Why Science CANNOT Prove the Earth Is Billions of Years Old

This eye-opening presentation from Bryan Osborne will show you why the earth isn’t billions of years old, as well as why science and the Bible clearly support an earth that’s only a few thousand years old.
========
Answers in Genesis is an apologetics (Christianity-defending) ministry dedicated to enabling Christians to defend their faith and proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ effectively.
On our KZbin channel, you’ll find answers to your most pressing questions about key issues like creation, evolution, science, the age of the earth, and social issues. We desire to train believers to develop a worldview based on the Bible and expose the bankruptcy of evolutionary ideas and their implications.
You’ll hear from top teachers such as Ken Ham, Bryan Osborne, Dr. Georgia Purdom, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, Tim Chaffey, Bodie Hodge, Dr. Gabriela Haynes, Dr. Terry Mortenson, and more.
Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world: AnswersinGenesis.org/give

[@charlieb9144]

As a new believer in Jesus Christ coming from atheism, this is exactly what I needed to confirm! Praise God and thank you for this video ❤

[@christopheespic]

Good for you! But please, do not throw away your critical thinking, e.g. when it comes to the age of the Earth 😉.

[@off6848]

@@christopheespicthis video is the definition of critical thinking It’s a critique of an ideology

[@christopheespic]

@@off6848 oh please.... 🙄

[@billyb7465]

Why were you an atheist before?

[@mrastin821]

@@off6848 Errr....sorry, but this video is entirely based on uncritical acceptance of bronze age myths over verifable sceintific information.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

100% Truth, which is why you never see a single example of a human who was the offspring of a nonhuman.

[@sciencerules2825]

Why would you expect to see an entirely new species in one generation?

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@sciencerules2825 I don't, because I accept observable biology and documented history which demonstrate to us that creatures only reproduce after their own kind just like the Bible says God created them to. There is only one observable species of human. Here we are over 150 years after darwinism's inception, having observed billions of human births and we have zero transitions of nonhumans to humans and zero transitions of humans to something that is not human. Yet we see 100% accuracy of what scripture says: that humans only produce after their own kind. That's solid scientific evidence for the Bible. Pls accept observable science and documented history; declare Jesus as your Lord, believe in your heart that God raised him from death and you will be saved (Romans 10:9).

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@sciencerules2825 just tell us who in your family was an ape and put this whole debate to rest.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@refuse2bdcvd324 So you're whining over something no one says or thinks happened anyway. 😂

[@sciencerules2825]

@@refuse2bdcvd324 All human beings are apes, including you. Cope.

[@CuriousMouseExploration]

I have a question: why don't they use the principle of uniformitarianism when it comes to climate change/global warming? Because we can prove climate change is always changing from the beginning to the present, but they act like this is something new.

[@jockyoung4491]

Because uniformitarianism has not been a scientific tenet for many decades. It is not "what science says." It is a straw man the creationists latch onto to help them mislead their audience about science.

[@fabianwittmann8121]

Uniformitarianism is applied, when something seems constant. For example half times of radioactive material. Not constant is for example CO2 in our atmosphere or the change of distance between the earth and the moon.

[@jockyoung4491]

Uniformitarianism has not been a scientific assumption for many decades. The climate has not only changed many times form the beginning, and has sometimes done so suddenly and most definitely not "uniformly". That should be enough to give us pause. The only thing that is new today is that WE are contributing to it.

[@sciencerules2825]

@@jockyoung4491 The huge concern today is the rapid *rate of change* of the climate. Extreme climate changes are documented in the history of the planet but in the past they always happened so slowly life could evolve fast enough to keep up. That is not true with this latest change which is 100% man made. We're currently entering a 6th mass extinction event because most species just can't keep up with the environmental changes.

[@mike111om]

because climate change/global warming is a cult

[@leithmark959]

Hmmm... I was taught in school that the Great Barrier Reef here in Australia was millions of years old despite the sea level being up to two hundred feet lower than today during the ice age. Most of the reef would have been high and dry during that period.

[@tone9358]

So it being plunged several miles underwater then still having to be above water after anyway (AiG agrees that the ice age happened) makes more sense to you?

[@naturenifties3798]

Core drills have been done on coral atolls, for obvious reasons. The reefs grow one polip per year. It's a great way to get a history of events. Ocean Core drills in deep undisturbed Ocean locations, ice Core drills ect. Read my other posts. The book of Hebrews makes the case that God is in his 7th Sabbatical creation day of rest. Incidentally, these Core drills are among our best dating methods. Radioactive decay methods are always calibrated with these types of Earth chart recordings.

[@Daniel-of6rw]

The ice age accounts for a small fraction of the last millions of years, so Im unsure why you would base your sea level predictions entirely on that alone. It is also much more likely that sea level would change significantly over millions of years than over 6000 due to the shear amount of time.

[@cosmictreason2242]

@@tone9358you seem to think it preexisted the flood. It did not.

[@tone9358]

@@cosmictreason2242 Not only is there no evidence of a global flood, it’s precluded by modern physics.

[@nickt.7305]

@6:43 sums it up perfectly - “It’s not a head issue, it’s a heart issue.”

[@jockyoung4491]

Yes, the Bible is faith, not science. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as we remember the difference.

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

​@@jockyoung4491 DEFINE, for us----the definition of the word.... "SCIENCE."

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

​@@jockyoung4491 Evidently, YOUR chosen word for "GOD," is "SCIENCE!" Hmmm.....Interesting!

[@howdydoodey3872]

Are you really that uneducated? Wow ! @@raygsbrelcik5578

[@howdydoodey3872]

I agree. I can see, hear, and taste science. A missing-in-action god with a heavenly choir that vanished 2000 years ago becomes a DOA god. Forgettable. @@raygsbrelcik5578

[@johnnemeth825]

Jesus open thier eyes and heart of all the people to the Truth of God's Holy Word the Bible in Jesus name I pray Amen 🙏

[@nofairytales5604]

Jesus, please tell them once and for all that you're not real and that there's no reason to believe in you. Then we can stop the insanity. For the sake of common sense.

[@johnnemeth825]

@@nofairytales5604 so sad so blind to Truth one day you will.meet Jesus and you will regret that day if you don't believe I pray you will open your heart to the Truth of who Jesus is our Savior and our God Hallelujah Amen 🙏

[@johnnemeth825]

@nofairytales5604 I was an atheist for 7 yrs and started to read the Bible got to the book of numbers and I said if you want me to believe your going to have to show me because I wasn't going to read this book anymore that is when God opened my eyes and heart to the Truth of who Jesus is our Savior and our God I could go on a tell you what happened to know this but it would take forever to write it all.out but if you want to know Truth if Jesus is real you going to have to ask and open you heart and if you are sincere you will find the God you reject because if you ask with an open heart God will draw you to Him believe me it will be Amazing when you meet God I pray you will Amen 🙏

[@johnnemeth825]

@nofairytales5604 you are so blind to Truth so sad you don't know who Jesus is our Savior and our God Hallelujah Amen 🙏

[@nofairytales5604]

I don't think I'd be telling anybody else they're "blind to truth" when you believe in non-rational and unprovable fantastic claims. And I do know who Jesus is, or more appropriately, was: Jesus was someone who may or may not have lived. I believe he probably did exist, but the gospel presentations are all conjured-up myth (based totally on earlier myths). Most probable is the view that he was one of many Jewish preachers trying to help his people establish a metaphoric "kingdom of god," I imagine largely an effort to get the Hebrews out from under the thumb of the autocratic Romans. Jesus's early followers most likely saw him as a god figure (not uncommon for the time), but there is no evidence to suggest that he was claiming to be a god or trying to start a new religion. Lastly, the four gospels are not original sources and are not reliable historical documents, regardless of what people want to believe. Sorry that reality gets in your way.@@johnnemeth825

[@danielcarter5537]

That fact is that geological and biological processes are not consistent! They can vary widely. Example: In 2023, a big earthquake in Turkey opened up a canyon in the middle of an olive grove about a 1.5 miles long and 130ft. deep in a span of just a few days. It exposed many rock layers, and you know what? The slower process of erosion has now started working on it too, as local streams and rainfall begin to flow into it and carry away sediments. However, a flash flood or another big quake can make more abrupt changes to it in the near future. We just can't predict when those events will happen or how big of a change will occur.

[@Atlas461]

Yep, we can't even predict the weather, yet some dude in 1700 stated that everything is consistent without abrupt change, and people unquestioningly believe it and sustain it.

[@danielcarter5537]

Yeah, it's hubris to think that we've "arrived" and understand how it all works! We don't know Jack!

