Why Science is right and Ken Ham is bunk @aig

While studying what’s known as a globular cluster, called Messier 4, 7200 light years away, in the constellation Scorpius, they found a star that is much younger than those around it.

” star #37934, shows remarkably high lithium abundance, compatible with current estimates of the primordial lithium abundance,” researchers report.

via Mysterious star challenges view of clusters › News in Science (ABC Science).

First… note the 7200 light year distance… (1200 years more than 6000 years, amen?). Second, note the younger star… Ham, forgetting logic, reason, and most other human cognitive senses (except lying), has suggests that creation no longer occurs (I guess babies be born come from a pre-manufactured center or something). And yet, we have proof.

Thank you, God’s holy book of Science.

You Might Also Like

14 Replies to “Why Science is right and Ken Ham is bunk @aig”

  1. Its Dr. Tee to you and there is no way for evolutionists, secular scientists, or false teachers to measure the age of a planet. The article does demonstrate how willingly some people are to accept and believe a lie.

    In reading the article it is ridiculous to call Ken Ham or other creatinists liars when all one is basing their false accusation upon are assumptions, speculation and conjecture. There is no way to verify the claim of those researchers and it still doesn’t mean Ken Ham lied. Creation is over but that doesn’t mean men and women do not reproduce.

    Nor does it mean that animals and plants do not reproduce BUT that does not mean reproduction translates to the universe. Since those researchers did not see the supposed birth of those planets, they cannot say that they were ‘born’. Since those researchers did not see and observe minute by minute the supposed process that is claimed to take place in the supposed birth of a planet, there is no way they can say that ‘reproduction’ of planets is taking place today.

    Accepting such ideas from sinful men who have rejected God is disobedience to Him and sin. When will supposed ‘christians’ get this through their heads. God did not say, only listen to secular experts who have published and completed a lot of experiments. HE SAID –DO NOT listen to the unbeliever. It doesn’t matter how many years experience they have, how many experiments they have conducted, or how much of an expert they claim to be.

    God has spoken and people are to listen and obey.

    1. David, when you present any evidence you actually deserve respect, I’ll call you Dr., but until then, be happy I call you David.

      Creationists misinterpret Scripture and are heterodox at best, heretics are worst. I prefer the latter, myself. Ham is a liar, or ignorant, and if purposely ignorant, than a liar. The fact is, is that light has traveled 7200 years, meaning that the light from the starts are older than Ham’s imaginary creation stories.. And since it takes millions of years for stars to form, well… you can do the basic math, right?

      First, stars are born through the combination of “genetic” material from several sources. It is every bit a creative act as the birth of a child. It is an act of God each and every time… and yet… you do what? You deny God’s power. Heretic.

      You can only rail against something, but present no evidence for your views… As a matter of fact, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest, to confirm, to solidify that Young Earth Creationists read Scripture falsely, idolatrously.

      So, either put up, or for the love of all that is holy, shut up.

      1. Yet you present No evidence to support your claim. How do you know that the light from those stars actually travelled that distance?

        Hubble declared that red shift galaxies are moving away from the milky way so exactly where is this supposed starting point for this light to originate? At what point was this star supposedly ‘born’? Where in the galaxy was it compiled? How long did the compilation take and what are the exact measure ments to chart its progress?

        How can you be sure the gas or mineral measured can tell the age of the star? What comparison figures do you have that will verify the conclusion?

        You have nothing so before asking me for evidence produce your own.

        As for your ‘genetic’ idea, please produce the actual samples from that star that confirm your diagnosis.

        I do not have to provide ‘evidence’ as I go with the Bible and declare that God created the heavens and the earth at the same time, then he created all stars at the same time. They are all the same age.

        All you have is speculation and math equations which prov enothing

        1. First, light has to have a source, otherwise you have a god who is Loki and worse, creating impossible paradoxes.

          No, the red shift myth is a favorite of those who pretend to know about science and have neatly framed PDF degrees in their wallets but it is debunked.

          Surely you understand what is meant by the quotes, right? Stars are formed by gravity, gases and the such. You know, like sperm an egg. I know the bible doesn’t talk abou sperm and egg but suggests God does needlepoint, but children are created when sperm fertilizes eggs.

          No, you need more evidence than “I read the bible this way and I have a degree I printed off the pc.” this is not evidence. This is at best hysteria and at worst psychological madness, something you seem familiar with.

          No, the stars are not the same age. We know this by the simplest experiment of measuring light, a constant.

          I understand people like to think more of themselves often times, but I don’t know how your voices aren’t truly embarrassed by your statements.

          1. Hate to tell you this but every astronomer I have read still follow Hubble and his ideas. What your little personal attack tells me is that you cannot answer those questions nor provide any evidence to support your view.

            Light has a source, it is God and if you recall, God created light first which means that the sun is not the origin of light but a mere tool of God’s.

            Your denial of the truth is complete. Please do not claim to be Christian any more as you have left God and gone with evil.

            The rest of your post i snot worth even considering as you do not want the truth, you want secular science over God and His word.

          2. Hubble and this theories do not support, in anyway, the young universe, anymore than they do the “biblical” universe of a sphere where a flat earth is stationary.

            The Red shift is misinterpreted by flat-earthers, YECs, and the like because they do not understand what they are talking about – much like they treat Scripture.

            I realize you do not understand simple Hebrew, or ANE lexicons, but “create” is not the same as ours. Hebrew “create” means to assign function.

            Light does have a source. It comes from the singularity preceding the Big Bang, much like gravity.

            Poor thing… you choose heretics over truth, over God’s truth, and you think you are right.. awwww so special…. Like others, you fail to comprehend just how silly you are.

          1. Insult all you want but it doesn’t change the truth and just because you do not like what someone says it doesn’t give you permission to address them any way you want.

            You have alot to learn and your first step is admitting that you are a heretic and a false teacher.

          2. People like to be called all sorts of things – but until they earn it, they don’t deserve it.

            I agree – you are a heretic, but in order for you to be a false teacher, you first have to teach, something you clearly don’t know how to do. And for that, Davy, we can be thankful.

Leave a Reply, Please!

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