Four Moons That Indicate a Young Universe

[@mk71b]

12:02,12:09 Good point

[@deannesanv8931]

Lauren, you are such a sweet young lady. Don’t let the negative comments discourage you. I always like hearing Jake’s interviews/presentations or reading his books. Good stuff. :)

[@RobertA-up9ur]

03:30 amen

[@TJforChrist]

03:00 amen

[@Torby4096]

Seems to me, the more we know about anything, the less sense evolution makes.

[@jefffinkbonner9551]

It was a hypothesis that could only be made having the luxury of knowing nothing about genetics, cellular complexity, molecular machinery, 4D DNA sequences, mutation rates, sedimentary deposition, fossilization, embryology, continental drift, statistical probabilities, radioactive decay, magnetosphere decay, and the second law of thermodynamics in general. Now, evolution is held up on a priori suppositions, ideological commitments, and its own inertia.

[@forestgiest1380]

Oh the perverse irony of this statement. You believe that all radiometric dates are wrong and that their nuclear decay was rapidly accelerated in the past. Releasing enough heat TO TURN THE EARTH HOTTER THEN THE SURFACE OF THE SUN! Nothing you believe is even remotely possible. And the only reason you can believe what you believe is because you know nothing about anything.

[@freddiefreihofer7716]

@@forestgiest1380 Yes, and the "rapid acceleration" came from the release of radiation in the rock and fossil strata left by the "Biblical Flood"! The "Heat Problem", as it's known, is a bone in the throat of these Biblical Flood advocates. One of the ICR "geologists" says at the beginning of his YT video that the Biblical Flood was no later than 2,500 years BC! See Gutsick Gibbon's super channel for treatment of the Heat Problem. She has an excellent video on it.

[@TJforChrist]

​@@jefffinkbonner9551yes. What you said 😊

[@zerosteel0123]

I agree

[@user-galations_2-20]

Great study, thanks for sharing your knowlwdge.

[@timc6341]

Thank you ICR

[@uncensoredpilgrims]

Wow, Dr. Hebert, I'm a big fan. It speaks volumes that ICR allowed you to state they were playing politics with the pandemic. Other creationist ministries took the exact opposite stance, to their extreme detriment.

[@poliincorrect1771]

Great info!

[@felixvecchiarelli6458]

That was a fantastic video. Such great information!!! Thank you!

[@akmurf7429]

Evolutionists do not intimidate me whatsoever. As a matter of fact, I find that in almost every conversation I enter into with a lay Evo, as a lay creationist, I know far more about the subject matter than they do (they usually walk away frustrated and angry). They tend to parrot some TV show or evolutionary article without examining counterarguments or questioning. what I really appreciate about creationist scientists, that Evo's lack, is that creationists will first accurately explain the evolutionist position or theory and then refute it with logical thinking. On the other hand, Evo's have no idea what creationists believe because they don't read the literature or deliberately misrepresent us to the public. Honest science is good science. BTW, the James Webb telescope (more billions of dollars) proved them wrong again concerning what they expected to find at the edge of the universe (another bad prediction). The creationist prediction was proved correct (fully formed mature galaxies). I suppose, James Web was worth the money after all.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

Agreed. They are clueless about the actual fossil record and clueless about abiogenesis theory. They don't know biochemistry or cellular biology.

[@ConservativeMirror]

How can we see these galaxies that are billions of light-years away if there has only been 6000 years of time?

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@ConservativeMirror Not all Creationists are young earthers. This site probably is, but they talk about variable speed of light and time/space dilation as explanations I think.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​​@@sliglusamelius8578 not only that but the Bible says God stretched out the heavens and is still stretching them out. I believe that the stars were much closer than they are today. There's no reason to feel like we have to mix evolutionary timelines with the word of God.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@newcreationinchrist1423 That's a good point, I hadn't thought about the stretching thing. The raqiya was poorly translated as "firmament", when it really just means "expanse". Thanks..

[@GreatGatling]

A subsurface ocean seems to be the description of earth in the early chapters of Genesis.

