4 Undeniable Signs of a Young Solar System

[@andreareitan]

I took a course on Earth's geological evolution as part of my BSc. One of the textbooks (Moons & Planets by William K. Hartmann) actually said that the Oort Cloud had been observed. I was rather shocked by that claim because any other astronomer/astrophysicist I've heard, including the non-creationists, says that it has not been observed. They even say there's no way we can observe it. It seems like the author should have cited a paper where the observation was published.

[@IAMhassentyou]

Psalm 19:1-6 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. 2 Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. 3 They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. 4 Yet their voice[b] goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. 5 It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. 6 It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth.

[@duradim1]

I wholeheartedly disagree with Dr. Hebert's assertion that we should not use the moon recession and planet heat lose arguments to support a young Earth. The skeptics can't prove it wrong for one reason so, use it. And others can understand the argument you make. Don't overthink it folks.

[@hugh9996]

The moon is 1) 400 times closer than sun, 2) about 400 times smaller than the sun to give spectacular solar eclipses, 3) Humans happen to be around on earth with eyes to see the phenomenon and minds to appreciate it. Coincidence? I think not.

[@twosheds1749]

Ever wondered why the word coincidence exists? hmmmm I thought not!!

[@hugh9996]

@@twosheds1749 Wow, incredible that you think that's a coincidence. However it happened and however long it took, the universe is so obviously designed, it's bizarre to me that people don't recognise it. Anyway all the best 😎😎

[@twosheds1749]

@@hugh9996 Wow to you as well! 😀 The universe is so obviously designed?! WTF!!! You mean just for us? Wow again, I mean I never envisaged earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, cosmic rays, solar flares, the vacuum of space and asteroid strikes could be so good for us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@hugh9996]

@@twosheds1749 OK, now you're bringing in a moral argument. That's the Fall brought about by human sin, which affects the whole cosmos. However one reads the text, no religion or philosophy has ever come up with any better explanation for the situation we're in than Genesis: A) The cosmos and our own lives are totally phenomenal / beautiful etc. ( Gen 1-2). B) The universe and our own lives are flawed and messed up (Gen 3-4). Give those chapters a read if you get a chance!

[@twosheds1749]

@@hugh9996 Absolute bollocks! Human sin affects the Cosmos? I have never heard so much shit!! LMAO Pathetic childish fantasy!!

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

This is great ICR! Thanks so much! 🙂🙏

[@marionchase-kleeves8311]

15:55 I took an astronomy class at New Mexico State University. Clyde Tombaugh came to class to demonstrate his procedure and tell about his experience in searching for Pluto. I am in favor of keeping Pluto as a planet in view of his contribution to astronomy. Perhapes the other planetoids could be named the Clyde Tombough Cluster. Rita Bebee was my professor and did Earth based observations for Voyager l and ll from NMSU Observatory in the 70s. She is the Jupiter authority for JPL

[@JustinBenya-r5w]

I can't believe all the nonsense the supposed doctors saying, is the world going to be flat too with the firmament above it.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

Nice! Love it guys

[@PearlmanYeC]

9:00 on YeC lunar formation hypothesis Pearlman YeC SPIRAL cosmological redshift hypothesis and model 'Draw-play' for the cause and effect of the physics of lunar formation mid-day 3 with the moon at mature size, density and orbital peculiarity by the end of day 4. reference Pearlman YeC 'Draw-play' hypothesis.

[@christopherscallio2539]

A hypothesis is a step within the Scientific Method. So where's your Science again?

[@PearlmanYeC]

Pearlman YeC 'Draw-play' is by far the highest probability explanation of all the cosmological observations vs any competing hypothesis to date. 'Draw-play' the strongest science on lunar formation with the basic cause and effect for the not just the moon but our original single continent! you ask where to look up, follow, study, fairly consider and test, then if unable to falsify, recommend and share to advance the science. 8 years and still panning out / standing the test of time, of all peer-review scrutiny. Thriving and gaining momentum as new date comes in from JWT etc..

[@PearlmanYeC]

define the strongest science as the highest probability explanation of the empirical observation/s.@@christopherscallio2539

[@Morewecanthink]

Additional recommendation: Creation Science with Philip Stott

[@allyncraig7419]

There is a major fallacy promoted in this video relating to the "creation" of the sun and moon. The Hebrew word for creation "ex nihilo" (out of nothing) is bara', but that word is not used in reference to the "creation" of the sun and moon on day 4. Instead, the Hebrew word used is asah, which does not mean "creation out of nothing", but rather, "creation by moving, rearranging, reforming or fashioning something that already exists" much in the same way that a goldsmith does not create gold out of nothing, but rather, fashions objects from gold that already exists. So the Hebrew text supports better the idea that the sun and moon may have already been present in some form, but were merely moved or rearranged into place on the 4th day. Also, note that the Hebrew text of Gen 1:15 does NOT say that the stars were created on the 4th day. What the Hebrew text says, literally, is "And God arranged two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night and the stars." In other words, it says that the moon was put in place to rule the night and the stars, implying that the stars already existed. It is significant to note that this is exactly how the Septuagint, early Syriac and earliest Latin Vulgate translations all have this reading. The first instance of the "he made the stars also" interpretation actually comes from later Latin Vulgate manuscripts. There is NO textual support for the idea that the sun, moon and stars were created ex nihilo on the 4th day of creation.

