Cosmos, the tv show

[Moonglow]

Then you have really bad reading comprehension skills because you commented on my comment about how old the world is.

No one knows how old the universe OR the world is. Period.

Who has bad reading skills?

I said nothing about the age of the Earth. Nor did I say what I think the age of the Universe actually is.

All I said was that we can safely rule out that the Universe is older than 6,000 years because of the time it would take for the light we see from stars even in our own galaxy, not too mention from distant galaxies, to reach us.

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

That does not surprise me....distance x speed of light = time

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Who has bad reading skills?

I said nothing about the age of the Earth. Nor did I say what I think the age of the Universe actually is.

All I said was that we can safely rule out that the Universe is older than 6,000 years because of the time it would take for the light we see from stars even in our own galaxy, not too mention from distant galaxies, to reach us.

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

That does not surprise me....distance x speed of light = time

How would that formula aid in determining the age of the universe?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Then you have really bad reading comprehension skills because you commented on my comment about how old the world is.

No one knows how old the universe OR the world is. Period.

Who has bad reading skills?

I said nothing about the age of the Earth. Nor did I say what I think the age of the Universe actually is.

All I said was that we can safely rule out that the Universe is older than 6,000 years because of the time it would take for the light we see from stars even in our own galaxy, not too mention from distant galaxies, to reach us.

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Who has bad reading skills?

I said nothing about the age of the Earth. Nor did I say what I think the age of the Universe actually is.

All I said was that we can safely rule out that the Universe is older than 6,000 years because of the time it would take for the light we see from stars even in our own galaxy, not too mention from distant galaxies, to reach us.

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The earth's 24 hour rotation makes everyone travel at 1,500 kilometers per hour.
The earth traveling around the sun means everyone travels at 100,000 kilometers per hour.
Our galaxy is traveling through space at a half million kilometers per hour.
Anyone feeling any jet lag?
At the speed of light, it takes the sun's rays eight hours to reach us.
The light we see from the nearest galaxy to us takes 100,000 light years to reach us, which means what we are seeing is a galaxy as it was 100,000 years ago. That really puts a hole in the evangelical's belief that creation is only 6,000 years old.

Just a few trivia from the COSMOS show.

Did they discuss socks?

 

[orogenicman]

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No.

Methods of Observational Astronomy

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No.

Methods of Observational Astronomy

So basically it's an educated guess.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No. We know for a fact how fast light travels. Using triangulation, we know how far distant objects are such as stars or galaxies. From there its a simple math problem. Speed x distance = time.

 

[orogenicman]

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No.

Methods of Observational Astronomy

So basically it's an educated guess.

In the same way that measuring a city block is an educated guess.

 

[edthecynic]

No one has said the universe was 6,000 years old so there is really nothing to rule out.

I still don't see how light from stars can reveal anything about the age of the universe nor the earth for that matter.

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No, you only need the speed and distance to solve for time. We know the speed of light and we can measure the distance and using the formula, distance = speed x time, we can solve for time.

 

[edthecynic]

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No. We know for a fact how fast light travels. Using triangulation, we know how far distant objects are such as stars or galaxies. From there its a simple math problem. Speed x distance = time.

That should be, Time = Distance ÷ Speed

 

[Politico]

The earth's 24 hour rotation makes everyone travel at 1,500 kilometers per hour.
The earth traveling around the sun means everyone travels at 100,000 kilometers per hour.
Our galaxy is traveling through space at a half million kilometers per hour.
Anyone feeling any jet lag?
At the speed of light, it takes the sun's rays eight hours to reach us.
The light we see from the nearest galaxy to us takes 100,000 light years to reach us, which means what we are seeing is a galaxy as it was 100,000 years ago. That really puts a hole in the evangelical's belief that creation is only 6,000 years old.

Just a few trivia from the COSMOS show.

The fact is, no one knows for sure how old the world is.

But we can make a reasonable assumption that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old based simply on the time it would take for light to travel here from stars within our own galaxy.

A monkey can make the assumption that the universe is more than 6,000 years old. Lonestar said no one knows for sure how old it is. That is true.

 

[orogenicman]

The fact is, no one knows for sure how old the world is.

But we can make a reasonable assumption that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old based simply on the time it would take for light to travel here from stars within our own galaxy.

A monkey can make the assumption that the universe is more than 6,000 years old. Lonestar said no one knows for sure how old it is. That is true.

Based on multiple lines of scientific evidence, we can make a reasonable estimate of the age of the Earth. And based on all of that evidence, the Earth is orders of magnitude older than the age that some 17th century Bishop convinced so many people he 'knew' was true based on questionable biblical genealogies.

 

[petson12]

Thanks for the information and i got many valuables information from your post

 

[Politico]

An estimate is what is it is. A guess. No one actually knows. Especially you bipedal humans who have never been farther than the moon.

 

[orogenicman]

An estimate is what is it is. A guess. No one actually knows. Especially you bipedal humans who have never been farther than the moon.

No, a guess is an estimate without sufficient information to be sure of being correct. We know the age of the Earth to within 1%. That is far more precision than a guess. But thanks for playing.

 

[Politico]

Exactly so we agree. A guess is an estimate without sufficient information to be sure of being correct. Aka no one knows. It is a bipedal scum fail.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The OP refuted a common claim among young Earth creationists that the Universe is only 6,000 years old. You responded that no one knows exactly how old the Earth is. I agree, but I pointed out that its probably older than 6,000 years because the light that left stars within our own galaxy, which is approximately 100k years across, took longer than 6,000 years to get here. If the Universe were 6,000 years old we wouldn't see the light emanating from stars more than 6,000 light years away. Therefore we wouldn't see stars even across our own galaxy, let alone galaxies which are millions and billions of light years away becuase there wouldn't have been enough time for the light to get here since their creation. That was my point and the purpose of my first statement.

And that's what that formula above means.

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No. We know for a fact how fast light travels. Using triangulation, we know how far distant objects are such as stars or galaxies. From there its a simple math problem. Speed x distance = time.

So you know the speed of light, you do not know the distance and you do not know the what time the light began to shine.

Sounds simple.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Wouldn't you need to know when the light started it's journey to guess how long it took?

Maybe not.

No. We know for a fact how fast light travels. Using triangulation, we know how far distant objects are such as stars or galaxies. From there its a simple math problem. Speed x distance = time.

So you know the speed of light, you do not know the distance and you do not know the what time the light began to shine.

Sounds simple.

It is simple which is why I can't understand why you aren't getting it. We know how fast light travels. We DO know the distance. When the light began to shine is irrelevant. By this we can assume the Universe is more than 6,000 years old. Exactly how much older isn't known with certainty. But we can see objects which are about 13.6 billion light years so we can safely assume that the Universe is older than that.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The fact is, no one knows for sure how old the world is.

But we can make a reasonable assumption that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old based simply on the time it would take for light to travel here from stars within our own galaxy.

A monkey can make the assumption that the universe is more than 6,000 years old. Lonestar said no one knows for sure how old it is. That is true.

I agree that no one knows with any real certainty exactly how old the the Earth and the Universe are. Science doesn't claim certainty or absolute truth but probability based on evidence. Based on evidence, the Earth is probably around 4.6 years old. Based on evidence, the Universe is probably around 13.6 billion years old.

Many fundamentalist Christians believe the Earth and the Universe are 6,000 years old. That claim is, based on evidence, and you seem to agree, ridiculous.