[@Vernon-Chitlen]

I recommend the video(s) on YT: The Solar System to Scale in the Desert. The nebular theory of our solar systems formation is plainly bogus. The sun having 99% of the solar systems total mass, yet it has less than 2% of it's angular momentum. Almost totally backwards

[@ClaudeSenior]

In my opinion, both the "young earth" and "old earth" crowds tend to suffer from a bit of "assuming the outcome" before examining the evidence. In this case, in my opinion, the largest gap that is not often examined is the ORIGINAL wording (Hebrew) of the text in Genesis. In English, the text seems clear to say that the creation week started in Genesis 1. However, Hebrew leaves the door open for a much older universe and world. For example: the passage which says, "... was the FIRST day" is incorrectly interpreted. There is a hint that the existence of all things did not start when the creation week begin in the phrasing that shows there were "waters" and a "deep" there for the spirit of God to hover over. The closest to a universe being young is the fourth day in which the text indicates that the Sun and Moon were created. Almost as a footnote, even in English, the stars are included, which may well indicate they already existed. I would be careful about drawing too much "faith" from what the Bible may not intend to say in those first few words, especially since they are poorly translated. Just my thoughts.

[@markbrennan6684]

Magnesium is a heavy element?

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

We know that Mars was once a highly active volcanic body, with streams and lakes and an atmosphere, but has since cooled almost completely. The maths to work out how long this takes is relatively simple - it took about a Billion years for Mars' core to cool sufficiently to solidify - at which point it's magnetic field stopped working.

[@JohannaOberlechner]

Sehr interessant, der Kosmos spricht von der Größe dessen, der ihn geschaffen hat, und das war nicht der Zufall oder die Zeit, danke für die tolle Recherche

[@zerosteel0123]

Thank you 👏

[@birdman1174]

Can you create light that is not in transit? Light here is in transit, light there is in transit. Whereever light exists, it is always in transit. Im asking because i believe a recent beginning and the space time light problem is not a problem to me. All created at the same time everywhere. Let there be light and it has been lit ever since, here, there, everywhere.

[@fergusonhr]

800 million years is not that long??? Thats 133,333 times longer than anything that has existed in our young earth creation timeline. LONG TIME...😂

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

08:19 volcanism on Io is a problem for the BBT and deep time

[@johnglad5]

95 moons, i should have known that. Blessings

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

03:00 proving Genesis helps us trust the rest of the Bible 🙏🙏🙏

[@Denis-lp3pz]

Underground global oceans, wow. Sounds like Earth in Genesis 7:11.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

Like #226 ICR 🙏🙏🙏✝️ watching now

[@mrazyone]

As a follower of Christ. We need to obey 1 john 4:1.. on Evilutional view and Creationist views.

[@fyrerayne8882]

however if the electric universe theory (or plasma universe theory) is correct then perhaps that is a mechanism that can warm up small astronomical bodies and keep them warm

[@christhewritingjester3164]

Given the history and countless examples, I usually start with the base level assumption that any "evidence" for an old Earth is based on fabricated or false data. And I haven't seen anything yet that shows me that I should change my mind.

[@therick363]

I can say the same…but about young earth. That they cherry pick data and science

[@christhewritingjester3164]

@@therick363 I have yet to see that as the case. Can you provide an example?

[@therick363]

@@christhewritingjester3164 and I haven’t seen anything supporting young earth like you said. Do you have any? Radiometric dating Light year Geology To name a few

[@christhewritingjester3164]

@@therick363 Radiometric dating objections mainly centers around the assumptions being used to calculate the dates. That's an issue old earth people cherry pick and have not provided a good answer for and not and issue young earth people stand on. So I'm not sure what you mean by this being an issue young earth scientist cherry pick on. Other than pointing out the numerous problems via real world examples where it doesn't work. A light year is a unit of measuring distance, so I'm not sure what you mean here. I'm assuming you mean something about how there is distant starlight if the earth is young? The light travel-time issue has been discussed bypeople like Dr Danny Faulkner. Obviously a lot of it is theory, but it's hardly cherry picking. Geology? This is huge topic. What do you think it being cherry picked? There is a ton of hard science in this area. I might suggest looking into what Dr. Andrew Snelling has been putting out?

[@therick363]

@@christhewritingjester3164 the opposite mate. YEC cherry picks the radiometric system. Light year being how far things travel in space. The “cosmic speed limit” having galaxies billions of light years away… Yes he’s cherry picking physics. And the hard science shows old year, no global flood, long time scales. I have looked. Nothing has impressed me. What science supports young earth?

[@pedrorivera7931]

LUKE CHAPTER 21 VERSES 25/27 👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆👆

[@RobertA-up9ur]

02:50 even when you assume evolution is true, the evidence is problematic for evolutionists.

[@therick363]

Nope

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

Yep, darwin's hypothesis thrives on ignorance. Scripture is the foundation for understanding.