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@keithziegler8881]

@@bryanjackson8917 well since God is a myth that would be a lie

[@keithziegler8881]

Yes and you know what if you come back a thousand years from now they will be able to tell that the earth suddenly opened up and created that canyon and then subsequent erosion took place

[@valerieprice1745]

Darwin and Lyell were friends. Lyell was a Mason, an occultist. Darwin's father and grandfather were Masons, and it's likely Darwin was too.

[@jockyoung4491]

Who cares? Darwin is of historical interest only.

[@travisbicklepopsicle]

Who cares? Scientific theories do not belong to, and are not based on, one person. Evolutionary theory and evolutionary biology are not synonymous with 'Darwinism'. Darwin could have been a freaking serial killer and that would have no bearing on modern evolutionary theory whatsoever. Isaac Newton was into Alchemy, for Christ's sake.

[@valerieprice1745]

@@jockyoung4491 say that to the monkeys in secular academia. Somehow, they think being a bunch of monkeys wearing suits gives them more credibility than specially created children of God, made in His image, would give them. I just say, "Hey, y'all, listen to the monkey talk! Give it a banana." ;)

[@edwardroberts5087]

Freemasonry has played a part in the teaching from many false teachers including Joseph Smith the founder of The Mormons and Charles Taze Russell who started the Jehovah's Witnesses and Charles Darwin was also a Freemason. Freemasonry is evil and teaches false teachings and hidden Occult practices and wants to destroy the truth of God's word.

[@ChristisKing117]

Watch the 7 days of Noah. They talk a lot about this.

[@dforeman0007]

Death before sin! Perfect. Well said spot on.

[@Radrook353]

Animals were never granted eternal life.

[@oldearthcreationguy6082]

Animal death. The Bible clearly states the death came to all men at fall(Romans 5 12)and doesn't mention animals. From scripture and creation, we see that there was animal death before the fall of man and that doesn't change the gospel in the slightest. The gospel is still exactly the same.

[@Silver77cyn]

Sin is just an imaginry disease, with an imaginary cure.

[@MasonStPeter-oe8tu]

I don’t think death is caused by sin

[@MasonStPeter-oe8tu]

@@Silver77cynsin means to do something against goodness. Do you believe murder is immoral?

[@justgopherit3454]

And they'll fight tooth and nail to hold to those ideas, because of what it means if they're wrong. God bless this channel, and help them reach the younger generation.

[@richardgregory3684]

_And they'll fight tooth and nail to hold to those ideas, because of what it means if they're wrong_ lol, my irony meter just exploded.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Amen 🙏

[@travisbicklepopsicle]

​@@richardgregory3684 Crazy, isn't it? It's as if these young Earth people live on an entirely different planet, and are completely disconnected from reality when it comes to subjects like this.

[@huytruong7370]

​@richardgregory3684 Sure you can say that same thing, but the irony shows even more when all the evidence shows creationism is true and people who subscribe to a naturalistic worldview will find anything excuse to hold onto their worldview.

[@justgopherit3454]

@@richardgregory3684 you're reply makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, though I know you were aiming for the whit award. But if I'm wrong, when I die, I have nothing to worry about... and if you're wrong, well, that's a whole different story now isn't it?

[@WarioSaysSo]

I have read the Bible's explanations and I have read various science books explanations. What others decide they want to accept is up to themselves but for myself, I can't buy any guesses and speculations and mere fantasy created by human minds to ever be "science". I believe the old Bible is the only truth, and only truth that is satisfying. I do not believe human made words being superior over the old bibles. I do not trust mankind to decide anything that is regarded to the past or the future. I trust the Lord!

[@ChrisFerguson-zm4gt]

Hahahahahaha....u trust bronze age desert goat herder myths that are largely demonstrably false. Every religion has their "word of god". Jesus is a myth and there is no god. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing some evidence

[@jockyoung4491]

That is certainly your choice. Believe what you want to, but don't claim that science supports it when it does not.

[@andresmcguire-buckley1659]

​@@jockyoung4491 not sure if he meant science or scientism.

[@thomasmaughan4798]

"I believe the old Bible is the only truth" Why do you believe "the bible" to be truth? Why not the Bagavad Gita, or the Urantia Book, or the Book of Mormon? "I trust the Lord!" As do I; but how did you obtain a knowledge of the Lord?

[@chinchintabete]

​@jockyoung4491 right! If we could only find that one first miracle then all of science can be correct!

[@Concerned_Bystander]

If you start off with the wrong assumptions you will reach the wrong conclusions. That much is true. However, if you start off with a conclusion that your narrow worldview will not allow you to deviate from then you don't have science at all, you have ideology.

[@TheConstitutionalOathkeeper]

Then tell us, atheist, why God doesnt exist with 100 percent backed proof and the real age of the earth not one of you imbecile eggheads can figure out? How is it History proved Jesus exists, with all His miracles, yet you reject a hypothesis that may be right because not one of you fools can carbon date?

[@ryans8081]

Exactly, and that's what the debate is about. It's not science vs religion, but man's word vs god's word. Even evolutionists have admitted that evolution is a religion, not science, and it should be treated as such when talking about it. To quote Michael Ruse: “Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint-and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it-the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. “… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.”

[@Eunity286]

@@ryans8081 I do not know who Michael Muse is, nor can I find any reason that he is a scientist.

[@Eunity286]

@@ryans8081 The key here is that the theory of evolution did not start by one man's word. It was a collective effort from scientists to discern what we now know as evolution.

[@ryans8081]

@@Eunity286 You're right in that it's not one particular man, but it is "man's word" in the sense that it excludes the Bible as the starting authority and starts out with us humans, God's creation, being the authority, and not God himself. So it is an alternative religious worldview in that sense. Michael Ruse has taught at Florida state university since 2000 and has written over 20 books about evolution, some dealing with creationism alongside it, so I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss him as being illegitimate among evolutionists, nor not being a scientist. He was speaking the truth about evolution being a religion, and that is how evolution has been treated in the American public school classrooms and universities since the supreme court took God out of public schools in the early 1960's. If you're a school teacher and you criticize millions of years as being illegitimate history and say that the universe was created only a few thousand years ago, according to the Bible, you'll get fired, lose your job, have your credentials revoked, and so on. If evolution was merely science, then people would be free to criticize and disprove it without fear of being reprimanded, but it's not.

[@alantasman8273]

A study of the Great Barrier Reef was done after WWII to see how fast the reef could recover from damage during the war. From their twenty years of observation...scientists came to the conclusion that the reef was about 4500 years old. Let's see, what global event happened about 4500 that reshaped the Earths surface. ...oh yeah....the Noahic flood.

[@miscamisca6775]

We have formations that is older than 20000 years old

[@travisbicklepopsicle]

There was no Global event that happened about 4500 years ago that reshaped the Earth

[@travisbicklepopsicle]

The southern third of Isle La Motte contains remnants of the Chazy Reef, which, at 480 million years old, is considered the oldest reef in the world where corals first appeared. Corals are animals that leave annual layers that can be counted like tree rings. Just saw a doc the other night about a reef that was (I think in Australia) dated at about 15,000 years based on those annual layers.

[@miscamisca6775]

There are tree rings up to 9000/11500 years (of the tree type that only give 1 ring per year, correlated to layers on lake bottom, ice core, radiometric dating etc ....)

[@alantasman8273]

@@miscamisca6775Actually...trees have been found to reflect multiple rings in a year based on weather conditions...look it up. A tree ring is no guarantee of chronicle age. Just as soft dinosaur tissue...now found at dig site on five continents puts the lie to dinosaurs having lived 65+ million years ago.

[@Sammy61...]

10:26 "That was a very slow birth" Got me 😂

[@walterbrown8694]

They can't prove the multibillion years age for one of 2 reasons - a) What they are trying to prove is not true, or b) They lack the forensic tools and/or ability to prove the age "scientifically"

[@richardgregory3684]

Well neither a or b are actually true, so....

