DEEPER 146 - How Old Is The Earth? w/ Dr. Hugh Ross & Dr. Michael Easley 

why don't you just see what the facts say and decide if you still want to accept your mythical beliefs? you don't need tyson to learn what the scientific evidence says.

regretfully (or thankfully) Tyson is busy with reality. That is not to say that it would not be entertaining.

@@aue82a I saw a link where he has done that with Tyson.

So true! The credibility of a person's argument is largely found in how they present it. It's one of the reasons if not the main reason, I find Ken Ham's arguments lacking

you need earth to have been created just for you to feel special

James tour lies for a living.

I was just thinking of this. I hope that there are some young physicists learning from his fine example.

Not much of a debate, more of a discussion, which I welcome.

Christ takes it Seriously. He says liars aren't getting into heaven. Evolution is lies. There's nothing that proves evolution. The more technology improves the more the bible proves the Bible is correct. And everything was created at the same time in 6 24 hour days almost 6000 years ago.

For perspective, no matter how educated or our lot on earth, we are all equal through the Blood. When I see someone less fortunate I just remind myself, by the Grace of God, there go I.

Woe unto you scribes!

I truly believe math, chemistry, biology, science in general really are Gods language he wrote for us here.

Claiming that young earth creationists, don't know science is a hottie, an arrogant statement, brother. Maybe they disagree with you and have a different interpretation of the data, If someone returned your insults by saying, you don't know science, you would be furious. I've watched countless debates. And in my well, educated and experienced mind, I've come to the opposite conclusion of you. That doesn't make me stupid. And I know you're trying to claim intellectual honesty and saying that you enjoy Dr. Ross because of his humility. So I'm glad you're attempting to turn over a new leaf. But have you ever even thought for one second that you possibly could be wrong about this? Have you read any books by Henry Morris at all? Because I think he would rock your world.

@@askbrettmanning Yes sir, I have read all of Henry Morris's books. I used to be a YEC Christian with a fundamentalist Southern Baptist Church in a small country town in rural Indiana. I was inspired to become a scientist because I wanted to learn more about God's creation. However, I became disappointed while I was studying secular material in physics and astronomy because of the light travel problem and the laws of radioactive decay. I was stubborn and didn't want to accept the majority interpretation of the data. Instead of praying and searching the Bible for answers, I searched for other YEC scientists. I found Chuck Missler. I loved Chuck. Chuck introduced me to the book, "In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation" by John F. Ashton Ph.D. Chuck also introduced me to Barry Setterfield and his work with the speed of light decreasing. As I studied Barry's calculations, I realized that he was ignoring the error bars in each of the light measurements beginning with Roemer in 1676 by his observations of the eclipses of Jupiter's moon Io. Barry concluded that the speed of light would have to be a billion times faster when God created the universe in order to circumnavigate the light travel problem. I'm a physicist and I know that general relativity indicates that if the speed of light was a billion times faster in the past that the cosmic microwave background radiation would be far different than what COBE detected. Furthermore with E=mc2, the energy level with light being a billion times faster would be way to high for stars and galaxies to form. I then started to look at Danny Faulkner and his theory to resolve the light travel problem, but Danny's concept of logic driven deduction based upon the one-way speed of light never being measured left me squinting my eyes as a leap of faith and not a scientific theory. I was left disappointed but I remained a YEC Christian by clinging to the belief that God can create in any way that he wants to and it doesn't matter if we understand it or not. Then I met Hugh Ross and through his humility and guidance, I started to look at the Book of Scripture instead of the Book of Nature. I studied all of the creation scriptures in Genesis, Job, and Psalms. Psalm 104 really made me reevaluate my YEC belief. Job 38 showed me a whole new way of interpreting Genesis 1:7. I then went to Hugh's Reasons to Believe website and consumed as much material as I could assimilate. Hugh showed me a whole new way to interpret Genesis 1 that changed my respect and awe at God's creation. I am not a patient man nor am I humble enough to debate my former YEC Christians. It took me over two decades to come to the point that I'm at now. You called me arrogant and suggested that I'm only trying to be intellectually honest. I apologize that my previous post came across that way to you. It was not my intention. I know that you said that you have listened to many debates, but that is not how you learn about the science. Debates are not fact checked, and even though Hugh tries to fact check Faulkner and Stinger while debating them he is limited by time. I have spent my entire life with my head buried in physics and astronomy books studying the science. Just because something sounds scientific doesn't mean that it is. One must look at the data objectively without bias.

Amen

I commend your honesty to seek truth, whether it agrees with your preconceived beliefs or not. I wish more people could admit they could possibly be wrong.

How do they explain the sin aspects that Adam was the first human to be created. Why would Moses have confused us. Problem is, there's no verse in the Bible saying that the there was anyone else before Adam. Peter doesn't refer to a pre-Adamic world he was referring to the days of Noah, at least that how I understand it. That would be the only mention of it if Ross is correct.. Mind you I haven't watched this but will soon, to see if the scriptures are made to fit or not..