[@therick363]

This video is about astrophysics…so why are you talking about biology? Also, it’s not a hypothesis, it’s a scientific theory. Scripture thrives on ignorance

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@therick363 your first question was answered by the accredited scientist in this video. Darwin's idea is a hypothesis that is taught as if it is a scientific theory. However it fails to meet the standard of the scientific method. Therefore it thrives on ignorance. Scripture is used as a primary reference by archeologists. Are archeologists ignorant for using it? Please accept documented history; receive Christ.

[@therick363]

@@refuse2bdcvd324 I asked YOU. So you’re not aware that science advances and we don’t hang on only his word? Fails to meet the standards? Evolution is a scientific theory…which means it’s meet the standards of the scientific method. Why do creationists lie?

[@razark9]

It's not a hypothesis, it's not ''darwin's'' and no, science thrives on questioning. Scripture has nothing to do with science and creationists misrepresent everything.

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

@@razark9 you just made assertions, but gave no supporting evidence. Creationists rightly point out that the information required for life requires a creator. Please accept intelligence; receive Christ.

[@roberthess2762]

The light from distant stars; God caused the light to be to be brought forward! (Probably to confound the deniers!)

[@appaloosa42]

The speed of light has been found to decrease over the years since it was first determined ( about 300-400) Ot can be assumed that at creation it was nearly instantaneous.

[@michalp79]

@@appaloosa42 What????? Speed of light is decreasing? HOW, why? Who said that?

[@appaloosa42]

@@michalp79 Chuck Missler details the studies that found it; he personally knows the Aussie researcher that confirmed it.

[@michalp79]

@@appaloosa42 Why no one knows about this except the Christian writer? Think about it

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@michalp79 maybe you don't realize this but secular astronomers need the speed of light to slow down as well for the BBT to work.

[@RobertA-up9ur]

I don't listen to evolution anymore. Thanks to creationists, our faith has been strengthened.

[@therick363]

So you don’t listen to facts got it.

[@razark9]

You mean you started denying reality for religious reasons.

[@RobertA-up9ur]

@@therick363 I do. That's why I don't listen to people like you.

[@RobertA-up9ur]

@@razark9 you are blind to reality

[@razark9]

@@RobertA-up9ur No. Unlike you, all I need is evidence. You don't care if it doesn't support your fantasies about wizards and talking bushes. That's the difference between you and I.

[@samuelburleigh1895]

The new and old testaments weren't even written by the same people , for gods sake.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

The Old Testament was not written by the authors people thing, either.

[@nickstreeservice4454]

The hint is "in the beginning " a trillion yrs ago.. i think to put an age on the solar system is for the darwinist. Always been is the way of our creator.

[@therick363]

Who said trillions of years?

[@nickstreeservice4454]

When was Gods beginning?​@@therick363

[@davidcr.6962]

On your stars and starlight let me throw another monkey wrench into the works: Rev 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

[@freddiefreihofer7716]

The universe and earth are 6,000 years old. I know that because Dr. Hebert says so in his video "Our Young Universe".

[@nickstreeservice4454]

Two different eras of time. . Pre nova and after nova. Thats let there be light. So different changes to the planet and moons after the stripping effect of nova 7k yrs ago.

[@forestgiest1380]

We look into the heavens and see galaxies hundreds of light-years across. In the process of colliding and ripping each other apart. And strewing their Stars across space. These are events that take millions & billions of years. The idea that anything in space proves that the earth is 6,000 years old is insane.

[@TJforChrist]

What's insane is that you think God is not able to do all of that in a faster time frame when he created all things in 6 days. You're thinking of things in the natural. God is not restricted by the natural. He is supernatural.

[@skueky]

God created stars and light to be seen from all angles from the beginning, so light is visible from all corners of the universe no matter the distance. Also, God didn’t made diversity in His creation, that’s why we see colliding galaxies and nebulas, because it wasn’t made uniform, which in my opinion would be less beautiful.

[@vikingskuld]

I will happily point out the insanity here is the fact you haven't done any real research into the topic. Soft tissue in Dino bones proves beyond a doubt they are VERY VERY YOUNG. The protiens they found cannot last a million years let alone billions. C14 in coal Dino bones and DIAMONDS also prove a very young age. All that is proof the earth is way younger then academics will tell you. There are hundreds of other things that disprove billions of years you just need to look.