[@shawnj3525]

What does Jesus say about stars falling to Earth in Matthew 24:29? What were the stars to which Jesus was referring when He made this statement?

[@jasonhenn7345]

Before mass existed, all the physical laws that control that would have needed to exist, those laws are mathematical, which is language which is intelligence, Tho, all that mass could have been created, then moved and fashioned later, and even just this solar system fashioned later

[@JamesWalters-s3u]

Fallen angels

[@justinjozokos1699]

That's very interesting. I haven't studied Hebrew, but ever since I stopped believing in radiometric "dating," I've been interested in the problem of distant starlight from the creationist perspective. Do you have a source or a link to an article or something concerning these translations of Genesis?

[@eugenearmstrong6836]

AMEN VERY TRUE 💯💯

[@paulfeifert3607]

If Pluto is a planet or not is a matter of definition but if they change their mind it shows they need to planet better. That's my comment for today.

[@shots-shots-shotseverybody2707]

@@paulfeifert3607 exactly which makes nasa a ridiculous agency

[@CrazyRev]

I have sometimes wondered, if the moon was "chipped off" planet Earth by some impact, how is it so spherical? Would it not be a ragged lump?

[@sciencerules8525]

Gravity. Gravity will cause a cloud of particles or loose matter floating in space to coalesce into a sphere.

[@roblangsdorf8758]

​@sciencerules8525 Gravity holds some things together if they are moving at a slow enough speed. But at higher speeds the impact can blow them apart.

[@sciencerules8525]

@@roblangsdorf8758 Yeah, so? He was specifically asking about the moon's formation.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

​@@sciencerules8525gravity. Lol Doesn't explain the perfect shape of the moon. If that were the case it would be far more jagged and not rounded off.

[@sciencerules8525]

@@RobertA-oi6hw I know you don't understand evolution. Now you don't understand how gravity works either. 🙄

[@TellicoJim]

Spike Psarris has similar videos making these arguments.🤙

[@Hydroverse]

Thanks for the information ICR. I personally subscribe to the idea that a lot of the evidence of volcanoes and geysers on other worlds was part of Noah's Flood.

[@dongee1664]

What evidence would that be?

[@Hydroverse]

@@dongee1664 I was talking to ICR, but mainly biblical as the springs of the deep denotes a volcanic catastrophe.

[@dongee1664]

@@Hydroverse Sorry Hydro but we all know it didn't happen. There is an absolute mountain of evidence and logic that says so. Look at evidence impartialy and it will be obvious to you.

[@Hydroverse]

@@dongee1664 I disagree. The galaxies and their jets scream catastrophe alongside the fossils being buried in a watery grave.

[@dongee1664]

@@Hydroverse Fair enough but I would revert to the logical queries. What a monstrous action to kill the world, how could you manage the food and the waste on an arc, how did the extreme areas of the world get the appropriate animals, how did a global flood escape being recorded elsewhere??? Plus lots more.

[@livingpicture]

I saw a documentary that explained that what we thought were volcanoes on Io are in fact electrical discharges. Thus, the markings are electrical scars and not lava flows or otherwise related to vulcanism. Can you address this at some time?

[@TheRealColt45]

We have sent several probes to Jupiter and there is zero question that Io is covered in volcanoes.

[@nickstreeservice4454]

It comes down to. . What is "in the beginning " mean. . ?? When was Gods beginning ? Earth was void and empty. . The crust is thick from spinning forever. . Idk. . The glaciers in nevada are gone. That ice says alot to old. . But. . Let there be light. . Melted the ice. . Old. . Dont 2nd guess that. .

[@miner79r]

In my opinion... I will call Pluto a Planet, because if I say it's not a Planet, it's just just a Dwarf Planet, will the Dwarf People go after me for being Politically Incorrect by insinuating that they are not really People? Great video.

[@marcomclaurin6713]

I'll demonstrate electrical process for creation in my video 'Begining of understanding ' It's an observation in plain sight that has been overlooked

[@dadsstash9842]

really like the Dr.

[@skunkape5918]

I never knew George Castanza was a YEC scientist 😳

[@johndoiron9615]

Great stuff! I have heard that comets may have been made when the earth broke open before Noah's flood. Has anyone else heard that?

[@wholiddleolme476]

@annieoaktree6774 What is 'physically impossible by the laws of physics and orbital mechanics' is for Both Jupiter and Saturn to have moons, the gravitational pull of these giants should have long ago [ maybe BILLIONS of years ] swallowed up their moons. Same goes for Mercury, it shouldn't exist, and yet and yet, alas, alas!

[@wholiddleolme476]

@annieoaktree6774 I'm not interested in what a pack of Nazi criminals say. Unlike yourself, I can think for myself and don't need to be told what, when & how to think. 💩🥱

[@truthisbeautiful7492]

That is Walt Brown's idea, which isn't held by ICR, AIG or CMI. I don't know of any scientists that Christians and astronomers who are convinced by that.

[@TheRealColt45]

LOL.

[@rubiks6]

Tidal friction for the warmth Jovian moons is really quite obvious. I am a biblical creationist. I value honest arguments. I don't think we can use internal heat of Jovian moons to argue for a young solar system. I think this is ambiguous evidence. Orbital mechanics in general might make for better arguments.

