Dwarf Planet Pluto

Here are some words that can be used to describe the planet Pluto:

1. Small (it's diameter is 2390km)
2. Cold (it's average temperature is -225C)
3. Dim (it's apparent magnitude is 15.1)
4. Far (it's distance from the sun is 5,870,000,000km)
5. Slow (it's orbital velocity is 4.7km/s)
6. Eccentric (it's orbital eccentricity is 0.244 degrees)
7. Ringless (it has no ring system)
8. Weak (it's force of gravity is 0.6m/s2, which is 16 times less than that of Earth's)
9. Brown (it's colour is considered to be mostly brown)
10. Icy (it is believed to consist mostly of frozen water and methane)

Lots of oxygen, lots of sandwiches (vacuum packed of course), something to do on the way, a torch and spare batteries, a radio, a deck chair, a spare pair of underpants. A flag designating who you're claiming it for. Sick bags. Miniature sports equipment of your choice.

Also remember to write your will before you go, it's unlikely you'll return in your life time.

1. Oxygen
2. Water
3. Skies
4. Portable Heater
5. Extra Clothes to Wear
6. Food (vacuum sealed)

If the Earth were indeed "about 4 billion years old," then one can conclude that those who believe the creation account in the book of Genesis would indeed say that man has been on Earth for that period of time.The problem is, many Christians do not accept the premise that the Earth is that old. Many Christians believe the Earth is significantly younger than that; some will say around 6,000 years. Thus, those people do not suggest that man has been around for 4 billion years.

Answer

It's all "suggesting". No Facts.

Answer

This is mixing science with Theism. It is not possible, because science is the antithesis of Theism.

Answer

The Bible says that earth was created within six days. People say that the earth is four billion years old. It is impossible. For example: the measurement of the earth's magnetic field over the past 150 years indicate a rapid decline in strength. If the rate of decline has always remained the same, the heat required to produce the strength of earth's magnetic field approximately 20,000 year ago would have destroyed the earth. This rate of decline limits the age of the earth to a maximum of 10,000 years. This age for the earth is consistent with the age indicated in the Bible. So...there is the proof needed.

Answer

The strength of earth's magnetic field proves nothing. The earth's magnetic field has reversed itself several times in the past (and over geological time, in spite of what the young-earthers say) and this renders unidirectional extrapolation to deduce field strength useless.In an attempt to save face, Dr. Humphreys now compresses all of the shifts of the magnetic poles into an impossibly small window a couple of thousand years in breadth. And no thinking geologist (or any other thinking individual) could possibly look at the paleomagnetic record and come away in any kind of agreement with Humphreys.

Answer

In order to understand the Bible necessitates learning the universal language of mind.As this is learned and applied, the overall picture being presented will be more clear.The sixth day is the one we are now approaching which is the age of intuition.We are currently experiencing the fifth day which is the age of reasoning. The practice of reasoning is required to develop intuition.Spending time attempting to determine how old we are is taking attention away from the focus of finding our way back home, compatibility with our creator. The original light from our creator was the first step. Next was the division of light into that of our individuality, in language of mind referred to as 'I AM", which is who we really are, it's just that we don't remember. Being a part of our creator, we have all the same attributes which when fully developed will culminate into compatibility. To determine how much is left to do we simply ask ourselves how many of these attributes are we aware of and have use of now. Anywhere in the bible where I AM is mentioned, will be referring to the innermost part of ourselves. The initial step to get acquainted with self on a deeper level is through the use of undivided attention. There are many more steps, each building upon the previous step to understanding who we really are. A sincere desire to know will manifest the information for anyone. You will find that speculation gives way to knowing when your intention is to look as it was suggested in the Bible.Using the opinion of others or constant debating will not produce the knowing quality for you. We not only have the right to know, we must. We've been here for a long time and we've got a ways to go. We can either wait on the rest of the crowd before we get on board or we can take a personal initiative and get on with it and actually speed up the process of our own progression. We had permission for this from the beginning. How long we take to get it done is a matter of choice. It is the process of claiming our inheritance. Religion and science are not really at odds and many are beginning to see this. The greatest mistake that any of us can make is to think that what we now know is all there is. So ask, and you will receive. I not only believed this but went on to prove it to myself. A truth will stand up to the test and it's okay to find out for yourself.

