bible is factual and truthful.
I respect everyone who carries out this mission. Thank you and always support you
저도 한국에서 있어요. ^^ 지금 포항에서 한동대에서 가르쳐요. 만나서 반가워요.
@ChristensenLow 오오오 반갑습니다. 한동대 교수님이신가요? 와아 한동대 정말 좋아합니다. 존경합니다. 창조과학 활동도 하시나요?
정말 불행한 일입니다, 약 2,000년 전 바티칸의 권력 장악:
거짓과 기만이 여전히 당신을 사로잡고 통제하고 있는 것을 봅니다, 한국에서.
"신세계 창조론"은 그저 거짓말과 사기일 뿐입니다.
언젠가 당신은 진실을 알게 될지도 모릅니다.
솔직히, 그때는 당신처럼 역사에 대해 완전히 무지할 때 훨씬 더 행복했어요.
어쩌면 "무지함은 행복"이라는 말이 맞을지도 몰라요.
이 경우, 진실은 정말로 아프다.
@@_shabah_ 네~저는 한동대 교수예요. 창조과학 활동 안 해요. 그냥 긍굼해요. ^^ 저는 영어 쓰기와 발포 가르쳐요.
It is high time interviewers learn to say "what I'm hearing is," and drop this "so you're saying." Doc said what he said. You heard what you heard.
Amen CMI 🙏 all of creation testifies to the glory of God
and I am a brainwashed zombie ...
Then why don't you put forth the effort to learn some some real science/mathematics so you can begin to understand it??
Completely false. You have absolutely nothing to prove your bible
😂😂😅😂😅😂😅
Nothing is impossible for God
God can't sin.
Except there is no such thing as a supernatural being
@@gryph01 because our existence is random without a creator ?
@traex8325 Why do you think it's random? Why create a dichotomy?
You can use magic to explain anything.
I've ways thought it odd that secular astronomers claim to know so much about the universe and yet we sit here, seeing things from only our perspective. Sure a satellite made it out past the edge of our solar system but in light of how big the universe is, it is still a very small lense we are seeing through.
We can see light from objects almost as old as the universe itself. The galaxy HD1 was spotted by the HST at an estimated distance of 13.5 billion light years. Just by using parallax alone as measured by the Hipparcos space telescope we can see stars at a distance of 10K parsecs or over 30,000 light years away.
@@BmoreGrrrrl That is exactly what I was about to say ;)
Nobody knows very much about the universe. And if modern scientists are on shaky ground because of the limited ability to examine the cosmos, it also doesnt escape my notice that ancient ppl claiming revelations from invisble beings is even shakier ground by the same logic.
My question is, how are they able to even maintain contact with any probe that far away when my internet fails with a hardwired connection any random day of the week?
@@BmoreGrrrrl Because the expansion of the universe hasn't been consistent you can't say that just because stuff that is 13.5 billion light years away doesn't mean the universe is 13.5 billion years old.
That's the equivalent of saying, he must be 60 years old beacuse he lives 60 miles away and it takes a human 1 year to travel 1 mile. (well how did you come up with him moving 1 mile?) Because I just assume its a constant 1:1. Do you see the failure in that model? Because the reality is that human is 30 years old and he used a car to move 60 miles away and he actually did 100% of the moving in the first week of that year and has just lived there since.
You can't assume age of the universe based on distances of things.
Earth is the pinnacle of his created universe and humans are the pinnacle of his creation here on that earth.
If humans are the pinnacle of his creation he must be utterly hopeless.
@@teks-kj1nj
No, that's just you.
We can put ourselves as the pinnacle of this universe, but the universe doesn't care whatever we are thinking... it will do whatever natural and physical laws governing it...
If our galaxy was the size of the USA, our sun would be the size of 1/2 a red blood cell. If each galaxy was the size of a grain of rice, and you started filling an Olympic swimming pool, fill it to the brim ( it will take a long time) then fill another 180 swimming pools, and you have the amount of galaxies in the observable universe, and the creator of all that cares what you eat and who you fall in love with? How ludicrous do you want to get?
@bevanbasson4289
Amazing!
Isn't it?
Thanks to Creation Ministries for your great work in bringing the Truth to people. The knockers like to think that Creationists are idiots while they themselves cannot offer any plausible rebuttal. In these times The Lord told us that there would be scoffers…..
It’s delusion and pseudoscience.
You can still be a Christian without ignoring basic well understood science. But you have to assume much of the Bible is not scientifically accurate
A rebuttal for what? Claims made with no evidence?. My claim is that Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall and then Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. There's quite literally no evidence whatsoever of a young earth a young solar system or anything like this. Participate in your delusions if you will I can't stop you.
Yup, exactly
@@avechristusrex31 not all creationists, but many creationists ignore and deny many, many fields of science, so that does kind of make them willfully ignorant.
@ in my opinion the new discoveries being made through scientific research brings us closer to realising how utterly impossible it is to explain the universe and everything in it by purely naturalistic processes. As a Catholic I am aware of numerous scientifically studied Eucharistic Miracles (not to mention artefacts such as the Shroud of Turin or the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, or the thousands of incorrupt saints etc.). All of these are supernatural phenomena that defy natural processes. In the case of Eucharistic miracles a piece of consecrated bread becomes (there are numerous examples worldwide such as the miracles in Lanciano, Buenos Aires, Santarem and so on) in many cases actual living heart tissue from the left ventricle with AB blood type in all cases (same as the blood type on the shroud). This did not happen by an evolutionary process but rather a supernatural process that science cannot explain.
Many creationists are themselves scientists and are well aware of ‘The Science’. However, the supernatural is real and we do not need to limit ourselves to purely natural processes. For example, I believe that God (who operates in the supernatural apart from when He manifested as man in the form of Jesus) created a mature universe which means that we do not need to pour over the issue of distant starlight for example.
Yay! New episode!!! My new favorite channel!
Mine, too! Their stupidity is so entertaining ❤
"Very delicate ring structures ... which are not consistent with being billions of years old" is like saying those six month old tires are not consistent with that car being thirty years old.
Likewise, "Oddball moons orbiting different planets" has nothing to do with the universe's age. That is like saying that because we have all these oddball cars, then cars could not be old. One would expect moon, planet, star and galaxy variations. That is exactly what we find.
Short period comets come from the Oort cloud. There is nothing unusual about that.
Edit: Short term comets were originally long term comets that got too close to a gas giant. Consequently, their orbits were reduced to short term orbits.