@@Event_201 I don’t think your theology of the Bible is the one we should all have. We shouldn’t look at the Bible as an infallible book that describes every single thing about the world. We should view it as a compilation of multiple different books with each of their own genres and stories. If you take the Bible literally, you’re going to miss so much value of it. There are fables, myths, narratives, poems, parables, laws, wisdom, etc. The Bible wasn’t composed by one author with one underlying concept in mind, it was composed by multiple different authors across hundreds of years. Not all of them will have the same rhetorical goals. Genesis describes the creation and flood myth which was an etiology for explaining how humans came about, why snakes don’t have legs and why they’re dangerous, why women experience childbirth. The flood myth represents rebirth and the power dynamic between god and humans. If we take these forms of literature to be literal, we lose the intended meaning. The story of Adam’s and Eve was meant to show how humanity was good until we chose to disobey god and be punished to inhabit the world without him. As for old earth, we reached that conclusion with science. We can’t use the Bible to make presuppositions and make reality fit it. We should look at the world that exists and observe it to make conclusions. You forget, god made the world, he didn’t write the Bible. The world tells us that it’s very old and we shouldn’t make the facts conform to fit the Bible. We should reinterpret the Bible in ways that fit the world god made for us. Earth is gods creation, while the Bible is man’s word about god. Would you believe that god wants to deceive us by making the earth old, or do you think the ancient people have deceived us into thinking the earth is young. I trust in god, because he made the earth for us to inhabit and to learn.

@@obiwankenobi2520 You don't know my theology but if you don't understand the 6 days of creation & God Resting on the 7th, was also reference to when the Messiah would rule over the nations, You haven't rightly divided the word. You really so blind if you don't see what happening now, is setting the stage for the antichrist.. Then the Lord will return after the 7 year of tribulation. We're almost at that stage now, the mark 666 is being set up using Digital ID & currency. The chip will be in the body, no buying or selling is coming via the NWO that WEF are pushing. 2020 was the start of the agenda 2030 . The pushing of the vax was get ppl normalized with trusting govt.

We are God's "poema" in the Greek, His Masterpiece. ;-)

Much older

And the evening and the morning were the first day. Gen1v5

I would say this was far too casual to call a debate; it's more like a discussion from differing viewpoints. Dr. Ross also had the floor far more than anyone else (which I don't mind, given how interesting and well spoken the things he had to say are).

Amen to that. If you hold a gun to my head and make me choose, I would pick old earth. But it's indeed very interesting that "recorded history" is 6,000 years roughly. And, carbon dating could very well be inaccurate. They carbon dated rocks from the Mt St Helens eruption in 1980. They knew the rock was 10 years old. But the carbon dating showed a few million years. And carbon dating science says that it's nearly impossible to accurately date things less than 50,000 years old. In any case, God bless you, brother!

James Webb Space Telescope recently imaged a starburst galaxy Messier 82 (M82) It is located 12 million light years away, in Ursa Major. Looks incredible, and if it's 12 million light years away... 😀

I love science and the universe, but lean to young earth. But it's not a hill to die on imo, the gospel of Christ is.

@@robbienl8176 Amen Jesus is everything. Sometimes people are taught YEC, and then study astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology and learn the age calculated appears to be multiple billions of years old. What I have found people I know, is that it can have an effect of undermining faith. I don't think it should. It is what it is, and if the Earth is very young, or ancient, it matters not - what matters is that God created, with intention, and incredible design. And He created us as humans in His image and loves us. We have the opportunity to observe (JWST, Hubble, NuSTAR) galaxies forming millions of light years away - that's a glimpse of God's creative genius at work. No matter where we look in the universe or deep into a cell with a microscope, we see as Hugh Ross said, the "fingerprints of God."

⁠@@NickB1121after looking it up, it wasn’t carbon dating, it was potassium-argon. Additionally, the lab they tested it at specifically stated that samples under 2 million years old would not produce accurate results. The researchers who tested it were young earth creationist and probably clever enough to know this. It seems as though there was bias in his research, as there tends to be with young earthers.

Radiometric dating isn’t refuted in the debate club

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

Yes,i think you make two great points,we are talking earth time,and the heavenly realm of spirit beings is outside of that,so in their time frame just a few days maybe for creative activity? We already know that time dilation when close to large masses is real in this universe,we humans have a problem with long creation time,he does not.We shouldn't have a problem we were all asleep!! Secondly,i also believe that honest and truthful study of laws of physics,and the phenomenon that gives,will dovetail beautifully with the bible,both books have the same source,and tell the truth. Well expressed lady

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

Dr. Ross addresses that in many of his books: the original conditions on earth were darkness because of a thick atmosphere and water covering the earth and the Spirit of God hovering over the water.