[@JustinBenya-r5w]

The main reason Pluto demoted was because it didn't have its own orbit and it veered into Neptunes orbit. Scientists came together and made a list of criteria for a planet to be a planet and one of them is to have its own orbit.

[@brianjongeling8126]

Suns, planets & moons do NOT dictate age of a Universe.

[@robertramsey653]

I think the soft tissue and dna fragments found in dinosaur bones ends all arguments. All they can say is "nuhuh", thats it they have no argument.

[@olderrol]

I love hearing this stuff. I’m definitely a Bible believing Christian but have some questions for these scientists. When we talk about our universe being young I presume we’re talking about our solar system, or, are we talking about the universe? I ask this because the Bible says God created our world and the heavens in six days and rested on the seventh. What do we, as creationists, see as a creation boundary. What was created? Our solar system? The Milky Way? The universe? When astronomers and scientist look at space with instruments, like the Webb telescope, and say they are looking at systems billions of light years away why do creationist scoff? God has no beginning. We can’t put an age on God. Am I to believe God lived in a completely empty void for countless billions of years then decided to create a universe just so we could look up and see stars which show his glory? Let’s face it. Without the Webb telescope we wouldn’t be able to see passed some of the Milky Way. We creationist scoff at evolutionists because they look for alien life. Am I also to believe our God lived for countless billions of years in an empty universe then got lonely and decided to create us? I believe God spoke all we see into existence. How could I believe He hasn’t done the same somewhere else, maybe many times, before he created our would? As I understand it, put simply, Lucifer’s rebellion developed because he wasn’t consulted during the creation of this earth. This would mean, where God created other “earths”, these were done prior to Lucifer’s rebellion so have not sinned like we have. This also means, if they were to visit earth, they would indeed be alien. In fact everything about our world would be alien to them. I hasten to add I do not believe, for second, what people believe, or call alien, are created by God. That’s another subject. I have another question although this is directed at evolutionists. Why do scientist insist water is required to sustain life. Of coarse it is, on earth. Evolution tells us we evolved. If so, we evolved to suit the conditions on this planet. If evolution is our origin then life could evolve on any planet. After all, if we evolved from nothing here why wouldn’t life evolve from nothing anywhere, or everywhere? Where is the law which dictates what conditions are necessary for a lifeless substance to come alive or to sustain its life. Evolutionists can’t provide answers which explain how an inanimate object could begin to live so how could they decide, or dictate, what is necessary to start or sustain life. Yes, this means life could even evolve on our own moon or even Pluto. Now there’s a though Lunatians instead of Martians. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@kevinrtres]

If God is your authority then the bible is your authority on earth. So what exactly does the bible tell you? How do you read Exodus 20:8-11? I see all your "MAYBE" speculations and the age of God mix and ask where in the bible is that stated? If it's not in there, what exactly do you base your statements on? As for the billions of years of God's loneliness - there are 3 persons in the Godhead - with perfect LOVE - so where is the loneliness or boredom? Use the bible to answer your own questions - don't go looking at human "science" or make up your own speculations. The bible tells you to do exactly that in no uncertain terms "do not be wise in your own eyes", Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

[@iaindcosta]

Why should billions of B years be any different to a few seconds to an eternal being? Why should an omnipotent being not just stretch it out?

[@kevinrtres]

When you read Genesis 1 it says that God created an expanse between the waters above and the waters below - and he put the stars into that expanse. So there's your answer. Genesis 1:16 God made the two great lights, the greater light [x]to govern the day, and the lesser light [y]to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the [z]expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and [aa]to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. If you want to contend that it's not to be taken literally - as many unbelievers do, then I'll simply respond that Jesus also didn't really die literally on the cross. Simple as that.

[@olderrol]

Please don’t misunderstand me. Any question I have is directed a science which, while using the Bible as it go to as it should, seems to exclude interesting points, in some areas, while making assumptions, based on good sound reasoning, about others. For example. It makes perfect sense to assume God lead baby dinosaurs into the ark, even though the Bible does not say so, and yet they disagree with the distances some have given for some galaxies to be from earth. Now I’m the first to admit my scepticism about such things, however, dismissing the vastness of the universe/space is a terrible mistake. This is not my point. We cannot comprehend something which has no beginning and no end. How old is God? You tell me when time began and we’ll both know how long God has been around. How far does space stretch? That’s as impossible to know as how old is God. So, am I questioning anything God has told us in his infallible word, the Bible? Definitely not. Nor do I put God in a position which limits Him to my understanding, imagination or my inability to comprehend his majesty and power. Yes his thoughts are above mine, see Isaiah 55:9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts higher than your thoughts”. My take on Exodus 20:8-11 is very simple. This scripture addresses the fact that God set the seventh day of the week apart from every other day as a memorial to His creative power. A day where man could have special connection with Him. The day was also made for man, not man for the sabbath, Mark 2:27. I firmly believe this so I’m not sure of the relevance of your quoting Exodus. On the other hand, Genesis 1:14-18 refers to the creation of the sun, moon and stars. In this reference it states the lesser light, the moon and the stars, were to provide light on the earth at night. There are no maybes in my comments. I was simply wondering. Since very distant galaxies can’t be seen by the naked eye is it possible they were created, by God, for the benefit of other created worlds. Do you not wonder if, in fact, there are other worlds out there God created and those stars, the ones not possible for us to see without the aid of telescopes, are there for their benefit and not necessarily ours. I’m no theologian but as far as I can see everything you mentioned, about our 6 days of creation, relates to our world and what we can see from our world. I firmly believe God created everything, regardless of when or how far it is from us. Does it matter when or how far? I don’t believe so. God hasn’t told us everything. There are many things we haven’t been told. As far as God being lonely. This was tongue in cheek. Something to make us consider the real possibility of other worlds. Not only did God have his Son and the Holy Spirit, which are one, but the presence of countless numbers of angels. Again my curiosity relates to whether or not other worlds are inhabited by beings God has created rather than aliens our non believing friends think are out there. As far as human wisdom being foolishness. Yes you are correct, however, our awesome God gave us incredible minds. There is nothing wrong with looking at his creation, whether we can see it or not without assistance, and wondering about it. In fact seeing it through a telescope only makes His creative power the more fantastic.

