Those who call God a liar, and contend with His Record of events, simply Refuse to give God the Glory He deserves, and will continue to discredit His Handiwork, and His Authority.

@samburns9350

2 ай бұрын

God isn't a liar but some of his followers have a Pinocchio nose extending around the block.

@cs5250

2 ай бұрын

Can’t be a liar if you never existed in truth

@michaelyork4554

2 ай бұрын

@@cs5250 You're not smart enough to be an Atheist, an Agnostic maybe, but you need not be without knowledge, just do some homework, and stop believing human liars. I don't get paid anything to say I believe God, they get paid to conjecture anything, and everything but God. Better to investigate fully than to mock.

@shayonsmith

2 ай бұрын

This is one of the best summaries of the attitude of humans

@michaelyork4554

2 ай бұрын

@@cs5250 You are not smart enough to be an atheist, maybe an agnostic, but I wouldn't revel in just claiming lack of knowledge. Do your homework, and realize that humans lie, and make conjectures based on assumptions, that doesn't make God a reality, but it certainly doesn't rule out a Creator. You don't know if God exists. I have amassed more than enough data to believe that He exists, but I am overjoyed to know that Divine Justice will prevail, and that Gods Plan is Perfect. it is sad that you wish to mock God rather than put forth the effort to thoroughly study the matter. What if our eternal destinies are bound up with Him, what will you have missed?

It is thermodynamically impossible for a cloud of gas to collapse into a star; it reaches hydrostatic equilibrium long before fusion ignites in the core. I don't think creation scientists are talking about this enough. We have never observed the "birth" of a star.

@lawrencesmith1985

16 күн бұрын

Absolutely correct and never will happen. That’s equivalent to a human being dying but taking their life back. Absolutely impossible.

@ChrisFerguson-zm4gt

15 күн бұрын

You people are hilarious....the vile arrogance to think you know more than the experts while believing in talking donkeys and snakes and people living in whales etc....hahahah

@thurlravenscroft2572

15 күн бұрын

@@ChrisFerguson-zm4gtsomething to consider with your argument is that the experts we are supposed to believe don’t agree. Professional, peer-reviewed journals have become a joke, and there is no place that the common man can go to find objective truth. “Scientists/science educators will take a hypothesis which have not been objectively proven or disproven and run with it just to have to walk it back when the next idea comes along. Just my thoughts, I don’t want to argue, but these very real problems in the field of academics have to be addressed. Until they are, people will continue to believe what they see as a reliable view of existence.

@ChrisFerguson-zm4gt

15 күн бұрын

@@thurlravenscroft2572 bs

@thurlravenscroft2572

15 күн бұрын

@@ChrisFerguson-zm4gt deep thoughts 🙄

Matthew 7:13 &14 Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14“For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

@natlovell122

18 күн бұрын

An amazing package I find myself going back to over and over again.

@asunder6797

4 күн бұрын

You can thank Zoroastrianism in Persia for the construction of that concept. It's considered the earliest religion. Christianity owes a lot to preceding religions.

I met Hugh Ross years back, even attended a seminar or Two... Something was off then and Thank you for confirming the up to date accurately

@douglasjacobs882

2 ай бұрын

Hugh Ross doesn't believe in evolution or a naturalistic origin of the universe, so if this video confirmed that he does, you have been mislead.

@seaknightvirchow8131

2 ай бұрын

Ross tailors Genesis to the current fads in evolution.

@MutsPub

2 ай бұрын

@@seaknightvirchow8131 NONSENSE! Why do you spread gossip?!

@auauqn

2 ай бұрын

Why does he keep saying "evolutionists"? Evolution theory is about biology, not astronomy

@seaknightvirchow8131

2 ай бұрын

@@MutsPub It is not gossip, it is fact. Did you watch the video or have you ever read HR’s interpretation of Genesis 1? Evolutionary assertions are constantly changing and what was considered fact yesterday might not be fact tomorrow. Accommodating so called science which might be in error to the interpretation of Genesis is poor exegesis if you are teaching scripture. Science is about what exists not about how it came into existence. As far as time, the geologic columns are about an event, a global flood, not millions of years of time. HR believes in a day age interpretation of Genesis but this is not only unnecessary, it is ridiculous. Ross and so many others in the end, are intimating that God does not know how to express himself and that we had to wait for 3000 years for a correction. If you agree with HR that’s up to you.

Never believed the big bang. There is no way they could possibly know. We have God's first hand account. I'll sticj with that! God bless

@pipMcDohl

2 ай бұрын

where is god first hand account? Where is god to begin with? tell him to come and show himself. If he has something to say about the origin of the universe, that's interesting. Tell him he his welcome. Bring him. Got some beer for him.

If you get the first question in the Bible wrong then you will get almost everything else wrong. “Did God really say…?” Has to be “Yes”

@philipbuckley759

2 ай бұрын

amen.....

@jasonlogan5765

2 ай бұрын

What would God have to say anything that don't even make sense

@Laurie-eg8ct

2 ай бұрын

God's did not write to Bible, his disciples did.

@josephlewis7443

2 ай бұрын

And your point is?@@Laurie-eg8ct

@edwardjackson9791

2 ай бұрын

@@jasonlogan5765 Gen 3:1 the serpent ask Eve “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” The meaning being is God’s Word true. Which would include all of Scripture. It’s either yes or no. If you say no then your understanding of the world made by God will always be subject to error. He gave use His Word to understand Him and His creation.

The Wife Theory is obviously not true since the moon's orbit is a near-perfect circle. If the moon was gravity captured, it would not have a near-perfect circle orbit but far more of an oval or elliptical orbit. The moon is also in constant tidal-lock meaning the same side facing us all the time (I think Saturn's moon Iapetus also has near-perfect circular orbit with tidal lock).

@gregoswald7723

2 ай бұрын

Remember that the earth is moving too. IF they were traveling in roughly the same direction and speed it could enter the orbit at a near circle. This is how the lunar missions get into an almost circular orbit with the moon without expending a lot of fuel to slow down. See Low Energy Transfer Orbital Maneuver.

@mmaimmortals

2 ай бұрын

@switzerlandful That's an interesting idea. But all of the deep time hypotheses have problems that relate to the circularity of the lunar orbit. That is, no matter how the orbit started out, it should have turned into a perfect circle long, long ago. Kind of like a magnet orbiting another magnet. They invariably start out elliptical, but are forced into a circle with relatively few revolutions. So, ironically, the out of roundness that the lunar orbit does have is strong evidence that it hasn't been there for millions of years, let alone billions.

@j.pershing2197

Ай бұрын

The key is Saturrn

@gregoswald7723

Ай бұрын

@@j.pershing2197 Isn't Saturn the key Ring?