The age of any of this is irrelevant. You and I have a life that is a vapor in terms of time. The world view is one that is an attempt to make sense of things absent from God. The problem with this is that it means something came from nothing. Now, that is also a religion that many cults follow. We try to sound so logical when we defend this belief that there is no God but under the surface glows an imminence of deluded evil. So in that short vapor of your life their view provides the very thing they claim everything came from; nothing.
There is zero evidence of an ort cloud. We’ve proven this theory wrong many times. Please keep your religious beliefs away from science
@@benevolentpercipience9195 its interesting to me how these people believe nothing created everything which is scientifically impossible and after they die they back to their creator which is nothing!
Actually that’s depressing to think about because there is no purpose to life!
@onementality9781 It doesn't matter how life came to be.
There is a deep, profound purpose in life. Life is to live a full life, go, do and explore many new and fascinating things. But above all, we are to do these things with others, to enjoy the simple things in life like a piece of art or music with others.
Great video. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. Hugs from Spain.
I love Bible astronomy
The heavens, We have built them with power. And verily, We are expanding it (Surah Dhariyat:47).
The Bible waswritten in a pre-scientific era why would you call it Bible astronomy? You just projecting your own modern assumptions onto the Bible
What do you know of Biblical astronomy ?
No such thing as bible astronomy, unless you want to count not even knowing that planets are as a win
As you explained the creation of the world at the end I was outside looking at the sky with the beautiful sunshine and clouds and birds singing, and it shows God's love in what He does. It should be obvious to all that there is a creator that loves us, and He wants us all to live forever in a world without sin.
Meanwhile your cat is ripping one of those beautiful singing birds to shreds for dinner.
Somewhere else in the world that beautiful sky is a hurricane tearing their lives apart.
Also, I was just reading about worms that eat the eyeballs of human children.
That same loving creator designed all this loveliness, what a guy.
@teks-kj1nj Note that your argument is actually a _religious_ argument, not a scientific one, since it is about what God supposedly would or would not do rather than about the scientific evidence. It's a common argument, though, and we've answered it here (and elsewhere):
→ The Attenborough eye-worm argument against God - creation.com/attenborough-eye-worm-argument-against-god
@@creationministriesintl
Yes, it is a religious argument.
And the answer is unsatisfactory. Who designed the condition of 'the fall' - God.
It still comes back to him, at the end of the day, everything is his design. Can't use the fall as a scape goat for god's cruelty, coz that's also god's design and intent.
@@teks-kj1njThe penny has not drioped for you yet. There is evil, ugliness, cruelty, pain, disease, viral life, misery and death purely because of human (and angelic) free-will.
God wants true communication with a flock of children of utter righteousness who reject evil... and the only way to win this return to Eden (Goodness, Beauty, kindness, peace, perfect health, perfect animal life, joy, and immortality) is to allow the evil ones who choose humanity (satan) to separate themselves and so be destroyed along with all evil in the day of judgement. This entire creation (since the fall) is merely the first universe and history necessary to find the flock who go to the REAL one - the Eternal Kingdom - the "New Earth" as it is described in the Book of Revelation.
If he loves us why did the Holocaust happen, why do children die of cancer and why do millions die of starvation every year?
Awesome work! Thanks for your humility and for not allowing yourself to be put to shame. When we know the truth we should not be afraid. Thank the Lord my eyes were opened. I can believe my Bible today without all those unanswered questions. They all stemmed from things the world taught me. The secular world that I knew was lying to me in a few ways. Some things do not make sense in the context of lies and sooner or latter it all falls apart. The truth is forever. It belongs to God. Naturally science would confirm biblical creation! I was so afraid to be let down or confused more. Ministries like yours are so needed today!
Universe
Uni = One
Verse = A spoken sentence
✌️
He’s absolutely correct when he says that what they believe about the age of the solar system reflects their worldview,
The science worldview is the data drives the conclusion.
The creationist worldview is the pre-determined conclusion drives the 5% of data they cherry pick and the 95% of data they ignore.
How so? We didn't believe the solar system was billions of years old until after we found evidence for it, not before.
He's describing himself.
🙏✝️💒
God's creation is glorious, indeed 💫
😈👿🤘🦹♂️
@JimHalpert706
Your parody ultimately meaningless, while the truth remains ✝️
@@freedominion7369 sure. Lol
One of my favorite rescue device's. Ort cloud. A imaginary place that's never been seen or detected where comet's come from. Because comet's exist there must be a ort cloud.
@@gordon985 actually the Oort Cloud has been observed, or rather icy objects from it have been. Dozens of them.
@Glop1177 yes icy objects have been observed they are called comet's. That can't last millions of years billions are out of the question. So the ort cloud was fantasized by people who believe in billions of years. Please list when the ort cloud was observed and where it is located because you obviously believe in a lie. Some people believe that the earth is flat. Now prove it.
you mean like God must exist, because we know people exist? Despite God never being seen?
@stevelever83 you think God has never been seen. Even today he's still being seen.
@stevelever83 science can only be done on things that are seen anything else isn't science but faith. For knowledge you need a historical record. Every living person was given a gift by Jesus Christ. All anyone has to do is accept it.
Not every feature of the solar system need be billions of years old.
Yeah, it generally does have to be. The entire complex depends on the stability that is provided by the gravity of all of them acting in concert all at once.
Ok, explain how one came to be.
Even Isaac Newton understood that the arrangements of the planets and moons in our solar system could not have come there accidentally, nor could that have happened progressively. It had to be there with precision from the start like the parts of a working clock.
@@pigzcanfly444 Are you kidding us? A clock does not have black holes that will transform and rearrange itself. A clock does not have hydrogen atoms floating inside that will eventually group together and form new clock features. The universe is self-transforming, both in destructive and creative ways.
Isaac Newton might have been the smartest guy ever but he lacked the knowledge we have gained since he died. Think about it.
Every object in the US must be as old as the US.
❤ simple answer is more likely to be true.
Problem with God is why stars and galaxies and eight or nine planets. What's the point?
I only see a young Solar System.
Based on what evidence?
@@teks-kj1nj
If you don't pay attention to the evidence presented here, why should anyone give you other evidence?
@@jacob.tudragens There was no scientific evidence presented here, just unsupported personal incredulity.
@BmoreGrrrrl
Umm.
You have nothing to back that up.
@@jacob.tudragens The video itself backs me up. It's all just personal incredulity with zero scientific support.
Ever since the so-called “pandemic”, my confidence in the scientific establishment has been completely eroded. ✔️
Psalm 19
The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork. 2 Day unto day utters speech, And night unto night reveals knowledge. 3 There is no speech nor language Where their voice is not heard. 4 Their line has gone out through all the earth, And their words to the end of the world. In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoices like a strong man to run its race. 6 Its rising is from one end of heaven, And its circuit to the other end; And there is nothing hidden from its heat.
