Neil deGrasse Tyson Proves Creationists Wrong on Age of The Universe

“The Crab Nebula is about 6,500 light years from Earth,” Tyson said. “According to some beliefs, that’s the age of the whole universe, but if the universe were only 6,500 years old, how could we see light from anything more distant than the Crab Nebula? We couldn’t.”

Eilzel wrote:As an example of your dense 'the Bible never says' argument. Imagine I write an autobiography. I never mention my age or how long ago I was born. But the book clearly records each passing year up to the present.

Could you, from my autobiography, use it to figure out my age? Yes or no.

Eilzel wrote:No, it is a hypothetical question to make a point. But you are too stupid to understand, so forget it.

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

Eilzel wrote:No, it is a hypothetical question to make a point. But you are too stupid to understand, so forget it.

lol no it was just another pathetic attempt to make a point that had no relevance...  

as usual....................  

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

lol no it was just another pathetic attempt to make a point that had no relevance...  

as usual....................  

No, it's the fact that the Bible contains enough information about when people were born and how long they've lived that it is possible to calculate the approximate date that Creation would have had to occurred if the Bible is true.

Those calculations have been done by Church officials such as the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, who reasoned that God created the world around the year 4,000 BC.

So Eilzel's points are perfectly apt -- that given a book with enough information, such as an autobiography, one could make deductions, like when certain things were supposed to have happened; and that you are too stupid to understand that analogy.  ::D:: 

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No, it's the fact that the Bible contains enough information about when people were born and how long they've lived that it is possible to calculate the approximate date that Creation would have had to occurred if the Bible is true.

Those calculations have been done by Church officials such as the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, who reasoned that God created the world around the year 4,000 BC.

So Eilzel's points are perfectly apt -- that given a book with enough information, such as an autobiography, one could make deductions, like when certain things were supposed to have happened; and that you are too stupid to understand that analogy.  ::D:: 

Thanks Ben; the problem when 'conversing' with GIG is that you actually sometimes start to think you are not being clear enough- so thanks for reassuring me that it wasn't my questioning that was the problem   

Of course our mutual friend here will still duck the point, fail at understanding, and completely evade the question   

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

lol no it was just another pathetic attempt to make a point that had no relevance...  

as usual....................  

No, it's the fact that the Bible contains enough information about when people were born and how long they've lived that it is possible to calculate the approximate date that Creation would have had to occurred if the Bible is true.

Those calculations have been done by Church officials such as the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, who reasoned that God created the world around the year 4,000 BC.

So Eilzel's points are perfectly apt -- that given a book with enough information, such as an autobiography, one could make deductions, like when certain things were supposed to have happened; and that you are too stupid to understand that analogy.  ::D:: 

Thanks Ben; the problem when 'conversing' with GIG is that you actually sometimes start to think you are not being clear enough- so thanks for reassuring me that it wasn't my questioning that was the problem   

Of course our mutual friend here will still duck the point, fail at understanding, and completely evade the question   

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Thanks Ben; the problem when 'conversing' with GIG is that you actually sometimes start to think you are not being clear enough- so thanks for reassuring me that it wasn't my questioning that was the problem   

Of course our mutual friend here will still duck the point, fail at understanding, and completely evade the question   

I think he understands more than he lets on, actually -- but he realizes it frustrates us when he seems not to understand, so he pretends not to.

Eilzel wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No, it's the fact that the Bible contains enough information about when people were born and how long they've lived that it is possible to calculate the approximate date that Creation would have had to occurred if the Bible is true.

Those calculations have been done by Church officials such as the Anglican Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, who reasoned that God created the world around the year 4,000 BC.

So Eilzel's points are perfectly apt -- that given a book with enough information, such as an autobiography, one could make deductions, like when certain things were supposed to have happened; and that you are too stupid to understand that analogy.  ::D:: 

Thanks Ben; the problem when 'conversing' with GIG is that you actually sometimes start to think you are not being clear enough- so thanks for reassuring me that it wasn't my questioning that was the problem   

Of course our mutual friend here will still duck the point, fail at understanding, and completely evade the question