[@luish1498]

option C: you are ignorant

[@luish1498]

To determine the age of the Earth scientifically, forensic tools are not typically used. Instead, scientists rely on a variety of methods from the fields of geology, astronomy, and physics. Here are some of the primary scientific tools and techniques used to estimate the age of the Earth: Radiometric Dating: Radiometric dating is a technique based on the decay of radioactive isotopes. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes in rocks and minerals, scientists can estimate the time that has elapsed since the rock or mineral formed. The most commonly used radiometric dating methods for dating the Earth include uranium-lead dating, potassium-argon dating, and rubidium-strontium dating. Fossil Dating: Fossils provide important clues about the Earth's history. By studying the distribution and age of fossils in sedimentary rock layers, scientists can develop relative age estimates. This is known as biostratigraphy. Additionally, the age of fossils can sometimes be directly determined using radiometric dating techniques. Geochronology: Geochronology involves studying the age of rocks and geological events. By analyzing the sequence and relationships between different rock layers, as well as the ages of volcanic ash layers and impact craters, scientists can develop a timeline of Earth's history. Isotopic Analysis: Isotopic analysis involves measuring the ratios of stable isotopes in geological samples. Isotopic ratios can provide information about the processes that have occurred over time, such as the age of rocks and the timing of geological events. Astronomical Dating: Astronomical dating methods use astronomical observations to estimate the age of the Solar System and, by extension, the Earth. This includes techniques such as studying the cooling and contraction of the Sun, the dating of meteorites, and the analysis of lunar samples brought back by the Apollo missions. It's important to note that these methods are complementary and often used in conjunction with one another to build a comprehensive understanding of the Earth's age. While estimates can vary slightly depending on the specific method used and the assumptions made, the current scientific consensus is that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old.

[@miscamisca6775]

" They can't prove the multibillion years age for one of 2 reasons You do not prove things in science " - a) What they are trying to prove is not true," Demonstrate why the earth can not be millions of years " or b) They lack the forensic tools and/or ability to prove the age "scientifically" "" But they do have them and demonstrated the age

[@luish1498]

Radiometric dating is important tool used to determine the age of the Earth and its rocks. It relies on measuring the decay of radioactive isotopes within rocks and minerals. By comparing the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes, scientists can calculate the amount of time that has passed since the rock formed. Radiometric dating is based on the principle that certain isotopes of elements are unstable and decay over time at a predictable rate. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter isotopes in a rock sample, scientists can calculate the amount of time that has elapsed since the rock formed or the event being studied occurred. For example, one commonly used radiometric dating method is uranium-lead dating. Uranium naturally occurs in several isotopic forms, including uranium-238, which decays into lead-206 over time. By measuring the ratio of uranium-238 to lead-206 in a rock sample, scientists can determine the age of the rock. Other isotopic systems, such as potassium-argon dating and rubidium-strontium dating, are also used for radiometric dating. Each isotopic system has its own decay rate and is applicable to different time ranges. Radiometric dating is a powerful tool in geochronology, but it is important to note that it is not the only method used to determine the age of the Earth. It is often used in conjunction with other dating techniques, such as relative dating methods (e.g., studying the order and relationships of rock layers) and paleontological dating (e.g., dating fossils found in the rock layers). These different methods help build a comprehensive understanding of Earth's history and the passage of time.

[@Gump_Hazard_PhD]

I felt like I was having trouble understanding and believing it but I understand it now. This video helped clear it up. We were taught things wrong in school I suppose

[@christopheespic]

At school... Or on this channel 🙄

[@pvpeet9374]

@@christopheespicsure, what would a system gain if you were to live solely for money and view yourself as a useless piece of flesh with now bigger meaning then working to the bone. Other then a mindless workslave, I mean.

[@sgt.grinch3299]

Thank you for the video. God bless your Ministry.

[@RitmosMC]

This video is absolute bull-crap, not a single point makes any sense whatsoever. And you believe him? Ask a scientist and they will be able to annihilate his entire argument easily. Don't trust people so easily, especially when they agree with what you already think. This leads down a dangerous cycle and is usually how cults start and spread.

[@Oskyosky2009]

He doesn’t and can’t. If he exists he has no power here on this earth

[@RobinDale50]

You can also add language and agriculture, tools, etc to that timeline. Even secular dating shows there is almost no language and culture recorded/found before about 7000 BC. Somewhere between 7000-5000BC, we suddenly see the rise of language, culture, nations, cities, etc. Seems like awfully similar timing to many other things. Now they are trying to tie all that to the post-Dryas period, after an ice age around 12000bc, they say. Funny that even then, that fits within the timeframe.

[@katamas832]

There are no historical records, aka written language. But we do have smaller civilization's remains and cave paintings dated way before that. Creationists cannot make their point without ignoring 99% of the facts 😅

[@jasonborn867]

Unseen evidence is not reliable, and there's no evidence of parthenogenesis fpr humans. People cling to religion for comfort, and suspend their disbelief to enable faith. Bigfoot and even a flat earth is still very real in many minds. You get it.

[@i-primeproductions1517]

Correct. They make attempts at stretching out ages best they can for various reasons, but that is correct and in fact, they get more COMPLICATED as they go back in time and become dumb down as we come closer to modern age.

[@katamas832]

​@ptsd888Or societies. Doesn't really matter. Smaller gathering of humans where they built stuff that still stands.

[@robertseavor4304]

​​@@katamas832Dated to when, exactly? Stonehenge is only 5,000 years old.

[@johnryan6658]

Hey AiG? If radiometric dating doesn't work, why does the oil and gas industry use it to find what they're looking for? If it wasn't accurate, it would be useless to them.

[@kittykatters3972]

Don't confuse the creationists with facts. 🙂

[@dinfast]

Schrödingers accuracy. They’re only inaccurate when that “proves” Genesis. Duh.

[@it7evenSins]

@@dinfastyou’re failing to understand that you’re following exactly what he’s explaining 😂

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@johncooper8839]

Who said that is the method they use ? They mainly use seismic testing to find the pockets. They also poke tens of thousands of holes to capture the entirety of that reserve. Just visit the Permian basin or Bakersfield. They can test the depth of it from drilling core samples and then drill horizontally to maximize well output. To ensure unfettered flow of oil or gas in the zones they inject sand and/or other chemicals into the pocket or reserve. This is known as fracking.

[@DrPowerElectronics]

Excellent! The problem with apologetics can be arguing from different places. But seeing science align with biblical truth is awesome! Christians need to trust the bible and true science!

[@faireplaymedia7622]

Regarding the seals radio carbon dating … I went and pulled the article that that was taken from as annotated at the bottom of his slide… It says that antarctic seawater has significantly less carbon 14 activity than is accepted as the world standard for carbon dating. I wonder what other situations where fossils and rocks have been dated have been under similar limitations? I wish they would go into that.

[@miscamisca6775]

Yes, so the scientific community knows about the reservoir effect, that is why you can not use C14 on sea living creatures. C14 works best on plants

[@bryanjackson8917]

Carbon dating can, at best, only go back to say 50,000 or so years (100,000 with AMS, but that's really pushing it), and as you may be aware, thousands and billions of years are quite different numbers in terms of the respective spans of time we are talking about here.

[@brandonsmith1670]

Because it is seawater - Hydrogen and Oxygen. There is no carbon in it.

[@calebstroup6917]

Hi, something I've been struggling with lately is the Septuagint genealogies of Shem. The Septuagint adds between 50 and 100 years of life to the dates that the patriarchs had the next patriarch. This adds between 600 and 700 years of timeline between the flood and Abraham when compared to the much younger maseratic texts. I would love to see you guys cover this topic in detail. This doesn't change my view on a young earth, but it would explain a lot of weird archaeological mysteries that we see in many ancient cultures.

[@lazarushernandez5827]

God is always several steps ahead. He made sure the Qumran/Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in the 20th century. They date back to between the 3rd century BC and 1st century AD. Most of the texts have more in common with the earlier Septuagint translations (indeed the Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC) than the newer Masoretic (which was composed between the 6th and 10th century AD). The Masoretic has quite a few changes here and there. About that genealogy, it only adds one person to the line of Shem, a person named Cainan is listed as the father of Shelah. This would add 130 years (the amount given in the Septuagint as when he fathered Shelah) to the time from the Flood (Shem) to Abraham. 130 years of wiggle room is not too bad, Archaeology tends to stick to close estimates unless they have a specific event they discovered...for example the Siege of Lachish is documented in the Bible as happening in 701 B.C., This is confirmed by the discovery of the Wall from Sennacherib's palace commemorating the event (currently in a british museum), as well as the dig site of Tel Lachish discovered in the 1930s.

[@2EdgedSword77]

As a Christian, my question is this. If all forms of radio/carbon dating are inconsistent, then by what process are the Creationist scientists and physicists dating everything? I don't doubt what I know to be true, but I also want to make sure we aren't using the same pre-suppositions.

