1. Dr Berry

    I have great regard for your good will, and credentials as a scientist … but the notion that a coupla blips on a screen, somehow "proves" anything, is worse than ridiculous. It's nothing but surmise upon surmise, then a few more surmises, just for good measure

    "Black hole"? that's a faith-based concept, if there ever was one

    it takes a lot more faith to believe in what anti-christ scientists hold sacred, than it does, to believe in the God who speaks to us through the Bible about His handiwork. His Word does not say the planet is only 6000 years old. What it does say, is : there's been almost 6000 years passed until today, since God placed the first man of the Adamic race on this planet. See the difference?

    1. I do know the Bible names names that are right on the money. The table of nations is another example of how accurate this book is..

  2. Dear Gordon, The interpretation of the "coupla blips" is based upon several hundred years of proven science. It may sound far out to a non-physicist but physicists do understand what they are doing very well. If it were as unknown as you suggest, then we would have no nuclear reactors, no nuclear bombs, no GPS positioning (which use calculations based on Einstein's relativity), no lasers, no internet, no cell phones, no satellites, etc.

    In other words, the interpretations are solid. Einstein's general theory of relativity predicted black holes some 70 years before they were observed. It is all part of the equations. Dr. Freidwart Winterberg, top student of Heisenberg, taught me Einstein's general relativity at the U of Nevada.

    I understand your difference. I address the very conservative evangelical folks I know who believe God made the heavens and earth 6000 years ago. Their belief contradicts everything we know about our world.

    The alternative you suggest also has problems. The Native Americans came across the Bering land bridge some 15,000 years ago. That precedes Adam by 9000 years. The dating is supported and confirmed by geology, physics, and DNA. We have ice cores that date the ice ages and the time the Bering land bridge flooded. All these show the 15,000 years or so is accurate. We humans have DNA that proves our ancestors intermarried with Neanderthals. We can easily trace our ancestors back 30,000 years.

    The bottom line is you and anyone else can believe what you wish. But you can't change or remove the mountains of evidence that shows human life on Earth predates Adam by many thousands of years.

  3. Albert Einstein was right about many things.

    Albert Einstein addressed the theory of quantum entanglement. In Dec. of 2011 this experiment was carried out:

    Quantum Entanglement Links 2 Diamonds.

    Speaking of Albert Einstein, he had an answer for those continually trying to claim that there is a consensus for their flawed, unproven hypothesis regarding anthropogenic global warming, climate change or what ever the charlatans now call it: “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of the truth” Albert Einstein.

    "The improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to acknowledge authority, as such. For him, scepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin." — Thomas H. Huxley 

    Here are some other experiment that HAVE been conducted.

    Einstein was right, neutrino researchers admit.

  4. One need not know much about geology to be able to look around and see that the earth HAS to be billions of years old. This issue brings up the famous one concerning the Catholic Church and Galileo.

    Considering how the Church came out of its persecution of Galileo, perhaps the body would do well to not get involved in this topic, such as Pope Francis's edict on climate change.

    "Pope Francis seems to seek an alliance with these nature worshippers.

    Unfortunately the Green wolf will never lie down with the Christian lambs.

    "Christians promote care for humanity especially the weak and the poor. The Gaia worshippers have subordinated humans to “nature” and their attitude to other humans ranges from contempt to deep hatred. Under their extremist Agenda 21, the priests of Gaia would sacrifice humans by restricting their access to land, oceans, food, minerals and energy, and then concentrate the survivors in soul-destroying dormitory cities and food factories. Greens want all descendants of Adam and Eve expelled from our Gardens of Eden.

    "Christians generally value individual freedom and private property. The Green priesthood will not rest until there is a world government in which there is no private property and all humans are numbered, controlled and planned. They are using climate alarmism to achieve these goals."


    The above seems to describe very well just what Eric Grimsrud and Christiana Figueres feel is the proper course that should be followed in order for the U.N. to be able to exert its total control over humanity.

    Pope Francis needs to refresh himself on how things turned out for the church when Pope Paul V weighed in on what were really matters of science and not theological concerns. The church never really lived that down and now Pope Francis seems to be intent on making a mistake ever bit as serious regarding something that he evidently knows nothing about; climate change.

    "The doctrine that the earth is neither the center of the universe nor immovable, but moves even with a daily rotation, is absurd, and both psychologically and theologically false, and at the least an error of faith."

    Formal Church declaration in its indictment of Galileo

    To which Galileo replied:

    "The doctrine of the movements of the earth and the fixity of the sun is condemned on the ground that the Scriptures speak in many places of the sun moving and the earth standing still… I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the Scriptures, but with experiments and demonstrations."

    "To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin."

    Cardinal Bellarmine, during the trial of Galileo, 1615

    "One Galileo in two thousand years is enough."

    Pope Pius XII

    "Because I have been enjoined, by this Holy Office, to abandon the false opinion that the Sun is the center and immovable, …I abjure, curse, and detest the said errors and heresies…contrary to the said Holy Church."

    Galileo Galilei, recanting his beliefs under threat of torture and death by the Holy Church, June 22, 1633

    It wasn't until 1832 that Galileo's work was removed from the list of banned books that Catholics were forbidden to read. That's two hundred years after his trial… and well after Isaac Newton established the truth of the theory!