Now that is amazing.
Job 9::13 "God will not turn back His anger". Good luck if you've ever angered God just once... His anger will never dissipate.
@@IAMhassentyou-w5m There are a few clues here. A firmament is a glass or crystal dome. The people who wrote this didn’t know anything about the world. The earth has no end because it is a sphere something the writer/s did not know. The sun does not rise from one end of the heaven, obviously. Just more BS claims.
@@FrugalRoo Well you are an odd man to garner the meanings from this sublime scriptute that you mistakenly ascribe to it...
to me I see no "flat Earth" - nothing about the word "firmament" strikes me as anything other than beautiful accuracy - and "to the ends of the earth" is a poetic description that I find perfectly clear and understandable without any question...
The fact that we call "day" and "night" from our Earthbound perspective makes absolute sense and accuracy - even though, from the perspective of the sun we are still in the first day - the "night" as we see it - being non existent.
Our Creator made an exquisite miracle of this existence and made sure that mankind will never understand the secret to the mysteries of His work but to divide us between those who will be thrown into eternal darkness by dint of their own chronic desire to know better than Him (foolishness) and undermine Him - and those whom He built it all for - those who put faith and trust in the sheer najesty of His amazing gift of grace, and thereby are Chosen for His Eternal paradise to come.
@@FrugalRoo Pangaea before the flood. If you know how to put puzzle pieces together, then you can tell that all land mass on earth was once connected. Just more evidence that the people in the bible weren't as stupid as you ignorantly claim they were. We can't even build the pyramids. People outside of your atheist cult religion aren't ignorant people.
Theres an excellent debate between Jimmy Akin and Gideon Lazar on the subject. Both are catholics, both apply scripture, and tradition. One uses scientific evidence and the modern magisterium and the other questions the science and views things from the early church fathers. It’s very good!
Mark Bless you for insights Im wondering when God had cursed earth and man did it include the universe?and do you think God created in the second heavens other species?
Glad you enjoyed the video. Regarding your questions:
1) Yes, the "whole of creation" was affected by the Fall. E.g., see Romans 8:18-25 (especially verse 22)
2) If you're wondering about sentient alien life, then we believe that the answer is a very clear "no". There is simply no space in the Bible, or the Gospel, for sentient alien life. For more explanation, see creation.com/did-god-create-life-on-other-planets
Thank you once more for your incredible eye openers !😮
Pluto is still a planet to me!
Only if god says so.😜
Yes. And, cheerleading should never have been made a sport.
Good observations and reasoning.
I especially agree with one particular observation with regards to a young universe, is that evolutionists don't allow for the possibility of the supernatural and rule that completely out, and then draw questionable conclusions around it. Even if the physics don't add up in their expectations. If an old universe of billions of years is a fixed assumption, then the observations can't speak for itself because certain presupositions were taken for granted, and must fit the mold of interpretation.
As soon as your hypothesis requires supernatural miracles to be correct you've throw out all pretense of it being scientific.
@@BmoreGrrrrl All I'm basically saying is, science and the supernatural don't need to be mutually exclusive as some suppose, but what if they were compatible instead? To start with the premise and demand that there can't possibly be any supernatural (presupposition), is to come to the scientific table of observations with pre-conditions, which affects the deducted conclusions. And then if the outcomes don't match the expected outcomes based on physics, then speculations to some other unknown cause is not helpful. Especially if a crucial possibility is dismissed because it doesn't fit the popular framework of perception.
@@Heinstein69 Scietific process 101
The null hypothesis (H₀) is a foundational concept in statistics and the scientific method. It is a statement that assumes no effect, relationship, or difference between variables. For example:
• In a clinical trial: “The new drug has no effect compared to a placebo.”
• In an astrophysical study: “There is no correlation between star formation rates and galaxy size.”
It serves as a baseline that researchers aim to test. The goal of experimentation is either to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis, based on evidence.
Why Objectivity is Essential
Objectivity ensures that the scientific process remains impartial and focused on evidence rather than personal beliefs, biases, or assumptions. The null hypothesis plays a critical role in this by:
1. Establishing a Testable Claim: It defines a clear, falsifiable statement that can be objectively tested.
2. Guiding Methodology: Researchers design experiments to gather unbiased data that either supports or refutes the null hypothesis.
3. Avoiding Bias: It prevents researchers from jumping to conclusions based on subjective beliefs or desired outcomes.
For science to remain robust, the null hypothesis must reflect natural, measurable phenomena, free of preconceived notions about the outcome.
The Role of Supernatural Confounders
Including supernatural explanations (e.g., divine intervention or magic) in scientific experimentation contradicts the core principles of the scientific method for several reasons:
1. Non-Falsifiability: Supernatural claims cannot be tested or disproven using objective evidence. For example, how would one measure or repeatably test the influence of an omnipotent force?
2. Lack of Predictive Power: Scientific hypotheses must generate predictions. Supernatural claims are inherently unpredictable and non-replicable.
3. Undermines Empirical Testing: If the outcome of an experiment can always be attributed to an unobservable, supernatural force, no hypothesis can ever be truly rejected or supported. This halts progress.
Why the Scientific Process Would Collapse
Science relies on the ability to explore natural phenomena through repeatable experiments and objective measurements. Introducing supernatural confounders would:
• Make results subjective, as supernatural forces cannot be independently verified or measured.
• Eliminate falsifiability, a core criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience.
• Lead to confirmation bias, as researchers could attribute any unexplained result to supernatural causes without seeking natural explanations.
For example, if every anomaly in physics were attributed to “supernatural intervention,” advancements like quantum mechanics or relativity would never have emerged. The pursuit of natural explanations is what drives scientific progress.
Conclusion
The null hypothesis and the scientific method thrive on objectivity, falsifiability, and empirical evidence. Introducing supernatural confounders would replace rigorous inquiry with untestable assumptions, effectively halting the progress of science. Science is designed to study the natural world; once supernatural claims are included, it loses its foundation and becomes indistinguishable from belief or ideology.
@@Heinstein69 he saying out solar system is not that old but the universe is different. That started with big bang or God spoke depending on what side you on
“You can always tell a story… that doesn’t mean the story’s right”
This man in really good at begging the question for 30 minutes
I trust God's word over the word of man. The 6 day creation would have been a miracle of infinite proportion and if he is omnipotent and omnipresent I don't see why this is a problem for some believers. They're listening too much to the world. Better to heed the voice of our Creator.
You’ve never heard the word of god. A man told you he hear it…there’s a problem here.
It's a problem because it contradicts observed reality so most believers either need to confront the fact that the Bible isn't literal or God is a liar.