[@DreamsOfLegend]

These folks want to use science when it serves their ideas and disregard the same science that disproves what they're saying. They will invoke DNA (literally deoxyribonucleic acid something from the periodic table and chemistry) then forget that SAME science. I'm a Christian and I know the earth isn't 6,000 years old. Don't like using Carbon-14 dating? No problem there are OTHER methods that can validate things scientifically. Go ahead and use Potassium Argon dating (K-Ar) if you have a problem with C-14

[@amaizenblue44]

Yep, same dating techniques are used to date archeological sites that are propped up as confirmation of the Bible's historical accuracy. Convenient, eh? And it isn't creation scientists doing the dating. They don't actually do research. They pull the data from secular scientific published papers.

[@2EdgedSword77]

@@amaizenblue44 Well archeology does consistently confirm the events, people and places of the Bible whether they get the dating right or not. They're still there. Plus they've found many artifacts and coins confirming people in the Bible such as King David, Pontius Pilot and Nebechanezzar.

[@amaizenblue44]

@@2EdgedSword77 some of the events, no doubt. Kinda beside the point, though.

[@2EdgedSword77]

@@amaizenblue44 I just didn't want to imply we should throw out archeology is all.

[@jamesgarcia9500]

Yeah, I’ve never believed that this earth is billions of years old. I was that guy in science class that just looked at the teacher like really….. sure.

[@unknown____9695]

@@kevinhank17because he’s open minded and doesn’t just accept what’s told to him? Good to see you admit you can’t think for yourself.

[@kevinhank17]

@@unknown____9695 you know if you pay attention in science class you can learn how to test all the things you don't believe are real and see for yourself, or just be an open minded free thinker and blindly believe an old book with nothing to back it up except for itself, cause that's good critical thinking right? I'm sure you searched long and hard for answers and tested all kinds of physical properties, thinking for yourself the whole time and determined the bible, which contradicts reality in so many ways is somehow more correct than reality, right? Which of the literal hundreds of versions of the bible is the right one again?

[@the.littlest.toaster]

the scientific method was not used in this video lol.

[@Romns1513]

@@the.littlest.toaster its a video, not a science experiment in and of itself, genius. You likely would not say the same for a video of Dawkins talking about evolution even though he also does not use the scientific method while doing so. 😂 and guess what - evolution also doesn’t use the scientific method. No one has observed it in all of history.

[@jacuzzihot]

People can be made to believe many things. This is the "art" of lying and the "art " of deceit. Firts thing to do is see what is the source of the information and if this source is credible amon th experts in the field. Not a small fringe club of non-scientists who do not know squat. Then you should fact check. Like Adam and Eve, fact or fiction. Noah's Ark, fact or fiction......are there any witnesses. Any experiments any encompassing theory. A miracle is the absence of an explanation. Of you kake such extrordinary claims it requires extraordinary evidence. No matter how strongly you believe or how many strongly belief, it can be a virus that infected many brains, because it was meant to do so. The Bible is that virus. The younger you are and the more naive you are, the more this non-sense gets imprinted in the brain, and unless you are extraorinarily smart and educated, most of the time people that fell victims to this hoax, simply cannot disconnect from it. It essentially has become a chronic addiction. The only antidote is science.

[@CreatedPSC]

Thank you. God bless you

[@Roihclem871]

Literally all the science does point to God

[@jockyoung4491]

Science, by definition, CAN'T point to God. It can't say anything about God either way.

[@Domtronic]

All of it.​@@nathancook2852

[@maliquesmith2311]

@@nathancook2852 he said what he said and he's correct

[@xlspeedfreaklx7871]

@@nathancook2852 Charles Darwin's theory of evolution says that there must be an intelligent creator in order for life to exist the way it does.

[@stevepierce6467]

@@maliquesmith2311 I can see that Nathan will have a long wait before you or anyone provides any evidence for the empty claim.

[@MannyCoon]

If this wasnt satire I would think that these people don’t know what they’re talking about

[@Bruce.-Wayne]

Perfect.....Love this study...

[@VirtualbackgroundsVFX]

I’ve read the Bible and I’ve read science books. I have to say that I believe the Bible, I do not believe man’s word. I do not trust man. I trust the Lord.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

That's unfortunate, considering that Science has done so much more for humanity.

[@Alien1375]

Men wrote the Bible too though...🤔

[@jasonborn867]

Christian faith uses unseen evidence to prove truth while science uses observable evidence to prove theory. I think the Bible is often preferred because the rewards of an afterlife and seeing loved ones again is more comforting than indifferent science. Religion enables tribalism, unfortunately.

[@Kaleb_Hicks]

Okay use your magic spells to prevent illness like the Bible says instead of antibiotics

[@shelhawke7206]

The bible is written by men ! It's contradictions prove it !

[@garyroman3196]

WHEN DO WE GET TO THE PART WHERE HE EXPLAINS HOW DINOSAURS WERE ON NOAH’S ARK?

[@bobbyyounger7632]

Thank you, this is excellent !

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@greghood9481]

Great work! God's truth is shining through!

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@angelalewis3645]

I love this so much! So well explained! Thank you.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@keithziegler8881]

They are lying to you… Please take a actual science course in an actual college

[@Oskyosky2009]

@@keithziegler8881bump

[@360decrees2]

If this teaches me anything, it's that average people like me take either side of this controversy on faith. I have not the grounding in the many specialties that make up physics, chemistry, biology, geology, nor of philosophy, the history of science, etc, that would enable me to hold my own in an argument defending either side against holders of the other. I also think that there are very few professions or trades in which competence is affected by whether the practicioner believes in Deep Time evolution or Young Earth creationism. This is because most fields deal with things as they are now and not as they were in time immemorial. This includes medical doctor, astronaut, lawyer, ship captain, and many more.

[@njhoepner]

Not true. One cannot be a geologist without understanding the age of the earth and geologic processes. One cannot find oil without understanding both long-term geology and radiometric dating. Medicine is grounded in biology, and biology makes no sense outside of evolution. Our ability to make vaccines and many other successful medical treatments relies on genetics - which relies on evolution. Linguistics requires understanding origins of language, and one can't make sense of that if one is restricted to Genesis mythology. History falls apart if one is restricted to Genesis mythology. Engineering relies on physics, and physics is very clear about the age of the universe and of the earth...deny the science behind those things and you make a hash of engineering. The simple truth is that even the folks at AiG live in a world that would not exist, and broadcast their ideas over means that would not exist, if everyone actually held to their genesis-only views. We'd still be in the iron age (at best). One does not have to be an expert in the sciences to see the basic reality of the world around us, nor to recognize the dishonesty and cherry-picking that AiG relies on to keep the money flowing.

[@360decrees2]

@@njhoepner Well spoken. But again, I personally take most of these matters 'on faith' because of my lack of grounding in these disciplines. I deliberately did not include geology, astronomy, or physics and certainly not paleontology because the current state of those fields leans on deep time, and there has been no compelling evidence to make the materialists question the assumption. By the way, that's interesting about petroleum exploration. If I meet someone in that field I'll have to pose him a question about how someone would fare in that endeavor without a belief in evolution. Given either belief an engineer would know from training and experience where to look for oil. And oil is, ultimately, where you find it. (I read somewhere that some Russian oil people are investigating a possible mineral origin for crude oil. But the Russians will try anything, like sputniks, communism, etc.) As a Catholic growing up in these times I've always been a deep time creationist. Deep time may clash with scripture, but it's in keeping with His apparent style, what with our being buried in deep space. My fascination with Young Earthism after all these years is fueled by the thought of the jolting derailment of everyone's expectations if it were somehow proven true. The effect would be like the moment in _The Truman Show_ when his boat rams into the fake horizon of his artificial habitat. In the meantime, yes, there are many things the young-earthers cannot explain away. Fossils of species alive today should be as numerous as those of extinct ones. We should be unable to observe stars more than about 6,000 light years away. (Adam and Eve should have seen no stars until Alpha Centauri popped into view four years on!)

[@njhoepner]

@@360decrees2 I'm not an expert on these field either (I have an MA in History), but one of the differences between the sciences and religion is I can do some investigating and study for myself and at least get a decent idea what's really happening. As you noted, I think deep time speaks for itself...the only way to get around it is layers upon layers of miracles/magic, and deception at that. I just don't see it. It is possible to be a deep-time creationist and still be rational...but it does require relegating parts of the bible to allegory. Once one starts doing that, it seems to me the whole thing eventually comes apart at the seems. It's possible there is a god behind it all...but if so, it appears to be a god so embedded in natural processes, and hidden by them, that he/she/it/they can be discounted. I can't close off the idea, and I won't fall on my sword trying, but I don't see enough evidence to get me to accept it. If we are all on some version of The Truman Show, we've got other issues. 😄

[@Daniele63]

@@njhoepner Genetics and evolution are not contradictory to the bible of young earth whatsoever, it's a real process and it works because dna contains information (like a programming language), in fact it proves the intelligent design behind it all. It's what made us be able to breed dogs we like, crops that are productive etc, adapt to various environments, which is all a blessing and intentional. Nothing in evolution implies that the world is old or young, it's just a process. Abiogenesis on the other hand has never been proven with the scientific method and people who believe it say it would take impossible odds to happen. So unless they can prove life on other planets exists or recreate life from non life in a lab, there is nothing but faith in either naturalism or creationism that dictates your belief.