    Pope Pius IX wrote, in the 1864 Syllabus of Errors, that:

    "Divine revelation is perfect and, therefore, it is not subject to continual and indefinite progress in order to correspond with the progress of human reason…. No man is free to embrace and profess that religion which he believes to be true, guided by the light of reason…  The church has the power to define dogmatically the religion of the Catholic Church to be the only true religion…It is necessary even in the present day that the Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship… The civil liberty of every mode of worship, and full power given to all of openly and publically manifesting their opinions and their ideas conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people…  The Roman Pontiff cannot and ought not to reconcile himself or agree with progress, liberalism and modern civilization."


  5. Christiana Figueres, UN control& poverty & why free people must worry

    […] "However the official, Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC, warns that the fight against climate change is a process and that the necessary transformation of the world economy will not be decided at one conference or in one agreement."

    "This is  probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history", Ms Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels.


    "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 – you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."

    &nbsp ;http://www.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-figueres-first-time-the-world-economy-is-transformed-intentionally

    These remarks made by Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC should bother anyone with a brain and a desire to lead their own life free from the dictates of such an organization as the UN and their climate change agenda. The question is and the answer is obvious, is this a "fight against climate change" or a fight against basic human freedoms that all in civilized parts of the world have, up until now and this kind of request for dictatorial powers, to decide their own destinies?

    One can wonder if Christiana Figueres desire "…to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution…." will produce what follows:

    19 June 2013 "One of the most remarkable feats in the world has been the lifting of about a billion people out of abject poverty in the past couple of decades. If the industrialisation trend continues, then this century could witness some of the rapid improvements in living standards seen in the West during the 19th Century. […] The prize, which many will hope is in reach, is that global poverty is eliminated entirely within another couple of decades. It is the reason why the Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas said that once you start thinking about economic growth and the improvements in standards of living, it is hard to stop." http://www.bbc.com/news/business-22956470

    Since the UN has done nothing good or beneficial the past, why would we believe that the future will be different if this corrupt organization is allowed to have anything to do with it?

  6. https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/starlight/

    Pretty good objections raised here to "age of universe" (13.8 bybp) based on closer look at starlight and what it may really tell us.

    I'm not sure how gravity waves being detected from somewhere in space is confirmatory of the presumed big bang age. No one I know ever doubted that these waves might not exist or one day be detected, because most creationist astronomers have never had any objection to Einstein's theories of General and Special Relativity.

    As is true with all of science, actually, the book of nature is still open and beckons us come and see.

    As one with a geology degree, I am more intrigued with what is closer to home; here on earth, and what we see and can interpret regarding the mystery and complexity of life itself.

    You do write well on the scam of "anthropogenic global warming (aka: climate change). But, I will remain a young earth creationist. 😉

  7. What is of note over the age of the Earth is that the so-called “1 day is as 1,000 years” is an extrapolation that does not necessarily have to apply to the creation of the universe. After all Genesis mentions 6 DAYS, not periods of 1,000 years. That is important to this discussion. There are two places that do mention “1 day is as 1,000 years” but that is a mistake to say that HAS TO apply to the Genesis ‘days’ and probably applies to an entirely different concept. It’s not a one size fits all.

    The Bible can be true (I don’t deny at all that it is), but perhaps it is terribly misunderstood and too much license has been taken in some cases to say “this has to mean that” or “look here, this must be referring to what this actually means”.
    The truth isn’t helped when people try too hard to set in concrete what something has to mean when they avoid what is learned from science as long as the facts that are found were berthed by no agenda and are simply and honestly arrived at.

    I believe the universe is at least as old as the time it took for light to reach us from the galaxy farthest away.
    MANY billions of years. This should not upset anyone. There is no reason for that to happen.
    The Genesis ‘days’ do not have to be identical, fixed periods of time, as much as they should just be seen as significant periods where the amount of time varies immensely between each so-called ‘day’.
    We do not know the exact amount of time each of the Genesis ‘days’ represent, and I think believers are not meant to know that AND we may never know the answer to that.

    ALL WE KNOW, is the laws of nature we’ve learned through science. Light travels at 186,000 miles per second.
    It takes a certain period of time for light to go from point A to point B.
    We’ve already long ago found objects in the universe millions of time further away than a mere 6,000 light years.
    Let’s accept what that means and appreciate that nobody’s been able to refute that for a very long time. It’s probably a fact.
    It’s not necessary to be fanciful and say “well, God could have made the light from the most distant objects travel much faster to us to fool us”.
    That is not necessary to prove the Bible is true. What’s necessary is to have a open mind regarding what’s truly important and what is truly literal and to what nature teaches us…none of which can disprove what the Bible is trying to say.
    As we go along in science, corrections are made as needed to what we learn, if we’re humble about it.
    I think this was the attitude of people like Galileo and Sir Isaac Newton who weren’t enemies of the Bible.
    Nothing we learn should be required to be permanently in stone and unchangeable. That goes against making progress.

  8. This is a somewhat odd conclusion to draw from this experiment. Pretty much every geological, cosmological and biological discovery since the commencement of the Age of Reason (and quite a few even before that) comprehensively falsify the notion that the earth is only 6000 years old – and by the way, if you’re going to be true to James Ussher’s work on this, the correct number at this stage would be 6026 year old, given that it was he who calculated the figure of 4004 BC from the scriptures at the time in the 17th century. The Bible itself does not “prove” this anywhere, it is inferred tangentially from a literal interpretation of the Bible’s various histories.

    The confirmation of yet another of Einstein’s theoretical predictions is all by itself a hugely interesting and important discovery. The fact that it incidentally heaps further disqualification upon James Ussher’s already discredited work does not seem remotely relevant or important.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.