No. You are too lazy or scared to think.
@@bryanlib137I am in communication with God, personally - there are many of us.
Lol but in the same verse, gods words claims the (flat) earth has a metal firmament which prevents the waters of heaven from flooding earth ... and also has all the stars, planets and moon stuck in it.
You don't believe this, and must be very intellectually dishonest to ignore this.
Great video!
Things to ponder!
Our physical, deteriorating, dying, temporary universe was created by a spiritual God that lives forever.
Which domain is actually real? And which, therefore, demands our attention?
If your god lives forever, he would have to start at negative infinity and get to 0 before starting the universe. The problem with negative infinity is that you can't even get to the starting line because you don't can't name its location. Baked into your statement is its own undoing.
These are pretty amazing research on just our solar system that proves the universe is very young, thanks 🙏
@@alexdrake8079 does that mean your position is that the world's astrophysicists, cosmologists, and astronomers have been lying for the past several decades?
@Mark-h2s I would say they've been lying to us for years buddy
The moon is also moving away & would have been too close for their evolutionism timeline.
Based on what evidence?
@teks-kj1nj Based on how fast it's moving away (if memory serves: about an inch & a half per year).
@@vashmatrix5769 The current rate of lunar recession has not been constant over time but has varied quite a bit due to plate tectonic movements affecting tidal drag. Even if the 3.8cm/yr was constant that would indicate a distance of the moon 4.5 billions years ago at roughly 40% of the current distance. So what's the problem?
That's incorrect I've done the math the moon would have only been about 40% closer if you use today's rate of recession for all 4.5 billion years of the scientific age of the Earth.
That's not a problem.
@@noneyabidness9644 have you ever actually done the math?
The main reason for removing Pluto was to avoid having to include dozens and dozens of dwarf planets in our list of solar system planets. Today you would be listing @50 planets to describe our system.
If this man were a genuine scientist, he would publish these claims in peer-reviewed journals and likely become one of the most famous and influential scientists in history. The fact that he is not a renowned scientist and instead makes unfounded claims to audiences who accept them without evidence demonstrates that he is not a serious scientist.
100% !
Ah yes… because his peers who are locked into believing an unfounded theory as more factual than physics would be quick to review his findings favorably. Convenient chip to play, but as you have been taught, logically inconsistent.
its an echo chamber. He only talks to believers.
@@AiDreamscape2364 ohh and what makes you such an expert? Who are you to say that he is not a serious scientist, especially in a scientific society who are already swelled headed egotists and already made up in their minds about science and do not search for the truth about our existence.
@@AiDreamscape2364 Tell that to Fauci.
It's interesting to note......The Hebrew word for "Day" is "Yom" this can apply to any time period. so if we examined Genesis 1:1 "In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth" This states that they were here before the creative days that allowed life on earth to begin.......The translation of Yom could also mean that the period referred to a "day" in English could also be epochs. Proof of this is found in the next chapter Genesis 2:4 "The is the history of the heavens and the Earth in the time they were created, in the DAY God made the earth and heaven." That lumps all the creative "days" into 1 "day" So we are talking about a literal day.
I really enjoyed this video lots of great information I just wanted to present another way to look at it. Does this mean an all powerful creator couldn't create everything in 7 days? No of course not, but examining translation brings a different view that many in the scientific community might not have ever thought about.
I question comets like Hayley’s Comet. The tail is mass torn off from the comet itself. The comet is consuming itself at a fast rate, but there it is every few hundred years…… in millions of years it would have eaten itself
The comet only loses mass when it gets close to the sun, which it only does for a few months once every 4,000 years, and the actual amount of material lost is surprisingly tiny.
@ r u 100% certain of your statement or just theorising
@drdarren666 No I'm not just theorising, although I did screw up the periodicity it's about 80 years. Hale Bopp is the one that's on a 4000 year cycle. Nonetheless the point stands the actual amount of mass they lose per aphelion is surprisingly tiny the matter in the tail is incredibly diffuse.
@ but billions of year against a 4000 year cycle is insignificant. Assuming the comet has been going for so long.
@drdarren666 Well it probably hasn't. Comets don't originate from the inner solar system they come from the kuiper belt it's a region out beyond Neptune. It's like a second asteroid belt, except it's mostly ice not rock. Pluto is a kuiper belt object, and there are a few others big enough to have names. Most don't there's probably millions, billions of them floating out there. Comets that come into the inner solar system are probably the result of collisions out in the kuiper belt something gets knocked off course and starts falling towards the sun.
Even the ones that do come close to the sun will last a long time. Hundreds of thousands of years anyway, and the really long period ones like Hale Bopp will probably last millions.
All this debris floating around the solar system makes me wonder if the war in heaven was a bit more literal than i thought.
Is this a real channel, as in presented unironically?
I honestly can’t tell if we are being trolled 😂
@@Byorin take a crack at it. Troll back. Debunk it all. It's easy after all.
@ Not trolling.
More flabbergasted (never thought I would need to use that word) because apparently people are having an unironic discussion about this topic like it’s a real thing. This is Flat Earth level absurdity. But it’s 2024 now, not 1024, so it’s way worse.
It would be interesting satire if I didn't know people who would believe this.
@Byorin
A troll uses insult to contest what's been said. An intelligent person uses reasoning. Guess which one you are.
@ nope. ( Edit: @7ebr830 )
If what you said was true, then literally anybody, who means to offend us by criticizing what we say, is by your definition a troll. A troll provokes for the purpose of disruption and argument. I pulled that off urban dictionary, which took like three seconds.
I’m not interested in trolling. I’m conveying that I’m genuinely baffled that we, with the power of modern science and the massive databases of the internet, are STILL arguing about the old Earth/universe vs a young one like we are still cave men.
Dunning Kroger effect at its peak. 🎉
Belief will always affect how one interprets the data. You must start with belief in God or you will most likely come to wrong conclusions.
"You must start with belief in God or you will most likely come to wrong conclusions."
I'm an atheist. Was I wrong to point this out?
Someone stated on here: _Dinosaurs fossils are not millions of years old by that time they would have turned into dust._
So I answered with the following:
_That's not how fossilisation works._
_Dinosaur fossils aren't just old bones lying around-they've turned to stone over millions of years through a process called permineralisation. Minerals gradually replace the organic material, preserving the shape and structure._
_We also know they're millions of years old because of radiometric dating, which measures the decay of radioactive elements in the rocks surrounding the fossils. Techniques like uranium-lead dating are highly reliable and repeatedly confirm these timeframes. It's solid science, mate, not just guesswork._
How is this the wrong conclusion?
Why start with God? Why not start without belief, and see where the evidence takes you?