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

On Day 1 the Bible states, “Let there be light”. Genesis 1:3. On Day 4 the Bible states "Let there be lights". Genesis 1:14. In both examples, the Bible does not state that God “Created” or made the light / lights at this point. The words Create (bara) nor Made (asah) are not used here. The text simply states, “let there be.” The Hebrew word for made (asah) in Genesis 1:16 is in the verb form that denotes completed action. Genesis 1:16-18 are parenthetical statements that indicate that the sun, moon, and stars had been made sometime in the past. IN THE BEGINNING! Several Bible translations wrongly add the words “and” and “then” to the beginning of verse 16 causing problems. Why allow these lights, Sun, and Moon, to be seen now on Day 4? To mark for "seasons", "days" (24 hours), and "years". Again, why? The animals to come after day 4 need them for migration, hibernation, etc. The language also “implies” that these lights were not visible prior to this day / period of time. It does NOT mean that the Sun and Moon were “not” there. Ever get a sunburn on a cloudy day when you could not see the Sun? Does the Sun need to be visible for solar radiation to permeate a translucent atmosphere and allow for microbial life and photosynthesis? We know that the oxygen level of the Earth increased changing the atmosphere from translucent, can’t see the Sun or Moon, to transparent, where you can see them both. This transformation in visual clarity caused by an increase in oxygen in the atmosphere has been proven in the lab The solar system is completely dependent on the gravity from the Sun. It is impossible for a solar system to form if the Sun did not exist until the fourth day. Plants need the Sun for photosynthesis. Land plants came on day 3, right? Did fruit trees sprout from seedlings to mature fruit bearing trees in less than 24 hours on Day 3? - No. No, Day 3 has to be longer than 24 hours. In fact, we now know that land plants came 1.2 billion years ago. Sea animals (Avalon explosion) came 575 million years ago. Plants were abundant on land, ~600 million years before sea animals. Source: a) L. Paul Knauth and Martin J. Kennedy, “The Late Precambrian Greening of the Earth,” Nature 460 (August 6, 2009): 728‐32, doi:10.1038/nature08213 b) Paul K. Strother et al., “Earth’s Earliest Non-Marine Eukaryotes,” Nature 473 (May 26, 2011): 505‐09, doi:10.1038/nature09943. Land Plants came before sea animals is clearly documented in Genesis 1:11 & 1:20 written some 3500 years ago! The Bible has been scientifically proven correct again!

The Earth is exactly 4.54 billion years old. This has been proven many ways. One of the ways is called radio spectroscopy. This is the study of how electrons are distributed around the nucleus in an atom. Using radio spectroscopy on earth rocks indicates the age of the rocks and thus the Earth. These conclusions are as indisputable as 1 + 1 = 2. If you don't understand the science behind it there are many courses you can take to learn. Don't waste your time with fantasy when facts are readily available

" I saw how science confirmed the Bible" You may need a new prescription for your spectacles.

The assumption that the genealogies in scripture are exhaustive rather than indicative would seem to lead to that conclusion, but if God created the earth and the universe in such a way as to mislead people in regard to its origin, then we've got a problem with his righteousness, and the people of Romans 1:20 would have an excuse.

Yes, you laugh when you have lost an argument

So, millions of scientists all around the world are either wrong or lying. Which one?

Carbon 14 (C14) is formed by the collision of a neutron with Nitrogen 14 (N14) thus knocking out a proton and retaining the neutron similar to a classic billiard ball collision with reverse English being skillfully applied to the cue ball. C14 is formed constantly due to physical and chemical interactions with cosmic ray particles colliding with the Earth’s atmosphere. Every second over 100,000 cosmic ray particles collide with one square meter of Earth’s atmosphere. These cosmic ray particles come from supernovas and other astronomical events and consist of atomic nuclei and nucleons, such as protons, neutrons, and helium. They are mostly made of protons (89%), which are the nuclei of hydrogen, the most common element in the universe. Cosmic rays also contain 10% helium nuclei and 1% heavier nuclei, including uranium. The same process of high energy nucleons interacting with Nitrogen takes place in the mantle of the Earth too; thus, forming C14 within the mantle. So, how does C14 get into diamonds? By the same process that occurs in the atmosphere. Through subduction of the ocean floor, Nitrogen is introduced to the mantle and through the radioactive decay of Uranium and Thorium within the mantle high energy nucleons are created which interact with the Nitrogen thus forming C14 within anything that contains Nitrogen within the mantle. Diamonds and graphite are formed in the mantle. The most common impurity in the growth of diamonds is nitrogen. Nitrogen gives the appearance of yellow or brown hues, Boron is responsible for blue hues, plastic deformation can cause pink hues and irradiation can result in green hues in diamonds. High energy nucleons pass through the carbon matrix of diamonds and interact with the Nitrogen impurities thus forming C14 all throughout the growth of the diamonds from start to finish; therefore, it is common to find a small amount of C14 that had been formed within the last 10,000 years of the diamond’s growth process. Nitrogen makes up 78% of the atmosphere; therefore, it's everywhere on the surface of the Earth, in the crust and in the mantle. The soft tissue in dinosaur bones that you mentioned was discovered by Mary Schweitzer. They were not 'unmineralized dinosaur bones', they were soaked in an acid bath that demineralized them after 7 days. It is an intriguing discovery. However, in no way does it refute all of the data collected by geologists, archeologists and paleontologists over the last two centuries. Mary Schweitzer herself, a professed Christian, said that it forces scientists to reexamine the process of fossilization, not that it completely upends all of geology and paleontology.