@j.pershing2197

Ай бұрын

@@gregoswald7723 Our 0² molecules match only those found in the rings of Saturn. Saturday is named after Saturn. Some of this will sound unbelievable but Saturn with her axial tilt belonged to a family group. This group all have the same axial tilts. Saturm was a brown dwarf star that was captures by a larger main sequence star, the sun. For a time there was a celeatial alignment of planets after Saturna system was pulled into the new hybrid system. This appeared in space for a long time forming "the cosmic wheel, lotus, squatterman and many other peteoglyphs foumd around the world. The Eye of Ra, osiris etc. When this formation broke up Saturn had a nova event and was pushed back. Venus was born and flew by on its way to the current orbit. But it was known as the Wondering Star, Morning Star and at times dragon or serpent. This depended on the ionization of plasma. Our ancient ancestors left us evidence all over earth. If u want to know more plz ask. I will send u reference points. Gotta go to work. Have a nice day

It ultimately boils down to 2 scientific laws: Consistency and Conservation. The Consistency Principle states that the laws that govern nature today always have and always will. The Law of Conservation states that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. If matter and energy cannot be created today through natural phenomena, then it couldn't have been created in the beginning through natural phenomena. If Creation ever occurred, it therefore must have been a Supernatural event.

@nyestrovicpenchkofferberge3407

Ай бұрын

The consistency principle doesn't account for that which we don't know. Matter can obviously be created, as God did so. It could be that God operates entirely outside of the laws of our universe, or it could be that we simply haven't discovered all of the laws. The law of conservation may or may not be valid. Let me put it this way, had we used some of our current science today, 1000 years ago, they would have said, "That violates the laws of consistency principle, therefore it must be of God" What we don't know is more important than what we do know. In this case at least. I'm not atheist, mind you. I just don't necessarily believe that God operates in ways that are impossible for humans to comprehend on some miniscule level. The Big Bang theory isn't incomprehensible to me, nor do I find it contradictory to the Bible. But again, what do we really know? As Dr Mortenson said over and over, "We don't really know." I don't know either. I'm just not operating under the assumption that what we know today is all we will know.

@ThreeEyedMonkeyMan

Ай бұрын

@@nyestrovicpenchkofferberge3407 If they said "That violates the consistency principle, therefore it must be God" they would have been correct. If Creation can occur through Natural phenomena, in any way, then humans would be able to manipulate those natural phenomena and force it to happen in accordance with our own will. We would become Gods, and Lucifer would win his Rebellion. Creation is, and can only be, the unique power of God. I'm not guessing.

@wintersresurrection9841

Ай бұрын

@@nyestrovicpenchkofferberge3407 "Matter can obviously be created, as God did so." The Law of Conservation is property of the universe and as such, applies to natural processes. God isn't constrained by physical properties within His creation so it doesn't not follow that because God can do it, natural processes can as well.

What happens when you dispense a gas in a vacuum? Does it collapse, or does it spread? How on earth did a theory that defies all odds of thermodynamics become accepted and established ?

@22190971

2 ай бұрын

Gravitational pull. How is the sun and gas planets different. Look at sun - a great ball of gas.

@Jewonastick

2 ай бұрын

In an environment that's a vacuum and has no gravity the gas would cling together by its gravitational pull. All mass attracts mass. Please elaborate how it is a problem to any law of thermodynamics

@d3m3n70r

2 ай бұрын

Apparently there remains significant confusuion, why gaseous masses do not gravitationally collapse. First of all, according to Newton's laws of motion, if you dispense particles into the void, these particles will move randomly in all directions. Second, the second law of thermodynamics states that entropy always increases and never decreases. Meaning the particles will continue to drift appart. Third, even if the mass between two particles would be sufficient enough to attract each other to cause a collision, the particles are not deformed and no kinetic energy is lost during the collission. Imagine two balls thrown at each other: They bounce off of each other and don't clump together into a larger mass. This is all based on observations, so any model must be able to account for these phenomena. And since we are not talking about an isolated and closed system, the idea of gravitaional collapse doesn't hold ground.

@Brian_L_A

2 ай бұрын

Um, you do realize that the Earth's atmosphere is surrounded by a vacuum too?

@Brian_L_A

2 ай бұрын

@@d3m3n70r The repellent force of a gas varies indirectly by the radius squared of the gas cloud. The gravitational force on a cloud of gas varies directly with the cube of the radius. Hence, if the cloud of gas is big enough, it will condense. Also shockwaves and electrostatic forces seem to enhance star formation.

I don’t mind the models being based upon naturalistic laws as we use simulations to figure out many things. But, like using FEA for stress calculations, there must be a physical experiment to verify and calibrate the simulations to in order to know that it actually mode,a how nature works. The largest issues are assumptions that bias the simulations. How much are the programmers biasing the simulations from expected behavior to create a desired result.

@jasonborn867

2 ай бұрын

The most apparent bias in biblical creation models is the assumption two individuals can establish a long-term genetically viable population.

@mikeb1596

2 ай бұрын

​@@jasonborn867that's funny because DNA evidence shows that our current human population did come two individuals

@Austin1990

2 ай бұрын

@@jasonborn867 ??? Did you not realize that ALL genetic research has validated the young earth timeline with only one potential exception. The Neanderthals, who were just a group of humans, had many more mutations, although we have no example have their mutation rate

@jasonborn867

2 ай бұрын

@@mikeb1596 Correct, but scientific Adam did not live in the same generation as scientific Eve, and these African ancestors lived hundreds of millennia before recent bronze age Mesopotamian shepherds and farmers. But based on the biblical story Eve was formed from Adam's rib, so roughly what percentage of genes do you believe they shared?

@jasonborn867

2 ай бұрын

@@Austin1990 Biblical propositions such as humanity descending from two individuals and human parthenogenesis is supported by faith in unseen evidence. There is no observable scientific evidence of these notions and also explains why Bigfoot isn't real.

Imagine that the current naturalistic theories of how stars came about and evolution become something similar to stories of Zeus, Thor, and such in the future. That would be very funny.

@skeeterburke

2 ай бұрын

fairy tales lol

@Nobody85746

2 ай бұрын

Pay attention to symbols and you'll find out its not something you've imagined as a comedian. Those princes are re-emerging and they're gaining followers.

@alantasman8273

2 ай бұрын

@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 No, the Bible has been found to be historically and scientifically accurate even thousands of years before modern day scientists confirmed observations chronicled in it pages. For instance...at the time of Moses...GOD provided laws on human hygiene...well before modern microscopes were around to confirm germs. Louis Pasteur who authored the process of pasteurization did so because milk was contaminated by germs making it harmful to drink. God thousands of years prior commanded what man should eat and what to refrain from. He gave medical advice on diseases such of Leprosy. And even told those obtaining metals like bronze, gold or silver as the spoils of war were to heat them in fire to sanitize them. The Hebrews knew this because God revealed it to them.

@jockyoung4491

2 ай бұрын

We have very good evidence of how stars form and how life evolves.

@JiraiyaSama86

2 ай бұрын

@@jockyoung4491 And what would that very good evidence be?

Glory to GOD. I thank and praise you Father God for all the beauties and wonders of the earth and universe. Blessed be your name great creator of everything in heaven and here on earth. Ruler of the universe and all things in it. I love you heavenly Father. Praise the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

What about the moons of all the planets?

Why has it been that we've been in God's good graces in the United States for over 250 years believing in the Bible in Jesus Christ and now that we've pulled him out Jesus Christ the Lord and Savior that our nation is starting to fall and collapse?

@daygrindmike8913

2 ай бұрын

A vast majority of America hasn't believed the gospel since America was birthed. Nothing has changed. Just because someone calls themselves a believer, doesn't mean they actually believe.

@donaage6303

2 ай бұрын

God is not a puppet master,, he sent us to school with a free will.. we are responsible for our actions,, like your parrents don't cotrol you life,, blaming God is pathetic.