@Faust2Dr everyone velueves something. That belief influences how they see the natural world. If one starts with the wrong belief it will negatively impact how they see the evidence and come to a false conclusion.
@@kevinhenry5749 - you can't really start with the 'wrong' beliefs. You try to understand the world, have theories, test them, and see if they stand up to challenge. If your theories are not open to change as the evidence emerges, then they are prejudices, not beliefs.
@@Faust2Dr if I start out believing that the moon is made out of cheese, am I wrong?
i learned some of what he's saying from kent hovind... kent was definitely less boring😅 but i did learn more from this guy
Ignorance is running rampant and unimpeded!!
@@Ronaldoluiznazario Come on! At least insert the object of the sentence so we know WHO exactly you're calling ignorant. If your calling the people in this video ignorant then shouldn't you point out what sort of information they are missing to show how they don't have a proper argument?? Your comment as is is utterly useless and I'm inclined to think that the author of such a comment is on the contrary ignorant themselves and simply projecting that ignorance onto others.
@yoshiperspectives4880 ... That's the beauty of the comment, to get asinine comments like yours!!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤡🤡🤡💩💩💩
@Ronaldoluiznazario You can call it asinine, but that doesn't make it actually asinine. You still haven't said anything of substance. And called my comment asinine with zero rationale.
27:30 His model "God created everything with miracles!" doesn't explain a darn thing. It's the worst sort of begging the question fallacy.
We live in a Holographic Universe. Which gives a 6-day creation viability, but God laid-out a 7-day week. All versions of String Theory dictate that the smallest part of matter is compared to SOUND, and God SPOKE to create, God said, God called, God commanded. And humans made in the image of GOD, also create by speaking; therefore, we must guard our words. Our DNA is a superLANGUAGE. We are made in the image of God. ARMS & LEGS like Jesus Christ, but we are mostly made of water, and the atoms of the H2O molecule are mostly space. Gold is 99.999% SPACE, therefore, humans are 99.999% SPACE with consciousness...like the invisible part of GOD the Holy Spirit is omnipresent consciousness.
@@SacredDOVE6893how did God make all the strings vibrate?
@@SacredDOVE6893if we are made in God's image, does that mean that God has feet to walk on a surface, a nose to breathe air and so on.
@@BmoreGrrrrl to the avatars of a computer game (if we attribute sentience to them for the sake of the illustration), the mechanism by which the programmer "created" their world must seem miraculous, since it is inexplicable in terms of the set of rules that define their digital existence.
@@hamobu Did space debree and cosmic rays decide that pain and suffering are bad?
PhD in what? In antiscience?
Trusting in the Bible! God's word is truth.
Is your translated Bible as accurate as the original? Because, in any case, God said whatever He said in Hebrew. Once you translate any language to another one, it becomes an interpretation, or "adaptation".
Written by men.
@@ALEX-KYLE-g9 Yes it’s accurate. Language evolves over time and the Bible absolutely keeps up with it. ‼️ 💯
@@RoyBathamDivinely Inspired
@natarianimationsandmore Hahahahahahahaaha. Got any more jokes ?
The James Webb Space Telescope demonstrates a Mature Creation. Hubble looked into deep space for a prolonged time, but saw nothing, just darkness. But the JWST saw thousands and thousands and thousands of mature galaxies (Scientific journal: NATURE). The discovered galaxies are too large, and as mature as the galaxies closest to earth. Mature disk-shaped large galaxies with smooth arms. This discovery is of a MATURE CREATION!
Yeah you have no idea what that means and neither does anyone else lol
Glad this video was balanced with the overwhelming evidence that the solar system is 4.6 billion years old.
He forgot to mention that 😅
Amazing video! And thanks for bringing it all home at the end praise Jesus merry Christmas everybody!
Even if we say every single factoid was completely true and correct, that would not mean that solar system "Can't Be Old". He even admits this himself at 21:50 so that's not great for the veracity of the title. But bizarrely none of this even really challenges an old universe. The universe has many features that appear old, and some that appear young. Well, the most harmonious explanation for that is that younger features formed more recently or if they are old, there may be certain factors prolonging those phenomena. That is not atheistic, that's just common sense rationality. If my younger cousin is 12, we don't say my whole family can't be more than 12 years old. Saturn's rings might be "only" 400 million years old. So what? That's about 1/10 the time they could have existed in the solar system. We have 4 gas giants. Maybe Jupiter had bigger rings from 2 billion years ago to 1.5 billion years ago (It has small ones now), who knows? It doesn't really point to a younger solar system. Comets have long orbits, and we see new ones all the time. So scientists think there's a big cloud of them far away. Again, that's not exactly shocking, it seems very likely, actually. There's several features in our solar system with unusual spin or atmospheres, sure. How do we know they are unusual? Because usually other planets and features looks old.
Now how about a single counter example? No matter what "dark spot" we point Hubble or JW at, we see distant stars and galaxies. Everything we know about physics says these images are of objects that existed billions of years ago and so far away that their light is just now reaching us. If the universe is thousands of years old and God created it, He would have had to create streams of light that look like stars and galaxies that never existed that are only visible to high tech telescopes. Or maybe he created all of it, let it sit for billions of years and the created the solar system young but with a bunch of old looking features. I would think doing something like that would be counter to God's nature, but far be it from me to assume I know that. All I know is this is extremely strong evidence that the universe is old. And that many, many other features of the universe point to it being old. Unless you are dogmatically committed to the young view that's where the preponderance of the evidence clearly leads. Trying to say that it's because the people he's arguing against are committed to naturalism is just a way of dodging the fact that most of the available data suggests the opposite conclusion. This whole video he's appealing to naturalism when it suits his position and then ignoring it when it doesn't. Total Hypocrisy.
@jsunontheleft Still it's all decaying. Entropy. 2nd law of thermodynamics. Chaos from order. Never order from chaos.
@@keepthechange2811 None of that prevents us from understanding the age of the universe is on the order of billions of years.
@@RicWillies All evidence to the contrary.
@@keepthechange2811 This is sort of a misunderstanding of entropy. Or maybe an oversimplification. In a closed system, high energy states tend toward lower energy states until equilibrium is reached, and no work can be done at equilibrium. However, this isn't "chaos" in the traditional sense. For example. If you have some salt water in a closed system with enough air, eventually the water will evaporate and the salt crystals will coalesce. From a traditional definition, salt water is more chaotic than salt crystals (which tend to be regular cubic crystals), but water vapor is more chaotic. However, the salt crystals will never dissolve again and the water will stay in the air as humidity. There will be sustained "order" in the salt crystals even as entropy goes up from an initially more "chaotic" state. So this isn't "decay" in some deep order-chaos sense, it's just physics at work. In reality, there is often order from chaos as a byproduct of entropy because that is how work gets done.
