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

Re: [creation_evolution_debate] Re: stretching the heavens again ..... was: Reconstruction ....

Expand Messages
  • Robert Stewart
    ________________________________ From: PIASAN@aol.com To: creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:03 PM
    Message 1 of 49 , Jan 3, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      From: "PIASAN@..." <PIASAN@...>
      To: creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:03 PM
      Subject: Re: [creation_evolution_debate] Re: stretching the heavens again ..... was: Reconstruction ....
       
       
      Robert:
      Now when the heavens were stretched there would be a vast red shift.  But in order to see it you would have to see that moment in time.  After the stretching or what we can see now is only the general expansion of the un iverse or shrinking.  Let me explain further using 2 simple stars.  Sol our sun and the closest neighbor is 4.7 light years apart.  Now according to theory mine as well as big bangers.  there was a time when those two stars were together.  When the heavens were stretched that nis when the red shift of these two stars relative to each other happened.  We can see into the stars past.  But we cannot see far enough to detect the red shift of these two stars being four light years apart.
       
       
      Pi:
      Your example works for stars only a few years apart.  If falls to pieces when the stars are over 6000 light years apart.  For example, if Sn1987a were  in its present position as the result of stretching the heavens, you would have a stream of light 167,000+ light years from Earth to Sn1987a that has been stretched.  In your example, the stretched light would have gone past the Earth thousands of years ago and we would now be observing unstretched light.  For more distant objects (beyond about 6,000 ly, that would not be the case.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
      Robert--My point alsso works for stars more than 6,000 light years apart.  The only thing that you are talking against is people that believe that the universe is only 6,000 years old.  If a star is 12,000 light years away then that also is proof against a 6,000 year old universe. 
       
       
       
      Pi:
      Let's be a bit more specific.... if a star is mre than 6,000 light years from earth and we can see it and it is not significantly red shifted, then it is proof agains a 6,000 year old universe.
       
       
       
      Robert:
       I believe in Creationism.  I do not believe that the Universe is 6,000 years old.  I believe that the Bishop that started this line of reasoning is wrong.  If the Universe is 15 billion years old I contend that the stretching happened within the first 1 to 30 seconds of creation.
       
      Pi:
      We'd still observe a major redshift of stars beyond  6,000 light years.  We don't.  Thus a 6,000 year old universe is falsified.  The redshift we do observe is consistent with a universe 13.7 billion years old.
       
       
      Robert--You see a red shift because the star is more than 6,000 light years away and it is moving, at the time of observance or light emitting.  But if a star was moved at a greater velocity, then slowed you would only see the greater shift for the time it was happenning.  conversely if a star went nova you wouldn't know it until you got to the proper time of that event.  Do you understand what I'm proposing now?
       
       
       
    • Robert Stewart
      ________________________________ From: PIASAN@aol.com To: creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:03 PM
      Message 49 of 49 , Jan 3, 2013
      • 0 Attachment

        From: "PIASAN@..." <PIASAN@...>
        To: creation_evolution_debate@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:03 PM
        Subject: Re: [creation_evolution_debate] Re: stretching the heavens again ..... was: Reconstruction ....
         
         
        Robert:
        Now when the heavens were stretched there would be a vast red shift.  But in order to see it you would have to see that moment in time.  After the stretching or what we can see now is only the general expansion of the un iverse or shrinking.  Let me explain further using 2 simple stars.  Sol our sun and the closest neighbor is 4.7 light years apart.  Now according to theory mine as well as big bangers.  there was a time when those two stars were together.  When the heavens were stretched that nis when the red shift of these two stars relative to each other happened.  We can see into the stars past.  But we cannot see far enough to detect the red shift of these two stars being four light years apart.
         
         
        Pi:
        Your example works for stars only a few years apart.  If falls to pieces when the stars are over 6000 light years apart.  For example, if Sn1987a were  in its present position as the result of stretching the heavens, you would have a stream of light 167,000+ light years from Earth to Sn1987a that has been stretched.  In your example, the stretched light would have gone past the Earth thousands of years ago and we would now be observing unstretched light.  For more distant objects (beyond about 6,000 ly, that would not be the case.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        Robert--My point alsso works for stars more than 6,000 light years apart.  The only thing that you are talking against is people that believe that the universe is only 6,000 years old.  If a star is 12,000 light years away then that also is proof against a 6,000 year old universe. 
         
         
         
        Pi:
        Let's be a bit more specific.... if a star is mre than 6,000 light years from earth and we can see it and it is not significantly red shifted, then it is proof agains a 6,000 year old universe.
         
         
         
        Robert:
         I believe in Creationism.  I do not believe that the Universe is 6,000 years old.  I believe that the Bishop that started this line of reasoning is wrong.  If the Universe is 15 billion years old I contend that the stretching happened within the first 1 to 30 seconds of creation.
         
        Pi:
        We'd still observe a major redshift of stars beyond  6,000 light years.  We don't.  Thus a 6,000 year old universe is falsified.  The redshift we do observe is consistent with a universe 13.7 billion years old.
         
         
        Robert--You see a red shift because the star is more than 6,000 light years away and it is moving, at the time of observance or light emitting.  But if a star was moved at a greater velocity, then slowed you would only see the greater shift for the time it was happenning.  conversely if a star went nova you wouldn't know it until you got to the proper time of that event.  Do you understand what I'm proposing now?
         
         
         
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.