Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The "apparent age" nonsense that NGC 2818 is an illusion

Expand Messages
  • greeneto
    Young earth creationists using the apparent age argument claim that this stellar nebula (NGC 2818) we see here is fake (because, they say, we re seeing an
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 10, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Young earth creationists using the apparent age argument claim that this stellar nebula (NGC 2818) we see here is fake (because, they say, we're seeing an illusion of something as it would have looked if the universe existed 10,400 years ago, but they say the universe didn't exist more than about 6,000 years go so God just created the illusions of everything as it would have looked if it had actually existed before the time of creation):

      Hubble Snaps a Splendid Planetary Nebula
      http://www.hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2009/05/

      See here also:
      Astronomy Picture of the Day - Planetary Nebula NGC 2818
      http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090122.html

      Yet young earth creationists say that stellar nebulae such as these are real because we're seeing them from less than 6,000 in the past:

      Ant-like Space Structure Previews Death of Our Sun
      http://www.hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2001/05

      Also:
      Astronomy Picture of the Day - Planetary Nebula Mz3: The Ant Nebula
      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050501.html

      NGC 6302
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGC_6302

      Also:
      Astronomy Picture of the Day - The Butterfly Nebula [NGC 6302] from Upgraded Hubble
      http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090910.html

      Yet young earth creationists HAVE ABSOLUTELY ZERO DATA to back up their notion that some are real while others are illusions. In other words, young earth creationists are - yet again - making a circular argument by merely ASSUMING their argument to be true without one iota of data to back it up, and then begging the question to as the basis for justifying their argument. Classic fallacious rhetoric. Typical young earth creationist nonsense.

      And they have the audacity to pretend that this is "science".

      Ha ha, very funny.

      - Todd Greene
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.