@daygrindmike8913

2 ай бұрын

@@donaage6303 Check out Romans 9:18, and then compare it with Joshua 11:20.

@John-df4wv

Ай бұрын

@@daygrindmike8913 haha so u think 🤔

@John-df4wv

Ай бұрын

@@donaage6303 God is always in control

I don't think Hue Ross is deceiving anyone. He is just really confident that his model is pretty good. It actually IS a pretty good model.

I have long reached the conclusion that any theory of natural history is imposible to be scientific in the strict sense of the definition. Current physics models are great to predict current natural phenomenon, but going back and reconstructing natural history is imposible. Take for example the big bang theory vs plasma cosmology, one favours gravity the other electro magnetism...

@samburns9350

2 ай бұрын

You don't understand the definition.

@miscamisca6775

2 ай бұрын

The reason big bang is more accepted than plasma cosmology or electric universe is that the big bang model (like the other models) make predictions and the big bang models predictions is better and more in line of what we observe.

@alanclark639

2 ай бұрын

which is why science searches for a unified theory!

@wintersresurrection9841

Ай бұрын

Right, nothing beyond the past couple of hundred of years or so has been observed. Everything beyond that point is extrapolation, or more simply stated - guessing. Observation and Measurement? No, Guessing.

@miscamisca6775

Ай бұрын

"Right, nothing beyond the past couple of hundred of years or so has been observed. ...ment? No, Guessing." Not true, we receive light from every point in time backwards so we can on daily basis see what happen million of years back

I always wonder what goes through the heads of people that lived their whole lives in rebellion to God up to dying apart from Christs forgiveness and standing before him in judgement. I would say more fear, awe , wonder and regret than they could ever imagine. Thank you Answers in Genesis for speaking truth! Thank you Jesus, for having mercy on my wayward heart and bringing me through your grace in to your Heavenly Kingdom.

@lukebryant6523

2 ай бұрын

Even here we have comments of individuals claiming God to be nothing more than a fairytale. I feel sorry for them because I know there will come a day when their hearts will sink when they stand before the Lord. Hopefully many of them will see the truth before their time is up.

@zmanag5297

2 ай бұрын

@@lukebryant6523well said!!

@kevinhank17

2 ай бұрын

​@@lukebryant6523that's funny, maybe if your truth was remotely true people would have an easier time believing it. Personally I've died before and your Jesus certainly wasn't there nor was whatever blood thirsty monster you worship as god. I hope when you go you aren't too regretful of wasting your life in servitude to an archaic idea of a monster designed by wicked men to subdue their followers.

@jockyoung4491

2 ай бұрын

I can't think of any way I would live my life differently whether God existed or not, so I really don't worry about it.

@sssarzzz

Ай бұрын

@@lukebryant6523 so how do u think works...u believe in Jesus and all ur sins will be forgiving and given eternal happiness.....sounds to me like a bunch of people making themselves feel better for all the crappy things they do ..want to cheat on ur wife...its all good cause jesus will forgive u in the end. give me a break.

one thing he missed is that the shadow of the earth during a lunar eclipse appears to be exactly the size of the moon. which I think adds to the solar eclipse story.

@barrywhite9114

2 күн бұрын

When you see the Earth’s Shadow depart the moon, take a look at the arc of the shadow…It’s somewhat larger than the moon. This is the size the Earth should look from the moon.

God bless Dr. Terry Mortensen and other scientists who stand for truth in the face of often immense pressure from colleges, peers, science publications, etc.

@christopheespic

2 ай бұрын

He doesn't stand for the truth.... Only for his personal beliefs.

I've asked that question many times.... point to the night sky and show me yesterday there was no start and today there is a star there. I have searched the net. Based on their framework, new starts should be popping up all the time. Maybe not on a daily basis but certainly on a yearly basis. If in fact their mechanism is correct.

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

You obviously have no idea how stars are born and how quickly light travels through empty space

@xXMACEMANXx

2 ай бұрын

In recorded human history, we've observed stellar collapse in the form of a supernova. One specific star got very bright for about a month and then very dim until it wasn't visible. The reason why we don't see stars "pop up" is because proto-stars also give off light. Odds are that many of the "stars" you see in the night sky aren't really undergoing stable fusion, and thusly are not quite stars yet. Stellar formation takes place over hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years. It's likely that, for the entire couple hundred thousand years humans have been making fire, we've never observed a gas cloud collapse into a star from start to finish. Though we do occasionally see stars go supernova, far more regularly than we watch stars form

@kevinhank17

2 ай бұрын

I feel compelled to inform you that all the stars you can see with your naked eye are incredibly close and compose an insanely tiny fraction of our own galaxy. As in there are stars being born and popping into existence all the time, we can't see them without telescopes though. Buy one maybe?

@stickman-1

2 ай бұрын

Protostars goes not give off observable light. In order for us to observe it with the naked eye, it already needs to be doing fusion. And quoting you: "Though we do occasionally see stars go supernova, far more regularly than we watch stars form" Okay. point me to one of these stars that we have seen born.@@xXMACEMANXx

@stickman-1

2 ай бұрын

okay. give me the coordinate and telescope used to show me a star birth. Give me before and after pictures, the name of the star, it's coordinates and the telescope used.@@kevinhank17

Excellent Scriptural (divine supernatural spoken & written revelation) and scientific (observable, regular, & repeated occurrences or revelation) apologetics that fit the facts! Great job Dr. Mortenson!

@eddie1975utube

Ай бұрын

Not even close. Terrible lecture if you are someone who understands science.

I know we havent observed the creation of stars, but Hugh would say we have because of observing light that supposedly left from the past you can see past events? Why is that incorrect?

This is a very realistic explanations of the forming and evolution of the earth and the moon and the solar system.

@ktrimbach5771

2 ай бұрын

Nothing explains any of it, but they can’t say that because … God

Our Creator God is MAGNIFICENT IN HIS PERFECTION AND GLORY!! Praise God! All GLORY TO HIM!! Thank you Jesus for Your sacrifice ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏

@sssarzzz

Ай бұрын

its truly amazing how scientific understanding gets attacked cause the people attacking don't have the knowledge and mental ability to understand and keep repeating...'no one saw if happen so u can't prove it.'.. then say everything was made by the invisible man in the sky with absolute zero proof...but thats ok ...cause someone can twist the bible "written by man' to justify...ignoring anything in the bible they don't like.

God bless this man, for sharring his knowledge with us

@waynehampson9569

Ай бұрын

He knows nothing,

So what calendar did Abraham use??

How do you have gas pressure without a container Danny?

"But my woke university professor scientist told me so".😂

@annieoaktree6774

2 ай бұрын

"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Creationist Pastor Ray Mummert at the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial. 😂🤣😅

@inthelightofhisglory9614

2 ай бұрын

​@@annieoaktree6774 🥱

@katamas832

2 ай бұрын

Projection, eh?

@Former2freeExjw

2 ай бұрын

​@@annieoaktree6774 Oh no not intelligent people! Cause we all know the world works better when people are ignorant and barely read one book yet thunk they know it all is better than educated people who realize they still have much to learn.

Beautiful!

Greetings from Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, USA. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and understanding. The Lord God Jehovah is an awesome God!