[@Daniele63]

@@360decrees2 There are plenty of fossils from species that would have existed during the flood and after, of course animals evolved after the flood and are quite different now. Also we have not found every fossil in existence and not all species have the same likelihood of being fossilised (in a flood). In genesis, God made the stars on the same day as the sun and the moon. You made the assumption that the universe must be old in order to be able to see the stars far away, but that's your belief in naturalism, that everything happens from natural causes and that the processes from today have always been the same. Nothing prevents it from being made 6000 years ago with the appearance of age. Lot of bias in mainstream science, the people who don't believe in naturalism are not taken seriously. So if you are a christian, take what they say with a grain of salt.

[@VoiceUnder]

Everything we observe is the past. You observe the light that traveled from something to you. Light from the moon takes seconds, light from the sun takes minutes, and stars that are light years away take years.

[@bryanjackson8917]

You only assume it's the past because science tells you it is, but can you prove it is not light from the future. (didn't think so!)

[@list1726]

Thanks for posting

[@edwardwicks304]

❤❤this is a great video!!!

[@Oskyosky2009]

Unfortunately it comes to the wrong conclusion in the end..

[@agentl0key891]

You can prove canyons can be made in hours or days (Mt.St.Helen). From that you know the Grand Canyon could have been quickly made say from the runoff of a great flood.

[@annieoaktree6774]

MSH "canyon" was 50' deep and rapidly straight cut through soft unconsolidated volcanic ash. The Grand Canyon is 2 miles deep and cut with sinuous incised meanders slowly eroded through extremely hard rock like sandstone, limestone. The geology of the two couldn't be more different.

[@agentl0key891]

@@annieoaktree6774 Yes a small lake draining vs huge flood, I would expect the damage to be on a greater scale.

[@mrastin821]

@@agentl0key891 It's not the size of the flood. It's the underlying hardness of the substrate. Volcanic ash is sediment; unconsolidated piece that are easily moved. The rock that makes up the Grand Canyon is considerably harder. In addition, a rapid flood would end up with mostly straight walls. The meandering mentioned by annieoaktree would not exist. Those only occur if the water flow is considerably slower.

[@agentl0key891]

@@mrastin821 Simple dam water releases have chewed through concrete with ease. It not the substrate but what particles are in the water and speed of it.

[@mrastin821]

@@agentl0key891 You're talking about steel reinforced concrete. Over time, the steel (if exposed to water) can rust and weaken the structure, which can result in faster damage than would occur with natural rock formations. The steel reinforcement is still useful for tension in the concrete, and allowing some flexibility where needed. And that still doesn't explain why the Grand Canyon follows the meanders of the Colorodo River, instead of a much more linear path if it was caused by a massive rush of water.

[@mrron9]

Love the breakdown! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[@WTL]

Excellent 💯

[@PennySmart]

Excellent, thank you! What a pity that most Christians don't work out the inconsistencies between the Biblical account of creation and the theory of evolution, made only to nullify Ps 19.1 and Romans 1:19-20

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

"THEORY," is not FACT, Penny! Did you even BOTHER to Study the Entire video??

[@lauramann8275]

So then we are wrong about evolution. Science changes as we have more information and knowledge. Macroevolution has never been observed.

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

​​@@lauramann8275 Pure, dumb Chance cannot even come UP with the Human CELL, much less, an entire human being, my Friend! Not only would chance have to Create ALL the necessary Components that make up a Cell, it would have to ARRANGE them all in the Right Order! Sorry but-----The Mathematical probability of just ONE CELL, Not only CREATING itself, but WRITING ITS OWN DNA, is a Number FAR TOO LARGE to Compute, by human standards. You've GOT to be Kidding!! Not to mention; This CELL would be Obligated to BUILD a Cell Wall around it self.....ALL BY ITSELF! Mathematic Perfection, without INTELLIGENT DESIGN?? Preposterous!!

[@njhoepner]

Or for that matter, the inconsistencies between the biblical account and the obvious reality before our eyes in almost any field of science.

[@lauramann8275]

@@njhoepner Such as? How do you explain the precambrian explosion and the great unconformity or the universal forces? Science can't explain everything.

[@tinasaxon1232]

Rightly divide the Bible. Only God can tell you the age of the world.

[@adelinomorte7421]

***why you do not ask God ? he can tell you all details! but mind you, first you must have an appointment and make sure you will be there on time, God is very busy, he has no time to loose with those childish kind of business.***

[@RitmosMC]

Nah god can't do anything because he isn't real

[@leebrown8029]

@@RitmosMC Maybe in your opinion of 10:10

[@RitmosMC]

@@leebrown8029 Nah no opinion, it's simply fact

[@tammyhall8628]

"At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow in heaven on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory if God the Father". Phillipians 2:10-11

[@garretmount8409]

These short videos are great. Especially for children and teenagers who’s attention span is hard to listen to a 1 1/2 , 2 1/2 hour or more presentation . Please keep doing these shorter and information packed style of videos as they are very good . God bless for all the work you guys put into making these great truth videos 🙏

[@stevenspeakman5363]

And Americans

[@bryanjackson8917]

Regarding the attention span of children, perhaps it would help if the video was cut up into short sections of no more than 30 seconds or so in length and then posted on Tik Tok.

[@Thereisonly-oneway]

Very informative, thank you 👍

[@sds_80]

Exactly right. As someone who has done research and technical applications in industry for 15 years I can tell you the word "science" gets thrown around and abused way too much. Most modern "science" is not a controlled design experiment, rather its observational - essentially stuff happens and you grab "data" and heavily rely on your "expertise" (your biased prenotions) to try to weave an ad hoc explanation together to explain it. It ends up being who can convince enough people of what you said, and most of the time that doesn't even happen, it just becomes political. Years ago I met a renowned geologist whose career boasts include achieving significant state zoning policies. We eventually became on good terms through unlikely circumstances (kudos to his openness as he knew I was a Christian and had a different worldview). After these kind of conversations, he fully conceded to the fact that evolution and millions of years is not provable science, it's just a theory driven by people who already decide what they believe in terms of worldview (not any differen than Christians who read the Bible). Compare that to the fact that the Bible is the most validated book archeologically speaking compared to any text by orders of magnitude, along with the great work this channel is doing, and you have a strong working theory that distinguishes itself. Thank you guys for all the great work, love the content!

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

That is hilarious. You clearly do not understand evolution, nor how radiometric dating works. Both of them are factual, and they prove that the Earth is ancient. Your beliefs in ancient myths will not deter scientific progress. Who is this geologist whom you spoke to? Any actual geologist would know that the Earth is ancient, and geological processes gradually gave rise to the structures that we see on the planet today.

[@Eunity286]

What is a scientific theory?

[@truthbebold4009]

​@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440I believe the earth is ancient but that man and animals are only from thousands of years ago.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

@@Eunity286 A scientific theory is a collection of facts and substantiated ideas that explain how a natural phenomenon occurs.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

@@truthbebold4009 That is incorrect, my friend. The first animals were aquatic organisms from about 600 million years ago.

[@janehelbert7551]

I will trust God's Word over science 100 fold!

[@richardgregory3684]

So if your appendix burst, would you go to a science based hospital, or a church?

[@paulrussell6495]

What a stupid comment 😂​@@richardgregory3684

[@miscamisca6775]

" I will trust God's Word over science 100 fold! " Says the guy who expressed his opinion via computer

[@nofairytales5604]

That's your own faulty reasoning.

[@hifijohn]

If you get sick don't go to the doctor, medicine is science. Go find a witch doctor.

[@michaelahofer1004]

Good video. Based on the title i was expecting the debunking of radioactive dating and such, but still had some good apologetics.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old Because God made it look that way when He created it!

[@miscamisca6775]

"Based on the title i was expecting the debunking of radioactive dating and such" Well, do not look any more, YEC fails with that every time.

