Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,789
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 975:
Line 975: + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to an Old Earth (view source)
Revision as of 01:23, August 27, 2011
, 01:23, August 27, 2011→The variability of the speed of light as a counterexample to relativity requires a 2-billion-year-old universe: A careful, objective scientist would express time in the distant past as a fraction
:::So their entire conceptual framework is flawed, but their findings within a completely flawed framework are valid, only they can't see that their data--which relies on years measured in hard numbers--that gives them the correct findings is fundamentally flawed because of their conceptual framework? [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 21:10, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
:::So their entire conceptual framework is flawed, but their findings within a completely flawed framework are valid, only they can't see that their data--which relies on years measured in hard numbers--that gives them the correct findings is fundamentally flawed because of their conceptual framework? [[User:BrentH|BrentH]] 21:10, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
::::Not their entire conceptual framework, just a specific aspect of it. They interpret various things wrongly to give an implausibly old age for the universe, but otherwise their observations and deductions are fairly sound. It's not all-or-nothing - we can work out which aspects of someone's work are valid and which aren't, rather than just accepting on faith that everything evolutionist scientists say is true. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 21:18, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
::::Not their entire conceptual framework, just a specific aspect of it. They interpret various things wrongly to give an implausibly old age for the universe, but otherwise their observations and deductions are fairly sound. It's not all-or-nothing - we can work out which aspects of someone's work are valid and which aren't, rather than just accepting on faith that everything evolutionist scientists say is true. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 21:18, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
::::In addition to Jcw's insightful observation, note that the "2 billion year" figure is just a way of saying 1/6th the age of the universe. It doesn't mean anything more than that. A careful, objective scientist would express time in the distant past as a fraction of the universe's age, rather than speculating about the number of years.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:23, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
== Groundwater and entropy ==
== Groundwater and entropy ==