Answer

It is folly to attempt to find scientific evidence of biblical accounts and only diminishes both fields of endeavor to know truth. Whatever the true age of the planet Earth, and I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Earth is about 4 billion years old, this has no bearing on the Genesis myth. Mythology does not continue to speak to people in immeasurable ways because they are silly stories for ignorant fools. Mythology speaks to us because we have been offered lessons in life. We have been offered instructions on how to act and behave in order to better survive the science of our reality. Science says there are universal laws. So does God. Science theorizes the universe began with a really big bang. Genesis theorizes and tells the story of when God spoke and said "Let their be light", presumable a really big bang. Genesis tells the tale of Adam and Eves expulsion from the garden where they had happily lived and flourished by surviving off of the lush vegetation in the garden. They were thrust into an unforgiving landscape where life had changed dramatically. Science tells a tale in the evolution of man where humans for some mysterious reason left the lush vegetation of the rain forests where they had lived for so long for the grasslands where nutrition was not readily available forcing humanity to become hunter gatherers in order to survive. There are profound similarities between the theories of these two fields of study. But it is not the similarities of the bible to science that makes it so popular across the world. Science can only inform us on the nature of the things we study. Mythology seeks to inform us on the nature of nature. Who we are and why we are here is the science of myth. Where here is and what it is made of is the science of fact. How old is the Earth is a question of science. How old are we is a question of myth. Not how hold are we as humans, but how old were we before we became humans, who are we? What are we supposed to be doing? These are the questions of mythology. Useful definitions Young Earth creationism is a form of creationism that teaches that the Earth and life on Earth were created by a direct act of God dating between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. Its adherents are Christians who believe the Hebrew text of Genesis is a literal account that the Earth was created in six 24-hour days, or believe that existing evidence in the natural world today supports a strict interpretation of scriptural creation as historical fact, or that the scientific evidence supporting Darwinian evolution, geological uniformitarianism, and other theories which are at odds with a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account, are either flawed or misinterpreted.Old Earth creationism is a variant of the creationist view of the origin of the universe and life on Earth. As a theory of origins it is typically more compatible with mainstream scientific thought on the issues of geology, cosmology and the age of the Earth, in comparison to Young Earth creationism. However, it still generally takes the accounts of creation in Genesis more literally than theistic evolution (or evolutionary creationism). Young Earth View There is a great deal of scientific evidence which suggests that the earth is nowhere near the ages claimed. Most of this evidence comes through the work of researchers who do not believe in the Bible account of creation. The evidence would allow the Bible chronology with a relatively recent creation around 6000 years ago to be correct.Thus man has not been on earth for the billions of years alleged, although created on day 6. The day 6 of creation just wasn't that long ago, with some of the supporting scientific evidence below:

1. Insufficient sea-floor sediment: At current rates of erosion the amount of sea-floor sediments actually found could accumulate in 12 million years. The oceans are alleged to have existed for 3 billion years.

Creationists contend these sediments could have accumulated rapidly at the flood of Noah c. 5000 years ago.

2. Insufficent Sodium Chloride in the sea: Evolutionary estimates for the age of the earth's oceans are 3 billion years. With current rates of deposition, the salt in the sea could have accumulated in 42-62 million years at todays rate and of course much faster in the Noahic flood.

Note: Calculations done for many other elements produce even younger ages.

3. Decay of the magnetic field of the Earth: This is occurring too rapidly to fit the long-age evolutionary paradigm - the total energy stored having decreased by a factor of 2.7 over the past 1000 years. Creationists have a model explaining this based on sound physics.

4. Tightly bent strata: These stata, thousands of feet thick are tightly bent without cracking. Yet they are meant to have solidified over millions of years and then bent. The creationist explanation is that they formed while still plastic as the entire formation had to be soft when formed to avoid cracking. This would point to the folding having occurred thousands of years and not millions after formation.

5. Fossil Radioactivity: Radiohaloes which have shown evidence of having been squashed indicate that the Jurassic, Triassic and Eocene formations in the Colorado plateau were formed in a short time-frame - over months, not hundreds of millions of years. This is so since the rings formed by the haloes, which only exist for a short time before they decay were squashed, indicating rapid formation. If the rocks had formed over a long time span the haloes would not have been there.

6. Misplaced Helium: Helium is generated by radioactive elements as they decay. The escape of this Helium into the atmosphere can be measured. If this has been occurring for 5 billion years there should be much more Helium in the atmosphere, instead of the 0.05% that is actually there when compared to the relevant time scale.

7. Insufficient stone-age skeletons: The 100,000 year stone-age of evolutionary anthropologists should have produced many more skeletons - around 4 billion, many more of which should still be around compared to the few thousand found.

8. Recent Agriculture: The archeological evidence shows the stone age people to be as intelligent as modern man and yet it is claimed they existed for 100,000 years before discovering that plants grow from seeds. Creationists would think that it is more likely that man was without agriculture for a much shorter period immediately after the flood.

9. History too short: Stone-age people built huge monuments, did beautiful cave paintings and kept records of lunar phases. It seems unreasonable that they should wait nearly 100,000 years before beginning to make written historical records around 4-5000 BC. A much shorter Biblical time-scale seems to better fit this evidence.

Source: These points are condensed from an article by creationist Dr. Russel Humphreys, in Creation Ex Nihilo13(3):28-31, June -August 1991.

These are not the only arguments used by creationists, but are a sample of some.

Other arguments include:

Processes thought to take a long period of time can take a short time given the right conditions:Among the list of such processes includes the following:

Coal and Oil formation.Opal formation.Stalactites and Stalagmites in Limestone and other caves.

Diamonds

General Geologic processes are not always slow and gradual but sometimes catastrophic in nature

Some Examples of Rapid Geologic Processes. The long accepted dogma taught by Charles Lyell that geologic processes always take vast amounts of time is being challenged by recent discoveries in science.

The following are now accepted as having formed catastrophically in a relatively short period of time:

- a major portion of Washington State

- the Snake River Plain of Idaho

- the Altai region of Southern Siberia

- the Black Sea basin

- the upper Mississippi River Valley

- the Hudson River Valley including New York City

- Wyoming's Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone

- Owen's River Gorge in California

- the Great Lakes/S. Lawrence River drainage basin

- the English Channel and Dover Straits (the most recently discovered addition to this list)

Scientists who are not creationists of any kind are now openly talking about catastrophism of a major kind in shaping some of these vast areas. Diamonds, Coal and Opals These have all been demonstrated as not requiring millions of years to form. They can all be formed quite quickly under the right conditions and in some situations are almost indistinguishable from the 'real thing'.