[@michaelahofer1004]

@@miscamisca6775 I’ve read some good pieces (especially when blind tests are done on items with known less than hundreds of years and they come back millions/billions) on that exact thing, I was just expecting a concise video presenting that evidence here.

[@miscamisca6775]

@@michaelahofer1004 " I’ve read some good pieces (especially when blind tests are done on items with known less than hundreds of years and they come back millions/billions) on that exact thing," Yes, with a large spread of the years, that is a strong indication that the specific method can not be used to reading errors. One famous example is when a YEC'er went up on mount saint Helen and used a dating method which lower range is around 2 million years, and sure enough, he got a wide spread of the dates. Everyone knows that this is an indication that there is to little isotopes in the material to be used with that specific method. Everyone knows then the rocks are to young to date with that specific method, a different method is needed. But the YEC'er fully aware of this fault went on and made youtube videos of it, >

[@jeffreyslater1656]

AMEN! GREAT WORK

[@maximpestsolutions3696]

Amen. God 🙏 Bless ✝️💛.

[@Mindmartyr]

You didn’t come to this conclusion because of honest scientific deduction, you reached this conclusion because you read genesis literally in a modern context which it was never meant to be.

[@miskittt]

We are actually on here arguing Genesis 1:1. It's really smart of Yahweh to starrt the Bible off with what He knew would be a big issue in the Last Days. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth...

[@Mindmartyr]

@@miskittt anyone who reads genesis literally, like a science textbook, is not worthy of being taken seriously; & genesis remains absolutely true. Life did come from the dust, mankind is still ashamed of being naked. It’s all true

[@izaks14]

The logic is sound but esoteric. Historicity is not a science, it's fundamentally theoretical

[@Daniele63]

@@Mindmartyr Who said it's like a science textbook ? However what it does say, is not as ambiguous as some say. When it does say God made man from the dust of the earth, and then breathing life in him, it implies it's a divine act, not a natural one like through evolution. Evolution requires bloodshed, which would also not be a thing before sin.

[@miskittt]

@@Mindmartyr You'll find out soon enough.

[@alexburge1560]

Thanks

[@seancycle1]

Right on Brother!

[@babrightlight338]

Excellent video! One point to consider is that the Bible teaches (Psalms & Job) that God stretched out the heavens. When you stretch space, you also stretch time. Imagine a rubber band marked into 6 equal segments (Days) that is stretched. Since the creation story requires Divine revelation as man was not created until the 6th day, his (man's) view of time and history (relativity) would appear to be longer. A second and considerably more speculative consideration is concurring that sin must have entered into the world before death (Rom 6:23). However, could the fall of Satan somehow have been the instigator of corruption into this physical universe?

[@bryanjackson8917]

Imagine a rubber band marked into 6 equal segments (Days) that is stretched out. Now imagine that rubber band is so old and cracked that it suddenly snaps when you try to stretch it out to suit your rather narrow needs. Now you have a very good Bible lesson to teach and demonstrate in Sunday school.

[@alphabeta1337]

In fact over 80-90% of independent dating methods prove the earth is much younger than 25k years

[@luish1498]

LOL!!! i have the feeling that is from aigs «scientists«!! where are those studies?

[@kittykatters3972]

Where "independent dating methods" means "stuff I pulled from my nether regions"

[@charleswatkins8558]

Next to scientology and ken ham STATING the EARTH is only six thousand years old, this might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard !

[@jockyoung4491]

Whoever told you that was simply lying.

[@imankhandaker6103]

How old is the Grand Canyon? Think of it as a giant tree-trunk & count the rings. You will struggle to get a figure below 250,000 years. You can lie to us all you want - just be sure you can repeat those lies to Him when he asks. He is unlikely to take kindly to those who feel the need to lie on his behalf.

[@noneyabidness9644]

Indeed. In college my biology professors were openly atheist. And their religious dogma was first and foremost the basis of their courses.

[@boni2786]

Great!

[@globalcoupledances]

11:13 Andrew Snelling? Institute for Creation Research? That is so funny!

[@treya5303]

Guys, this is how science works. You hypothesize the process from observations. Then you attempt to prove your hypothesis through experiments.

[@miscamisca6775]

Not According to YEC

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@miscamisca6775]

" Guys, this is how science works. You hypothesize the process from observations. Then you attempt to prove your hypothesis through experiments. " Not exactly but close, what you do is Observing something Create a hypotes to explain it and that predict something yet to be observed Testing the hypotes with new observation, that is, demonstrate it (you never prove things in science) and check if the predictions can be observed Then it start to move from hypotes to a scientific theory. If predictions fails or new observations occur that do not match, you either forget the hypotes or modify it and start over again.

[@treya5303]

@@miscamisca6775 Thank you doctor details.

[@adelinomorte7421]

***You can believe in anything, even that: your believing can not change WHAT IS.***

[@drinno8900]

There must be some advantage here a believer can see, like making better prediction from a more accurate time line. But thinking about weather predictions a man of faith can change it anyway or move mountains

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@MonkeyMind69]

Title could also have been... "Why Science Cannot prove that we are all living in a computer simulation that has been running for only 5 years" 🤔

[@marklmansfield]

Or only been running since you last woke up , ~16 hours old .

[@MonkeyMind69]

@@marklmansfield Exactly!

[@michaelspicer2941]

So you believe in a creator aswell. A step in the right direction

[@DavidSmith-xz4zz]

Amen!

[@Foreveryellow13]

If sediment settled that fast, we wouldn't be able to keep cities from being buried. We would see first hand as new layers formed within our lifetimes. The Earth would be millions of times smaller than it is now too.

[@andrewdellandrea]

Very well explained!

[@anny3046]

I love your "test" comment. It reminded me of my high school biology teacher - and I went to public school. He started the unit on evolution with the statement "you don't have to believe it but this is what's on the test." He also played the Paul Harvey bird story the last school day before Christmas break!

[@anny3046]

@@nathancook2852 don't feel sorry for me. He was a great science teacher. I feel lucky to have had him as a teacher. There's plenty to disagree with about evolution - I know that I didn't come from pond scum or a shrew or even an ape. Why do you want to watch creation science videos if you're so against it? ... 🤔 Maybe your trolling will eventually lead to critical thinking about evolution .....

[@loaid2078]

@@anny3046Sorry my friend, but we are all primates. Also known as apes.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Reminds me of a science teacher I once had who told us "you don't have to believe vaccines work but they just may save your life!"

[@derekjames9226]

Consider Charles Spurgeon’s view on this. I don’t think we should view this a first-rank issue, so that we would exclude him and many others over the centuries from the faith based on this. It can’t be said that all who hold a different view or just say they don’t know with certainty are doing so to accommodate the culture of their time.

[@lukebrasting5108]

Charles Spurgeon was a Freemason, a Luciferian mongrel who precahed a false and distorted version of Christinaity called Calvinism, so he excluded himself from the Chrstian faith.

[@lukebrasting5108]

Charles Spurgeon was a Freemason, a Luciderian who preached a false and distorted version of Christinay called Calvinism, so he excluded himself from the faith.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@MartinAsh785]

Great video! Learnt alot.🙂

[@marcelsimon6425]

How you have to lie to believe?

[@TheCRHKing]

Such a good video

[@josephreigens3090]

Thank you AIG !!!

[@ChillCat665]

We've been here around 6000 years

[@ancientdarkness3102]

6000 years ago the first civilisations came to be.

[@jacuzzihot]

LOL. And your source is a book of fiction. Ask an astronomer, biologists, physicist, .... and they will laugh in your face. A paleo-anthropolist will show you footprint, artefacts and fossils. Even archeology found stone structures over 10000 yo. There are stone artifacts that date back a million years. Cave paintings 40000 ya.

[@Daniele63]

@@jacuzzihot How do you know it's that old, were you there ? How do you know their dating methods are reliable ?

[@jacuzzihot]

People defending the Bible, incorrectly state that dating methods are unrealiable. Unfortunately, that would throw non-experts and those who regard the Bible teachings as absolute truth off. But there are a number of fields of science that have independent dating methods which mutually all agree, e.g. being able to give an upper and a lower estimate that almost coincide as e.g. the age of the Chicxulub impact. Fossils, artifacts, radiocative and luminescence dating all agree with independent estimates from completely independent estimates from cosmology, meteorites,

[@adelinomorte7421]

***pardon me, a lot more please***

[@glennmariacher4525]

I came heree to Rumble to watch because on youtube, various words were being blocked but I find it happening here also. This is happening in other videos too.

[@meritbrevity]

To be fair, it never says how long Adam and Eve existed in Eden. Adam had enough time to name every living thing before Eve was even formed, that seems like a long time, idk.