Nice 👌

Amazing

same i just dont buy it 😁, Amen God Bless

Bible says the earth doesnt move, but the sun has a circuit, Psalm 19. Joshua 10, Joshua told the Sun to stand still, not the earth to stop spinning. Genesis 1:6 Is there a Firmament or not?

Super. Nice and clear.

The truth points to six day creation! All of the planets and different systems display an order of creativity!

@IAMhassentyou

2 ай бұрын

Amen 🙏

@saintmalaclypse3217

2 ай бұрын

The Bible points to a 6-day creation AND a single day creation. The accounts in Genesis 1 are not the same as Genesis 2. So, if the Bible isn't sure how long it took, how did YOU decide you knew the right answer?

@IAMhassentyou

2 ай бұрын

@@saintmalaclypse3217 Genesis 2 is a more detailed view of day 6 of creation. Nothing different at all.

@fohrum4757

2 ай бұрын

​@@IAMhassentyouYou just admitted you didn't even read the first chapters of the Bible lol. The stories ARE different, but keep lying. Your god would love that.

@IAMhassentyou

2 ай бұрын

@@fohrum4757 no they aren't. You've just admitted you are lying and deceiving. Typical atheist.

Thank you, that was a marvelous presentation.

@paulgarduno2867

2 ай бұрын

Please 🙏..tell me something that you learned from this video. (I am a Bible believer)

@mehallica666

2 ай бұрын

​@@paulgarduno2867It's not about learning. It's about doubting real science and reinforcing the faith of believers so they don't leave. Oh and of course, money!

@paulgarduno2867

2 ай бұрын

@mehallica666 if you don't learn from other people, you must be a sorry human being . Doubting without answers is worthless .

@janinefrogge3992

2 ай бұрын

That the picture of the star being birthed was simply a computer generated model. In one of my grandson’s space books, it states that there is a place in the universe where stars are born and they make it sound like it’s a fact. I can’t wait to share this with him. This reminds me of the textbook I had to buy for a college biology class, where most of the pictures and diagrams were simply artists’ renderings of what dinosaurs looked like. I remember thinking that I had paid good money for a comic book!

@travisbicklepopsicle

2 ай бұрын

@@janinefrogge3992 did you expect to see photographs of dinosaurs in those textbooks?:-)

One thing is for sure is that science is always changing

@exaucemayunga22

2 ай бұрын

Improving *

@miscamisca6775

2 ай бұрын

That is why you are able to make a phone call, fertilize the soil, fly in air planes and see the back side of other celestial bodies

@jeffreyk5734

2 ай бұрын

It's not always changing. It is stagnant and literally going nowhere. Anything outside the box is ridiculed, ignored and persecuted. Just ask Roger Spurr or Mary Switzer or Tyson Carlson. Roger has game changing evidence to present, but it is being almost completely suppressed by the powers that be.

@miscamisca6775

2 ай бұрын

Just ask Roger Spurr or Mary Switzer or Tyson Carlson. Roger has game changing evidence to present, but it is being almost completely suppressed by the powers that be. Roger Spurr: Who is that? (is that the guy that claim mud pillars are remains of giants) What have he been silenced about? (I guess you mean Mary Schweitzer) was asked by her atheist manager, -"Are you sure about it", -"Yes", -"Then publish it" Tyson Carlson, who is that, what game chinging discoveries does he have under his belt. FYI:Mary have several times said that YEC should stop misuse her research and do something useful instead.

@oldol12

2 ай бұрын

Science is nowadays just a tool for the pharmacies and powerful companies. If they don't give money for research, there will be no research.Period.

Wonderful.

Great presentation! In the late 1800s, British Scientists declared that they had discovered everything there was to know about the world. In a hundred years, the majority of what we presently regard as “scientific fact” will have been relegated to the trash can of discarded human hypotheses. The “Church of Scientific Consensus” is as much a religion (i.e., a box humans place themselves into which helps them to orientate themselves within an astoundingly mysterious Multiverse) as any other. ❤

As a Christian I've always assumed the big bang that people of science like to talk about was the moment God spoke this universe into existence . I've never

@Dr.Ian-Plect

2 ай бұрын

...been able to complete a cogent thought?

@tommysonnier9848

2 ай бұрын

You have never what?

@jimbailey490

2 ай бұрын

@@Dr.Ian-Plect😂

@dennisfordii9737

2 ай бұрын

@@tommysonnier9848 I had never given it much thought - correct me if I'm wrong but didn't this guy say the big bang was wrong just like their time line , evolution , etc ?

@Dr.Ian-Plect

2 ай бұрын

@@jimbailey490 😎

And called all the stars out by name and the stars of heaven shouted with joy

Thank YOU, the truth is logical and builds a strong foundation to stand upon. Hugh Ross and others like him SEW DOUBT. Why? What is their intent? May Gods people desire HIS Truth and share it, for HIS GLORY

Excellent presentation. I've heard "scientists" such as Coyne and Dawkins belittle creationists time and time again, and yet creation scientists are the ones who inform others of the gaping holes in the claims of mainstream scientists. I find that to be invaluable and what is desperately needed to advance the pursuit of science today.

@jockyoung4491

2 ай бұрын

Asking questions is good, but then you have to accept the answers. Most scientific claims are well supported by evidence.

@jesus4400

2 ай бұрын

Space is fake, CGI . The Earth is flat with a firmament and waters above the firmament. Wake up!

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

@@jesus4400🐑

@momgo6533

2 ай бұрын

@@dinfast"nuh uh" -dinfast

@IslandUsurper

2 ай бұрын

@@jockyoung4491like life coming from not-loving material? Like material coming from nothing at all? Those theories are supported by evidence?

9:22 WHY would the evolutionists know how the moon came into existence?!? Wow... Blows my mind!

@xXMACEMANXx

2 ай бұрын

Nobody knows for sure, but there are some pretty good guesses based on observational and research data

@christopheespic

2 ай бұрын

@@xXMACEMANXx oh sorry, I just realized that my message was misleading.... For me, when the "PhD Christian scientist" was talking about evolutionists, I thought he referred to the theory of evolution (which has nothing to do with the history of our moon, thus my original comment). But thanks for your reply!

@xXMACEMANXx

2 ай бұрын

@@christopheespic My mistake, I misunderstood.

@bobKringe

2 ай бұрын

​@christopheespic But Evolution claims everything evolved from the Big Bang, does it not ? Planets, Moons, Stars, Earth and everything on it.

@christopheespic

2 ай бұрын

@@bobKringe when talking about evolutionists, one usually refer to the Darwin's theory of evolution of species.... Thus my first comment. The Big Bang theory and cosmology describe the evolution you refer to.

The near perfect sphere shape of the moon tells us it didn't come the earth. If it started as a molten glob of rock formed from the esrth, it would be jagged and blob shaped as it cooled without any natural erosion, making it smooth and spherical.

I am happy to see apologetic articles about the Christian vision of creation and the origin of the universe.🙏👍 In psalm 18 it is said: "The heavens (i.e. the “Univers” declare the glory of God and the work of his hands declares his power". It's just that many scientists prefer a world without God, so as not to feel the pressure of conscience for the "report" that we will all give, when we meet Him, face to face. These people are actually scared, because they do not know the Father's unconditional love for His children. He is only waiting for a sign from us, because he gave us total freedom in this world.