[@todd1s45]

Very well said! I am very certain that God has other creations like ours. As you point out, God's ways are not man's ways. If I'm telling a young child, maybe a four year old, about anything, I won't try to tell them every little detail... they won't get it. And that's if they don't fall asleep or run off out of boredom! You give them snippets. Truth, accurate, but not the whole story. In fact giving them little bits and then showing them how to test your words and learn for themselves is called good education! I would expect that God knows how to educate us better than anyone else could! So, for this reason, among many others, I don't think the Bible contains all knowledge. The most important knowledge, to be sure, but in many ways it seems like the beginner course... not the whole course. And like a truly great textbook it tells you where to go when you've learned all you can from its pages or even if you're just having difficulty with what it says. James 1:5. Put in a call to technical support! So, when I read about the creation, I don't assume that it means no stars were created before our earth. That may be possible but not a certainty. It tells me that this is when He positioned our earth among the other creations. Also where He put it in relation to those others. Because, as any good teacher knows, while it can be fun, particularly for one inspired student, a trip down the rabbit hole loses the majority of your listeners, so you tell them to see you after class for more information if they are interested, or refer them to other sources of information. But for the purposes of the class you are in, the simple explanation is sufficient.

[@HS-zk5nn]

it's almost like things dont fit in like scientists want them to

[@ryanvandyke9684]

😂🤣😂🤣😂

[@HS-zk5nn]

@VFA666 except when it comes to the solar system, the universe and biology.

[@HS-zk5nn]

@VFA666 there is no reason to believe that earth was 1 day old 6000 years ago. adam wasnt a baby on day 1. wrong assumptions you have

[@HS-zk5nn]

@VFA666 sure there is no reason why God couldnt make it appear that way. not sure what your point is

[@HS-zk5nn]

@VFA666 why would that be false? Adam didnt look like day 1 when he was created. there is no reason earth look like it was 1 day old when it was created. why do you keep dodging that question?

[@jasonhenn7345]

Will this falls planetary squaring shake earth, and allow debris impacts, and reference in relation to the now occurring Grand solar minimum event that is causing extreme weather shifts and thus global crop failures that r already occurring, and that r being leveraged in the geopolitical we see Soon enough food will buy gold

[@olderrol]

I understand what you’re saying. God is omnipotent. His power is beyond our comprehension and understanding. I believe the creation story exactly as it is written in the Genesis account. If it were possible to write all the details I couldn’t begin to imagine the size of the book, hence the very limited account. The discussion regarding creation v evolution is certainly a distraction but this is exactly what the devil wants to see. In actual fact evolution is still a theory only. Personally it doesn’t distract me but I do find it interesting now there is so much information which challenges the evolutionist. Evolutionists scoff at the idea of a person having faith in religious beliefs. Frankly, I feel more faith is required to believe in evolution. I can go into my shed and make something but I can’t believe if I left the materials in my shed they would eventually become something, let alone living creatures. Because I can create it’s easier for me to believe God can create. I’ve watched a number of videos John Lenoxx has done. One talks about the difficulty in understanding, and justifying, suffering on earth, from a Christian perspective. His explanation is brilliant and shows that apart from being distant, and uncaring, he has, through the death of his Son, become a partaker in our suffering. I’ve never thought of others of God’s creations being in a spiritual realm. I believe he is a physical entity along with His Son and the Holy Spirit. I also believe the Holy Spirit is only in spirit form here on earth. From scripture we can see Jesus told his disciples, when they were distressed about his accession to His father, it was necessary for him to go and he would ask the father to send a comforter, see John 14:16, so he could be with them always. As I understand it Jesus, when he came to earth, took on human form for eternity. This meant he would be restricted and would not be able to be omnipresent. The Holy Spirit is not restricted, therefore, is of more help to us than Jesus could be. Further, Jesus had a work to do in heaven, as our advocate with the farther, he couldn’t do if he stayed here on earth. As such I’ve always thought God would create in the physical form. I believe the angels are actual beings and not spirits. Will God ever create another “earth” after he recreates this earth? Good question. I guess the question needs to be. If God created another “earth” would those new beings understand the consequences of sin? The Bible says God will completely destroy sin and all memories of it apart from the nails scars Jesus will carry for eternity as a perpetual reminder of Gods love for us. If it’s not possible for sin to return would a new creation have the freedom to choose to worship God, which is the basis of love? Like you I long for the day the world, as we know it, will pass away and we shall live, forever, in a new perfect world. A place where God will be with us and we will have eternity to learn about Him. Praise God for his love for a sinful human race.