@jsunontheleft Gonna over simplify again here. Separation of salt from salt water is just that. It is not order from chaos
Got plenty of ways that creation speaks to us, though I won’t comment on a specific timelines
But I can tell you the rings of Saturn are constantly replenished via its moons
I can’t remember if it’s Gandymeade (spelling?) or maybe Europa but one is constantly spewing geysers of ice
Into Saturns gravitational field, add centrifugal force and you have Saturns rings
This is also why they’re bright and ‘new’ which is a completely accurate observation
There is no solar system, only a Firmament.
OK. Mr. Short School Bus.
Amen. This old man doesn't know the truth about creation.
My telescope says otherwise, they have only been around for the last 500 years ...
@@censortube3778 No one says the heavenly bodies don't move. It's just that you can't get to them. God created a firmament to sperate the waters from above, no one can get through it, not even satan.
@@larrybarela8676 How is life in the rubber room?
The Dunning Kruger is strong af with this one
We are blessed to have such an abundance of evidence that we were created!
@@poliincredible770 you should look up what evidence means. This is nonsense claims completely devoid of evidence. Even the speaker tells us that it “might” be but never ever provides any evidence.
@@FrugalRoo what evidence would you accept?
@@poliincredible770, factual, comporting to reality, testable, verifiable and falsifiable.
@@FrugalRoo factual: living organisms are composed of highly encoded genetic information.
Comporting with reality: code is always the product of a mind.
Testable: the Law of Biogenesis states that life always arises from preexisting life; never from non-living material. That means the origin of life has to be an eternal living source.
Verifiable: What do we know from documented history that fits the qualification of an eternal living source? Only God.
Falsifiable: reference the famous experiment conducted by Louis Pasteur demonstrating that life cannot arise from non-living material.
All your criteria have been met. Please accept Christ.
@@FrugalRoo factual: living organisms are composed of highly encoded genetic information. Code is always the product of a mind.
The earth is not 6000 years old, thats not anti bible. Christian saying 6000 is stopping new people from learning about christ. Stop with flat earth and young earth
Amen!
"Atmospheres that shouldn't be there"... Based on what empirical evidence?
"Delicate ring structure that are not consistent with billions of years old"... Who said the ring structured are "old"? Why should they have to be? You seem so locked, mentally, on an instant creation process that you leave no room for dynamic processes that evolve over time. (Sorry for bringing up the dirty word "evolve". I now it's taboo with you lot...).
-But that's a mistake. Everything in the universe evolves all the time. Stars are born, stars burn out. Stars explode. Neutron stars collide. Black holes are formed. And we measure this, practically all the time. And from distances that are far too great to have been formed 6000 years ago.
We've never seen a star form.
@@jacob.tudragens No one person has ever seen a mature redwood tree grow from a seed either but we can see redwood trees in all stages of growth. In exactly the same way we can see all stages of star formation with HST images.
Yup all he says is ' I wouldn't expect that ' and ' That shouldn't happen'
The universe doesn't care what he 'expects' and what he thinks 'should' happen. Sheese, what ignorance.
You're not listening he explains it in the next scentence. The rings are dimming at a known rate. If they had been around for billions of years it would have been vastly darker, even in millions of years.
Maybe you missed the bit about short lived comets? The lack of theories for how they evolve? Or maybe they are one offs? Makes me think you are starting from an assumption. God as the watchmaker setting off the Big Bang and in God like timescales it all falls into place. That was his point. That’s a God outside of the universe, not the god of Christmas. Happy Christmas!
According to the Bible, in 2 Peter 3:8, it states that "with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day," meaning that in God's perspective, one day can be seen as equivalent to a thousand years; this is interpreted as a way to convey that God is outside of human time constraints and perceives time differently.
If that's the case then to God it's only been 2 days since Jesus walked the earth. We've got plenty of time to work things out.
God is our Creator and was there at creation. We were not. Humans are not more informed or intelligent than an Almighty God.
Who created God?
@emarkc1 God doesn't need creating
I’m certainly willing to acknowledge the possibility of a short term creation, but the thing I notice is that he seems to presume that the way things are is the way they have always been. Rings may form for several reasons. Maybe it is lucky that we exist at the same time they do, but that presumes that they exist so that we can view them. A satellite may become trapped in the orbit of a large body long after the planet itself is formed. They might even go the wrong way. In fact, I would argue that it’s more likely that such a satellite would not move as normal accretion would dictate.
Please keep this non sense away from our schools.
The fool..in His heart....declares there is no God...psalms 14:1
Can you state whats the nonsense instead of saying “this” ? I mean he touched a number of topics it seems you dont want to accept as true. Which shows you probably dont have much schooling yourself. Be honest
Your Answer is 50/50.
It is nice to say I don't know.
Nice paradox.
I believe in Father of modern Science.❤😊
The Bible...any version...is not historically accurate but is a collection of folktales.
Except archaeology and historians have uncovered immense evidence that the bible was factually telling history. Just because you don't like God doesn't mean he doesn't exist.
As concerning the video, which, for the most part, I agree with... there are some points which need clearing up. First, the scriptures do not say that the Earth is 6000 years old. That was interpreted into the narrative. " In a beginning, YEHOVAH created the heavens and the Earth. " Accurate translation from the Hebrew. Does not say how long it took. Then the narrative goes into preparation of the Earth which was previously made. Days are used as time references, yet the scriptures say that a day to YEHOVAH, the creator... is as a thousand years to man. So, it is not a stretch at all to say ok, so he is saying that he spent 6000 years preparing the Earth which he had previously made, and we don't know how long he spent creating the universe. During the sixth day, we had the fall of man, in the middle of the day. 1.5 days later finished out the week. Then the new week begins. This is the pattern of the biblical calendar. Reference book of Jubilees, and Enoch for some of this information. Then, in the book of Adam and Eve, " the word" ( the messiah, YESHUAH, aka Jesus ) said to Adam, after the great five and a half days, I will save you. Later , the word said to Adam, in explanation that "the great five and a half days are five and a half thousand years ". Book of Exodus says regarding the Passover lamb, that " you will select a lamb of the first year, and separate it from the flock for four days prior to the sacrifice. 1.5 plus four equals the five and a half days mentioned previously. It can not make sense any other way. Shalom.
another funny evidence Yahweh put there to poke fun at atheism i bet.
The surprising strengths of Mercury's magnetic field - if Mercury - a solid core planet - still has a magnetic field, it can't be very old.