@pipMcDohl

2 ай бұрын

yep. total freedom to not stray from the dogma and to submit our thought to traditional beliefs. i'll pass the authoritarian claim, thanks.

NASA is still trying to discover what I knew in the early 1960's. As a young child, I had something most scientists lack to this day: fairh.

@richardgomes5420

Ай бұрын

You are correct: Scientists do not believe in ***MAGIC***.

@paulmanoha

Ай бұрын

Faith is something they will never have but their knowledge will grow leaps and bounds changing even your life while you keep your faith.

All Evolutionists do is explain away creation with chance + billions of years and then claim there is no creation.

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

Tell me you haven't understood evolution without telling me you haven't understood evolution

@irvingmitchell6986

2 ай бұрын

You can't get something out of nothing

@RobertSmith-gx3mi

2 ай бұрын

Evolution doesn't explain away Creation. Evolution has nothing to do with creation. Evolution is the scientific theory that explains the diversity of life on the planet. I think your argument might be with the hypothesis of abiogenesis which is a hypothesis that seeks to explain how life got here. Arguing from ignorance about evolution is no way to try to prove a god exsists nor does it bolster the assertion a god created anything

@RobertSmith-gx3mi

2 ай бұрын

​@@irvingmitchell6986 "you can't get something out of nothing." So you don't believe like other faithful religious believers in Creatio ex nihilo? The assertion that your god created matter out of nothing?

@rayspeakmon2954

2 ай бұрын

​​@@RobertSmith-gx3miYep. No issue whatsoever. God would have to be eternal and outside of the physical laws that He creates. We have faith that He exists, you have faith that He doesn't. Why do you need to argue with believers?

Mr. Ham is the founder of Answers in Genesis

I love how he is sitting in the chair of the student.

@user-tt9jz5ym8h

15 күн бұрын

@@Mario_Sky_521 It is a position of humility that I was honoring. He sits with us. I wasn't mocking.

@user-tt9jz5ym8h

14 күн бұрын

@@Mario_Sky_521 No worries. Love you, brother. God bless you.

The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. -Psalm 19:1

@benz8421

2 ай бұрын

Firmament not sky

@GailS.7777

2 ай бұрын

This sounds "off" to me. It reads beautifully in the King James Bible.

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Hebrews 4:12 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work . 2 Timothy 3:16-17 Your word is a lamp for my feet, a light on my path. Psalm 119:105

This is the kind of science that should be in every school. Not fary tales.

@UraStr

24 күн бұрын

:D

@tma2001

18 күн бұрын

I think you win the internet with that one ... although not in the way you think ;)

I've been following mr ham before the internet

Hes saying its a theory that nobody researched! Its just a theory that more than one person agreed it with so they made it seem like fact when in actually its just a guess that other people liked

@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440

2 ай бұрын

Wrong. You still don't understand what a scientific theory is: it's a model for explaining a natural phenomenon. It holds much more value than believing in religious myths.

@bluemarble2458

2 ай бұрын

​@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 Seriously, if you were born centuries ago, you would proclaim phlogiston as the fact in the name of science. Apparently, so-called "scientists" are surprised to find out "now" that gender is actually spectrum. "Trust the science" they say. Could not even get the fact right on the origin of covid. Actually fooled many people, while enriching others pocket.

@kevinrtres

2 ай бұрын

@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440....riiiiiigggggghhhhhtttt! How about some very specific refutations of the contents of this video? I think none will be provided....as per usual.

@kathleennorton2228

2 ай бұрын

​@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440The only model that can explain creation is the Creator. No other model can even hope to begin to suffice. To not understand this is to not understand the nature and utter complexities of existence, as well as and especially of life. To say that NYC could have been formed by natural processes doesn't even touch it. It takes excessively simplistic thinking. It takes a tremendous lack of comprehension of the nature of things, and likely a real desire to enter into the mass delusion of denying God's existence. In the final summation, it is inexcusable.

@CelticSpiritsCoven

2 ай бұрын

@@weltschmerzistofthaufig2440 Religious myths? You do realize that Peter and Paul were real people writing about current events, right? How do you know that stories in the bible aren't true? How exactly did you come to this conclusion? Sources? Evidence? Were you around at the time and can personally testify that they didn't happen? How did you come upon this information?

Let go that YEC only can pull out a Phd in history of geology to present Astronomy and argue against a professional Astronomers Hugh did not say that 2003, it is till Karen, also the quote from 2012 is Bob not Hugh. This guy mix quotes and years and use magazines as source, not a very reliable source. The reason for "solve the mystery of the origin" is that the material that moon is made of, is demonstrated to come from Earth. Other planets have solar eclipse, so their moons are in the ecliptic. It seems that this guy in the video os the who does not know anything

Thank you God amen 🙏🙏🙏

If a simulation based on our best knowledge from ALL our observations confirms that an event is plausible, then it can become a valid hypothesis. The fact that we actually didn't see an event happen, doesn't mean that it's not possible or that there are not mechanisms by which that event is possible. Also, the Moon's orbit is not exactly in the same plane as the Earth and the Sun, it's plane is tilted by 5º. If it was exactly ecliptic, we would have two eclipses every month. Also most moons in the solar system are not alligned to the Equator.

Thanks for this introduction. I'm nearing the end at 69+, but in my tweets and twenties wanted to become an astrophysicist. In that early period I too wanted to believe the lie of the scientific method, but forgot to remind myself, they abandoned that path and jumped from hypothesis to accepted theories. No testing of any hypothesis. However, in spite of this, one day in my thirties, I took a leap of faith in God and decided the Word of God is the record of truth No matter what man said. It wasn't long after taking that stand God showed me the truth behind the lies and led me to Answers in Genesis. I received degrees in Chemical and Civil Engineering becoming an aerospace materials engineer and a bridge designer.

@ehartwick88

2 ай бұрын

That's wonderful! God bless you ❤

Note that whenever AiG says according to naturalistic assumptions, they mean according to physics.

@vld7850

2 ай бұрын

No, it means it's a foolish theory and has NOTHING TO DO WITH PHYSICS

@tone9358

2 ай бұрын

@@vld7850 So when Tom Abel plugged his "foolish theory and has NOTHING TO DO WITH PHYSICS" into his virtual observatory & got celestial bodies matching what we observe in other galaxies & solar systems, I guess that was just bunk science.

The heavens declare His glory

Great video!! Well researched and professionally delivered. I really enjoyed this one, thank you for sharing. New subscriber due to this program.

Good stuff! 👌

Awesome explanation and so thankful to our Lord for giving us the answer in Genesis.

@22190971

2 ай бұрын

Not an explanation- just ramblings of an ignorant religious nut job

If he disagrees with your ideas, he calls it unscientific.

One of best video. A lot dusturbing quotes from evolutionary authors. Just you forgot to add few quotes from Bible, including Romans 2.

wisdom starts with the fear of God. These people only fool themselves, fooled they are in deed. In my bible it says “and he made the stars also”. like it was an after thought….. like it was nothing for Him to do.

@marcdc6809

2 ай бұрын

indeed, the fear of god, even in heaven you won't have a second of respite, you'll be a lobotomized blob... but you're not going to heaven, because you can't stop coveting... enjoy.