[@luish1498]

Radiometric dating is a method used to determine the age of rocks and minerals by measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to their decay products. It relies on the fact that certain isotopes of elements are unstable and decay over time at a predictable rate. Here's a simplified explanation of how radiometric dating works: Isotopes: Atoms of the same element can have different numbers of neutrons, resulting in different forms called isotopes. Some isotopes are stable, meaning they do not undergo radioactive decay, while others are unstable and decay into different isotopes or elements. Radioactive decay: Unstable isotopes, known as parent isotopes, spontaneously decay into more stable isotopes or daughter products. This decay occurs at a constant rate known as the half-life, which is the time it takes for half of the parent isotopes to decay. Measuring the ratio: By analyzing the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter products in a rock or mineral sample, scientists can determine how much time has passed since the rock formed. This is done through laboratory techniques such as mass spectrometry or counting the number of radioactive decays. Half-life: Each radioactive isotope has a unique half-life, which is the time it takes for half of the parent isotopes to decay. For example, the half-life of uranium-238 is about 4.5 billion years, while the half-life of potassium-40 is about 1.3 billion years. By measuring the ratio of parent isotopes to daughter products and knowing the half-life, scientists can calculate the age of a rock. Assumptions and limitations: Radiometric dating relies on certain assumptions, such as the initial abundance of parent isotopes, a closed system (no addition or removal of isotopes), and constant decay rates over time. While these assumptions are generally valid, they can introduce some uncertainties in dating. Additionally, radiometric dating is most accurate for rocks that formed in the last few million to billion years, as older rocks may have experienced significant geological processes that can disturb the isotopic ratios. By applying radiometric dating to different isotopic systems, such as uranium-lead, potassium-argon, and rubidium-strontium, scientists can determine the ages of rocks and minerals with varying degrees of precision and accuracy. These dating methods have been extensively tested and refined over many years, and their results have been cross-checked with other dating techniques and geological evidence, providing a reliable means of determining the age of rocks on Earth.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@vasilymartin4051]

Is anyone able to confirm for me that the objections with origin science also apply to future science, such as modelling? Thanks

[@njhoepner]

Probably...both objections are equally ridiculous.

[@off6848]

Future science is called predictive Which just means divination Did you also know that the ancient witchcraft of divination was based on numbers? Using numbers to predict the future Divination comes from the word divine which is a variation of the word divide The word science means to cut or divide knowledge the Sci prefix is like as in the word Scissors ✂️ To cut and divide knowledge Now you know science = witchcraft literally

[@user-rb3tk5th2i]

@@njhoepner notice how you arent able to actually address the topic, theres obviously huge difference between historical science and observational science

[@njhoepner]

@@user-rb3tk5th2i No, there isn't. Science is based on observations, followed by inferences from those observations, which lead to hypotheses, which are then tested either by experiment or further observation. Science about the past is based on observations about the past...the age of the earth, for example is based on observations of geology, of radioactive decay, of physical processes. Lies in Genesis attempts to create a false dichotomy by saying "we can't go back into the past, therefore we can't possibly know anything about it." Which is pure nonsense. Never mind that that would make their bible a fantasy as well.

[@Mike-pf1ru]

Models are not permitted in the scientific method.

[@brockdalton8641]

Fantastic message, thank you. Per Fidem Propter Christum

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@user-oh2ps3ft8s]

I used to be a true believer in science and I can only hope I have sufficiently atoned for my blasphemy to ensure grace for my eternal soul.

[@The1707regina]

Awesome! ❤

[@gregoryholden3255]

The fact that you have been dissuaded from your former atheistic beliefs ___that has you on the right track. Persist! 😊 May I ask whether there was any one thing that caused you to change your stance? Or were there several things?

[@Fromthestreets2Christ777]

Gods word is true

[@philhart4849]

God is a fiction.

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@user-on3wh6wu9n]

@@bryanjackson8917 "Because God made it look that way when He created it!" Thanks for the laughter! 😀

[@brandonsmith1670]

Absolutely, unfortunately this guy is doing something he is accusing the scientific community of doing, taking something and extrapolating it out so far that it no longer makes sense. He seems to be a master of this.

[@Oskyosky2009]

How do we even know the Bible or any other book is the true word or god?

[@pauljansentextor1788lx]

But the Bible does not say any where how old the earth is. How can we be sure of the age of 6000 years? Evidence?

[@adelinomorte7421]

***plus 6 more zeros***

[@miscamisca6775]

It comes from Usher, he made calculations based on the family description in the old testimony, that is, who gave birth to whom and what age.

[@Doty6String]

I contend the solar system, and earth are 4.5 billion years old.

[@danielrrivera5126]

Good stuff

[@Foreveryellow13]

Only Evil speaks in absolutes without proof. Therefore God would be Evil for making us go off his word without proof.

[@roberttrough6439]

No accurate way to calibrate the measurement scale! It’s a guess! Not good science! 😊

[@sids5002]

It's a guess to you and me. To a scientist, who knows much more than us, it's pretty certain. The bible on the other hand, utterly unreliable set if much changed old books from when humans knew very little, containing lots of proven nonsense.

[@roberttrough6439]

@@sids5002 too bad for your pain. I realize on this point and this time your not capable of understanding. You have much to study and learn. As you grow your knowledge will increase. If you allow yourself to grow. You can always ask God for help in that area. Unfortunately for you with a closed mind and hard heart a person can’t even help you find the truth. All up to you! Your choice!

[@BucketOfAndrew]

​@@sids5002 archaeologists around the world use the Bible to find lost cities and the Bible has literally never been proven wrong.

[@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440]

No, it's excellent Science. You just haven't studied this.

[@roberttrough6439]

@@BucketOfAndrew agreed 👍

[@dessiewatkins1006]

Whether you utilize the resources that God has placed within one's own grasp, or build upon the labors of others, a person discovers a world beyond one's grasp and sets out upon a course of life's persuits, be it self fulfillment or selfless service to those around one. Corruption being what it is will seek to profit from the labors of those who have labored for the benefit of others. Here is where wisdom counts for more than knowledge for it alone determines the value of one's faith in God's truth and not mankind's collective knowledge.

[@brucermarino]

I believe we've not found the original source of the quote that's attributed to Keppler. Have you found it?

[@benm38]

A huge apocalyptic reset occurred in the “1700s”. The entire world changed, I believe some sort of mud flood is what did it. Up until then we had a different (Christian) society which would be unrecognizable to us today.

[@hglundahl]

14:03 Our magnetic field is not at its least strong now. The centuries after the Flood, the carbon 14 production was c. 10 times faster. It's influenced by three magnitudes: * directly, number of incoming particles (forget which ones, but can look it up) * directly, energy level of each particle * inversely, strength of magnetic field. The same higher income of radioactivity back then also contributed to both lowering of human life spans (that nice curve studied by Dr. Robert Carter), and the ice age.

[@jockyoung4491]

giggle

[@hglundahl]

@@jockyoung4491 Enjoy the laugh. You may chuckle, smile etc as well. When you are done, you tell me what you find strange?

[@travisbicklepopsicle]

​@@hglundahl Well, there really isn't any evidence demonstrating a global flood occurred, and there's much evidence demonstrating one most definitely did not, so there is that to consider. A global flood would have left geological evidence, biological/ genetic evidence, etc., but there simply isn't any.

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

​​@@travisbicklepopsicle NEWSFLASH!! You've been listening to Secular propaganda, my friend! The very NATURE of the "Fossil Record," itself, demonstrates a MASSIVE Catastrophic Event once Took place!

[@raygsbrelcik5578]

​@@travisbicklepopsicle You've been fed a humanist Lie, my Friend! The very NATURE of the Fossil Record, demonstrates a once Catastrophic Event, that HURLED Millions of animals to their death-----Crushing, and preserving them for future generations to Observe.

[@gecko-saurus]

This is one of their biggest problems: they constantly assume that scientists assume things about the past and that how they interpret things. Scientists didn't just say "Hmm, I think the Earth is billions of years old" and start interpretating everything based on that.

[@amel2784]

Actually, they did. Right from the beginning with a theologian and Lyell in the 1700s and they clearly said their reason was because they wanted to cut the Bible out from history. If the Bible said there was a flood that there wasn't one If the Bible said that it was relatively young Earth they said it was an old one. They're attempt was to make it naturalistic and they made assumptions and guesses without much proof. Or do you want to tell me that in the 1700s they had a lot of scientific proof of the age of the Earth?