God is not the author of confusion, and yet even the most scholarly Christians argue about the very fundamental tenets of the Christian faith. Therefore no God.

@@markb3786 I would agree God's not the author of confusion. He's not confused about what he did, but men seem to not be able to get things right whether it's about God or the origins of the universe. The part about the physical sciences that they're only taking consideration material things. They disregard all the other science is that except the real possibility.

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

@@chrismartino3519 Assumed. Everything is assumed. Not sure what you are missing. Everything is based on pre-suppositions. There are plenty of other qualified scientists that have many other differing opinions.

@@stewartpink3117 go to any national park in the USA and they'll tell you the sediment there is millions of years old not 6000 years old. You can measure ice on Antarctic, measure rocks all kinds of ways to measure the Earth's age. A scientist that says the Earth is 6000 years old would be laughed out of the Chem lab. Just do a little bit of studying reality and less time studying fantasy and the world we be a much better place.

@@chrismartino3519 Based on what? Scientific observation? You're one of those guys it's easy to fool the hard to convince there have been fooled.

@@stewartpink3117 ions in atom decay over time.. that time can be measured. those measurements are in the millions years. The laws of physics have been proven true both thru observation and mathematicallly.. A fool is the one that says 2 + 2 does not equal 4 which is clearly your world view. You've been lied to. Why not get some science skills so you know what's real and what truth is.

Down

@@lafenelson3212 everywhere is down, try again.

Do you honestly expect me to believe you've never heard of up? Up isn't down.

@@lafenelson3212 u.r. missing it, if there is a ring around the earth 🌎 and one part falls down the rest of it goes....up?, or are you a flat earther,?

I'm not the one claiming everywhere is down. The entire structure would collapse because internal stresses caused by gravity would fracture it. This isn't particularly difficult to understand.

When you run the Lorentz transformations, you quickly discover that's not how time dilation works. In fact time dilation observed in supernovae within the Hubble flow as well as the damped random walk in quasars during cosmic noon confirm the FLRW/ΛCDM model for the expansion history of the universe and point to an origin about 13.8 billion years ago.

Correct , man living several hundred years reaches his total depravity point from his sinful nature,God in his perfect timing uses the laws of physics, knowing in advance where and when man would be in this stage of fallen chose to use cosmic rays to limit human life span.

@@Terrylb285yep, I think the same way, he’s using things to produce the results he says he wants, he wrote a story with his mind in a way, and this is that story.

Sisters. There was no prohibition at that time. Adam and Eve's offspring would have married and had children. The prohibition came later for good reason as genetic defects became common. Adam and Eve would not have had any genetic defects.

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

One or two who have misinterpreted the data are making that claim for clicks from people who haven't studied star-forming in galaxy mergers, but no serious cosmologists takes these claims seriously.

There's plenty of proof we're not inside a giant air bag.

The Sun and moon were allowed to be seen from the surface of the Earth on day 4. The Hebrew word for made (asah) in Genesis 1:16 is in the verb form that denotes completed action. Genesis 1:16-18 are parenthetical statements that indicate that the sun, moon, and stars had been made sometime in the past. Quote from you, "We calculate time based off rotation of the earth around sun and moon." Partially correct. The Earth and Moon rotate together around the Sun. The Moon rotates around the Earth. The Sun does not rise and set. The Earth revolves creating the appearance of the Sun rising/setting. You cannot have "evening and morning" without the Sun on days 1, 2, and 3 if the Sun was not Created until day 4. The Sun and Moon were not formed at the same time. The Sun was formed first in order for the solar system to form. The Moon was not formed until after the merger of the planet Theia and the proto-Earth. The debris in space from this collision formed the Moon.

@@MutsPub ‭Genesis 1:14 ESV‬ [14] And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, I would argue that from this passage, we have no indication to suggest they were made visible rather than created. If you want to argue the sun was made first at the beginning of day 4, I can see that. Evening and morning without the sun on day 1 is the mystery of God's word I'm getting at. This is why I believe it's impossible for humans to accurately radiologically date earth's minerals.

@@MutsPub idk what evidence there is for a merger between earth and another planet. Last I heard, none of the models really played out perfectly.