@roydodds3693

Ай бұрын

Well would be an after thought to those who wrote the Bible as thousands of years ago stars were thought to be mere points of light, not object comparable to the Sun, This is one very good reason why its complete bunkum to view the Bible as a historically or scientifically accurate text book. It isn't, those who think it is are deluded - its a religious text book, for the use of, those who adhere to that religion. It has no relevance for those looking for knowledge of astronomy, geology or history, nor for those who aren't Christian (which may surprise Christians, especially those of American persuasion, means around 80% of the world's population...) You wouldn't use a cookbook to learn car mechanics, and so you shouldn't use a thousands of years old religious text to learn about astrophysics in the 21st Century.

@marcdc6809

Ай бұрын

@@roydodds3693 true, even the exile in Egypt and the Exodus was just made up... they thrive on being the persecuted underdogs...

Calling Huge Ross a Christian scientist is like calling Kenneth Copeland a Christian pastor.

@douglasjacobs882

2 ай бұрын

Are you implying that Ross isn't a Christian or that a Christian can't be a scientist? Science is what we use to describe what God has created and encouraged us to discover.

@newcreationinchrist1423

2 ай бұрын

​@@douglasjacobs882I think he is referring to him being called a "Christian."

@terrypussypower

2 ай бұрын

@@douglasjacobs882. Science is what we use to describe the natural world. The claim of a “supernatural” realm has NOTHING whatsoever to do with science. Science deals in reality, NOT Biblical fantasies!

@iblogthereforeiam4267

2 ай бұрын

Well put!

@stevenrobinson8263

2 ай бұрын

God is the ONLY JUDGE of who is a believer, not us. I don't doubt that he is a Christian OR a scientist. But I DO doubt, or rather I KNOW that he is wrong! Far too many Christians bow their knee to the atheist evolution crowd, to try to find a compromise between scientism, aka evolution, and the Bible. There is NO compromise! The Bible is literally God's spoken word, just read 2 Timothy 3:15-17, and also 2 Peter 1:12-21 where it is clear that it IS God himself who spoke through the prophets and the leaders. From Moses to the Apostle John, God directed the words to those who wrote God's word. Here is what Peter wrote in verses 20-21: "20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." (Notice, "carried along" by the Holy Spirit LEST ANYONE say he was talking about prophecies, Jesus called Moses a prophet AND the historical books were ALSO called prophetic books! The division of the OT was thus: The Law, Prophets and Psalms as the first of the poetic books. The "latter" prophets were the historical books because they wrote about God's work AFTER they occurred, while the former prophet wrote before God's work in the affairs of men.

I have to mention the electric hypothesis, namely for comet functions. I think its been discredited somewhat from overreaching claims, but one wonders why the electric force is ignored in any formative theories when its magnitudes more powerful than gravity. Funny story, I casucally mentioned this to below avg intelligence roommate once, and he goes, oh yeah, I know about that. I was shocked and asked how? His science teacher in high school was an ex -NASA employee. 😮

@keyscook

2 ай бұрын

I have found that the electo-magnetic theoretical model for many astronomic observations to be MUCH more viable than the gravitational theoretical models proposed, as discussed on The Thunderbolts Project KZread channel and website. Cheers from Seattle!

@cobramcjingleballs

2 ай бұрын

@@keyscook Yes but they do overreach claiming the earth came from saturn for example without any proof.

@cobramcjingleballs

2 ай бұрын

@@keyscook also just gravitional collapse of star slowly would account for heat and light over 50,000 years from our sun as figured out by Lord Kelvin

@keyscook

2 ай бұрын

@@cobramcjingleballs I agree - Some of their claims are nuts. I am referring to Birkeland currents / electromagnetic exchange between stars, planets, and beyond have good potential for what is happening + Z-pinch appears to be where star formation is taking place. Cheers!

@cobramcjingleballs

2 ай бұрын

@@keyscook well I was at first exposed to this by electromagnetic interactions of comets, where they start to form tails far beyond the heat theory out by saturn's orbit. and as I said....my ex roommate knew of this being taught by ex NASA scientist surprised me by no means.

Has he considered plasma theory along with electric capture of the moon?

Hi, something I've been struggling with lately is the Septuagint genealogies of Shem. The Septuagint adds between 50 and 100 years of life to the dates that the patriarchs had the next patriarch. This adds between 600 and 700 years of timeline between the flood and Abraham when compared to the much younger maseratic texts. I would love to see you guys cover this topic in detail. This doesn't change my view on a young earth, but it would explain a lot of weird archaeological mysteries that we see in many ancient cultures.

@shayalynn

2 ай бұрын

I wonder if there is anything in the Dead Sea Scrolls that matches closer to the Septuagint or the Masoretic. Also the Samaritan Pentateuch.

@22190971

2 ай бұрын

You do realize that it’s nonsense- the lifespans in the Bible are ridiculously high. 6000 years is a tiny amount of time for the formation of the earth and the drift of continents and formation mountains etc how can it be close to fact. You need to wake up and read something other than fantasy books.

@lubegadembe

2 ай бұрын

​@@22190971 Of course. It doesn't make sense from a human point of view, but it does from a biblical one.

@calebstroup6917

2 ай бұрын

@@22190971 oh yeah? Can you explain away the mathematical impossibility of abiogenesis? Can you explain the statistical necessity that even given the best evolutionary considerations in favor of beneficial mutations - including the unproven assumption that new genetic information can be spontaneously acquired in an existing genome, which is an action that had NEVER BEEN OBSERVED IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION - the amount of time needed just to get from the genome of an ape-like ancestor to the genome of a human with less than 1% difference would take about the current estimated "age of the earth"??? Can you explain why the strength of the earth's magnetic field - a measurement which is directly correlated with the age of the magnetic field and follows an extremely consistent and predictable degradation function over time - indicates that it has only been in existence for at most 10,000 years? In fact, can you explain why all the planets in our solar system that have had their magnetic field measured all measure much higher strength than what they should be? Indicating they are all also only about 10,000 old at most? Can you explain why the earth's moon is BY FAR the largest moon relative to a planet's size that has ever been observed? Or why it's orbit is nearly circular and stable? considering the only possible ways that scientists can figure out that earth acquired the moon, with orbital equations of motion and computer models with very generous assumptions, are that the earth had to have acquired a moon of that size from wildly catastrophic circumstances that would have resulted in an extremely elliptical orbit? Or how this would have also likely caused an irregular earth orbit? Or how this would have almost certainly would have caused an irregular tilt of our axis, or irregular speed or direction of rotation, or a dramatic procession (wobble) of our axis? Can you explain why all the major layers of sedimentary rock are present over the entire globe, and are consistent with a fluid dynamic precipitation pattern of being laid down by a massive amount of turbulent water all around the globe at the same time? Can you explain how the Bible - the oldest book in the world, written over 1500 years, written by at least 40 different authors, which has been more critically examined with the intent to disprove than any other writing in history - could have withstood thousands of years of attack and criticism without ever being disproven to be historically accurate? The correct answer to all of these questions, and many more like them, is "no I can't"... Because nobody can answer these questions from a naturalistic uniformitarianism world view. Every "answer" secular scientists give to these types of questions just begs even more questions, and kicks the proverbial can further the road and further back in time. Everything makes sense (aside from the oldest monuments and cultures) from a biblical world view that sees the Bible as historically accurate. If you factor in the Septuagint genealogies that I mentioned in my original post, the time table for the emergence of the earliest cultures and monuments coincides perfectly with the time several hundred years after the global flood. There is so much data from every field of science that points to a much younger earth than what had been sold to us by the accepted narrative of mainstream science. Like these guys have said, "it's not a head problem, it's a heart problem." The evidence is there for anyone to see the truth, but not everyone wants to.

