Today, I will document logical evidence for a young earth based on a series of logical questions. The premise of these questions is going to be based on facts, not assumptions. I realize that if you are a Darwinist then logic is meaningless to you and facts are irrelevant. Therefore, this post is written more for those who are capable of logical thought and accepting facts, and for that I apologize.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Archaeology, Australia, Botany, Bristlecone pine, Charles Darwin, China, Creation myth, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Damascus, Darwinism, Darwinist, Dendrochronology, Environment, Evolution, Flat Earth, Forestry, Geochronology, Great Barrier Reef, Methodological Naturalism, Methuselah, Nature, Oldest City, Pseudoscience, Religion/Belief, Sahara desert, Secular Humanism, Tree
Posted by Gregg on Feb 7, 2010 in
apologetics,
Creation,
homeschooling
I realized that while all of this information is far from new to me, now, after the years of research I have performed on this subject, it may be completely and entirely new to some readers due to the fact that no one dares teach it and thus defy the Darwinian stranglehold on academia.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Charles Darwin, Charles Lyell, Coastal geography, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwin, Darwinism, Darwinist, Earth, Environment, Environmental soil science, Euphrates river, Evolution, Geology, Great Barrier Reef, Gulf of Mexico, Methodological Naturalism, Michael Denton, Mississippi, Mississippi embayment, Mississippi River, Mississippi River Delta, Niagara Falls, Niagara Falls gorge, Ocean, Oceanic basin, Persian Gulf, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Sediment, Sedimentology, Soil, Tigris river
Posted by Gregg on Jan 24, 2010 in
apologetics,
Creation,
homeschooling
Vast amounts of time don’t prove Darwinism, but if the earth is quite young, that directly refutes Darwinism. This post continues to present facts about the age of the earth looking at evidence from our atmosphere and from our globe itself.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Atmosphere, Charles Darwin, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Decay law, Earth, Environment, Evolution, Helium, K.F. Gauss, Kelvin, Larry Vardiman, Melvin A. Cook, Methodological Naturalism, Physicist, Planetary atmospheres, Planetary science, Plasma physics, Polytechnic Institute, Religion/Belief, Robert Whitelaw, Secular Humanism, Space plasmas, Terrestrial planets
I documented evidence from comets, meteors and meteorites, our fellow planets in our solar system, and our sun. All of the empirical evidence suggests that the earth cannot be billions or even millions of years old. There are an astonishing number of factual evidences that our world is quite young.
Pin It
Tags: A. Lyttleton, Age of the Earth, Apollo Missions, Apollo program, Architect, Charles Darwin, Christ Jesus, Comets, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Edwin Aldrin, Environment, Evolution, Exploration of the Moon, Geodesy, Jonathan Sarfati, LEM, Lunar isotopes, Lunar Landing, Lunar science, Lunar soil, Meteorites, Meteors, Methodological Naturalism, Moon, Moon dust, Moon rocks, Moons, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Neil Armstrong, Northrup Grumman, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Tidal acceleration
As I said last Sunday, vast amounts of time don’t prove Darwinism. However, short amounts of time, young ages, directly refute Darwinism. Today, I will continue to present some facts about the age of the earth and the universe in which we exist. While opinions can vary pretty vastly, the fact is that there are numerous factual evidences that our world is quite young.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomer, Astronomy, Charles Darwin, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Evolution, Hydrogen, Methodological Naturalism, Planetary science, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Solar energy theory, Solar System, Stellar energy, Sun, The Universe
Vast amounts of time don’t prove Darwinism. However, the converse does not follow. Short amounts of time, young ages, directly refute Darwinism. This is why Darwinists have worked so hard over the last half century to make anyone who believes earth and the universe to be, in fact, rather young look like a quack, a nut, or someone with an agenda.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomer, Astronomy, Binary Stars, Charles Darwin, Comet, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, energy, Evolution, High-Energy Stars, Hydrogen, Jan Hendrik Oort, Jan Oort, Methodological Naturalism, Oort cloud, Planetary science, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Solar energy theory, Solar System, Star Clusters, Stellar energy, Sun, The Universe
Posted by Gregg on Dec 27, 2009 in
apologetics,
Creation,
homeschooling
Because of the Hubble Constant, their math doesn’t even work out anymore. There are stars that are moving far too fast; stars that are far too distant, stars that are far too bright; etc., ad nauseam. Informed scientists know this. Many have abandoned the accepted theories and are in dedicated pursuit of the truth. Many others refuse to do so because of the metaphysical implications alternative theories present. The latter group has the loudest voice.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Architect, Charles Darwin, Christmas, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Designer, Evolution, Methodological Naturalism, New Year's Day, Objections to evolution, Religion and science, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Social Darwinism, Stephen Jay Gould, The Universe
Before I step into the primordial soup that is Chemical Evolution, which slips nicely down the logical slope into the quagmire of Abiogenesis, I must preface those future posts with some foundational data. This data is important for context. The foundational data we must examine has to do with the fallacy of Darwinist reification and the age of the earth. In this post, I will focus on reification.
Pin It
Tags: Abiogenesis, Age of the Earth, Charles Darwin, Chemical Evolution, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Evolution, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Modal logic, Mother Earth, Non-classical logic, Panspermia, Philosophical logic, Reification, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism
This post will conclude my look at the Darwinian take on the Birth of Stars by listing further scientific problems with the theory and concluding with the number one problem that is insurmountable for Darwinist believers.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Environment, Evolution, Galaxy, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Nuclear physics, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Space plasmas, Star, Stellar astronomy, Stellar evolution, The Big Bang
In my first few posts explaining some of the problems with Stellar Evolution, I detailed the logical problems with the theory and several scientific problems. One of the major conclusions I reached in my personal journey of discovery was that each and every single logical and scientific problem with the collective theories of Darwinian evolution amount to single limiting factors.
Any single limiting factor is enough to refute the entire theory.
Pin It
Tags: Age of the Earth, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Charles Darwin, Christian, Christian Faith, Creation, Creation-evolution controversy, Creationism, Darwinism, Darwinist, Darwinists, Environment, Evolution, Galaxy, Homeschool, Methodological Naturalism, Nuclear physics, Religion/Belief, Secular Humanism, Solar energy, Space plasmas, Star, Stellar astronomy, Stellar evolution, The Big Bang