@@jndvs95 I'll not argue. There is no such thing as a word for word translation of the Ancient Biblical text in any modern language. It is thought for thought at best! The Sun and moon were allowed to be seen from the surface of the Earth on day 4. The atmosphere changed from translucent to transparent. We know that now because of the oxygen content on the early Earth. Does the Bible talk about neutrinos which are the most abundant particles that have mass in the Universe? NO. How about microwaves? Nope. The Hebrew word for made (asah) in Genesis 1:16 is in the verb form that denotes completed action. Genesis 1:16-18 are parenthetical statements that indicate that the sun, moon, and stars had been made sometime in the past. It was written in Hebrew, not English. "made (asah) in Genesis 1:16 is in the verb form that denotes completed action." Did they have past tense in Ancient Hebrew? NO! They only had perfect and imperfect tenses! "verb form that denotes completed action" The Hebrew word for Create (bara) is only used three times in Genesis 1. It is NOT used here. Do you know what parenthetical means? A parenthetical statement is one that explains or qualifies something. Why do you waste my time? 1) Young Earth creationism has simply failed every empirical test that mainstream science demands. 2) There are no serious peer reviewed young Earth creationist science papers. 3) There are no scientists studying “young Earth creationism” in any secular research center in the world. 4) Why? Because the Earth is 4.5662 +/‐ 0.0001 billion years old. 5) All three of these indicate that the universe came into existence billions of years ago. a) The “Sloan Digital Sky Survey” b) The “Two Degree Deep Sky Survey” c) The “WMAP,” which is the most accurate map of the radiation left over from the Creation event. 6) There are 6 independent measures for the date of rock. a) 2 Uranium dates: ‐ Uranium -235 decays into lead -207 ‐ Uranium -238 decays into lead -206 b) 1 Thorium date. ‐ Thorium -232 decays into lead -208 c) ALL 3 of these listed Lead dates come to the same result; 4.5662 +/- 0.0001 billion years. Therefore, the Earth is ~4.5662 +/- 0.0001 billion years old. 7) None of this is a salvation issue. 8) The Bible remains the inerrant word of God.

@@jndvs95 Quotes from you, "Last I heard, none of the models really played out perfectly." Please give me the peer reviewed article you are referring to including the name(s), date, and DOI. Again, I'll not argue. Moon-forming impactor as a source of Earth’s basal mantle anomalies. Yuan, Q., Li, M., Desch, S.J. et al. Nature 623, 95-99 (11/01/2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06589-1

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

Jesus said he is the Lord of Sabbath. And in Hebrews, there remains a Sabbath rest. On the seventh day (in chapter 2, do not follow chapters, another man made invention, it will lead you astray), there is no evening and morning. Jesus said Sabbath was made for men. Ponder over that. Did God say he stopped working? Not according to Jesus, He said Father is working and so he is working. Why is that so? In fact God is working a New creation in reverse. he is creating New people ( born again) that Jesus in the resurrected Man is the first fruit and those salvaged are the rest of the fruits to inhabit the New Heaven and Earth. The translators writes there was evening and morning. Note originally it is not with tenses and verbs in the Hebrew so the translators faithfully translated and not forcing it to say done in 1 day -. I think it is beautiful but it did not say, this was done in between one earth rotation, ie between one evening and morning. A period. In this way it was deliberate that the seventh day remains open. It implies that creation follows the arrow of time. The passage of time.

By the way, Hebrews 4 12, the word of God, or would it be The Word of God - that is Jesus himself. Check the interlinear Bible in Greek, it is the Logos… same as Word of God made flesh in John’s Gospel . Thus Jesus is the double edged sword as said in the book of Revelation. in Psalm 33, by his mere word. What is time? Time as in the number of rotations of our earth? Did earth established time when God made the Universe. Does God experience time like us? Indeed it is by his mere word. Time is a dimension in our world describing physical laws. We are misunderstanding time as we feel its experience and decay.

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

@@chrismartino3519 what an amazing Father that made it all - just as we know…. All praise Him forever!

The Sun was Created in the beginning. Plants came to be on day 3.

@@MutsPub Day 1 He created light. But it says that He created the greater light to rule the day and a lesser light to rule the night and all the stars on day 4 and they were “to give light on the earth.” (Gen 1:15) I’m so confused!