[@kevinrtres]

Just to be strictly correct - the use of the word Theory in science points to a well-established and well-supported by evidence hypothesis which has yet to be contradicted. Evolution is nowhere any bit close to that - it's simply still in the hypothesis stage looking for evidence to support it. Its adherents will say anything to make it look like an established theory - calling it a fact left right and center to make the unwary believe it is true. It's just sheer conjecture in my view.

[@olderrol]

@@kevinrtres Thank you for passing that on. It frustrates me evolution is forced on us, as fact, when it hasn’t been proven. If this was done with anything else it would be quashed very quickly.

[@twosheds1749]

@@olderrol Religion is forced on people much more than evolution ever is! Would you support not forcing religion on people? Evolution is taught in schools because all the evidence and observations support it. In fact you could spend the rest of your life studying it, there is so much supporting information for it. After school you can go home and forget about it if you want. It does not change the reality.

[@twosheds1749]

@@kevinrtres You are entitled to your view no matter how misguided. Evolution is one of the most tested theories in scientific history! It is accepted as fact that explains bio diversity in all sciences including biology, palaeontology, molecular biology, genetics, anthropology etc. It has never been challenged in science. Finally I think you will agree science while not perfect, is still the best tool we have for determining truth from fiction. It is irrelevant that you just dont like the idea of it! It is still the truth.

[@kevinrtres]

@@twosheds1749 The evolutionary "explanations" stink, period. I am well pleased that I can see for myself and form my own judgements on the genetics, biology, molecular biology and the veracity of the bible. There is only ONE truth - not the many that gets spewed out almost daily as people keep finding that things are older than they thought, or younger than they thought or not extinct any more or whatever other happenstance that invalidates the evolutionary view that now has to be fixed because it's broken. Where is the truth in that? There is only ONE truth - HE is Jesus, the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to God the Father except thru HIM. He doesn't change - He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. That is pure truth - ROCK solid. You are free to put your trust in the age of rocks - I'll put my trust in The ROCK of Ages!

[@clightning300mi]

When I see a plane with bright contrails I go on flight radar 24 and touch follow. Then with good binoculars I follow the contrails. 300 miles is attainable. According to the internet earth curve calculator that is 11 miles over the curvature of the earth. The contrails stay flat and level with the horizon. Following contrails into the sunset is best. With our eyes we were following plane contrails into the sunset at 220 miles. Ahead we saw plane contrails going north south. The plane app showed it was at 400 miles. That is 20 miles over the curvature of the earth. My friend was speechless.

[@lexpox329]

Is this a flat earth comment? No one contests a spherical earth, way to much evidence you can see with your own eyes that the world in spherical.

[@clightning300mi]

@@lexpox329 have you ever been outside at night and been startled by lightning bolts on the horizon. Look at a weather radar app and match the storms with the radar. You will be surprised. I have seen lightning bolts at 300 miles. According to the internet earth curve calculator that is 11 miles over the curvature of the earth. A proof anyone can do to prove the earth is flat. Even you.

[@geoffsutton78]

Just playing "devil's advocate" here, regarding the Earth's magnetic field could not the gravity of the moon and it's rotation (never mind that it should by now be tidally locked) be enough to maintain the current, presumably caused by electron flow between the rotating core and the mantle, recharging itself? It seems that is an argument that would be used to support the continuance of the magnetic field.

[@TheRealColt45]

The moon is tidally locked.

[@geoffsutton78]

You're right, my bad. I meant geosynchronicity, where it's orbital period matched the Earth's rotation and is always over the same point of the planet. Thank you.

[@TheRealColt45]

@@geoffsutton78 You're welcome!

[@kpec3]

The sun throws off over 1 ton of energy per second. Its diameter shrinks such that if you went back one billion years, it would have been too large, too close and too hot for life on earth.

[@brianjongeling8126]

What is the evidence of a "young universe",knowing perfection existed long before sin entered with man?

[@michaeldeas1969]

Rescuing devices come out of evilutionists like clowns from a clown car😂😂😂

[@jotunthe11thhyman65]

It's so nice to be able defend faith with hard science. Thank you so much for making these videos.

[@CBALLEN]

Im not even sure this is 2024,I think we've been lied about almost everything

[@Au.9999]

The Earth receives its electricity from the Sun which in turn is connected to the 'Cosmic Electrical Grid'.

[@shots-shots-shotseverybody2707]

Record after the second age is 6000 years. But the Bible is very clear through written and empiracle evidence of the first age which we have no clue the age of it but its not millions or billions.

[@thomasmyers9128]

Salt levels in the oceans points to young earth…. The oceans would be like the Dead Sea if the earth was old….

[@srb4722]

He is one grade higher than a flat earther.

[@randylahey8153]

OK, I have a QUESTION too : how come we can see Venus and Mercury in deep night on the sky if we supposedly in the night are faceing away from Sun surface and those two planets are on inner orbits around the Sun...its like seeing something from back of your head whats in front... just like this guy on the video says, and shows how on TV the news anchor clearly shows four planets near each other in plain night : kzbin.info/www/bejne/qpm4g3-mZsZgrJY

[@TheRealColt45]

You cannot see them in the deep night. You can only catch a glimpse at dusk, thus Venus having the nickname of the evening star.

