From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

It has been pointed out that since YEC doesn't even adequately explain how the light from distant galaxies is supposed to have reached the Earth in less than 10,000 years, any criticism Creationists make of conventional theories is rather moot.

This is a non-sensical statement. A criticism of one theory is not rendered moot by the inability of the critics to provide a comprehensive alternative theory. The criticism remains valid -- it is just equally applicable to both theories. Just because I can't explain how life came from non-life doesn't mean my criticisms of another theory are no good. It means that we need to all admit that we just don't know.
Besides that, creationists can easily provide an explanation for the light "problem" -- that the universe is older than 10k years, but the Earth was made habitable 10k years ago.
Is it appropriate to provide a rebuttal to this nonsensical "criticism?" Ungtss 19:23, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

Your rebuttal goes against biblical literalism: if the universe was created in 7 24-hour days, yet the stars are older than 6,000 years... one of those days was very, very long, then.-AmesGyo! 19:25, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

there are two parts to the rebuttal -- the first goes to logic, not literalism. the second goes against strict innerancy and literalism, but not the substance of Genesis, nor creationism as a whole. a scientific creationism must be committed to truth, not text. Ungtss 19:30, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

I mean, I agree with you, but then doesn't a scientific creationism abandon the young earth thing altogether?-AmesGyo! 19:32, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

if there were facts to support the abandonment ... Ungtss 19:36, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

No critisism allowed?! And this tries to be an "encyclopedia"... --Aulis Eskola 20:26, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

Conservative viewpoint

As a person with many conservative tendencies and views, I am dismayed at the quality of this article. That the first (and only) major section deals with the YEC view is not representative of most conservatives' views. If Conservapedia is for the consumption of YEC conservatives only then I suppose that's fair. But that's very restricting as it's only a small minority of conservatives. This article should present the facts that we know for sure about galaxies, then and only then talk about the theological positions of a minority of conservatives. i.e. YEC. You are simply ensuring that most conservatives won't take this site seriously. Ajkgordon 13:05, 20 September 2007 (EDT)

  • You are an editor, no? Do you have cited facts and links to add to any content you add? Please feel free to add content, but please do other editors, who might believe differently than you or I, the courtesy of not removing the YEC content without discussion. Fair enough? --şŷŝôρ-₮KṢρёаќǃ 07:59, 21 September 2007 (EDT)
Well, yes, I am an editor but a) I'm new here and b) I'm no expert. The Earth article is a much better example of an article that includes YEC viewpoints but balances it with both OEC and mainstream science all the while keeping the conservative Christian POV (although some of the claims for YEC about the flat-earth look doubtful in their veracity. I've never met a YEC who believes the earth is flat!) I have made a couple of minor changes in the opening paragraph but do not feel qualified to expand it as I think it should be. The article as it currently stands is easily dismissed by many reasonable conservative Christians as unprofessional and could well bring Conservapedia into disrepute. I would strongly recommend that experts add to the article. Ajkgordon 08:57, 21 September 2007 (EDT)

The light from other stars and galaxies "problem"

Quite simple really. God created the light from the stars as he created the stars themselves. I do not want to second guess our Creator, but it seems absurd for him to make the nearest star but not let Adam and Eve see it until four years later (the time it takes the light to travel). Was the sky of Eden at night empty except for the moon? No, I believe God created the light from the stars and galaxies, already in transit toward us, so that our appreciation of the splendour of His creation would not have to wait for years or thousands or millions of years.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years,

15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth. And it was so.

Genesis 1 (NIV)--TruthOfChrist 07:58, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

See Starlight problem, in particular the section titled Light created in transit. Philip J. Rayment 08:37, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
Thanks! I'm still finding my way around Conservapedia, good to have someone signpost things for me --TruthOfChrist 09:04, 21 October 2008 (EDT)