[@pflume1]

Your ad hoc argument, the same can be said about you looking not just Jupiter's young moons, but the countless other issues, one example Mercury having a magnetic field.

[@forestgiest1380]

@@TJforChrist No. What's insane is that you look at something as evident as a cannonball landing on the ground next to you. Then look over your shoulder and see a smoking cannon on the hill. Then saying that because God "Could" make a cannonball and a cannon. It's evidence that the cannonball never came from the cannon & it just looks that way because God made the cannonball in mid air.

[@djsarg7451]

Twisting truth due to missing the meaning of one word Yom (day), Biblical Hebrew has a limited vocabulary, with fewer words compared to other languages, such as English or Spanish. This means words often have multiple meanings determined by context. Day - yom is commonly rendered as day in English translations, but the word yom can be used in different ways to refer to different time spans thus literally is: Period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness), Sunrise to sunset Sunset to next sunset Time period of unspecified length. (as a long time span ). Day 1 to 7 is the last and we are still in day 7 see Hebrews 4:10 we are in day 7th.

[@vikingskuld]

You know I really think what your pointing out is not only wrong ite deceptive to a point that's disgusting. The word day is used how many hundred plus times in the Bible and yet it consistently refers to a 24 hour day. So stop lying to people.

[@marktapley7571]

It is very clear that the Bible is referring to a 24 hr. day: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3fNmIpviqd6b6c

[@zerosteel0123]

Nope. That's not what we believe.

[@RobertA-up9ur]

No, we are not old earth creationists and "yom" almost always is in reference to literal days.

[@vikingskuld]

Yes its definitely not billions of years old. IT really shocks me people want to keep lying about Yom and trying to deceive people into thinking it means millions of years. When it's very clearly a 24 hour day. There is plenty of evidence foe this and even several debates that show its just a day. So there is no God resting and millions of years go by. Evolution is a joke and yec has continually shown it to be nothing more then a false religion..

[@jacemay5197]

Genesis 1:14-17. God made ONE sun, and ONE moon, and He made the stars also. hence stars are NOT suns. Joshua 10-the sun and moon STOOD STILL. hence, not far away, but local. There cannot possibly be a solar system according to the inspired word.

[@StudentDad-mc3pu]

Our sun is a star, like many of the others. We've literally taken tours around the Solar system with probes, and landed a probe on an astoroid AND a commet. Keep up.

[@jacemay5197]

@@StudentDad-mc3pu Not according to God, who made them

[@JRRodriguez-nu7po]

Dr Hebert looks like a Metalunar from the movie This Island Earth.

[@Cali4Gayle]

Kinda rude, dude

[@JesusRodriguez-zy3wj]

@@Cali4Gayle Most likely Dr Hebert would find it funny and not rude. I am guessing that Dr Hebert is a man, he might even use the pronoun "he" (I do hope I'm not being offensive :). We men don't generally take offense at having our looks mocked. Nerds like Hebert and me are especially tolerant of remarks about how we look.

[@forestgiest1380]

0:00 we'll that's f@&kin& ironic.

[@michalp79]

This guy is just lying. As I have said many times - it is sad that to confirm your beliefs you have to lie.

[@freddiefreihofer7716]

Hand-waving is not a substitute for cogent argumentation.

[@TJforChrist]

That's why I'm dismissing your comment

[@forestgiest1380]

This guy looks like the human version of Dave the octopus from the penguins of madagascar movie.

[@Cali4Gayle]

That's the nicest thing you have to say? What a limited vocabulary

[@ConservativeMirror]

OK, so maybe these moons formed millions or billions of years after the solar system formed. Same with these geological or magnetic processes. If some process began 500 million years ago, that doesn't mean the solar system can't be older.

[@zillva]

What's even funnier here is that Jupiter has rings of asteroids, which is just a smaller version of how the solar system came to be in the first place. Dust clumping together, clearing out fields within the disk surrounding the center of its orbit. This works for disks orbiting planets as well. What's even worse here is that they claim this is reoated to evolutionary theory, which it really isn't

[@roblangsdorf8758]

Evolutionary "theory" is refuted by the length of the carefully crafted human genome. A DNA code of 3,000,000,000 units is something that any programmer can tell you can't happen by random chance. So, it is time to put aside the fairy tale religious belief in evolution and do real science.

[@therick363]

@@roblangsdorf8758how wrong can you get? How blatant misrepresentation can you pull?

[@roblangsdorf8758]

@@therick363 so trick, what in the world are you talking about?