[@randylahey8153]

@@TheRealColt45 you shouldnt be able see Mercury in the evenings or sunrises cuz its beyond of visible spectrum acording even to science models, Mercury should be only visible in the day by telescopes with filters.

[@brianjongeling8126]

Remember, God does not claim "literal creation" in Gen. 1. Everything God declared was made, except for man.

[@shawnj3525]

Earth is not a spinning ball of water circling a massive ball of fire that is screaming through an ever-expanding extreme vacuum.

[@user-vn8so9rf3d]

Earth is not a spinning ball of water, it is mainly rock with a thin bit of water on the surface. The Sun is not a massive ball of fire - It is quite ordinary in size and is a hot fusion reaction (H --> He etc.). And also, vacuums can't be expanding, as technically, vacuums are an absence of matter.

[@shawnj3525]

@@user-vn8so9rf3d Earth is not a water-covered spinning rock circling around a speeding ball of fire that is flying through an ever-expanding extreme vacuum for billions of years. That's what big-bang cosmology tells us is true. The Bible says otherwise.

[@shawnj3525]

@@user-vn8so9rf3d God created the Earth BEFORE He created the Sun, Moon, and Stars. God set the Sun, Moon, and the Stars above Earth, just as the Bible says. This is the Biblical model of our cosmology. Big-bang cosmology completely contradicts Biblical cosmology. Big-bang cosmology is THEORETICAL nonsense, just as Evolutionary Theory is THEORETICAL nonsense. Evolutionary Theory was born out of Heliocentric Theory. I choose to believe the Bible's description of creation rather than the models that big-bang cosmology and evolutionary theory present to us.

[@kevinhank17]

​@@shawnj3525if you look up you can quite definitively prove to yourself that we are on a spinning sphere. Try it. Look up. Specifically look towards polaris and Sigma Octantis, though you will likely need to travel to see Sigma Octantis, which is further proof in itself of a spherical world. If the world was flat then all the stars would be visible from everywhere, there wouldn't be southern constellations that are only visible from the southern hemisphere and there certainly wouldn't be two pole stars.

[@MastaE2288]

God loves you, but I have to say it. George from Seinfeld.

[@thomasmyers9128]

A rouge planet slamming into “their problem” is their solve all answer…… 😂

[@mmast7554]

The voting on Pluto less than 25% were present so science is reduced to conveniences where before no matter how uncomfortable the science made you feel the science was accepted....in case this sounds familiar.....B I B L E

[@nathanalexanderguess25]

He lost me at comets being dirty snowballs. I'm an electric universe armchair theorist and don't fly that.

[@jd-gw4gr]

science/physics will never contradict King Jesus' creaation, never.

[@VaxtorT]

As we approach closer and closer to the end times, evolution will not so much be the problem as will be the Alien/Nephilim Phenomenon. Cannot understand why Creationists avoid this topic like the plague.

[@kevinrtres]

I think the Universal e-ID being put into place now under the auspices of the UN ( with magnificent financial support from BGates ) - and already on the cards in the EU - will be a much, much more significant problem for Christians.

[@skunkape5918]

✝️💛🙏☦

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

Supposed “indicators of youth” don’t nullify current dating methods of age. What dating method yields a result of 6,000 years?

[@HS-zk5nn]

6000 years old? even science says that the earth wasnt formed instantly

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@HS-zk5nn: Yes, I know that..

[@valerieprice1745]

You put too much faith in dating "methods " and testing. No methods are accepted by Marxists in academia unless they are consistent with the atheist political narrative.

[@Sawyersmaple]

Biblical genealogies, give us around 6000 years.

[@scienceandbibleresearch]

@@Sawyersmaple: Your misuse of the genealogies is not a direct statement of age. The context of my question was a scientific one. What scientific dating method yields a 6,000 year old earth?

[@rosewhite---]

Hebert is a Big Banger who imagines Earth and Moon were made from bigbang dust! What a fool.

[@lastchance8142]

There is still way more to consider regarding the age of the universe. Because of Relativity, we see a universe of 13.8 billion years "looking back". But looking "out" from the origin of the big bang, you would see a little over 8000 years. The creation narrative is written from God's perspective, not ours. Both time lines are "correct" depending on your frame of reference.

[@stephencummins7589]

Load of rubbish. You are making a home made pie of evolution and astronomy.

[@infocloudonline3720]

utter nonsense

[@JuvoII]

Drive-by scientist yes? Bear in mind, no "theories" where presented here, no explanations that one could call nonsense. Just a presentation of observations, that established science, has great difficulty fitting into their timeframe.

[@mrazyone]

I do not believe billions of years but I do not think it 6000 years. From the bible a s my studies it's 13k

[@GenealogyGuy1947]

Dr. Hebert keeps saying the evolutions say "Maybe this or that." How does the word "maybe" fit the scientific method? And how many times do they get to use that term before becoming a totally incompetent scientist?

[@kevinrtres]

IT fits as long s it supports the evolutionary fairy tale. Under that world view even blatant lies are equally welcome.

[@youllneverfindthischannel]

I think the ‘maybes’ he’s using are just him describing hypotheses. The ideas scientists have come up with that aren’t yet proved. Because in the short sense, they are still just possiblities.

[@rosewhite---]

Moon is activated every time the sun comes into alignment. The moon was never hot but was once filled with water just like Earth is.

[@WoistdasÖlkännchen]

🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣

[@TheRealColt45]

I double checked the maths and you are correct.