[@off6848]

Yes they practically did Essentially the whole goal is to tell the opposite of the truth because when you believe the opposite of the truth the truth appears absurd This is why all kinds of calculations about curvature of the earth Acial tilt etc are always 66.6 or 33.3 It’s Masonic craft/witchcraft potent stuff normies will never understand

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@gecko-saurus]

@@bryanjackson8917 Or maybe it's just billions of years old - nowhere does it say that God created the world to LOOK billions of years old.

[@williampremo2197]

Earth is definitely more than 6000 years old. That has been proven time and time again

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@kylecoburn8896]

It’s so maddening sometimes when people doubt the great flood, and therefore doubt God’s Word and therefore His existence. I mean for starters, there are multiple cultures and civilizations from all around the entire world that have a great flood story, and these are people who didn’t have contact with each other for centuries. And then there are even ones that have a Messiah like figure that sacrifices themselves for their people’s salvation. There’s the years of Jesus’s life that were unaccounted for that could explain some of those people’s accounts.

[@user-fp7to5lt7d]

EVERYONE needs to hear/watching this video. Great job brother

[@brianschmidt704]

And every year the world gets older. The more they find, The more time is needed. It's just like being able to change the answer In the back of the book to fit yours.😅

[@Atlas461]

Typical in human history, honestly, humans want to change everything to fit in their subjective tastes. Like how the Pharaohs in the past constantly tried to erase evidence of other Pharaohs they disagreed with or every record of events that could paint them in any negative light and lived in a constant state of façade. Humans have always been doing that; it's why so many denominations of Christianity exist because of people twisting something to fit their narrative. Or literally to create lies to spread their worldview and so on. Heck, there is even an effort to try to discredit the Holocaust... It makes one wonder why men keep trusting men for the truth; we have clearly shown to be unreliable in multiple ways across history.😂

[@thedubwhisperer2157]

Therein lies the humility of scientific knowledge to grow and improve. Contrast with 'it says so in a 2000 year-old book'...

[@brianschmidt704]

@@thedubwhisperer2157 I had no idea that people were getting smarter. Looking around I see people having more knowledge but less wisdom. This is why the bible says accurately that the fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom.

[@ss6830]

My wakenup momemt happened in an Anthropology class, which isn't a class most people take. They straight tell you they CAN NOT DATE past 55 THOUSAND years. My first question was, so why do "They" say dinos were BILLIONS of years old? No, dinosaurs/dragons were killed off by humans in the dark ages.

[@xXMACEMANXx]

It is not impossible to date beyond 55 thousand years. That's just when Carbon-14 dating becomes wildly inaccurate. For objects that we suspect may be older than that, through relative stratigraphy analysis, we measure different isotopes for radiometric dating. Some examples of isotopes and their effective dating rage include, but are not limited to: Aluminum-26 for up to 700,000 years, Iodine-129 for up to 17 million years, Uranium-235 for up to 700 million years, Potassium-40 for up to 1.3 billion years, and Uranium-238 for up to 5 billion years. We can definitively prove through analysis of radio-isotope dating that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old with an accuracy of a few hundred years. We just can't definitively date organic samples beyond 55,000 years.

[@barryhill1044]

Time Is the guesswork of Mankind and his scientists .. who said what the length of an hour is, ? A day , a year , a million years Etc.. ? A Million years might be a split second in the eyes of the creator .. Mankind ‘Alone’ has interpreted the length of time using his own calculations !

[@thedubwhisperer2157]

Just as mankind alone has interpreted the meaning of the bible...

[@birdsinacage6627]

I believe in Jesus teachings, but since there's no evidence that the earth was formed supernaturally 6000 years ago I'm sticking with archeologists geographers, astronomers, cosmologists, biologists, earth scientists, physicists and geologists.

[@skepticalfaith5201]

Modern science is based on trying to find *naturalistic* explanations for the world we see. It is literally opposed to any biblical/supernatural explanation. This is particularly evident in their “explanation” for the most obviously non-natural things: Life, consciousness, the universe itself.

[@birdsinacage6627]

@@skepticalfaith5201 science is the process by which knowledge is acquired. This process has been written in books and is repeatable and falsifiable. While the theories of earth cosmology have not been fully vetted, without this scientific process we'd still be in the dark ages believing the earth to be flat and the center of the universe. The bible supports the belief in a flat earth. So, since the creation of earth itself cannot be tested or falsified, the bible as a stand alone document simply isn't sufficient proof. Just because the earth was created by natural processes does not obviate the reality of a universal creator indirectly responsible for all natural processes as a means to experience itself through its creation.

[@mattwhite7287]

​@@skepticalfaith5201umm. Hate to break it to you, but science is looking but has no firm position on any of the things you just claimed it did. 😅

[@Daniele63]

Then your faith is inconsistent with what Jesus believed. Why is it so hard for you to believe God created the earth, when you believe he rose from the dead ? Why pick and choose the miracles you choose to believe ?

[@birdsinacage6627]

@@Daniele63 what miracles? I said I believe in Jesus teachings. Not everything in the bible is what Jesus taught and much of it was misinterpreted ie: turn the other cheek etc .Many texts are not included in biblical cannon due to the council of nicea that ushered in Catholicism. The teachings of Jesus that overlap with previous enlightened beings such as Thoth are those that have the most merit.

[@jjwwqq]

A hypothesis is not synonymous with a guess. Major mistake right there.

[@jjwwqq]

@@jjw000dw you don’t think I checked to confirm my comment first?

[@mrastin821]

@@jjw000dw "educated guess" doesn't mean the same thing as a guess. Educated means that, when observing something novel or interesting, the first thing you do is go into the body of scientific knowledge and see if anyone else has observed this and explained it. You also get very familiar with all the information around a particular phenomenon, so that you have a solid background of information. You use THAT to produce a hypothesis, and the key to a scientific hypothesis is that it must give you the ability to make testable predictions. It is those predictions that help us design the experiments and sets of observations we need to test our hypothesis.

[@roomwithapointofview]

Time and luck is their hero, and necessity. Luck, that magical, invisible force that chooses winners and losers. Sounds like a myth.

[@alwaysgrowing7273]

SO GOOD!

[@markav1212]

I think you guys are great and love so much of what you say and do, and I believe in a young earth. But as far as no death before sin, you have a big problem you need to address. If there was no death, there was no need or use for the Tree of Life. If there was no death, why did it exist? What was its intended use? Did plants die when you ate them? Did micro organisms die? What was the line between what could die and could not?

[@off6848]

Plants are part of the tree of life like limbs belonging to the whole eating individual plants did not kill the tree of life You have to realize that the separation of life forms is artificial or illusory there’s only one living thing the whole It can and will die though

[@jesusknight1]

The bible is specific. There was no death until sin entered the garden. The Tree of Life was there as a test, and a testament. It was not the Tree of Life and Death, it was just the Tree of Life.

[@markav1212]

@@jesusknight1Chapter and verse please. If death did not exist, then how could God's threat of death for eating from the Tree of Knowledge have any meaning to them? Would kind of make the whole test unfair.

[@markav1212]

To expand on that, if God really wanted to stop Adam and Eve, he could have given them a Revelation type 1/2 hour, showing them the death of millions of babies, women, people. The diseases, the wars, the addictions, the corruption. He could have shown them what death really meant for the future. It's almost as if he wanted them to fail so he could provide a Saviour. He'll probably give me a Job moment for that one.

[@jesusknight1]

@@markav1212 Romans 5:12 for one. It mentions sin entering by one man. Adam. Genesis 3:19 mentions returning to the ground (death) because of his sin. And his work (tending the garden) became a chore because the ground was cursed. There are other verses, but you can start with these and find more if you wish to continue your research. Blessings!

[@MJ-td3ij]

Ummm… no. The moon making contact to the earth math you did is wrong. Distance to moon: 238,855 miles (average) Convert to inches: 15,133,852,800 inches. Now divide by 2 inches a year: 15billion / 2 = 7.5 billion. Simple math and you didn’t put that correctly in the video. What else are you misleading us with in the video?

[@bryanjackson8917]

Revealed: The Real Reason The Earth Appears To Be Billions Of Years Old! Because God made it look that way when He created it.

[@denatajasper]

He is not talking about the moon touching and grinding the earth surface by 0 distance. He is talking about the distance of the moon 2 million years ago will cause destructive ocean waves by that theory.

[@josephsmith8833]

Thank God Thank Jesus Thank the holy ghost...

[@reasonwarrior]

If everything is reduced to materialism then it's easier to dismiss, control, and destroy. The evil that walks the earth and seeks power doesn't want you to know how significant you are to God.