@@nicolehutton4560 The Hebrew word for Create is "bara" (specifically, “He-Created”). In all of Scripture, “bara” is only used of God, never of man. It means to bring something into existence that never existed before. Bara is only used 3 times in Genesis 1. 1) In the beginning. (No physical reality existed before the beginning. God Created matter, space, time, and energy.) 2) Day 5 - “nephesh” animals. (Various insects, sea creatures, fish, dinosaurs, and other animals already existed.) However, these specific types of “nephesh” animals never existed before and were Created here on day 5. The Bible does not tell us “when” as in the date. It does tell us that they all came “before” humans. What sets Nephesh animals apart is they have emotions, feelings, they care and sacrifice for their young, i.e., birds, sea mammals, land mammals. Even alligators and crocodiles care for their young. Elephants bury their dead. Your cat or dog “feels” the loss of a loved one, etc. Non of them have a “spirit.” 3) Day 6 - Humans - (specifically) Adam / Eve. (“Humans” never existed before.) Humans were uniquely Created and did NOT evolve from any bipedal primate, period. The fossil record clearly indicates that ALL bipedal primate species went extinct before they physically evolved. ‐ ALL! What sets Humans apart is a “spirit” (the ability to Worship the Creator), our symbolic capabilities, consciousness, etc. No other animal has a spirit and cares about God or their own existence in the universe. No other animal on the planet has or ever will be able to “read” even the simplest of beginner books, regardless of the language it is written in. No other animal will be able to understand any mathematical equations, written music, etc. All sciences are based on symbolic recognition, which no other animal will ever comprehend in any way. Humans are NOT just animals that are slightly smarter, as Darwin put it back in 1871 and is still widely believed to this day! The beginning was before Day 1. The first verse of Genesis is interesting. It appears, at first glance, to be improper Hebrew grammar because it places the "beginning" before God in the sentence. Their sentence structure lists items in terms of "importance" in an order. It is similar to our ingredients on a can of Chicken noodle soup are listed in order of quantity. i.e., water, noodles, chicken, etc. The Hebrew here in Genesis 1:1 is communicating that the "beginning" is the most important concept in this sentence. God is second? That seems weird. This tells us there is “something” unique being communicated here. Here is how it translates. In the "absolute" beginning / "Elohim" (the plural form of the “triune” God) / bara - "He-Created" / "all physical reality." FWIW ‐ From the Hebrew for Genesis 1:1: (Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'aretz.) a) Bereshit bara Elohim (Hebrew): - “In the beginning God (Elohim) Created” b) et hashamayim ve'et ha'aretz (Hebrew): "the heavens and the earth". (*) This specific phrase ("the heavens and the earth") is a “merism,” a figure of speech indicating the two stand NOT for "heavens" and "earth" individually, but "everything" (i.e., the Universe). This phrase ("the heavens and the earth") is used 9 times in the Old Testament, always referring to the totality of physical reality. It is not about the Earth. It is about the Universe. The equivalent word for our English word "Universe" simply did not exist in the Biblical Hebrew Language. Thus, “universe” is not found anywhere in the Old Testament Hebrew text. Now, if you read Genesis carefully, the perspective changes from God in space "in the beginning" verse 1:1 to the surface of the Earth, as the Spirit of God is hovering above the waters, verse 1:2. The story is now being told from the surface of the Earth looking upwards towards the cloud cover. On Day 1, in Genesis 1:3, the Bible states, “Let there be light.” The “light” from the Sun (Created in the beginning), is “allowed” by God to become visible on Day 1. On Day 4, in Genesis 1:14, the Bible again states, "Let there be lights.” The Sun and Moon (Created sometime in the past), is allowed by God to become “physically visible” from the surface of the Earth on Day 4. Why allow these lights, Sun, and Moon, to be seen now on Day 4? To mark for "seasons", "days" (24 hours), and "years". Again, why? The animals to come after day 4 need them for migration, hibernation, etc. The language also “implies” that these lights were not visible prior to this day / period of time. It does NOT mean that the Sun and Moon were “not” there. Ever get a sunburn on a cloudy day when you could not see the Sun? Does the Sun need to be visible for solar radiation to permeate a translucent atmosphere and allow for microbial life and photosynthesis? ‐ No. The Bible does not state in either case that God “Created” (bara) or "made" (asah) the light / lights at that point. The Hebrew word for made (asah) in Genesis 1:16 is in the “verb form” that denotes completed action. Genesis 1:16-18 are parenthetical statements that indicate that the sun, moon, and stars had been made sometime in the past. A parenthetical statement is one that explains or qualifies something. They did not have past tenses in Ancient Hebrew. We are Saved by Grace, through Christ. None of this is a salvation issue. The Bible remains the inerrant word of God.

@@nicolehutton4560 This is hard to post. It can't be answered in

​@nicolehutton4560 I agree re the assumption of many is that the 1st "let there be light" was the sun - but as you say Gen.1v16 clearly states creation of the 2 Great lights = sun & moon on the 4th day ! Ref Rev.21v23 In the new heaven & earth there will be no need for sun or moon to give light to it for the Splendor & radiance (glory)of God illuminate it, and the Lamb is its lamp. - amp.version So, equally the 1st ever light was God Himself

Exodus 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. :9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates: 11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

@@chrismartino3519 martino, The earth was said to be around 2.5 billion years old when I was younger. We must address the issue that all of these radioisotope dating systems have several assumptions being made for the researchers to come to their conclusions, any one of which if wrong, would throw off the entire scheme.

@@statutesofthelord they just keep finding older rocks.... It's not some mystery

@@chrismartino3519 chris, Your response is sadly amusing. Instead of fighting your Creator - Jesus Christ, who spoke this world into existence, why not love and follow him?

What here makes you disheartened, friend? C'mon, as Christians, we should be able to have these kinds of conversations without it effecting your spirit and love for The Lord. Spiritual praise and praising The Lord is wonderful and important, but at a certain point, you should have real reasons why you actually believe what you believe, instead of just gong with it because "it all sounds good and I just want to praise The Lord and sing Him praises all day". There's many of us who came to The Lord and His all mighty nature through the lens of science, logic, and other reasons that aren't "well I was raised in a church". I think God Himself, calls upon us to actually believe what we believe, instead of having blind faith, as long as it is still centered around The Lord Himself. I have to ask, do you just not ever have philosophical conversations with friends or family about how all things work? That's one of my favorite parts of God. Thinking about how He does things, and what anything is, is just extremely fascinating to hear and think about. Remember, God wants us to evolve and create. We can't do that if we just sit down in a Church all day and praise God from sun up to sun down. You also praise The Lord by growing your community and growing as a thinking person, as long as God is ALWAYS at the center of your life, and what these gentleman are doing, is keeping God at the forefront of their lives. God bless, friend!