[@robertbrown5536]

I think both of you are missing the whole point, you're talking about fundamental physics on the surface of the Earth and how that works and that's not at all what you're dealing with when you're talking about the magnetic field of the Earth. How much pressure is it under halfway down. How much pressure is it under 90% of the way down. Now if you really understand the power factor when you make a magnetic material very dense it increases its power if things are purely aligned it increases either the current ability to flow through it or it increases the resistance depending on the type of material and that would increase the voltage produced by that current so you're not looking at the physics that actually take place in the center of the Earth. You're also leaving out the fact that the universe is expanding but so is our solar system the Earth used to be much closer to the Sun and the Moon was much closer to the Earth and so that has changed things in ways you're not taking into account. Maybe you should read Revelations or it talks about the 144,000 that were born before the foundations of the earth that have the right and the duty to overcome the darkness. That means some of us were born in heaven before the Earth was created. I know I have had many lives when I was a child I thought they were daydreams but then I started reading people they were in those days rings and they started remembering me. Not just one time but Israel in the 40s world war II world war I the American revolution times before that times in ancient England. And mankind has been on the earth more than 6,000 years. Of the ancient Hindu records are correct there was an atomic war about 35,000 to 50,000 years ago. And they have found that glass the results from an atomic blast 18 places on the Earth but they don't talk about that in the news. You have tunnel Vision on, you're not listening to the scientist in the ancient religious historians. And you're definitely not talking to God. But you put the Bible between you and God your worshiping a false idol...

[@kevinrtres]

Just visit their website please - all your assertions have already been attended to.

[@johncollins8304]

New Genesis 1: In the beginning, we just got lucky.

[@MastaE2288]

4.5 billion years after the beginning, we just got lucky. But not for long because we only live to about 100 years or so and nothing we believe in matters after that anyway.

[@johncollins8304]

​@@MastaE2288Unless it does. You only have 100 years to wait to find out.

[@MastaE2288]

@@johncollins8304 I'm on your side here. My point is that they mock, ridicule, and argue while according to their own belief, it doesn't matter anyway.

[@johncollins8304]

​@@MastaE2288Sorry/ thanks. My sarcasm-o-meter needs tuning.

[@rosewhite---]

Hebert is a fool.

[@erwinrommel6777]

Hit that like plz thumbs-up helps spread the word of GOD ❤

[@twosheds1749]

Jake, you are not credible!

[@sciencerules8525]

What *scientific* evidence indicates a 6000 year old Earth or a 4400 year old Noah's Flood? "The Bible says" isn't scientific evidence.

[@HS-zk5nn]

adam wasnt a baby on day 1. why would the earth look like 1 day old 6000 years ago?

[@sciencerules8525]

@@HS-zk5nn Why would God create the Earth with tons of evidence it was really billions of years old?

[@HS-zk5nn]

@@sciencerules8525 why not? He did the same with Adam

[@HS-zk5nn]

@VFA666 if anything it is being consistent since he did the same with adam.

[@LuciferAlmighty]

They love their myths so much they believe it and lie the whole way

[@twosheds1749]

These two are just coming up with topics that science has not fully explained yet and trying to pretend a creator did it! LOL

[@sciencerules8525]

Magnetic signatures in rocks show the Earth's magnetic field has reversed at least 183 times in the last 80+ million years. It's amazing how much basic scientific knowledge this guy gets wrong.

[@timconstable7348]

An interpretation of SOME magnetic signatures could be that the field might have reversed 183 times. there is NO definite mechanism as to how the field would reverse. Creationists propose that it is the result of seabed folding during the Great Flood. You have no grounds to accuse people of getting stuff wrong if you can' t distinguish between hypothetical speculation and solid science.

[@sciencerules8525]

@@timconstable7348 The magnetic reversal signatures are empirically observed in rocks going back that far. Creationists just yell *NUH-UH!* as they always do because they have no way to explain the empirical data. But do show us the "solid science" which conclusively demonstrates the seafloor folded 183 times in one "Flood" year and produced this magnetic data. 🙂

[@LuciferAlmighty]

It's hilarious a 5th grader has more knowledge in science than these two in the video combined.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

That's a nice guess but unproven speculation. More and more from you guys all the time.

[@sciencerules8525]

@@RobertA-oi6hw More hand-waving and screaming *NUH-UH!* from the science illiterate.

[@zeus7914]

the bible should not be taken so literally. it was written thousands of years ago by multiple authors and translated countless times into many languages. lots of room for errors. religion, science and evolution can co-exist.

[@kevinrtres]

Please go study the history of the bible and get your facts straight. The bible is the most reliable book in the history of mankind. Get to know the history and see for yourself.

[@zeus7914]

​@@kevinrtres do you even know what facts are? nothing i said is wrong. you are just triggered. what does 'most reliable book in history' even mean and how does it relate to what i said? chill out. we are on the same team.