@calebstroup6917

2 ай бұрын

@@shayalynn the dead sea scrolls, Josephus, and the Samaritan pentateuch, all agree with the Septuagint. The Septuagint is also at least 1,400 years older than the maseratic text. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint, as it was the most widely available translation of the old testament circulated during this time.

Love it!

Ótimo vídeo parabéns e muito obrigado.

Nobody ever saw the moon designed and nobody ever designed it. Because nobody ever saw an undesigned designer. And nobody ever ran a program that concluded that an undesigned designer ever existed. It's looking more and more like the cosmos has always existed in one form or another and never had a beginning.

And here's the one I like they can't explain why the universe is drifting apart apart faster and faster and not slower and slower as the law of thermodynamics would prefict or whatever any other law they come up with

@22190971

2 ай бұрын

And yet you can prove that a god spoke the universe into existence- how did it do that ?

@tommysonnier9848

2 ай бұрын

The bible says God spreads the heavens.

@22190971

2 ай бұрын

@@tommysonnier9848 what’s that ? The Bible says - it’s a book

gravity explained: "The magnitude of this force depends upon the mass of each object and the distance between the centers of the two objects. Mathematically, we say the force of gravity depends directly upon the masses of the objects and inversely upon the distance between the objects squared." For objects to attract each other they must at least be of a size and adequate distance from each other. So how does an object that is singular explode? How does the ejection of energy create mass? How do the masses created begin to form unless there is some logic and order that causes it to happen. If Logic exist in us, how, unless it preexists in nature. Every attempt to discover how things began while rejecting the explanation given by revelation is the description of Genesis that humility and obedience are eliminated when we out of pride try to eat of the Tree of Knowledge and become separated from the Tree of Life thereby.

@timpilgrim1463

2 ай бұрын

What are you saying?

@tone9358

2 ай бұрын

Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light in a vacuum squared. That is how the ejection of energy can create mass. Gravity is what usually pulls thing together after.

@stevenswenson7041

2 ай бұрын

@@tone9358 At the moment before the explosion the entirety of the universe was supposedly a singularity. Something that does not take up space, ther was no time as time is a dimension of space and space did not exist, effectively there is no mass ( no matter) there was no space nor time. So How did a timeless construct 'explode' or expand ?

@stevenswenson7041

2 ай бұрын

Big bang happened it is a point of Creation and is easily attributed to a prime mover we cannot see. This is easily God. Science is confined to nature it isn't unexpected that it does not see the supernatural if such phenomenon can't be codified by us.

@keyboardwarrior5756

2 ай бұрын

i will try to answer your questions. 1. How does an object that is singular explode? By this, I'm assuming that you are asking how a planet could explode. Planets are not rigid objects, like a boulder would be. They are, from a cosmic perspective, like balls of sand. If you were to go outside and pick up a rock, you would be holding a small piece of the earth in your hand. You were able to separate that part of our planet from the rest of it, and quite easily too. This is because gravity is by far the weakest of the four fundamental forces of the universe, so it can easily be overcome by other forces. So, when a massive force is applied, such as a planetary collision, there is enough energy for a planet to explode; its gravity cannot hold itself together any longer. I highly recommend watching a simulation of planets colliding. They almost look like water droplets! 2. How does the ejection of energy create mass? I'm not sure what you mean by this. However, mass cannot be created or destroyed. 3. How do the masses created begin to form [together] unless there is some logic and order that causes it to happen? Yes, there is an order that causes it to happen! It is the fundamental force of gravity. 4. How does logic exist in us unless it preexists in nature? This isn't scientific, but I agree with you. I believe that our system of logic was built around how our universe works.

7:27 yes the speed of sumarization =adhd. ❤❤❤

"The Heavens Declare the Glory of God" Psalms 19:1.

I certainly enjoy brother Mortensen, his integrity is ever-present.

They've never actually witnessed a star "turning on." They assume they are formed in stellar dust clouds. Astronomy is fascinating. Especially when you go by the biblical perspective.

@Gek1177

2 ай бұрын

That's because there isn't a singular moment like turning on a microwave. What we do have is images of millions of proto stars and accretion disks forming on thousands of Stellar nurseries on dozens of Nearby galaxies. Any honest person would say that we know how stars form because we see them forming.

@newcreationinchrist1423

2 ай бұрын

​​@@Gek1177"isn't a singular moment?" 😅 Oh man. You guys sure like to stretch this out, don't you? You have no idea. You have no idea if stars are actually "born." Seeing as it has never been observed, what you propose is not observable science. Therefore it is not science at all.

@christtheonlyhope4578

2 ай бұрын

@@Gek1177 #1 I don't believe I asked for anything from the atheist peanut gallery. #2 we don't listen to you guys anyway. So why bother? #3 like NCIC said, it's never been observed so you can't even call it science. It's a fantasy that you guys have come up with in your minds. Good day.

@christtheonlyhope4578

2 ай бұрын

@@newcreationinchrist1423 hey NCIC. God bless, brother

@ellayararwhyaych4711

2 ай бұрын

@@newcreationinchrist1423 You've no idea what 'observable science" is or means if you're refuting @Gek1177

Wouldn't Boyle-Mariotte law prevent star formation from gas to star?

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

No. The BML is valid for ideal gases at constant temperatures in closed system.

@luish1498

2 ай бұрын

No, Boyle's gas law does not disprove star formation. Boyle's law, also known as the Boyle-Mariotte law, describes the relationship between the pressure and volume of a gas at a constant temperature. It states that the pressure of a gas is inversely proportional to its volume when the temperature is held constant. Star formation, on the other hand, is a complex process that occurs in interstellar clouds of gas and dust. These clouds are vast regions of space where gravity causes the gas and dust to collapse, leading to the formation of new stars. The collapse of these clouds is driven primarily by the force of gravity, not by the pressure-volume relationship described by Boyle's law. Boyle's law is applicable to ideal gases under specific conditions, typically at low pressures and high temperatures, where intermolecular forces are negligible. It is not directly relevant to the conditions present in interstellar clouds, where gravity, radiation pressure, and other factors play significant roles. Therefore, Boyle's law does not disprove or contradict the process of star formation.

@SilasCole88

2 ай бұрын

@@luish1498 "These clouds are vast regions of space where gravity causes the gas and dust to collapse, leading to the formation of new stars" Where does the gravity come from?

@luish1498

2 ай бұрын

@@SilasCole88 Gravity is a fundamental force of nature that exists between objects with mass or energy. It is described by Einstein's theory of general relativity, which states that mass and energy curve the fabric of spacetime, creating what we perceive as gravity. According to this theory, when an object with mass or energy exists in spacetime, it causes a curvature of the surrounding space. Other objects nearby will then move along the curved paths dictated by this curvature. The force we experience as gravity is the result of this curvature and the motion of objects within it. In a sense, gravity is not something that "comes from" anywhere in the traditional sense. It is an inherent property of mass and energy interacting with spacetime. All objects with mass or energy, no matter how small, generate a gravitational field. The strength of the gravitational force between two objects depends on their masses and the distance between them.