How can you be a young creationist period, it takes light forever to reach us and its almost too easy to debunk this young earth nonsense.
If God created the stars for us (which He did) it would be no problem for Him to make the light from distant stars to reach earth at the same moment He made the star. Simple as that!
@billbernard4261 You don't even know if it's even possible for a god to exist. you guys are just making bold face assertions.
The Bible tells us that the proof for God is in the stars. Gee, who would have thought?
Is this guy serious? He must be joking right? He must be trolling everyone who watches him. What's really amazing is that there are actually grown adults who have more than a 3rd grade education who seriously believe this man's BS. Just look at the comments for this video.
"Ooh, I'm gonna throw a tantrum laced with mockery. No science. No evidence. Just anger."
@@rudolphschmitler725 This video contains no science. Why should a reply be different?
Education is irrelevant - the Bible is preeminent. I don't know why they bother with a worldly education if they will ultimately disregard it.
This is horrlible misinformation
1) Where's your counterargument?
2) Disprove God, please
@@freedominion7369are you being sarcastic? The concept of God is an unfalsifiable. I implore you not to fall into the trap of "well there you have it, God is unfalsifiable and therefore must exist"
I'll give an example
The God you know is not the real one, he got fired for drowning a bunch of kids in a flood and was replaced.
God 2.0 took over the job immediately and since the new God was also all-powerful, he made sure that Christianity and the Bible still came out identical because he's aware that it's a really good way to brainwash people.
So how do you know that your God is the original in this case?
From what I understand the age of the solar system here is being judged by the deterioration that happens.
What if the deterioration only started at the fall of man? That is how we understand through scripture what happened on earth. Looking with that perspective the solar system could actually be older than what we think with deterioration only starting 6000 or so years ago.
But no-one says Saturn's rings are billions of years old - what a strawman
And why does he thinks the rings are there just for us to observe?,, nutty
His whole argument is the typical 'I don't expect that and don't understand' therefore 'god done it'.
Jeese, just go look it up, the answers are all readily available. So lazy, or actually more like dishonest, because he knows you won't go look it it up yourself and will just believe what he tells you.
Why do you think the beautiful sky is. NOT there for us to observe. We’re not ants. We’re made in the image of God. As John said, “now are we the sons of God.”
@@margomoore4527 I didn't say the sky, I said Saturn's rings and for millions of years no-one could observe Saturn's rings at all, only till some genius invented the telescope.
If it was put there for our viewing pleasure, why can't we see it with the naked eye? Derp.
@@teks-kj1njuse your head a little more... you are exhibiting an astounding lack of imagination! You have been sold a false bill of goods... Your telescopes were/are not unseen surprises by an all-seeing, all powerful God... What you are seeing revealed to you now is precisely what He wants you to see.
This universe is not the real one that is His New Creation. All of this is a test.
Some of us will be taken to the New Earth which is eternal.
Read your Bible and learn.
I have a very simple question for anyone who does not believe in Creation and intelligent design. Why are flowers and even tree leaves so geometrically perfect and beautiful? Don’t tell me it is to attract insects!!!! As someone who bought into Evolution I am now a total Creationist (after 12 years of research). Evolution never even got started because chemical evolution aka abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE!!!! Do your research. Evolution depends on the existence of self replicating life already being there. Adaptation within Kinds is all we see, because of the regulatory networks built into the genome of each kind.
Re astronomy maybe someone can explain how we live on a life sustaining planet where the odds of such a planet existing defy mathematical probability. I won’t ask how nothing created everything. That’s too difficult!
@@avechristusrex31 Virtually all multi-celled species exhibit bilateral symmetry or radial symmetry. That's a feature formed by their growth from a single fertilized egg.
Just as there is no salvation in believing in a false doctrine in a secular sense there can be no enlightenment in believing in anything that is false.
That is why Jesus sent us to declare the Gospel, not creation as the saving message of God. There is enough ambiguity in creation that presents itself for interpretation. However the Gospel is short and sweet - the death, burial and resurrection. That's the Gospel.
1 day can be as 1000 days to God and 1000 days as one day... We have all we need to know in Genesis.
He created a mature world.
The Bible is HIStory.
We know Genesis is not accurate by reading it, it present two different accounts of creation which are mutually exclusive. Genesis appears to be the amalgamation of 3 earlier scripts/stories that are incompatible.. Of course some of those anomalies have been written out of modern versions.
@criticalthinker8007 nothing has been "written out of modern versions" (certainly nothing that the all powerful Holy Spirit hasn't Directed in order to veil what He so desires)- and, no, there are not two contradictory accounts of creation - there are only words (of unequalled precision and power) which paint the factual history of how God created life into consciousness and thereby being - written by the Creator Himself.
Perhaps if we all (as clueless fools) could learn to show some respect - consider what all this actually means and stop talking about the absolute miracle of rLife - which none of us know better than Him- we may learn something staggeringly profound... Like that the entire universe - the existence of all we have ever seen or been or ever imagine - remains completely mysterious to ALL mankind except for the ones who have eyes that shine with joy in thr knowledge that they are destined for a place in the "real", far greater creation, still yet to be revealed to the few who pass this test.
God Bless.
@@matthewstokes1608 Is that a tad covenant to say what has been written out is only what God decides. How do you account for the different versions of the modern bible.
Considering the bible never say it was written or inspired by god, why do you believe it was.
Why are you referencing God as a him, Genesis and the bible before the KJV never stated God was male, never assigned the male pronouns to God.
Genesis says that in the beginning everything was water and then god created space in the water and land but it also says in the beginning there was nothing but air and god out of nothing created land and water. Those statement contradict each other.
@@criticalthinker8007
"Considering the bible never say it was written or inspired by god, why do you believe it was." You are wrong:
2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
He has studied all of this yet he knows just as much as I do about the solar system.
I am no one in this field. And man has no idea when , what , who , where or why...
Those are the facts
Do you know every single person who has ever existed and can confirm with scientific evidence that no person has actually known? Or are you just talking about your feelings? You didn't state fact, you stated your feelings.
With a degree in electromagnetics, it gave him the knowledge to electromagnet his brain.
Imagine trying to describe the entirety of the ocean whilst sitting atop a cliff side and not once ever swimming in the ocean. Imagination tries to compensate for what you don't know and to give you an idea of what is. It's not always accurate but it's fun.
There is literally nothing you could not "explain" by the bible "model". Just say "because god made it so" and we're good. Quite elegant, you don't even need to know any math or physics. Brilliant...
It is brilliant! And observable. Just like the evolution made it so belief. What’s the statistics of that? A lot of maths and physics doesn’t get you very far in non observable science, which is why huge money is put into JWST, Hubble etc.
so how old is the solar system in your opinion ?