[@lexpox329]

The number of times my Bible was translated was once, from Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic into English. So translations are not really adding to ambiguity anymore. Its more the loss of cultural knowledge that makes various passages uncertain and the inherent limitations of ancient Hebrew in vocabulary. Even the multiple authors is not really a problem as long as the narratives are coherent (like they are), revelation was progressive though so you do have to take the entire corpus as a whole when trying to understand what is being communicated. In light of that I agree with your assessment that certain parts should be handled carefully with an appropriate degree of room for interpretation. I mostly favor an approach of what can this absolutely not mean to put bounds on what I allow to be interpretations, also using more clear scriptures to inform what less clear ones can mean. I find that YEC (namely Ken Ham) often conflate my unwillingness to draw concrete conclusions from ambiguous texts as meaning I don't believe Jesus was an actual person and I must not be saved. This is ridiculous, the new testament accounts of Jesus are very obviously intended to be interpreted literally due to many textual markers such as the clear distinction between parables and regular text and the large number of place names, personal names and events recorded (including exhortation to go find eyewitnesses still alive at the time of writing and ask them yourself for corroboration). The old testament however is much less certain as the genre of a given text and how it should best be interpreted in many places.

[@zeus7914]

@@lexpox329 well said. my comment was rushed and short. i could have explained my position better, but opted for a brief retort instead. i was only trying to illustrate that interpreting the words of the bible will not always yield concise results, and that statements should not be all taken so literally. the book of Revelations is a good example. do we really believe a monster with 7 heads and 10 horns existed? i suppose its possible but unlikely. thank you for your comment. i appreciate you taking the time to explain your position, which is more than i did when i originally replied to the video.

[@kevinrtres]

@@mirandahotspring4019 I'm sorry you feel such animosity towards the Word of God. Hearing quotes from it must fill you with great revulsion and loathing. Such pain. Did you know that the bible is the most researched and corroborated piece of literature in the whole world? There's nothing that even comes close. So if you think that IT is all lies then I don't know what the others are? Do you think W Shakespeare was a figment of someone's imagination? Or how about the Da Vinci code? Is that truth personified? Do you think Julius Caesar was a myth? And what about the Homer's Iliad?

[@dongee1664]

Excruciatingly embarrassing..... Stick to faith.

[@sciencerules8525]

There's not one single thing this guy claimed which established an *upper* limit to the age of the Earth.

[@kevinrtres]

Just as you are sticking to the faith in abiogenesis...pure blind faith???

[@dongee1664]

@@kevinrtres I didn't mention abiogenesis but I would much prefer that to your magic man in the sky who loves to threaten, punish, and kill people and all because he made them badly in the first place...or so it is said.

[@christopherscallio2539]

I Don't have enough Faith to be an Evolutionaist.

[@dongee1664]

@@christopherscallio2539 I think it would be fairer to say that you haven't studied the evidence of evolution enough to understand it. Also you are likely to have been subjected to so much threat and fear that you dare not. Evolution does not require faith, just the ability to absorb facts and the things that man has learned over the last several thousand years instead of standing still in his knowledge.

[@AENDT]

Cherrypicking from science in order to justify a crappy old book.

[@HS-zk5nn]

why are you imposing your views on others?

[@LuciferAlmighty]

They aren't even cherry picking they are straight up lying

[@kevinrtres]

Says the son of lucifer, great!@@LuciferAlmighty

[@LuciferAlmighty]

@@kevinrtres Jesus is Lucifer

[@youllneverfindthischannel]

We’re just exploring what’s out there. They’re talking about what has been found that supports the Bible. We hear the arguments about what doesn’t every day. I think these people would admit that there are things that don’t add up. But for us, we feel that the science will always come back around to Gods word. We just haven’t learned enough about those other things yet.

[@LuciferAlmighty]

Yec has been proven wrong ad nauseam.

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

According to the ad populum fallacy? 😂

[@sciencerules8525]

@@RobertA-oi6hw According to 160+ years' worth of scientific physical evidence.

[@LuciferAlmighty]

@@RobertA-oi6hw obvious troll is obvious

[@RobertA-oi6hw]

@@sciencerules8525 vs an eternal God who had no beginning. Trumped again rulesy.

[@kevinrtres]

try abiogenesis - produce supporting evidence

[@n8mail76]

Exegesis of the book of Genesis doesn't necessarily make a rock solid case for a 6000 yr old earth. But that is fine. The problem is that the scientific and educational systems are based on freedom of though yet refuse to permit a young earth hypothesis.

[@sciencerules8525]

It will certainly be permitted and even welcomed by science *as soon as it comes up with some scientific positive supporting evidence.* Do you have any? "The Bible says" isn't scientific evidence.

[@kevinrtres]

@@sciencerules8525 The *scientific positive supporting evidence" requirement doesn't seem to apply to the evolutionary/big bang adherents, so it would appears that the dices are loaded...?? Yes? Take for instance the solid prediction that Mercury would have no magnetic field. Or that the moon Titan of Saturn would be drowning in a sea of methane? Or that Uranus and Neptune should not exist - according to the nebular / planetesimal model - and that scientists have known this for 30 years already - yet they still hold onto it? We can go on and on with this lack of evidence that supports the evolutionary religion.

[@sciencerules8525]

@@kevinrtres Wow. You really don't know the difference between astrogeology and evolution? Oh wait, you're a creationist... 😄

[@youllneverfindthischannel]

I definitely agree. I’m very passionate about wanting to share different sides of science with others, as I was pretty much told growing up that I could either believe in science, or believe in the Bible. It makes me so happy to see strides taken towards supporting Gods word with science as well. I just wish it was at least shown as an option

[@globalcoupledances]

Ratio Uranium-Lead in Zirconium crystals points to 4.5 billion years. Creationists can not deny that

[@RoyTheInfidel]

Drivel.