@robertsmith2956

2 ай бұрын

@@dinfast If the universe isn't closed, where are things going and coming from?

I certainly would not want to be out in outerspace depending on them. I would be there and would know, i am in deep

Amen AIG 🙂🙏✝️ thanks for this

Very good video supporting God's miraculous work.

@jesus4400

2 ай бұрын

All CGI. The Earth is flat with a firmament and waters above the firmament. Space is a satanic HOAX.

@tone9358

2 ай бұрын

@@jesus4400 & how many people are in on this conspiracy?

We are under the firmament.

Just a comment here and correction. The Moon does not revolve in the equatorial plane of the Earth or in the ecliptic plane. The lunar orbit is inclined 5.1 degrees to the ecliptic, whereas the Earth's equatorial plane is inclined at 23.4 degrees. Otherwise a very good article!

And then there is Craig Lane .I think that's his name . Early on when I was watching them I was following. But I was also watching Answers in Genesis. Then I found they believed in old earth and they lost my following.

@jessebryant9233

2 ай бұрын

William Lane Craig. He says lots of good stuff... but like so many of the, shall we say, "intellectual" defenders of the faith... compromises on Genesis.

@TJforChrist

2 ай бұрын

WLC is a false teacher. Definitely don't follow him.

The basic difficulty that evolutionists have is how to explain that if unplanned and unintended activities led to the development of life, how did that life attain consciousness and believe that it had purpose?

@sciencerules2825

2 ай бұрын

As far as we can tell consciousness is an emergent property of our brains and their evolved capability to process information.

@tdoc666___

2 ай бұрын

@@sciencerules2825 yes but why does it need or feel the necessity for information processing? what drives it? as a rock cannot decide or "wish", non life cannot decide or wish for life... how does this work?

@burnttoast2790

2 ай бұрын

​@@tdoc666___ All living things are sentient to some degree; all of us can detect and react to outside stimuli. Nervous systems in animals act as a dedicated set of cells for that task, which helps given our generally-mobile lifestyle. The requirements of such a lifestyle means that bigger, more interconnected neural systems can be favored, leading to brains of increasing size. We simply happen to be at the top of the pile.

@sciencerules2825

2 ай бұрын

@@tdoc666___ Being able to process information about one's surroundings is a huge beneficial advantage for survival. That's why it evolved.

@ricochrisnatansantoso187

2 ай бұрын

yadi yadi yada.. after reading all of these replies to ur comment, it's funny that all of these evolution ideas breakdown at the existence of human's moral absolute where every living human on earth seems to agree whether a deed (such as : killing other human) is wrong or right. Not mentioning, due to scientist' inability to create a living cell in a lab, desperate measure being taken by producing theory that life on earth brought to the earth by intelligent creature which is alien. my suggestion is let these clowns keep producing these comedies, they really are entertaining

Can you not make these cuts so rough please?

Assuming that design implies a purpose, then what is the purpose of a total solar eclipse? For our entertainment? And what about annular eclipses? Poor design? Nope, simplest explanation - no design, no designer. Please, just grow up.

@davidharshbarger

2 ай бұрын

Pretty sure we can predict both... a good thousand years out. Read Genesis. It clearly explains what everything in the heavens is for. Too bad curing smugness isn't it.

@infinitedeath1384

2 ай бұрын

😂 nope there's design alright, you are made in the image of God. Earth is the only known planet that both has liquid water, and is the perfect distance from the sun. Earth is the only planet that has lunar eclipses. The universe has laws, which cannot be changed. Laws need a law maker. We discovered the laws, God created the laws. The main problem with the big bang theory also, is that you assume that matter always existed, that it was condensed into a small point, which then exploded. No one recorded or saw that happen, no one has replicated it in a lab. Evolution is full of assumptions and holes.

@UniteAgainstEvil

2 ай бұрын

Ridiculous.

@wadeerwin3920

17 күн бұрын

Obviously, you evolved from an ape.

Great info, thanks Terry.

Alléluia and amamen 🔥💜🔥

Never question, not even thinking of question. Just read Bible only for your whole life.

"No one saw it happen, therefore it never happened" 🙄

if a moon formed from Debris we would still have a ring of Debris going around the earth at 8:15 you say moon is ecliptic orbit but it is actually 5% off and atlernates up 5% down 5% to which we have total eclipses NOT every month but every so often instead.

@RobertSmith-gx3mi

2 ай бұрын

How long does it take rings to dissipate? And you do know that saturn's rings are disappearing don't you?

@litigioussociety4249

2 ай бұрын

The moon's orbit isn't perfectly aligned, but just about nothing is in the universe. The probability of its approximate alignment is quite low. Then you factor in all the other probabilities in creation, such as the moon and sun being the same relative size in the sky, the earth having a full water cycle, the gravitational constant, etc., and the probability of intelligent life forming in our given planet becomes lower than the number of particles in the universe. That's why people who think there must be life on other planets haven't crunched the numbers properly.

@RobertSmith-gx3mi

2 ай бұрын

@@litigioussociety4249 The moons orbit is not perfectly aligned. Compared to what? I don't factor anything into creation because I reject the term creation. Its a term meant to poison the well. Until you prove creation of something I do not accept your assertion Of creation.

@alantasman8273

2 ай бұрын

@@RobertSmith-gx3mi "I reject the term creation" because you reject the creator of the Universe....Jesus the Christ ...the Word who spoke everything into existence and as the bible states through Him everything consists...stays together.

@RobertSmith-gx3mi

2 ай бұрын

@@alantasman8273 Yeah, that about sums it up. I reject the word creation because you've never proven there's a creator of the universe. I think I said that already? I think your problem is you think making an assertion about a creator makes that assertion true which is the same circular logic that says the bible is true because the bible says it's true.

The hubris of modern scientism is exceeded only by their ignorance. The moment one of them thinks they have an idea, it becomes the new dogma.

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

It's almost as if you have never seen a university from the inside and have no clue about science at all

@skeeterburke

2 ай бұрын

​@@dinfastno, that's pretty much it in a nutshell

@critical-thought

2 ай бұрын

@@dinfast It’s almost like you are so blinded by your religion you will say or do anything to maintain your illusions.

@dinfast

2 ай бұрын

What a pathetic attempt for a comeback @@critical-thought

@sciencerules2825

2 ай бұрын

@@dinfast It's true though as evidenced every day by the science denying creationists here.

The problem with his presentation is that there is no 'theory' of star formation. There is a general idea that stars somehow form from clouds of atoms due to gravity. But there is no theory of how that happens There are hypothesis that will likely never become theories because they are untestable.

@miscamisca6775

2 ай бұрын

You just lost the attention of intended target groups of the video with "there is no 'theory' of star formation" That is way to complicated reasoning.

@jockyoung4491

2 ай бұрын

There is very detailed theory on how stars formed, most of which has been confirmed by evidence. The Nobel prize for figuring out how the stars form the elements was awarded in 1983.

I loved your video... and do not disagree with you. But, how is binary code based on naturalist or evolutionist ideas? I do not have the answers, hence the question.

Excellent.