I don't understand cosmology. Therefore, it was created by God. Brilliant!
I understand that there are way to many things that have to happen for this place and us to exist...temperature, fruits and vegetables, wood, water, air, consciousness, animals, Love, salt, sugar, color, smell, pain, soap, taste, etc...million more...And you think believing this was designed is stupid? I say Designer...you say nothingness...lol
Misunderstanding of theology ~ meaningless atheism
@fergusonhr it's called natural processes, natural selection. There's pretty good evidence for how everything on your list works. No God needed to explain any of it. You're asserting an argument from personal incredulity. And I never said nothingness.
@@mabus999
1) Who set up the laws of 'how everything works'?
2) Who gave you life?
@freedominion7369 atheism is someone who is not convinced there is a god. No misunderstanding. Just not convinced.
Many arguments point to a solar system that is older than 6000 years.
Interesting no scientific evidence at all is provided for the remarkable claims in this video, just the narrator's personal incredulity. That and $5.50 will get you a grande latte at Starbucks.
is this like your scientific evidence or whatever?
@@Dulc3B00kbyBrant0n No. My scientific evidence can be found in the published peer-reviewed professional scientific literature. This place references no such scientific evidence.
@@BmoreGrrrrl
It's funny how you never actually present any evidence yourself.
@@jacob.tudragens You can read any of the evidence any time by going to the primary scientific literature. But first you have to want to educate yourself.
You talking about your never ending forever changing error of evolution, or just lying again, or passing gas??
The big problem I have when comparing naturalistic explanations with creationist explanations is that the naturalistic explanations are just so much simpler and make so much sense, once one takes the time to understand them. They make God unnecessary.
Naturalist explanations are not just simple, they have been simplified for mass consumption and you are told "the experts say...". But as this video shows, the devil is in the details of what you are not told. You are not told of the evidence for a young earth, young solar system, or young universe. You are not told of all of the fudge factors required to make the Big Bang theory work. You are not told of the difference between experimental science (truth found by repeatable experiments) and historical science (speculations about the past which exclude the eyewitness testimony found in the Bible). Let me give you one example. The Big Bang Theory requires one God sized miracle to be true: cosmic inflation. Cosmologists could not explain why the background radiation, which they believe is leftover from the big bang, is so uniform in every direction because even with 14B years, that is not enough time to achieve that uniformity. So one cosmologist came up with the idea that a very very very short time after the big band, the universe suddely expanded at a rate faster than the speed of light (cosmic inflation), but only for a very very very short period of time, and then its expansion rate was reduced. No one observed this and there is no evidence to confirm this speculation, yet it is a miracle that is required by the big bang theory.
QUESTION: so I keep hearing that the atmosphere of Mars was pretty much blown away by the solar wind because Mars has NO magnetic field to shield Mars from the solar wind and hence is why Mars has such thin atmosphere; then why does Venus that has NO magnetic field to shield it from the solar wind and is so much closer to the sun than Mars and Earth still have such a THICK atmosphere??????? I have NEVER heard anyone ask that question.....
Pseudo science
Science is limited, God is true
✝️ Hallelujah
there are 2 hypothesis for the age of Saturns rings: 1. They are relatively new. Or 2. They are as old as Saturn is. The first hypothesis is the more favored hypothesis and the 2nd option is not promoted by 99% of scientists.
I believe in a creator also. And I believe his greatest work was creating something from nothing. After that feat, I dont hold him responsible for my failings.
This stuff is laughable. The guy doesn't understand how anything works so he thinks god must have done it. I tell you what... why don't you invite a scientist/astronomer to sit alongside this guy and discuss his "points".
This guy has zero expertise in the topics he is invited to speak on. Zero expertise and zero credibility. Yes someone with a PhD in planetary sciences would be a definite step up. I would listen to this guy (maybe) if he spoke on electromagnetics.
Start up a TH-cam channel and enlighten us. You'll discover that don't know what you've been spoon-fed all your life.
@@HuFlungDung2 , like your fundy hero here I don't know enough about the rings of Saturn to be able to make conclusions about the age of the universe thereupon. My advantage is that I'm honest about it and rely upon people who have actually studied the matter.
As a born again Christian, I respectfully ask, what possible difference does the age of the earth have to do with God's grace and our salvation through Christ Jesus? I would propose nothing at all.
Whats funny is, the yec movement is young, only became popular again in the 1970's after Morris's book ( not a Geologist, and could not get one Christian scientist to back him up) now its a thing again. 😂 but is entertaining to watch how gullible people are.
@@bevanbasson4289 untrue. The question of a "young earth" is discussed in some of the earliest writings of Christianity. (Augustine, etc)
Make a science point to refute his evidence instead of insulting. Science should be about objective reality and not your snarky attitude which was what caused the leading ASTRONOMERS at the time of Galileo to deny his beliefs.
The moon of Pluto (charon) is actually pronounced keh-ruhn. Or Karen.
This guy is just straight up lying to everyone.
"facts I don't like are lies!"
Gotcha.
So why don't you prove it?
@@noneyabidness9644 no, more like people who mislead their audience are liars.
I don't like liars. Do you?
@@Glop1177
You are misleading your audience.
Makes you a liar, I guess!😉
@Glop1177 I don't, which is exactly why I am challenging your statements of faith. He's stated numerous facts. Which ones are lies?
Jupiters retrograde moons were likely captured not formed when Jupiter formed. Same goes for the other gas giants and Pluto. Creation is not a simpler answer than natural processes it is infinitely more complex. I’m sorry but this is like listening to my 6 year old autistic nephew try to explain astronomy. You are wrong about everything you said.
This guy is off base in reality. Ancient tablets were made 200,000 yrs ago. Bam there goes your 6000 yr theories.
Correction: Some atheists THEORIZED that "ancient tablets" were made 200k years ago-mistakenly, of course.
😅😅😅😅
Your a bit thick
Which dating method was used to date the tablets and what assumptions did they start with? Look into that please before taking their word for it! Apart from the igneous base rock of Creation , the rest of the rocks formed as a result of catastrophism in a short period of time. Hence we get fossils (including polystrate fossils and rock layers with little to zero signs of erosion on their surfaces (other than between mega sequences). These layers were created during a worldwide flood for which there is endless evidence.
Say what you want 7000 years old is still old as time! 😂😂😂
As things degrade in one form or another; the thought of moons colliding and reforming over and over is silly. They are more likely to form one large or be a ring strewn about and growing mire and more spacious pun intended. 😊 The more they disprove our Gods handiwork the more they prove it to be his .
Willful ignorance