The age of the Earth, as determined by radiometric dating techniques, is approximately 4.54 billion years old12. This estimation is based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes found in rocks and minerals on Earth and from meteorites. These methods measure the proportions of different isotopes, which decay at a predictable rate, allowing scientists to calculate the age of the samples. Radio spectroscopy, specifically, has been instrumental in astronomical observations, but it is not directly used to determine the age of the Earth. Instead, it has helped in the discovery of cosmic phenomena, such as the 21-centimeter H I line, which is important for understanding the structure and dynamics of our galaxy3. The age of the Earth is a result of extensive research using various radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead dating, which has provided consistent results pointing to the Earth being over four and a half billion years old

But then he couldn't say in Romans 1:20 that they're without excuse. "being clearly understood by the things which were made"

No, it doesn't.

Because the researchers procedures were faulty. The problem is that they used potassium-argon dating for something very, very young in comparison with the decay rate of potassium. The lab the researchers tested this at explicitly stated that samples under 2mil years would not produce accurate results. Not all labs can afford state of the art technology which would be much more accurate. Additionally, the half-life of Potassium is about 1.25 billions years old, which is much better for dating very old samples rather than samples a decade old. In a decade, there would be slim to none traces of argon detectable in fresh potassium samples. What most likely happened is contamination from previous tested samples that linger in trace amounts. In a normal sample, it is negligible. In a young sample, it skews the data. Radioactive dating overall is a very trustworthy method for measuring absolute dates, but you have to know what you’re doing to get accurate results. This is why samples are cross referenced with other radioactive methods.

Why are Ross supporters so angry? Young Earthers are in the majority when it comes to believers, they simply are so ignorant not o know that. Besides, you don't get angry like a spoilt child cuz one group of believers believe differently on things that are debatable or when the Bible isn't clear on things, ppl here are looking at young earthers as a cult. I've never seen any problem with the likes of Ken Ham, in fact, there's enough scriptures to say that Jesus will return on the seventh day. We've just entered the 7 millennial and the signs if the end is here..

@@Event_201 We get angry the same reason we get angry at flat earthers spouting nonsense and teaching pseudoscience to children. The Bible also implies that the earth is flat with a dome firmament separating the waters from earth and from the divine. But people know better not to believe the earth is flat because it’s demonstrably false. Science starts with the evidence and tries to make sense of it. YEC starts with the conclusions that earth is young and tries to make the evidence fit. It really is frustrating when people try to undermine these amazing fields of science that are just absolutely incredible. The majority of Americans may in fact be young earth creationists, but not the scientists. If you were to go into any scientific field, none of them would teach the earth is young or even hint to it. Geology disproves a global flood and affirms an old earth. Astrophysics affirms an old universe. Biology affirms common descent and the discovery of DNA confirmed many predictions made by evolutionary theory. I love to learn about this world but when I see people twisting science to fit their narrative, it’s insulting because it discredits a large portion of research great scientists have done. To scientists, young earth is a conspiracy theory and many don’t address it because it’s below them. The problem with that is, not many people think science is against them because you don’t have enough people correcting their presuppositions. And yes, you’ll have a few scientists who do affirm the earth is young but the number that do is very low and they are often scoffed at by others in the field. You don’t even have to look up reasons the earth is old, you definitely could, but you just have to learn about these different fields of science and you’d learn many of things. There are a large amount of playlists across RU-vid that teach certain fields. For geology, I’ve found that “Geo Girl” is very informative. For evolutionary biology, Yale has a free online course online. “Professor Dave Explains” has a ton of playlists of introductory to intermediate scientific concepts. For looking into young earth creationism vs old earth, don’t look up reasons/arguments for both sides. Instead, just learn about the relevant scientific fields and that will give you much more understanding that it would if you look for the answers you want.

@@Event_201 We get angry the same reason we get angry at flat earthers spouting nonsense and teaching pseudoscience to children. The Bible also implies that the earth is flat with a dome firmament separating the waters from earth and from the divine. But people know better not to believe the earth is flat because it’s demonstrably false. Science starts with the evidence and tries to make sense of it. YEC starts with the conclusions that earth is young and tries to make the evidence fit. It really is frustrating when people try to undermine these amazing fields of science that are just absolutely incredible. The majority of Americans may in fact be young earth creationists, but not the scientists. If you were to go into any scientific field, none of them would teach the earth is young or even hint to it. Geology disproves a global flood and affirms an old earth. Astrophysics affirms an old universe. Biology affirms common descent and the discovery of DNA confirmed many predictions made by evolutionary theory. I love to learn about this world but when I see people twisting science to fit their narrative, it’s insulting because it discredits a large portion of research great scientists have done. To scientists, young earth is a conspiracy theory and many don’t address it because it’s below them. The problem with that is, not many people think science is against them because you don’t have enough people correcting their presuppositions. And yes, you’ll have a few scientists who do affirm the earth is young but the number that do is very low and they are often scoffed at by others in the field. You don’t even have to look up reasons the earth is old, you definitely could, but you just have to learn about these different fields of science and you’d learn many of things. There are a large amount of playlists across RU-vid that teach certain fields. For geology, I’ve found that “Geo Girl” is very informative. For evolutionary biology, Yale has a free online course online. “Professor Dave Explains” has a ton of playlists of introductory to intermediate scientific concepts. “Clint’s Reptiles” has a few videos pertaining to biological taxonomy and explains species relationships to each other. For looking into young earth creationism vs old earth, don’t look up reasons/arguments for both sides. Instead, just learn about the relevant scientific fields and that will give you much more understanding that it would if you look for the answers you want.

