Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1

No belief is useful when it comes to origin issues. There is no useful application for origin claims of science. If you claim that a same nature on the earth is fact based then go ahead and show us the facts. You have none. Instead we see a desperate attempt to shift the burden of proof.

No matter how much weight you imagine your lack of evidence has, it remains a lack of evidence. From my unbiased and intellectually honest perspective your admitted lack of evidence is worthless and appalling.

quote:

---

Still, a lack of evidence that "the nature" changed sometime in the past is significant in doubting that such a change happened.

---

Still, a lack of evidence that "the nature" never changed sometime in the past is significant in doubting that such a change never happened.

And I can easily show that what you imagined to be evidences were actually beliefs. What we need here is fact and real knowledge and science, not political reinvent word games.

You have it all wrong. If you claim anything as science you need real evidence and support. If I claim we do not know, I am off the hook.

I have seen only belief based claims here that have falsely been labelled evidence.

You would know that the piles are belief based piles if you comprehended the thread. From radiometric decay in nature in the past, to using nature of today in determine the time trees used to grow, and ad infinitum. When so called science looks to the universe we see a variation of the same thing, they imagine that space and time that we see here exists all over. In all ways and in every single facet of science that deals in origin issues we see the same thing, and nothing but the same thing.

I am not fooled, so speak for yourself! The speed of light has only been clocked in this area of the solar system. Period. If you dispute that, then show us how you would clock movements from stars or objects in deep space, as to speed? Ha.
All you know is fishbowl speed limits, basically.

I understand the basis of arguments put forth here. If you did, we would not be chatting.

quote:

---

That's just the point, dad. There is plenty of evidence that "the nature" never changed sometime in the past. The effects and results of natures consistent operation in the past is precisely what we expect it to be. There are no ... as in none ... effects or results that differed in the past from the same operations of nature we see today.

---

None that you can see, being blinded by your beliefs. How would you know if there was radioactive decay in the past? You don't. You see it exists today, for example, and then you assign ratios of isotopes dates based on this. A more honest view of the ratios would include creation, as well as the former nature, as well as this present nature! Instead you look only at this end. You assume all the material/ratios came to exist in this present nature. The same sort of thing is true is all other areas and evidences.You view the fossil record as having been formed in our nature. You cannot prove it. So you try to shift the burden of proof to other beliefs! I can use belief in looking at the fossil record also. You are not the only one that can do that. I believe that nature was likely different and that in that different nature most life on earth simply could not leave remains. That means that man and most animals did exist, but could not leave remains at that time in that nature. From dust we came and to dust we used to very rapidly return apparently! That means your beliefs would totally ruin the true story of the fossil record!So this is why you MUST demonstrate that the nature on earth in the past was the same. Otherwise all is lost for your religion. (whether you realize it or not)

Faster nature in the past? No. The records so indicate a different nature though. You had the chance to show us that science knows that it was the same. Why have you failed?

No parallax measure can be used for distances to deep space. All you do is grab a slice of this solar system area and use our time and space here in a big line as one of three lines to a star!! That is just a statement of faith that time and apace are the same all the way to the star. If time and space were not the same no distance is possible. Have you anything else other than religion here?
If you want to cite radioactive decay you have a problem also, The time that decay takes is observed only here, If time were not the same out there, you can forget decay times being the same. Forget light movement times being the same etc.

quote:

---

Radioactive decay rates are based on some of the most fundamental properties of the Universe

---

Says who!? Try to remember that properties of laws here in the solar system and area involve time. What we experience in our time as, for example, 51 days, could represent for example, a fraction of a second out there. The time it takes light here to travel is not equal to the time involved in light moving out in the far universe as far as we know. You only believed that for no reason. So, no, you cannot extend fishbowl properties to the whole universe.

quote:

---

If those fundamental properties changed enough to change radioactive decay rates the repercussions would echo down the ages and we'd see them today. We've looked. They aren't there. Radioactive decay rates haven't changed noticeably in the last 13 billion years or so.

---

The ONLY radioactive decay and times we see are HERE. If time were not the same out there, that would mean that the decay times we observe would not be the same as the time involved out there. So nothing changes here.There is nothing but your beliefs that break.

No, they do not appear to be old at all. Only if we used the belief systems foisted on us by those who think they have intellect towering above God would it look old. The stars look beautiful to me, not old. The earth looks fine also. If I see a rock, I would not interpret the ratios in that rock to have all be formed in this nature, while ignoring creation as well as the old world! Only in such denial would it look old.

quote:

---

Why would we want to shift the burden of proof to you? You don't know anything.

​

Science is not interested in proving anything to you. Science is never finished, it is just a systematic process to understand observations of phenomena in our Universe.

---

You shift the burden of proving the basis for all models of the past you make because you cannot prove it. Obviously. Therefore you seek to ask anyone and everyone with other beliefs to do what you cannot do yourself, prove them! Hypocrites.

quote:

---

If there is, or was a different nature, it does not make any difference to science, because from our vantage point a distant galaxy looks the same as if the Universe is same there as it is here. Science has never detected anything resembling transitions to a "nature" where physics and chemistry do not operate the same as here and now.

---

Yes it makes a difference since no one cares how it 'looks to you'. Science uses the belief that it was the same in all models of the past. When doing this, how could anything possibly be seen as anything other than present nature caused? You cannot be honest or objective. [quote]If science cannot detect something AND if science can still make observations and report the results and make tentative conclusions, then it can operate as if nature is the same. Science will continue to observe nature, and if something like your imaginary other nature is discovered, will report it and study it and include it in our body of scientific knowledge./quotePeople could assume the tooth fairy tooted and made the universe. They could view all things through the lens of that belief, and report their conclusions. That is what science does, put all evidence and observations through a belief lens. Then they report back about what it looks like to them! Too bad the reports have no reality to them, or usefulness in actual science, or any application in the earth at all.

quote:

---

Belief is a clumsy tool. I would use a microscope.

---

That changes nothing. You still splatter beliefs all over the little things you see. The same is true if you use a telescope!