There is a lot more evidence to the contrary. If you wish to believe in the literalness of scripture, do you also believe in the firmament rather a globe earth? Because that is what the Bible portrays. It also portrays a literal talking snake. Do you believe that snakes can talk? I think it’s absurd to claim inerrancy of the literal interpretation if you don’t believe in absolute literalism in the Bible

@obiwankenobi2520 Apparently you don't know about the Channel "Is Genesis History." The only thing you have to do to disprove something like Darwinian evolution is prove a recent worldwide flood. That's extremely easy at this point. IGH has done that on numerous occasions. And yes. I believe in a firmament with waters above. My faith is God, His Word, and ability is not so tiny. My faith in scheming men is quite small.

You are misusing the word evidence. Plenty of grifting books and videos say it is Christ's burial cloth, but no actual evidence.

No one is saying that God can’t do it in 24 hour days. It’s just that the word yom can be 6, 12, 24 hours, or a long but finite period of time is the literal meaning. So the point is that God is saying it’s a literal “long but finite period of time” as the exact meaning for the word “yom”

Some say that it must be 6 days, because sin came after the 6 days, early life dieying of and ending up in the ground could not be possible.

How did Adam name all animals, and come to the realization that he was lonely all in 24 hrs?

Lots of answers. One easy one is that we started the 7th day at the end of the 6th. We are still in the 7th day. That's a very long day. ;)

Ross totes this cliché that we have the book of God and the book of nature, but this statement is a categorical error. One is the literal revealed objective word of God, the other is entirely subjective. Is nature now personified and revealing truth to us in the same? Nature is interpreted through a philosophical lens, a pre-commitment to a worldview. The naturalist / atheist, must necessarily reject any interpretation of the physical world that is young. Ross seems to have confused a biblical lens through which the physical world is interpreted with an atheistic lens through which the physical world is interpreted. He seems to be confused on which one is authoritative.

Quote from you, "For some reason Hugh Ross thinks you have to be an astrophysicist to understand the Bible" It is you that is stating that, not Dr. Ross. What on Earth would make you think a normal nine year old could accurately interpret Genesis? I assume that you are older than 9, yet clearly you struggle.. Genesis was written in Ancient Hebrew where the majority of nouns and verbs had multiple literal meanings and there were no vowels! Therefore, there is no such thing as a "word for word" translation in any modern language. All modern translations are a "thought for thought" translation at best. PhD experts differ on their interpretations, right? A normal nine year old could however tell you that to have evenings and mornings on the first three days without a Sun is silly.

The Earth is exactly 4.54 billion years old. This has been proven many ways. One of the ways is called radio spectroscopy. This is the study of how electrons are distributed around the nucleus in an atom. Using radio spectroscopy on earth rocks indicates the age of the rocks and thus the Earth. These conclusions are as indisputable as 1 + 1 = 2. If you don't understand the science behind it there are many courses you can take to learn. Don't waste your time with fantasy when facts are readily available.

No, it doesn't. The same laws of physics produce different results depending on temperature and pressure which do change in an expanding universe.

@@lafenelson3212 Ain't no proof of what you said. Only assumptions and math models.

@@lafenelson3212 There's no proof that the laws of physics haven't changed or aren't in the process of changing. JWST is blowing up cosmology. How many different doctrines (theories) of the Cult of Scientists are their out there?

There is plenty observational and experimental evidence. We have results of CMB observations from the COBE, WMAP, and Planck satellites, BAO measurements from SDSS, eBOSS, DES, and DESI, Type 1a supernova observations via the local distance ladder method from SH0ES and Pantheon+, and we've experimentally reproduced the conditions predicted by the ΛCDM cosmological model to as early as a trillion the of a second after the big bang in the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva. And yes, math *is* what's generally used to describe measurements of physical systems, but the people making the observations publish and actually show their work. Feel free to identify the flaws in their methodology. All of their work products are freely available.

Ain't no proof of what they say ​@@stewartpink3117... Only assumptions and math models....

Dont forget,radioisotopes dont care about the earths spin rate!!

@@ImogeneRichards I stopped trusting all the science as of the last pandemic.

thats called "changing the law of physics" - which was rejected by Dr Hugh Ross

@@mikewaddell8814 "I stopped trusting all the science" try dropping an anvil on your foot and tell us all that Newton's laws are a fairy tale.

That's not how theories work.

Actually, How do you know that Adam had two nipples as the first man Created by GOD? Do you have a Photo of Adam at the Creation? One thing is sure, Adam never had a Navel Obviously as Adam was not born from a Woman's Womb, but GOD Created Adam from the Dust of the Earth!